Archive for the ‘Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin’ Category
August 27, 2008
“IrvineRenter” over at the Irvine Housing Blog (excellent blog if you’re interested in Irvine or just want a good read) posted a clever little post called “Columbus Lost” yesterday. The post compares Christopher Columbus’ voyage and his “difficulty getting crewmen to serve because they believed the world was flat, and if they sailed far enough, they would fall off” to a myth about real estate that prices always goes up and will never “fall off” (as seen case in point in Columbus Grove).
This comparison of inverse myths got a little chuckle out of me. After hundreds of years, people are still behaving foolishly and going on popular opinion versus scientific research and trends. In Columbus’ time, there was science to support a round earth (stars seen in one region, but not others; the way the sun set; etc.). In our time, there was science to support the idea of a housing bubble and prices going up and up, to only fall and fall thereafter (just look at data from the early ’90s).
IrvineRenter comments on the buyers of Columbus Grove who bought at the peak had their resale values pushed “off the edge of the flat earth.” IrvineRenter continues “… the rate of decline is largely dependent upon the amount of must-sell inventory in specific areas. So far, the areas that have fallen the quickest have been those with large percentages of subprime loans (Santa Ana,) large numbers of new homes (Columbus Grove,) or both (Riverside County).” An interesting depiction of the trouble areas. Of course, in the long run, though, Columbus Grove has a higher likelihood of being able to bounce back given it’s prime (not sub-prime!) location, schools, and new development.
Interestingly enough, though, there are a quite of few homes in the Villages of Columbus that are selling for more than what was paid. Just look in Columbus Square (especially near this home). Whether they will sell or not is another question… my feeling is that they’re overpriced. However, those homes are not painting a picture of heightened trouble in comparison to surrounding neighborhoods. Also, these homes did sell later when the market was already falling, so the previous purchase price may already be reflecting a drop.
Regardless, many Columbus resale homes are telling one story… a “yikes! get me out of this mess!” one. These homes do hint to the idea of new developments being a target for accelerated decline.
428 Hudson Dr, Tustin 92782; 4 bed/4 bath; 2,302 sq ft house; $729,900 (down 9.6% from last sale of $806,500)
1494 Voyager Dr, Tustin 92782; 5 bed/4 bath; 3,088 sq ft house; $850,000 (down 13.7% from last sale of $985,000)
78 Liberty St, Tustin 92782; 3 bed/3 bath; 1,400 sq ft condo; $499,000 (down 16.2% from last sale of $596,000)
661 Loran Way, Tustin 92782; 4 bed/5 bath; 3,118 sq ft house; $849,000 (down 26.2% from last sale of $1,150,500)
August 26, 2008
If you are like my husband and I were when we were buying our first place, it was sinara to the dream house and hello affordable condo. In perusing this week’s price reductions and new listings, I came across a few condos that would appeal to those “budget-minded” folks. Thanks to this market, there are some great deal on condos… only in this market can you get three bedrooms for under $200k.
555 S La Veta Park Cir #234, Orange 92868; 1 bed/1 bath; 599 sq ft; La Veta Monterey Condos; $139,900; recently reduced from $144,900 (original price $154,900)
123 S Cross Creek Rd #F, Orange 92869; 1 bed/1 bath; 738 sq ft; $175,000; reduced from $195,000 (original price $297,000)
1800 E Heim Ave #34, Orange 92865; 2 bed/1 bath; 907 sq ft; $179,900; reduced from original price $189,900
3139 E Chapman Ave #1b, Orange 92869; 2 bed/2 bath; 1,022 sq ft; $185,000 (original price $219,000)
3139 E Chapman Ave #18c, Orange 92869; 3 bed/2 bath; 1,184 sq ft; $199,900; just reduced from $218,500 (original price $269,900)
855 N Lemon St #1, Orange 92867; 2 bed/2 bath; 1,062 sq ft; $199,900; just listed
August 19, 2008
Wow, time flies when the market is doing crazy things. It’s already been three months since I last checked the stats of the market in Tustin. Let’s check out the numbers, you won’t believe what you’ll see.
Thanks to Altos Research, we see that the median Tustin single family home price is… drum roll please, dummm da dumm dumm, $648, 407! What’s so crazy about this number? It is actually UP from three months ago. Ok, ok, so it’s up only $3,350 (0.5%), but come on… it’s up! It’s still down from late February, but what’s surprising is that it’s not down again. Is it the beginning signs of a market recover or the tranditional seasonal sales hike we see in the summer? Only time will tell.
There are slightly more homes on the market now (238 homes versus 225 homes in May). The number of days the average Tustin home has been on the market is relatively the same, at 124 days (up from 118).
(Data and graphs courtesy Altos Research)
Properties that are “Bakery Fresh”… Yum!
