Real Estate Info for Salt Lake & Davis County

In our industry, we are constantly barraged with information, statistics, data sets, and the like and it can be a chore to work through the seemingly unending torrent of information that comes at us. The "Information Age" was supposed to make us all smarter, better informed, and more educated in our decision making process.

However, the issue with this concept is that it assumed the information we were to have at our fingertips would be quality information. Unfortunately, with the 24/7 news cycle, the internet, blogs outnumbering people (OK, bit of an exaggeration there), wiki-this & wiki-that, and all of the sundry other sources of information out there, the quality component has suffered greatly. I have long felt that there has been a lack of critical evaluation of all of the data put forth (hence the incredible growth of sites such as Snopes.com and FactCheck.org).

For those of us in the real estate industry, the issue is just as relevant (if not more so). This was brought home once again by an innocuous article put forth recently in a Trulia blog where they introduced the "Trulia Rent vs. Buy Index." Always tempted to read about the latest index about our industry, I took a look. On the surface it appears to be a straightforward ranking of the rent vs buy outcomes for various US cities. But, as I read the article the statistical geek in me had serious questions about this report/index.

As stated by Trulia, the ratio was calculated "...using the average list price compared with average rent on 2 bedroom apartments, condos and townhomes listed on Trulia.com." Oh where to start with the concerns?

First using "average list price" as the basis for calculating the "buy" side of the equation? Wouldn’t the sale price be a more appropriate measure? Also, everyone knows using averages for a broad statistical group such as housing inventory is at best risky. Median prices would be a much better indication, especially when dealing with an entire metro area inventory (the same can be said for the rent component).

Second, the comparison is based on "…2 bedroom apartments, condos and townhomes listed on Trulia.com." So, this isn’t a market based inventory calculation but rather a subset based exclusively on Trulia’s data set. A couple of questions: a) what is the size, per metro area listed, of the data set used and b) how does that compare to the aggregate market inventory? Are we dealing with sample sizes of just 15 properties or 1,500? Is the Trulia data set equivalent to 2% of the aggregate market or 65%? These are critical data points in determining the value of this information.

Third, is the average list price only for "…2 bedroom apartments, condos and townhomes on Trulia.com" or is it for all listings on Trulia for that metro area. The sentence doesn't clearly articulate this, so the reader is forced to assume one of two potential scenarios: a) the average list price and rent figures are both based on 2 bedroom apartments, condos and townhomes, or b) the rent is for 2 bedroom apartments, condos and townhomes while the list price is for all properties. This simply gets to the question "are we comparing apples to apples or apples to steak?" And really, in either scenario are we really dealing with anything that can provide a substantive aggregate market assessment for these metro areas?  Scenario A is such a small sub-section of a real estate market is it worthwhile to try to project it over the entire market? Scenario B is just not worth anything from a statistical point of view.

I incorrectly assumed that somewhere in this article we would see the disclaimers providing the definitions and characteristics of the sample sizes involved in making the calculations. What was the minimum sample size criteria to "make the list" (they simply state in the actual downloaded report that Fort Worth had an “insufficient” sample size – but they still reported a ratio for Forth Worth).

Now on to the "Interpretation Key" for the "Price-to-Rent Ratio." They explain the Price to Rent Ratio bands of 1-15, 16-20, and 21+. But there is no definition or explanation on how these ranges were established. Why is the split between 15 & 16 critical?  Why not 11 or 19? 

There were so many statistical holes in the data I wasn’t going to give it much of a thought, until I read the following comment by a reader: "…I expected to see San Diego on the Rent v Buy list, but like you am surprised that Omaha, Oklahoma City and Portland outprice our balmy environs. And Cleveland is just behind us??? Interesting numbers!"  So, the information age has brought us information, but clearly lagging is our ability to critically assess the quality of the information put forward. It does highlight the concept that if it’s on the internet, it must be true!!!!

