Archive for the ‘Costa Mesa, Irvine’ Category
July 27, 2008
Note: Last week we took our monthly look at housing numbers for the Costa Mesa market. This week we’ll look at the Irvine housing market numbers. The Costa Mesa numbers, which describe a market in which prices continue to decline, tell a different story than what the Irvine numbers tell us about the condition of the housing market in Orange County. To complicate matters further, Irvine detached-only stats and Irvine’s detached+condo stats are also telling us different stories.
This month’s detached-home-only stats for Irvine are telling a different story than the Irvine condo+detached home stats are telling us. The condo+detached stats described a market that is in a holding pattern. However, the detached-only stats describe a market that, although still very much a buyers’ market, is moving in a direction that is more encouraging for sellers. The only number that didn’t move in a direction that is more favorable to the seller was the number of days that Irvine homes stayed on the market.
So, this month’s numbers brings up the question: Is the long waited housing turnaround about to make its arrival in Irvine? Maybe. Or maybe homes over $500,000 are selling in more volume than in the recent past, and this is increasing the median sales price. I think that the jury is still out on this one.
In any case, it is clear that, although the Irvine housing market has suffered and continues to suffer the pain of the housing downturn, the pain is less so than for many other Orange County cities. Watching what happens in the Irvine housing market in the coming months is going to be interesting. And, of course, I’ll be checking in again next month with the updated numbers.
Here are the 2008 detached home statistics for Irvine as provide by Altos Research:
- Median Sales Price:
On July 20, 2008: $939,431
On June 15, 2008: $920,910
On May 18, 2008: $901,771
On April 20, 2008: $904,096
On March 16, 2008: $922,371
On February 17, 2008: $943,718
On January 13, 2008: $961,225
- Price Per Square Foot:
On July 20, 2008: $469
On June 15, 2008: $408
On May 18, 2008: $411
On April 20, 2008: $413
On March 16, 2008: $416
On February 17, 2008: $421
On January 13, 2008: $426
- Market Action Index:
On July 20, 2008: 17.00
On June 15, 2008: 16.54
On May 18, 2008: 16.62
On April 20, 2008: 16.57
On March 16, 2008: 16.62
On February 17, 2008: 15.86
On January 13, 2008: 16.11
Note: The Market Action Index shows the balance between potential buyers and sellers, in other words, the balance between supply and demand. Above 30 is a sellers’ market; below 30 is a buyers’ market.
- Average Days on Market:
On July 20, 2009: 109
On June 15, 2008: 77
On May 18, 2008: 82
On April 20, 2008: 96
On March 16, 2008:106
On February 17, 2008: 103
On January 13, 2008: 94
- Number of Homes on the Market (Inventory):
On July 20, 2008: 401
On June 15, 2008: 448
On May 18, 2008: 441
On April 20, 2008: 427
On March 16, 2008: 413
On February 17, 2008: 416
On January 13, 2008: 442
For more information on May housing activity in Irvine, see yesterday’s post “Reality Check: Irvine Condo and Detached Home Stats, July 2008.”
July 26, 2008
Note: The Altos graphs and numbers, which are for detached homes, provide a good overview of market trends in each city. However, condos also play a big role in the Orange County housing market; therefore, taking a look at the condo numbers in combination with the detached home numbers is also helpful. That is what we will do with the following housing numbers.
I also like these numbers for another reason: Comparing the average listing price to the average sales price reveals if sellers are being realistic with their asking price. In other words, it provides a reality check for homesellers and homebuyers.
For comparison, I included the numbers from five years ago (2003). Predictions vary, but some think that Orange County housing prices will eventually return to these levels.
According to these numbers, Irvine real estate is still in a holding pattern. The average sales price went down, and the median sales price also went down slightly; however, the price per square foot went up slightly. This is what these numbers have told us for some months now: the Irvine condo-plus-detached home market is in a holding pattern. Tomorrow we’ll take a look at Irvine’s detached home stats to see if they verify what these condo-plus-detach home stats are telling us. Preview: a somewhat different story.
Now for our reality check: Note that the number of sales is down from where it was at this time last year. In addition, the number of sales is at only about half of where it was five years ago. However, more Irvine homes sold in this period that the previous period, which is not a surprise for this time of year. Maybe this and the fact that prices in Irvine have not declined significantly for some months is what encouraged homeowners to once again increase their asking prices: This month the increase in asking price was about $40,000 more than was asked in the previous period, last month it was about $10,000 more, the month before that it was approximately $55,000 more. Also note that the current average listing price is nearly double the average sales price.