13292 Fairmont Way, North Tustin 92705; 4 bed/2 bath; 2,224 sq ft; $569,000
14782 Foxcroft Rd, Tustin 92780; 4 bed/3 bath; 2,229 sq ft house; $599,900
12582 Ranchwood Rd, North Tustin 92705; 3 bed/2 bath; 1,820 sq ft house; $749,000
Properties that Should be on the Day-Old Discount Shelf in the Back
1182 Mear Lane, Tustin 92780; 3 bed/2 bath house; 1,427 sq ft; $499,900 (originally $629,900); 552 days on the market
1472 Lance Dr, Tustin 92780; 4 bed/2 bath house; 1,606 sq ft; $625,500 (originally $749,900); 508 days on the market
1447 Charleston, Tustin 92710; 5 bed/5 bath house; 4,191 sq ft; $1,579,000 (originally $1,695,000); 423 days on the market
August 18, 2008
When I haven’t been watching the endless hours of the Olympics, I’ve been tracking price reductions in Santa Ana. I am proud to announce this week’s bronze, silver, and gold medalists in the housing price reduction competition.
Bronze Medalist
3710 S Bear St #83, Santa Ana 92704
2 bed/2 bath; 1,093 sq ft; $219,900 (down 12%)
Price History:
Aug 15, 2008: listed for $250,000
Aug 16, 2008: reduced to $219,900
Silver Medalist
2814 W Cubbon St, Santa Ana 92704
3 bed/2 bath; 1,347 sq ft house; $299,900 (down 21%)
Price History:
Apr 16, 2008: listed for $380,000
Jun 16, 2008: reduced to $350,000
Aug 16, 2008: reduced to $299,900
Gold Medalist
2321 W Borchard Ave Santa Ana 92704
4 bed/2 bath; 14550 sq ft; $300,000 (down 36%)
Price History:
May 8, 2008: listed at $472,000
Jul 7, 2008: reduced to $372,000
Aug 15, 2008: reduced to $300,000
August 17, 2008
If you’re a first-time home buyer, you’re in luck. The American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, passed at the end of July, has some attractive tax breaks built in for home-buyer newbies (per the “Help for Home Buyers” article by Shelly Banjo in the Wall Street Journal). While it’s being advertised as a $7,500 tax creidt, it’s really more like an interest-only loan. If you buy a home between April 8, 2008 and July 1, 2009, you can claim the credit. However, you would end up paying $500 per year, beginning the second year after you buy the house (buy in 2008, pay in 2011 on your 2010 tax return). Also, there are income limits, to get the $7,500, you can’t have joint income of more that $150,000 (or $75,000 individually). As you increase in income, the amount of the credit phases out. Finally, you cannot have bought a home within the three years prior to your purchase (i.e. first-time buyers are targeted).
The positives? Gives buyers an incentive to buy now and not wait until after July 2009. Helps buyers offset the initial cost of buying a home (closing costs, down payments, necessary renovations, etc.).
The negatives? It’s not free money. In my opinion, it furthers the notion that taking on more debt is a-okay. Really, this tax credit should be treated by buyers as debt, they have to pay it back. However, no interest means money (and your own interest you’ve earned with money in the bank) in your pocket today… just make sure you can fork up the $500 a year later on.
Well, if you’re looking to buy and your a first-time buyer, then I say go for it! Buy now and claim the tax credit. To get you going, here are my top picks in Orange, a great city to get a larger place in sometimes a quality neighborhood for less (eh-hem, the first-time buyers’ dream)…
Condos (when you can’t afford the home, a perfect choice)
415 N Clark St #B, Orange 92868; 2 bed/2 bath; 1,080 sq ft; one common wall; possible garage?; $249,000
2100 W Palmyra Ave #58, Orange 92868; 3 bed/2 bath; 1,343 sq ft; townhouse; fireplace; two-car garage; one common wall; $299,000 (down from $344,000)
Homes (if you can afford, consider yourself lucky)
2805 E Hamilton Ave, Orange 92867; 4 bed/2 bath; 1,303 sq ft; 6,099 sq ft standard lot; newly redone; $419,000
4629 W Tiller Ave, Orange 92868; 5 bed/3 bath; 1,885 sq ft; 9,964 sq ft cul-de-sac lot; pool; $425,000
August 15, 2008
There’s been a flurry of action in La Veta Monterey condos. A few sold in July and many more are on the market. What’s this complex have to offer? Well, the location is ideal for many… near St. Joseph Hospital, CHOC, the 22 freeway, and the 5 freeway. The complex has two pools (one that is saltwater), a partial basketball court, clubhouse, laundry facilities, and a playground for the little ones. What’s this complex got going against it? Well, the HOA dues for a one-bedroom are $245 and $280 for a two-bedroom. It’s also in a “moderately” desirable area, on the border of Santa Ana and Mainplace Mall. The one-bedrooms on the market are priced pretty fairly, although I’d still offer lower. Meanwhile, some of the two-bedrooms seem to be out of the ball park with only a couple that are priced competitively. See below for details.
