Chicago-area home sales soared 71.6% in November compared with the same month last year, according to the Illinois Assn. of Realtors.

The group cited pent-up demand from buyers, low interest rates and the federal tax credit for first-time home buyers as the reason for the fifth straight monthly year-over-year improvement for the Chicago metro area.

Home sales in November and October of 2008 were extremely low as the worst of the nation’s financial crisis was hitting.

“November’s sales surge reflects the rush to beat the tax-credit deadline,” Mike Onorato, the association’s president, said in a press release. The tax-credit deadline was extended from November through April 30, 2010.

Median prices in the Chicago area, however, continued to fall.

In November, the region’s median price – where half the homes sold for more and half sold for less – was $189,000, down 9.1% from $207,995 in November 2008.

Total sales in the region, including single-family homes and condominiums, were 6,826 compared with 3,978 in November 2008.

In the city of Chicago, November sales were up 69.9% to 1,859 compared with 1,094 homes sold in November 2008. The median price in the city was $215,000, down 3.4% from November 2008.

Statewide, home sales totaled 10,361 in November, up 64% from the same month last year. The statewide median price was $155,000, down 4.3% from November 2008.

Last month, the average interest rate was 4.93% for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, according to the Realtors’ release, down from 5.0% in October.

The Illinois Assn. of Realtors’ sales figures include new and existing homes. The nine-county Chicago Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area consists of Cook, DeKalb, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry and Will.

Crain

By Eddie Baeb

Ever wonder why everyone around you is grumpy and mad? Check your zip code. A new study shows the levels of happiness by state. The New York metro area leads the way with New York as the most unhappiest state to live in followed by Connecticut and New Jersey.

The Northeast and the Midwest dominate the list of unhappy places to live, probably owing to the lack of sunshine, high housing prices, and high taxation. Less sunshine and disposable income can make even the jolliest person cranky.

The Top 10 Least Happy States To Live In:

1. New York
2. Connecticut
3. New Jersey
4. Michigan
5. Indiana
6. California
7. Illinois
8. Ohio
9. Massachusetts
10. Rhode Island

via LiveScience.com

The Top 10 Happiest States To Live In:

1. Louisiana
2. Hawaii
3. Florida
4. Tennessee
5. Arizona
6. Mississippi
7. Montana
8. South Carolina
9. Alabama
10. Maine

via LiveScience.com

What are your feelings about this list?

The popular image of wind power is of a windmill-like tower cranking away on the prairie.

The wind power at Kathleen O’Donnell’s North Side home, however, comes from a rooftop device that vaguely resembles a barber pole, without the red-and-white stripes.

O’Donnell has installed an 8-foot-tall wind turbine at her Ravenswood Gardens home, where since October it has harnessed the breezes to provide some of the electricity for the former two-flat that she and her husband spent about a year converting into a single-family home.

The premise is fairly simple: The device’s helical-blade scoops catch the wind, forcing it through the turbine and to the home’s generator, creating electricity. If the wind isn’t blowing, the home is powered by the energy grid, as usual.

An architect, O’Donnell realizes she’s something of a pioneer when it comes to wind turbines in residential use.

“It’s a little bit new,” she said. “Wind is not as ubiquitous as solar, in terms of what people are willing to do.”

But maybe not for long. She notes a broader willingness to embrace energy-conserving products these days. Such acceptance has come a surprisingly long way in a just a few years, she said, and solar panels, geothermal heating and even green roofs don’t get as many quizzical looks as they used to.

Usually, it’s all about that other green, she said — cost.

“The ‘want’ is out there, but the ‘will’ is lagging,” O’Donnell said. “Everybody wants it (when clients) call, but when they’re told this is this much money, and it will increase their overall costs, then reality begins setting in, and they start cutting it.”

Wind power is pretty much an unknown, as far as public acceptance, she said.