Here are the Irvine condo+detached housing numbers for 2008.
- Average Listing Price for:
- Week Ending July 20: $1,209,973
- Week Ending June 11: $1,066,271
- Week Ending May 14: $1,055,460
- Week Ending April 16: $999,976
- Week Ending March 12: $1,023,403
- Week Ending February 6: $971,094
- Average Sales Price for:
- Apr-Jun 2008: $676,963
- Mar-May 2008: $692,562
- Feb-April 2008: $704,150
- Jan-March 2008: $699,798
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: $743,982
- Nov 2007-Jan 2008: $797,749
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): $795,443
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): $491,703
- Median Sales Price for:
- Apr-Jun 2008: $580,000
- Mar-May 2008: $585,000
- Feb-April 2008: $578,000
- Jan-March 2008: $579,000
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: $619,000
- Nov 2007-Jan 2008: $650,000
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): $667,500
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): $453,000
- Average Price/SF for:
- Apr-Jun 2008: $360
- Mar-May 2008: $356
- Feb-April 2008: $356
- Jan-March 2008: $359
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: $365
- Nov 2007-Jan 2008: $369
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): $408
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): $276
- Number of sales:
- Apr-Jun 2008: 553
- Mar-May 2008: 536
- Feb-April 2008: 485
- Jan-March 2008: 442
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: 398
- Oct-Dec 2007: 421
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): 677
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): 1,119
Source: Trulia
For more information on the Irvine housing numbers, see tomorrow’s post “The Irvine Market Report: Detached Home Stats, July 2008.”
July 25, 2008
PHOTO OF HERITAGE PARK COURTESY CITY OF IRVINE
El Camino is one of Irvine’s more affordable areas for detached homes. However, today we’ll take a look at what some of the condos in this area have sold for. All of these El Camino condos are three bedrooms and two baths.
To see what is currently available as well as additional information on what has sold recently in the area, see the El Camino map.
1 Montgomery #46: 1977 condo, 1633 SF
Sold for: $375,000 on 06/09/2008
Previously sold for: $337,500 on 02/22/2008 & $565,000 on 05/26/2005
5228 Walnut #10: 1980 condo, 1482 SF
Sold for: $1000 on 03/19/08 (The bank must be involved with this one.)
Previously sold for: $475,000 on 07/30/2004
41 Mirror Lake: 1974 condo, 1164 SF
Sold for: $425,000 on 03/03/2008
Previously sold for: $167,500 on 08/ 31/1994
1 Denver #80: 1977 condo, 1504 SF
Sold for: $455,000 03/03/2008
Previously sold for: $355,000 on 02/18/2003
9 Helena #26: 1977 condo, 1128 SF
Sold for: $450,000 03/12/2008
Previously sold for: $226,500 on 10/10/2000
133 Oval Road #2: 1972 condo, 1091 SF
Sold for: $370,000 on 02/21/2008
Previously sold for: $160,500 on 06/30/1999
July 20, 2008
Note: I hadn’t planned on writing about the Orange County Great Park development for a while, but a comment I received recently made it seem timely.
The Orange County Great Park development generates a lot of controversy. An example is a comment that I received to one of my recent Great Park posts. Here it is:
Marsha said:
You should see the article at www.newsOC.org that talks about the Great Park coverup–it really tells it like it is.
My reply is:
I don’t know enough about this right now to give an opinion, but this is certainly a question that needs to be addressed. And I imagine that counter claims have been stated, so I would have to hear the other side of the argument (from the Navy, Lennar, and the City of Irvine) before coming to any conclusions. I don’t have this information right now, so I will reserve judgment. The Great Park development seems to generate some very strong opinions, and whether this turns out to be a valid criticism or political maneuvering is a question that I am not ready to answer. I will keep it in mind as I look into the Great Park development.
Answering these questions will help me to understand the issue better and the motivation behind the criticism:
I noticed only one post on the newsOC blog (e-newsletter) that you linked to. Are there currently other posts on this site, or is this the only post? Also, I was looking for a date on the post in the newsOC blog as well as on the the Financial Times News article that was linked to but didn’t see any (other than a 2008 copyright). Do you have the dates that these articles/posts were written?