(Photo courtesy GoogleMaps)
Sold:
Unit P13; 1 bed/1 bath; 596 sq ft; sold for $156,000 on Jul 17, 2008
Unit G6; 2 bed/2 bath; 944 sq ft; sold for $211,650 on Jul 15, 2008
Unit T6; 2 bed/2 bath; 944 sq ft; sold (or foreclosed) for $180,400 on Jul 16, 2008; now listed for $245,000
On the Market:
Unit O9; 1 bed/1 bath; 650 sq ft; listed for $154,900 on Jul 30, 2008
Unit O15; 1 bed/1 bath; 650 sq ft; listed for $140,000 (down from $165,000) on Jun 19, 2008
Unit O16; 1 bed/1 bath; 653 sq ft; listed for $159,900 in late May 2008
Unit A12; 2 bed/2 bath; 990 sq ft; listed for $269,900 on Jun 2, 2008
Unit R1; 2 bed/2 bath; 943 sq ft; listed for $249,000 (down from $269,000) on May 13, 2008
Unit F2; 2 bed/2 bath; 989 sq ft; listed for $200,00 (down from $260,000) on Jul 23, 2008
Unit C6; 2 bed/2 bath; 990 sq ft; listed for $245,500 on Jul 25, 2008
Unit M6; 2 bed/2 bath; 990 sq ft; listed for $265,000 on May 11, 2008
August 13, 2008
There’s a lot of discussion about the plans for Prospect Village for Old Town Tustin, housing/retail development built where the old Utt Juice Co. building was. Last week, the OC Register’s Elysse James wrote an article (“Prsopect Village fits, developer hopes“) which highlighted the new development and the ensuing controversy.
According to RPP Architects, the mixed-use development “provides housing, office, and retail development in Old Town along Prospect Avenue. The development is set to include 12 three-story town homes with retail and office space on the first floor, and two levels of residence on the top floors. A 9,000 Sq. Ft., two-story commercial building is being proposed on an adjacent parcel.” While it sounds all cool and hip, much of the opposition is pointed toward the size and the scale of the development. People are worried that it’ll dwarf the other historic buildings nearby.
I’d be more concerned with the price and the developer’s ability to sell these units. James covered some of this concern in her article, such as including Tustin resident Sharon Spiak’s comment, “I think it’s a little expensive in today’s market.” And with prices starting at the mid-$800k’s, I have to agree!
I feel like I’ve got déjà vu. Almost a year ago, I posted on those new live-work-play lofts in Santa Ana. There was a lot of hype about them… a great place for people to have work space and residential space all in one. Not to sound like the constant critic, but I wasn’t so sure. They seemed pricey ($700k-$800k) at the time. And now they’re down to the $600k’s.
It’s great to be able to go downstairs to work, but for $800k, wouldn’t you rather live a few miles up the road in North Tustin? I know I would pick these places (12521 Barrett Ln for $675k, 18092 Allegheny Dr for $800k, or 12972 Wheeler Pl for $800k) over a mixed-use home… of course, I don’t run a business out of my home, though.
The other thing that the developers are counting on is that homeowners will view these properties as income property. As James’ article mentions, “Developer John H. Tillotson Jr. likened the live-work aspect to the duplexes of days gone by. People would live in one and rent out the other, said Tillotson, co-owner of Pelican Properties.” So, rather than renting out a residential unit attached to your house, you’d rent out retail space. Good idea in theory, but not so sure it’ll be attractive to real buyers.
Quick facts on Prospect Village from James’s article:
- Prices start at mid-$800,000
- Homeowner association fees are $155 a month
- Property tax rate of 1.1 percent.
- Homes include granite countertops, recessed panel cabinets, stainless steel appliances, crown moldings, Kohler sinks, tubs and toilets, high-speed Internet wiring, energy efficient appliances.
- Two-car garages with gated access. Public parking lot across Prospect Avenue.
- The city approved special zoning to allow homes and commercial space in the same lots. Info: 714-550-4411.
August 12, 2008
We’ve heard it again and again… kitchens and bathrooms sell homes. Remodeling your kitchen and bathroom is said to bring you the highest return on your investment when you go to sell. But, what can you do without having to do a full renovation and remodel? Let’s check my new favorite blog and find out…
Nickie of the Home Stagging Blog recently posted about how to “Freshen Up Your Bathrooms for Buyers.” Her easy and affordable tips include:
- Display new towels “artfully.”
- Rid your shower extra bottles.
- Hang art.
- Add fresh flowers an candles.
- Replace shower curtains.
- Remove bath rugs.