As a professional in this industry, I find it disturbing that all the data assessments I do with full regard to disclosure and proper statistical evaluation techniques can be easily discarded by a consumer as they read articles on the internet that may have a contrary perspective but no delineation of where that data originated.

It reminds me of a listing appointment a few years ago where the homeowner was offended by the estimated market price I had developed as he knew his home was worth far more than that because the newspaper said "average prices" for the metro area were up 16%. I guess he didn’t factor in the fact he was located on a large, arterial highway in the middle of a well established and well known drug trafficking area and whose property line was shared with an abandoned industrial warehouse. Clearly, the newspaper knew better……..

The information age has highlighted the importance of assessment skills related to the reams of data available.  The question is, does the consumer value those assessment skills?

There is a good deal of discussion regarding the current status of the real estate market. Has the market bottomed? Have inventory levels stabilized? What impact will foreclosures and short sales have on absorption rates going forward? Along with the always popular, what are interest rates doing?

I recently had a conversation with a buyer client who expressed his perspective that our current market hasn’t yet "bottomed" and that there may be another 5% of downward price correction still to occur. After our conversation, I decided to run some numbers (yes, I’m a devout data geek) and see what the correlation to further price erosion relative to upward pressure on interest rates as the economy begins to recover. This is with the understanding it will be tough for rates to decline further with the current discount rate at 0.75% - it was at its lowest point of 0.50% a few months ago.

So, I did a quick spreadsheet evaluating a buyer’s "purchasing power" at various combinations of interest rates, down payments, and monthly payment amounts. I found some very interesting data elements that I thought others might like as well.

My first step was to determine the impact of interest rates on loan amounts assuming a constant monthly payment. The underlying logic being that if a buyer budgets for a say a $1,750 monthly principal and interest payment the amount the buyer is able to borrow for that monthly figure will decline as interest rates increase (quite a shock, eh?).

As expected, the amount of the loan, at specific monthly principal and interest payment amounts, dropped as interest rates increased. Not surprisingly, the bigger percentage drops occurred at the lower interest rate levels as a half point increase has a larger percentage impact to the base rate (math 101 on display here). OK, this wasn't the interesting part.

What get’s interesting (and not necessarily in a good way) is the impact small changes in interest rates can have on a buyer’s purchasing power. For example, let’s go back and see what happens to that buyer who wants to keep their monthly principal and interest payment at $1,750. If they are putting 10% down and the current interest rate is 5%, that $1,750 would equate to an estimated purchase price of $362,214.

However, if rates were to increase just 1%, all things being equal, the buyer can now only purchase a property with an estimated price of $324,217. That's a 10.5% drop in purchasing power based on just a 1% change in interest rates! If, in that same timeframe, average prices drop by the 5% estimated by my client, the “new” purchase price for that property would be $344,103. Ouch!!!!

So, IF the average price drops further but interest rates climb slightly, my buyer would no longer be able to purchase his targeted home without bringing more money to the table in terms of down payment. This doesn’t even address the differences in the “types” of homes which could be purchased for $362,000 versus $324,000 in any given market. What this simple exercise does is to reaffirm there is a significant “opportunity cost” for buyers who do not take advantage of the historically low interest rates currently available, especially when housing inventories are at such high levels in most of the country. This analysis also doesn’t factor in tax impacts or lifestyle impacts which should also be considered by buyers.

For those too young to remember what interest rates are capable of reaching, here is a quick history lesson in graphic detail (may be too intense for younger audiences). Given the Fed's immense concern about hyper-inflation should the economy begin to turn around (with all the excess money that has been injected into the economy to create the rebound), it is not unfathomable for us to see interest rates above 6% (which simply puts us back to where things were prior to the financial meltdown).

What this boils down to is advice I give to many of my buyer clients, don't miss out on a very good deal while chasing the "best" deal.  You may be sorry you did.