In addition, would you provide a link to the Financial Times News. This was cited as a source in your link, but I am having trouble locating it on the web. It would be helpful to know more about the publication. I am assuming that the Financial Times News is different than the Financial Times. Who are the publishers, and where are they located?
July 19, 2008
Note: The Altos graphs and numbers, which are for detached homes, provide a good overview of market trends in each city. However, condos also play a big role in the Orange County housing market, so it is helpful to take a look at these numbers in combination with the detached home numbers. That is what we will do with the following housing numbers.
I also like these numbers for another reason: Comparing the average listing price to the average sales price reveals whether sellers are being realistic with their asking price. In other words, it provides a reality check for homesellers and homebuyers.
For comparison, I included the numbers from five years ago (2003). Predictions vary, but some predict Orange County housing prices will eventually return to these levels.
Yesterday’s post, which covered the status of the detached home market in Costa Mesa, revealed that a bottom has not been reached in this market. Today’s post, which covers the condo and detached home market in Costa Mesa, reveals the same. Note that the number of sales is about the same as it was this time last year.
Now for the reality check: Homeowners are asking on average about $170,000 more than the average sales price. Also, homeowners’ average asking price increased by over $9,000 from the previous period, but the average sales price decreased by over $36,000. It seems that Costa Mesa homesellers haven’t come to terms with current market conditions.
Here are the condo+detached Costa Mesa housing numbers for 2008:
- Average Listing Price for:
- Week Ending July 09: $688,495
- Week Ending June 09: $679,047
- Week Ending May 07: $696,330
- Week Ending April 09: $677,338
- Week Ending March 05: $678,172
- Week Ending Jan 30: $701,471
- Average Sales Price for:
- Apr-Jun 2008: $517,483
- Mar-May 2008: $553,586
- Feb 2008-April 2008: $575,432
- Jan 2008-Mar 2008:$591,601
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: $589,408
- Nov 2007-Jan 2008: $620,022
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): $733,267
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): $476,137
- Median Sales Price for:
- Apr-Jun 2008: $493,307
- Mar-May 2008: $520,148
- Feb 2008-April 2008: $530,150
- Jan-Mar 2008: $540,000
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: $540,000
- Nov 2007-Jan 2008: $565,000
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): $705,000
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): $425,000
- Average Price/SF for:
- Apr-Jun 2008:$354
- Mar-May 2008: $399
- Feb-April 2008: $440
- Jan-Mar 2008: $444
- Oct-Dec 2007: $450
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): $502
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): $362
- Number of Sales for:
- Apr-Jun 2008: 220
- Mar-May 2008: 194
- Feb 2008-April 2008: 171
- Jan-Mar 2008: 164
- Dec 2007-Feb 2008: 134
- Nov 2007-Jan 2008: 133
- One year ago (Apr-Jun 2007): 223
- Five years ago (Apr-Jun 2003): 342
Source: Trulia
Note: For more information on the Costa Mesa housing numbers, see yesterday’s post “The Costa Mesa Market Report: Detached Home Stats, July 2008.“
July 18, 2008
A look at this month’s stats tells us that the housing market turnaround hasn’t arrived in Costa Mesa. All the indicators except the number of days on the market show a market that is even more in the buyers’ favor than it was last month. And don’t get too excited by the decrease in the number of day on the market. The paltry amount of the change in this number makes it insignificant.
Here are the 2008 detached home statistics for Costa Mesa, as provided by Altos Research:
July 06, 2008: $682,521
June 08, 2008: $688,307
May 11, 2008: $690,275
April 20, 2008: $702,668
March 09, 2008: $716,286
February 03, 2008: $735,900
January 06, 2008: $748,007
July 06, 2008: $380
June 08, 2008: $384
May 11, 2008: $391
April 20, 2008: $403
March 09 2008: $415
February 03 2008: ~ $424
January 06, 2008: $430
July 06, 2008: 15.87
June 08, 2008: 16.58
May 11, 2008: 15.96
April 20, 2008: 15.60
March 09, 2008: 16.04
February 03 2008: 15.91
January 06, 2008 16.03
Note: The Market Action Index shows the balance between potential buyers and sellers, in other words,
the balance between supply and demand. Above 30 is a sellers’ market; below 30 is a buyers’ market.