“Some people might look at wind and say it’s a vanity thing,” she said. “It’s untested. We just don’t know about its (economic efficiencies). The payback is probably going to be better than solar. Maybe in a year or six months we’ll be able to extrapolate that” at her house.

So she’s using her own home as a guinea pig, to an extent.

“I’m committed to it and want to make my own personal investment to suit my own pursuits and for my goals for green building,” she said.

The costs are not insignificant. Her wind turbine (manufactured by Helix Wind Corp. in San Diego) lists for $7,500. In addition, there were costs for labor, installation, wiring, permits and fabrication of a steel structure and base to support it, which drove the total to roughly $16,500, she said.

The device is capable of fully powering her home, but because it’s so new (installed in October), she hasn’t been able to monitor its energy output precisely. In the spring, she said, she intends to incorporate solar panels to help power the house, in addition to green-roof technology to help heat and cool the house.

O’Donnell may eventually move Tripartite Inc., her architecture practice, into her home, which will complicate her energy use, she said. On the other hand, it could make such conservation measures more valuable.

“I’m skeptical that the turbine is going to (cover) our total energy use, but at least it will be a large portion,” she said. “If we have an office in here and we have a lot of computers going, it will use a lot more energy.”

Nonetheless, she said, the days are gone when a homeowner can do a major renovation and not think long and hard about energy-conservation features.

“We’ve turned a corner,” she said. “You can’t do a rehab and not put in the insulation and the (efficient) windows.

“With all these houses on the market, and (a homebuyer) has to make a choice between house A and house B, and house A has a green aspect and house B missed the mark, I don’t know how you’re going to sell house B.”

Hear Mary Umberger at 12:49 and 11:15 p.m. Tuesday and Thursday and at 10:30 a.m. Saturday and Sunday on WGN-AM 720. Write to her at Money & Real Estate, Chicago Tribune, 435 N. Michigan Ave., 4th Floor, Chicago, IL 60611 or send e-mail to housingnews@comcast.net.

Mary Umberger Chicago Tribune

(Crain’s) — A company formed to develop a 102,000-square-foot shopping center in Glenview has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, thwarting a mezzanine lender’s plan to auction off the company’s stake in the project.

Central Park Development LLC had pledged its membership interest in the development at 600 Milwaukee Ave. in the north suburb as collateral for a $5.2-million loan from a subsidiary of lender CF Capital Partners Inc. The financing helped the developer launch construction last year, just months before the economy plunged.

Chicago-based CF Capital scheduled an auction for last Monday to sell the ownership stake in the partially built project, according to a public notice. But Central Park blocked the auction by filing for protection from creditors Monday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Chicago.

Mezzanine lenders typically hold such auctions only when a loan is in default, but the notice did not say why CF Capital was selling the stake. CF Capital Principal John Cadden declined to comment.

Northbrook-based Central Park member Hyun “Steve” Kang could not be reached for comment, and Mr. Kang’s attorney did not return a phone call.

Central Park picked a tough time to launch the project, as retailers nationwide have closed stores and scaled back expansion plans. Locally, the retail vacancy rate in the third quarter rose to 11.7%, the highest level since 1994, according to CB Richard Ellis Inc.

But news of the proposed retail project’s troubles still surprised Glenview Director of Development Mary Bak, who said the village thought the development was progressing, even though Mr. Kang hadn’t signed any tenants.

Central Park acquired the nine-acre development site in March 2008 for nearly $8 million. Fifth Third Bank was the main lender for the proposed retail project, providing Central Park a $20.7-million construction loan and a $2.8-million line of credit.

The construction loan was to mature Sept. 6 but was extended two months, to Nov. 6, according to property records. The line of credit comes due in March. A bank spokesman declined to comment.

Central Park owes Fifth Third, its largest creditor, $10.3 million, according to the bankruptcy petition, while the CF Capital subsidiary, Catfish Glenview LLC, is owed $6.2 million.

