Monday, April 04, 2011

Is Strib publishing yet another excuse for unproductive land speculation consultants, besides the road infrastructure and public transit dimensions at play?

Leaving specifics aside and not naming names, excuses for municipal government funds going at never before seen rates to a single consultancy with little worthwhile to show for it, a third excuse shows up on the spectrum, per Strib:

The hot housing areas are in close-in suburbs, as some big name developers look to snap up infill sites.
By DON JACOBSON, Special to the Star Tribune update: April 3, 2011 - 8:33 PM


It's probably not too surprising that demand for land in third-tier suburban areas -- crushed by the popping of the real estate bubble two years ago -- hasn't shown any signs of returning. With acres and acres of failed housing developments to choose from and no signs of a rebound in new housing starts, undeveloped lots in some of those areas can be had almost for the cost of maintaining them.

But it's a slightly different story closer in to the urban core. Smaller "infill" building sites in first- and second-ring suburbs such as Edina, Woodbury, Maple Grove and Bloomington are seeing signs of demand from recovering national home builders. And in the urban cores, multifamily housing developers are laying out cash for premium infill sites, industry players say.

The situation reflects the new reality of both consumers and builders all but abandoning the bubble-era paradigm of buyers snapping up houses 30 miles from their jobs in exchange for cheaper homes.

"The drive for affordability is not really something that's going on as much as it was a few years ago," said Mike Swanson, a division vice president with Rottlund Homes and past president of the Builders Association of the Twin Cities. "It's no secret the new construction market has shrunk by 75 percent since its peak, and it has really gotten down to those premium, closer-in places now."

Rising gas prices and younger new home buyers are sparking a long-term demand for smaller lots closer to the cities, he said.

Developable land in once-hot exurban outposts like Otsego, Zimmerman and Rogers -- much of it now gone back to lenders -- remains in plentiful supply and dirt cheap. Prices as low as $6,000 per acre aren't uncommon in areas that were once commanding $250,000 per acre, according to recent listings.

[...] A look at some recent land-for-sale listings shows developable land in first- and second-ring suburbs available for as little as $34,000 per acre in a subdivision near Interstate 35W in Blaine to nearly $200,000 per acre for a bank-owned residential site in Woodbury.

National home builders, such as D.R. Horton, Pulte Homes and Ryland, looking to get back into the game as the economy improves, are buying up some of the better-positioned of the failed subdivisions.

In Chanhassen LDK First Impressions home builders of Milaca, Minn., has picked up the option on an unfinished neighborhood called Serenity of Chanhassen; and in Maple Grove, Ryland Homes has stepped in for Toll Brothers to continue the build-out of the Lakes at Maple Grove townhome development, according to Maple Grove-based land brokers the Pfeffer Co.

That's the gist, but for a fuller detailed look, again, this report per Strib.

For those in Ramsey who have felt all along that the breakneck housing growth and mix changes the town experienced in the early part of this century was unwise and ill-considered, not good for the integrity of the community in general, and injurious to the character of existing neighborhoods, (with September 2003 being a particular month to live in infamy), the trend is our friend in terms of what Strib indicates as the trend of current market relity.

In-fill vs. major intrusion into outlying arenas seems to be a question asked and faced, these days. And the world's better for it.

BIG QUESTION: For those spending government money in an unparalleled cash-burn for consultation, is the trend your excuse and, hence, in a CYA way, your friend?

Just wondering.

____________UPDATE__________
A family member has long said, "I live out here because I like the large lots and distance from others; but if I am going to live crammed-in close together, it will be twenty minutes and miles closer to things."

That seems parallel to the trending that Strib reports.

The idea that commuter rail was any answer but for a handful of downtown workers as an acceptable trade-off to accepting living crammed-in close together in Ramsey, seems disproven by Northstar and Star Express ridership numbers. There's nothing really happening in Ramsey to justify shared-wall living compromises, and realistically there will not be anything but more crammed-in situations with nothing happening should Ramsey Town Center be fully built-out.

Tight shared-wall exurban living seems to not be the boom market it promised to be to early 21st century myopic land speculators in Ramsey, Elk River, and Otsego. And, the commercial real estate bubble has burst too, so don't expect a promised boom in places to work at high-paying jobs in Ramsey to happen at all soon, if ever.

Moreover, ABC Newspapers reports now what the same family member described as, "Great. Just what I need. Another light between me and Highway 10." With that having been said once already in relation to "improvements" to Ramsey Blvd. at the Clown Center; and said again now relative to plans for the intersection at Hwy 116 and Sunfish.