July 06, 2008: 94
June 08, 2008: 98
May 11, 2008: 108
April 20, 2008: 106
March 09, 2008: 105
February 03 2008: 93
January 06, 2008: 84
- Number of Homes on the Market (Inventory):
July 06, 2008: 305
June 08, 2008: 300
May 11, 2008: 301
April 20, 2008: 307
March 09, 2008: 304
February 03 2008: 315
January 06, 2008: 328
Note: For more information on the Costa Mesa housing numbers, see tomorrow’s post “Reality Check: Costa Mesa Condo & Detached Home Stats, July 2008.”
July 13, 2008
Note: I have spent a lot of time in the last few weeks on the development that is occurring at the former El Toro Marine Base. This is appropriate considering the impact the Great Park development will have on Orange County and beyond. But this will be my last on the topic for a while. In the future, I’ll write updates on the Great Park development, probably on a monthly basis.
Some have complained about the amount of time that it is taking to build the Orange County Great Park. This shows a certain amount of attention deficit disorder and a lack of understanding of what is being built. This is the development of a great metropolitan park—not the common subdivision-shopping mall-parks development. As I stated in previous posts, the housing-malls-parks development serves a purpose, but they are a dime a dozen in Orange County. The building of a metropolitan park is a more visionary and, therefore, long-term undertaking.
It might be just a matter of preference as to which is a better use of this 1,347 acres in the middle of Orange County, but I am going with the visionary. To say that a metropolitan park is not a good use for this land is similar to saying that San Diego’s Balboa Park is all very nice, but a better use for this land is to convert it into subdivisions and malls with some parks.
In hindsight some things could have been handled differently. Originally, the sports park was planned as one of the first Great Park feature to be available for public use. It would have been wise to keep the sports park, which is likely be a popular feature, on the fast track. As Doug Blonsky of New York’s Central Park Conservancy said: “I don’t think that the Great Park is necessarily behind right now, but you do want to get something in the ground growing as soon as you can.” However, Blonsky also stated that the New York Central Park Conservancy took years to perfect its master plan. Well, the sport park now is being given high priority and the preview park, which is the 27.5 acres located around the balloon site, is offering the public access to the Great Park.
Previously, I looked at the Great Park budget to answer the question: Is this thing “buildable”? My conclusion, after looking at possible revenue, was: yes, it is. Now I’ll ask and answer two other questions: First, is the Great Park development proceeding in a timely, efficient manner? Yes, for a metropolitan park in the mold of Central Park, Balboa Park or Golden Park, it is. Second, is the Great Park likely to be a benefit to Orange County and beyond? Yes. Absolutely!
Now here is my question to you concerning the Great Park development: Do you want common, or do you want visionary?
GRAPHIC COURTESY THE ORANGE COUNTY GREAT PARK CORPORATION
July 9, 2008
I wanted to share these before and after pictures with everyone. Above is hangar 10 of the former El Toro Marine base as it is today. Below is hangar 10 as it was a short time ago. The transformed hangar 10 is the beginning of Lennar’s Main Street USA which will be in its Life Long Learning District. The Life Long Learning District is one of the three neighborhoods that Lennar has planned for the Orange County Great Park. The transformed hangar will also be part of Lennar’s participation in the Orange County Great Park third anniversary party, “The Festival of Flight” (see link below). The Orange County Great Park Corporation is hosting the event. The Great Park Conservancy will also participate. I hear free frisbees will be available at the Conservancy’s booth.
Great Park 2008 events will include:
- July 11: The Jewel of Orange County at the Great Park balloon site, includes cocktails, jewelry auction, alfresco dining, music of singer/songwriters Randy Bachman and Burton Cummings of Canadian Hall of Fame Band The Guess Who with special performance of hit songs of Bachman Turner Overdrive
- July 12: The Festival of Flight in the Preview Park, includes exhibits, activities, performances, food & beverage as well as the return of the free balloon rides
- August-September: Food and beverage at the Hangar Cafe (hangar 244), free day and night flights on the Great Park balloon, dancing on Friday evenings and performing arts on Saturday evenings at the Timeline Stage and Dance Floor
- August-October: Photography exhibition, oral history project
How to stay informed:
PHOTOS COURTESY LENNAR”S GREAT PARK NEIGHBORHOODS
For more information on the Orange County Great Park, see “Building the Orange County Great Park: Bring in the Revenue.”