With the expiration of the home buyer tax credit, I thought this would be a good time to establish a base line report for reference later in the year in terms of market activity. For the first four months of the year, the activity levels in Farmington have been a mixed bag. Listing activity is in line with the same period last year while sales activity is up significantly over last year (impact of the tax credit).

In spite of the increase in the sales activity, average and median sale prices are down considerably from the same four month period last year. In addition, even with a similar level of new listings and an increase in sales activity, overall inventory levels, measured by “months inventory” remain elevated. So, what does all this mean??? The simple answer is our market continues to be in flux and this will likely continue through calendar year 2010. The primary macro economic factors impacting our market continue to be unemployment levels and the lack of growth in per capita household income levels. What it doesn’t mean is that our current real estate market has collapsed. As you can see from the enclosed report, transactions are continuing to occur. This is true in Farmington, in Davis County, Salt Lake County and Utah in general. There are still buyers in the market taking advantage of the historically low interest rates (more on that in a moment) and reduced home prices.

What it means for sellers is that properties need to be priced accurately to be competitive in this market. Buyers can and are being quite selective in the homes they choose to purchase. Why? Because they can. There is sufficient inventory available that buyers have the real estate equivalent of a smorgasbord.

As you review the average sale price comparisons it is important to note the 2009 data for Farmington was impacted by two sales over $700,000 occurring early in the year. Thus the large decrease in average prices in 2010 is actually overstated. A more useful figure for a year-to-year comparison is the median price. Not surprisingly, Farmington has experienced a somewhat larger overall decrease in median price points than Davis County as a whole. This is not surprising given Farmington higher overall sale prices over the years. Even with the price adjustments we have experienced over the past two years, Farmington continues to have one of the highest median home sale prices in Davis County. So far in 2010, the highest median home sale prices in Davis County are reported in Fruit Heights ($372,000) and South Weber ($272,000). However, in both of these cities there have only been 11 and 10 reported sales respectively for the first four months of the year.

Now, about interest rates. There was concern that interest rates would jump sharply when the Federal Reserve and the Treasury stopped purchasing mortgage backed securities as of the end of March. Overall, approximately $1.25 trillion (yes with a “T”) of mortgage backed securities were purchased under the program. When the buying stopped, there was concern interest rates would spike. Although they did increase somewhat, by the end of April, rates were nearly back to where they were in February & March. The next “big thing” being discussed in the financial markets is when will the Fed will begin selling the mortgage backed securities they just finished buying. I won’t even suggest I know an answer but if you are looking to make a move this summer, I would suggest talking to a mortgage professional to get their perspective. The number and types of financing options available today is much different from what was available just two years ago. Even if you need to sell a property first, a proactive discussion with a lender is recommended.

I attended a meeting last night at the CenterCal offices in Farmington in which members of the city council (along with the mayor) and Craig Trottier, Vice President of Development for CenterCal Properties discussed the current status of the Station Park commercial/retail development adjacent to the Farmington FrontRunner train station. In spite of the current economic conditions which have slowed the project, it is ready to move forward with two publicly confirmed tenants in the project. Most everyone has heard that Harmons will be opening a store in Farmington Station. In addition, Cinemark has confirmed their plans for a multi-screen theater complex within the project. There has been additional leasing activity but at this time no other tenants can be publicly announced.

Sufficient tenant commitments are in place, however, to allow for work on the project to continue. It is anticipated there will be additional site work done beginning in late April or early May with construction on the Harmons and Cinemark facilities moving forward in August. At this time, both Harmons and Cinemark are projecting a late spring opening (April/May) although that timetable has some flexibility to move faster if economic conditions warrant.

There was a good deal of discussion regarding the layout and design of the “town square” component of the development and current design concepts reflect a small town central park type of theme. The current make up of the project continues to consist of a mix of street level retail operations with commercial office space contained on the second floors of most buildings. The project continues to reflect a 130 room hotel component and there is serious discussion taking place of adding a complete healthclub/spa facility within the project. The intent is to have a good mix of national, regional and local retailers in this complex. Many of the retailers who have expressed interest do not currently have facilities in Davis County. For several others, this will be their first facilities in northern Utah.