By Andrew Schroedter

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — It appears 0% is here for the foreseeable future.

A year ago, the Federal Reserve took its key overnight lending rate, the fed funds rate, down to near 0% for the first time in its history in an effort to keep the economy from falling into depression.

The cheap money meant lower rates for consumers on credit cards and home equity loans, as well as for many business loans.

The threat of a depression is widely acknowledged to have passed and most economists believe the economy has begun at least a modest recovery. But the Fed hasn’t moved the rates since, and experts don’t think they’re likely to do so for the foreseeable future, perhaps not until 2011.

Fed funds futures on the Chicago Board of Trade, which track the key rate, show investors aren’t betting on a hike anytime next year.

Part of that is because of talk from Fed officials. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, named Time’s Person of the Year on Wednesday, has repeated frequently that one of the problems of the Great Depression was that the Fed raised rates too quickly when the economy first showed signs of life, causing a second, much more painful downturn that extended the Depression for years.

Economists say they think the chairman and many other policymakers are willing to wait too long to raise rates rather than risk hiking too soon.

“I think they’ll leave the taps open as long as possible, until they’re absolutely certain the economy is back on track,” said Anthony Michael, head of fixed income for asset manager Aberdeen’s Singapore office.

In recent statements issued after policy-making meetings, the Fed keeps cautioning that it expects economic conditions “likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period.”

That language is widely expected to stay in place when the central bank concludes a two-day meeting Wednesday.

But leaving rates at such levels is not without significant risks.

Low rates can sow the seeds of inflation, which can eat into workers’ earnings and squeeze budgets. It also has been blamed for the fall in the value of the dollar versus other major currencies, such as the euro, which in itself can limit Americans’ buying power.

Beyond that there are concerns that cheap rates can feed asset bubbles. Many blame the Fed’s decision to leave rates at its previous record low of 1% for 12 months from June 2003 to June 2004 as a major factor in feeding the housing bubble. The low rates caused builders to overbuild, lenders to make riskier loans seeking better returns, and consumers to use the cheap credit to buy homes they ultimately would not be able to afford.

While another housing bubble is not likely, some are now worried about bubbles in U.S. stock and bond markets, as well as in some commodities such as gold. The Standard & Poor’s 500 has gained 64% since it hit a low in March.

All those fears have prompted some in the market to argue the Fed risks falling behind the curve if it doesn’t raise rates sooner rather than later. But others dismiss those fears.

“Am I worried about the Fed being behind the curve in raising rates? At this point I want to make sure there’s a curve,” said David Wyss, chief economist for Standard & Poor’s. He said a rebound in hiring could prompt the Fed to move as early as next summer.

But others think the Fed will wait until it sees both a pickup in consumer spending and inflation warning bells.

“The consumer is not a viable spender right now and won’t be throughout most of 2010,” said Jeffrey Burchill, chief financial officer for business property insurer FM Global. “If you’re not seeing spending, it’s going to be difficult to raise rates even if there’s early signs of inflation. Similarly, if you see spending but without signs of inflation, there’s no need to raise rates.”

While economists think there’s a chance the Fed could raise rates late next year, few would be surprised to see them stay on hold all the way through 2010. A survey of 48 top economists by the National Association of Business Economics foresees rates at current levels through the first quarter of 2011.

Part of the reason is the Fed has done so much more than simply cut rates to nearly 0% in an effort to spur the economy.

It has bought more than $1 trillion in mortgages in an effort to keep rates low and spur home sales and building. It also has bought hundreds of billions of Treasurys and debt issued by mortgage finance firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And it has offered a number of other programs designed to jumpstart lending to small businesses and consumers.

Many believe the Fed will have to sell a significant portion of those assets into the market before it is ready to raise rates

“There are too many things that have to happen before the Fed is in position to (raise rates) again,” said Kevin Giddis, managing director of fixed income at investment house Morgan Keegan.

By Chris Isidore