July 7, 2008
This is the third post in a series on the Orange County Great Park development. For yesterday’s post, see “Building the Orange County Great Park: The Budget.”
In yesterday’s post, I wrote that Lennar’s development plans have changed and therefore some of the residential tax money that Irvine had planned to use for the Great Park development will not be readily available. This has caused some to speculate that the demise of Irvine’s Great Park development is near. However, as I mentioned in that post, in addition to the retail sales taxes and commercial property taxes from Lennar’s development that will be available in the near term, other revenues will also be available to build the public portion of the Orange County Great Park. These include accrued interest on money on hand, income from property leases, grants, private donations, advertising, corporate sponsorships, admission fees, and corporate and non-profit partnerships. Many of these corporate and non-profit organizations have stated their willingness to raise funds and sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU).
Here are a few examples:
- Numerous businesses have expressed willingness to commit funds to development in the Great Park. For example, Wild Rivers in conjunction with the Discovery Museum want to partner on building a water park, and various businesses want to partner on building the sports park.
- Numerous organizations have expressed willingness to commit funds to build cultural and non-profit facilities. For example, the National Archives is interested in building a west coast facility at the Great Park, and the County of Orange Recorder Office has pledged support for this. Also, the Children and Families Commission approved an MOU for the planning and development of a non-profit children and families resource center at the Great Park. Second Harvest food bank already has a facility on the Great Park grounds.
- Great Park land will continue to be leased for uses such as RV storage and agriculture.
- The Great Park Conservancy is raising money for a demonstration garden.
- Senator Barbara Boxer pledged to seek federal fund for the development of a 30- to 50-acre community farm, restoration of a World War II hangar that would be available for public use, and building a storm water reclamation and management system.
So, yes, the housing market is affecting the Great Park development. Fortunately, many options are available to fund the development, and the necessary adjustments are being made.
I had thought that this would be the end of my posts on the Great Park development until at least next month. However, I am finding that I might have more to say on this. So I just might write a bit more on this in the upcoming week. Then it will be on to other topics.
July 6, 2008
This is the second post in a series on the building the Orange County Great Park. For part one, see yesterday’s post, “Building the Orange County Great Park: Is This Thing Buildable?“.
The Plan
The build out of the Orange County Great Park is estimated at about $1.1 billion. Since the goal of this project is to provide a visionary metropolitan park, instead of the common housing-mall-parks developments (which can be useful, but are also a dime a dozen in the O.C.), the Great Park development will be a long-term process (perhaps 50 years or so). However, some features are already available for public use; others will be available in the next one to two years.
For example, the free balloon rides and the beginning stage of the surrounding preview park are available now. The 27.5 acre preview park currently contains the balloon site, picnic areas, a walkable timeline of Orange County history on one of the old runway, a visitor center, and hangar 244—the El Toro aircraft hangar that has been refurbished into a cafe. A sports park is planned to be available in the next one to two years.
A more detailed and impressive summary of what the Great Park Design Studio and Great Park board have in mind for the long-term development of the Park is available by watching the June 16th board meeting. If you don’t have time to watch, I will probably write an update next month. Also, you can see the list of events that are being offered in the near term by viewing the Great Park calendar of events.
How will this be paid for?
The Great Park board approved a $60.3M budget for the fiscal year which started on July 1, 2008. This money will be used for projects such as further development of the preview park, demolishing runways and 43 military buildings, creating the wildlife corridor, working on the design schematic, overseeing the park project, and creating a community facilities district.
Staff expects the Great Park revenues for this fiscal year to be about $8M. However, in spite of the difference between revenue and expenditures, funds are and will be available for continued development. In fact, the Park had about $104M on hand on June 30, 2008, and the Great Park staff estimates that the Great Park funds on hand by the next fiscal year (July 2009-July 2010) will be about $99M. Irvine’s city funds will not be used as part of the funding for the Great Park development. The City’s funds and the Great Park funds are in separate accounts.
So where will the revenues come from? I’ll write about that in tomorrow’s post.
Tomorrow’s post: “Building the Orange County Great Park: Bring in the Revenue“