The plans call for 12-18 restaurants in the project with upper end dining establishments circling the perimeter of the interior park area. It was clearly pointed out during the discussion that there are NO plans for a “food court” type of set up. The vast majority, if not all, of the dining options will provide “dine in” capabilities. The less formal dining options will most likely be located near the theater area but it is currently designed so that food services will be available throughout the project.

If the economy improves sufficiently for retailers to begin expanding and entering into lease agreements, the Station Park project could be fully operational by late 2011. However, it would not be unexpected for full build and lease out to occur by the spring of 2012.

 Overall, it was a good meeting attended by approximately 15-20 residents. There is a design model of the complex available and I would encourage other Farmington residents to swing by and take a look. The CenterCal leasing office is located at 42 North 650 West in Farmington.

You have likely heard all sorts of conflicting reports about the current state of our real estate market. It is true the local real estate market in 2009 continued its adjustment process begun in early 2008. Rather than trying to address the various media reports you may have heard, I prefer to just look at the data and see what the data reveals about local real estate activity in Farmington over the past year. Click on the thumbnail to see a copy of the full report for calendar year 2009.

One thing that stands out is the clear impact the federal home buyer tax credit made on home sales activity toward the end of the year as closed sales for the last quarter of the year were nearly double over the same period last year (50 vs 29). This late surge pushed calendar year sales in Farmington just over 10% higher than 2008 reported sales. This increase in activity, however, did not reverse the overall downward pressure on average & median sale prices.

Median sale prices were down just over 6% for the year in 2009 when compared to 2008. Although the tax credit helped with overall sales activity, it is important to remember the tax credit originally targeted first time homebuyers (although the recent extension of the credit now provides a component for existing homeowners). Most (but not all) first time homebuyers purchase properties priced below the median price point in a community. Generally, it is move up buyers who push median price points higher. This is especially true in Farmington where the average and median prices are some of the highest in Davis County. In terms of geographic activity, 40% of sold homes in Farmington in 2009 were located west of I-15, up from 32% for 2008.

There was a significant surge in average and median sold prices in December which is the result of two sales in excess of $750,000 at the end of the year. Without those two sales, the average sale price in December was $292,950 and the median sale price was $255,000. December’s adjusted median sale price is 26% below the peak monthly median sale price ($343,900) which occurred in September, 2007. It is, however, 11% higher than the lowest reported monthly median sale price of $228,589 which occurred in May, 2009. Has the market hit bottom? The current data seems to suggest it’s possible the market stabilized during the third quarter of 2009. We’ll need to see data after the current homebuyer tax credit expires in April, 2010 to make a definitive assessment.

Overall inventory levels in Farmington remain elevated with eight months of inventory currently on the market. Although elevated above “neutral market” parameters, inventory levels have decreased substantially in the past six months. Inventory levels had reached double-digit levels earlier in the year. This will be an important metric to watch going forward to see how much of this inventory reduction was the result of the tax credit & seasonality versus an actual balancing of supply and demand levels.

Mortgage interest rates remain at historically low levels and the credit markets have recovered from the near devastation of a year ago, the flow of capital into real estate has recovered somewhat, although the number of mortgage product options for buyers has been reduced. It will be interesting to watch interest rate levels as the new year proceeds. If the Federal Reserve believes inflation may begin taking root, they have made it clear they will use their fiscal policy tools (read interest rates) to keep inflation under control. Increases in interest rates can have a significant effect of buyer purchasing power (I will be doing an upcoming blog post on this topic). Most analysts are projecting relatively stable interest rate levels through the first half of 2010. I hope you find this information helpful. Feel free to email me (cfrazer@remax.net) with any questions you may have or if there is a particular topic you would like me to cover in my blog. I am always looking for new topics that would be of interest.