OCR Text |
Show :.vl ! '' I I Tin fiiS fy., i p- M i ll h i- wM I i 4 r i ft 1 "M l II' (Mi' iu I'Mw 1 L- !- ?zzZf t " -. " j i ;x 1ori -- - - - - Li HOUSING BOOM? By TOM BUSSELBERG SALT LAKE CITY Utah's homebuildng was at its lowest level since 1969, last year, although nonresidential construction saw a slight increase. in-crease. IN A REPORT issued . by Kristin Stark of the Bureau of Economic and Business Research Re-search at the University of Utah, she notes only 7,67 1 new dwelling units were authorized, autho-rized, valued at $347 million, a 20 percent drop from 1981. But nonresidential construction con-struction was up by 16.4 percent per-cent to $440 million, the highest high-est total since record-breaking 1979. That phase of construction construc-tion resulted in an overall 3.4 percent jump over the previous pre-vious year although construction construc-tion totals missed the billion dollar level established in 1977 by $37 million. TOTALS FOR dwelling units un-its finished at 17 percent below a year ago but the last four months of 1982 saw higher individual in-dividual totals than the same months in 1981, she says, noting not-ing "this could be interpreted as the beginning of a housing recovery" adding that "if interest in-terest rates continue to decline a more substantial recovery should occur in 1983." -the Although housing construction is still moving along at a snail's pace, f the home building industry is expected to make a substantial upsw- ' T ing within the next few months and by summer's end could result in a real boom. Mortgage rates saw a decline de-cline by about four percentage points along with a similar drop in the prime rate. "The performance during the last quarter would indicate demand de-mand is picking up although not substantially at this point." NOTING single-family home construction is traditionally tradition-ally harder hit by recessions, Ms. Stark noted a drop from 75 percent of total residential construction in 1979 to just over 58 percent in 1981. A slight recovery saw that share bounce back to 62.1 percent in 1982. "This signifies the increased relative demand for single-family single-family homes, perhaps because be-cause interest rates have dropped. drop-ped. It should be noted that in absolute terms the number of single family homes has steadily steadi-ly gone down even in 1982," she adds. ADDITIONS, alterations and repairs often pick up steam when new homebuilding becomes be-comes prohibitively expensive, expen-sive, she continues, noting that's been the situation for the past five years. That category rose from 3.3 percent in 1977 to 10 percent last year, although it should drop with signs of a recovery. Employment levels have "steadily gone down" since 1978 with any slight improvement improve-ment in residential permits registered reg-istered during the last months of 1982 insufficient to improve year-end employment figures. THERE WERE some bright spots, construction-wise, across the state, including Carbon Car-bon County (Price), where issuances were up 79 percent and Davis County, up 14 percent. per-cent. Layton and Clearfield both registered residential building gains totally 439 in both cities. SALT LAKE County also fared better than the state as a whole, although residential issuances dropped slightly from 1981. Sandy and West Jordan saw a 40 percent jump in homebuilding while Salt Lake City's authorizations fell by 76.5 percent. ' Other drops included Summit Sum-mit County (Park City), where a 61.8 percent decrease was registered and Uintah County (Roosevelt), off by 18.5 percent. per-cent. UTAH FARED better than at least Idaho when compared with construction activif , around the Intermountaii West while Colorado lead tljj tin increases, at 17 percent. Uta),;'re had the fourth largest percen-jm decrease in new building uniC" 'permitted and the third larger decline in residential valupP0 tion. Residential building de a creased in the state more ihi nationally, on the average. yi On another slightly brighte. j . note, nonresidential constrar tion value actually increased--'11 by one-sixth to $440 milling th with several major projecane boosting that, including th;. $11 million Valley West Ha;'.,:, pital in West Valley City.tvr-$10 City.tvr-$10 million-plus Salt Lake Cif !ous office buildings and a S90 mi "to i lion sewage treatment plant (iren South Salt Lake. PERMITS ISSUED in near)? every category fell, howeve'1" 8 such as churches by nearest two-thirds, industrial builrive.' ings by 40 percent and stgrjj "I , and other mercantile buildinLj by nearly 50 percent.' Office .. banks and professional buii"' . ings increased slightly frtf ia" 152 to 164 permits. Eibu Ms. Stark predicts homirt ! built should range from Itreti 12,000 this year and noni)) sidential building is expect ' . to see a continued rise. : . as i |