Here are some properties that “get it” when it comes to showing off their baths:
12891 Hickory Branch Rd, North Tustin 92705 (4 bed/2 bath; 1,875 sq ft; $599,900)
1610 E 21st St, Santa Ana 92705 (3 bed/2 bath; 1,594 sq ft; $629,000)
1621 N Marquart St, Orange, 92867 (4 bed/3 bath; 2,418 sq ft; $679,000)
And to make the point of how a bad bath can make any buyer go “Eww, umm… I don’t think so,” here are some examples of sellers who need to follow these tips.
422 S Sycamore St, Santa Ana 92701 (3 bed/2 bath; 1,119 sq ft; $299,900)
65 S Olive St, Orange, 92866 (3 bed/3 bath; 2,103 sq ft; $649,900)
2703 E Blueridge Ave, Orange 92867 (4 bed/3 bath; 3,156 sq ft; $869,000)
Recent Redfin Posts:
Neighborhood Spotlight: Barcelona
A Final Review of the Housing Bill
Lend a Hand at the Incredible Edible Park
It Is What You Say, Not How You Say It
Orange: Sold over asking… Can you still create a bidding war?
August 8, 2008
You would think anyone making an offer over asking would be crazy these days. Take this nice house with a pool in Orange (shown below with the blue house flag). It was listed for $499,000 when an offer for $509,000 was accepted. Okay, okay, so it’s only 2% over asking. Not a huge deal, at least not like what were seeing four or five years ago.
However, this house still raises a good point. Can you still create bidding wars or preemptive high offers with aggressive pricing? The first time on the market, this house was priced the same as others a coupe blocks over. The second time on the market, the house was a lot less than these comparables. However, two new entries just a block away lowered the bar (listed at $448k and $469k at the time). So, sadly for sellers, no, it is not likely you can create a bidding war with competitively pricing your house to sell. Now, pricing your house below what is considered competitive (let’s say $350-400k in this case) is another scenario that I’d like to see tested.
824 E Wilson Ave Orange, CA 92867
3 bed/2 bath house; 1,475 sq ft; built in 1959
Sold price: $509,000; Sold date: July 10, 2008
Listing history:
Date unknown: Listed, priced at $649,000
Sep 15, 2007: Reduced to “$599,000″
Jun 19, 2008: After being off the market, listed again at a price of $499,000
Jun 24, 2008: Status changed from “Active” to “Contingent” (usually means in escrow and confident with buyer)
August 7, 2008
It used to be that people would trade in their short commutes for a bigger house with a nice yard for their kids to play in. They’d prefer to spend an hour in the car everyday if it meant that their kids would have a safe neighborhood to ride their bikes around in and the family could have the house of their dreams (at the price they could afford).
Well, speaking of affordability, that long commute is getting less and less affordable. That dream house out in the suburbs is becoming less of a reality and more of a dream. It’s not just gas prices and inflation that are too blame. In Orange County, we have a distinct lack of reliable public transportation. Living up in Yorba Linda and commuting down to Irvine wouldn’t be such a problem if there was a rail line that whipped you right down.
Mary Ann Milbourn’s post on Lansner’s blog (“Long commute? Good-bye O.C.“) discusses these issues in the context of a recent release from RREEF Research. The release claims “A short automotive commute, a commute by public transport, and even a walking or bicycling commute has become more appealing. Thus, demand will increase for residential locations with good access to employment centers and will decrease for peripheral suburban bedroom communities that are poorly served by transit.” Milbourn ponders the question if this reverse suburban migration will pose a challenge for the OC in attracting residents in the future.
Milbourn describes a possible transportation-seeking phenomenon that may have already occurred: “Experts already have suggested that a tight rental market in North County may not just be due to cheaper apartments, but may also be evidence of people migrating closer to public transit and jobs in Los Angeles.”
A recent article in the L.A. Times by Paloma Esquive (“Busy bus route reveals a cross section of O.C.“) depicts the long commute on the packed (and getting more packed) 57 line. Esquive talks about potential solutions to ease the congestion: “At one time there were plans to replace the bus with light rail, but years of studies, turf wars and battles for funding made those efforts futile. In the end, the OCTA proposed a rapid bus system with fewer stops. The new buses should be ready in 2010, officials say.” More buses is better than nothing, but it still seems like a long way off for implementation for such a mediocre solution.
The San Diego Union Tribune ran an article (“Fuel for thought: Gas prices changing commuters’ attitudes“) in July about the changing behaviors of consumers with gas prices and a lack of a convenient and reliable public transportation service. “As a result, drivers here will have to learn more creative coping skills, from changing how they commute to possibly rethinking where they live.” The article noted that change in behavior has already been happening with changes in what cars are being purchased, according to car dealers interviewed. Also, “San Diego-area transit officials are reporting heavier bus and trolley ridership, as well as a near-record number of van pools.”
Will we see a mass exodus from our OC suburban areas? I would hope we would rather see some nice light rail lines put in.
