I attended the scoping meeting last night for Chapman University's proposed modifications to its current Specific Plan.  It was kind of a bloodbath, as expected.

On the one hand, Chapman wants to expand its campus and student enrollment, and on the other, residents of Old Towne Orange are pushing back hard.

The primary issue (based upon audience comments from last night and the neighbor-to-neighbor meetings I've attended) appears to be the students themselves.  Chapman University does a commendable job of adaptively reusing historic structures, blending new structures into the current environment, and restoring historic homes that they own near campus.  But there are enough problematic students living in the Old Towne Orange area (and well beyond, as I learned at the meeting) that the aesthetics of the architecture and restoration are overshadowed by the unruly students.  Chapman doesn't currently have enough on-campus housing to provide for the majority of its students, but wants to continue to increase the enrollment while providing additional housing along the way (but still in woefully inadequate numbers to accommodate current enrollment, much less expanded enrollment).

Therein lies the paradox:  As Chapman, Chapman parents, and investors acquire residential properties to house students and faculty, more students--not fewer--are housed off campus and into residential neighborhoods (and not within the confines of the campus); In addition, if bought by Chapman University, those homes are then no longer available to the general public for purchase, in all likelihood, forever.

As Realtors, we can't control who purchases homes - that is the responsibility of the seller. While many sellers want to find a nice family to inhabit their home and create memories just as they did, ultimately most concede to whomever is willing to pay the highest price -- it's just human nature.  In many cases that may be an investor, a Chapman University parent, or Chapman University themselves.  As noted prior, if Chapman University procures a residential property, it is one less home in the local inventory that we have to sell in the future.  From a quality-of-life perspective, I think that the City of Orange also has some responsibility to make certain that local ordinances and codes are enforced, especially when involving occupancy and parking issues. The City of Berkeley has done just that (click here to read their local ordinances regarding students in residential areas - mini-dorms).

To be fair, I suspect that the majority of Chapman University students are decent humans -- but it only takes a small percentage of the student body to create the wrong impression in the community.  I like to think that there is room for compromise -- as we get older we tend to forget that we were younger once and likely caused some of the same problems when we were in college.  But I also recall having a healthy fear and/or respect for adults when I was that age -- some of that may not be present in the current generation of college kids.  In the interest of full disclosure, I also don't live next door to a Chapman party house -- for those folks that do, I'm sure it's a different story.

Whether you are for or against Chapman University's expansion in Old Towne Orange, I would encourage you to make your voice heard.  Contact the City, the City of Orange Planning Commission, and the City of Orange City Council Members -- especially Planning and the City Council, as they will be the ultimate decision makers.  This will be an interesting process.  Click here for a recent article from the OC Register on the subject.

Direct your comments, for or against, to be included as a matter of public record for the environmental impact review (prior to June 15, 2015) to:

Anna Pehoushek
Acting Assistant Community Development Director
City of Orange
[email protected]

The photos above are of an old house in the small, historic town where I grew up (Astoria, OR).  It was right around the corner from the grade school, so I would pass it often.  It has been owned for many, many years by a prominent, but somewhat reclusive family -- although has been mostly vacant since about 1990.  The harsh weather in the region and neglect have taken their toll. The good news is that it was recently purchased by the owners of a local lumber yard, and hopefully the restoration will begin.  The house is 4,600+ sq. ft. (if one is to believe the news reports) and sits on a large lot with a view of the river.  Click here for the recent news article regarding the property.

And a blog chronicling the restoration process (click here).

Ancestors of the same family also built another prominent house in town, which has been restored and is now a museum -- photo below.  There are better photos of this property online -- I chose the photo below as it has people on the front porch, which gives you a feel for the scale of this property.  Look at the height of the front door compared to those folks -- this place is massive!  For additional photos online, click here.

Next week, Wednesday, May 27 from 6PM - 8PM there will be a scoping meeting, open to the public, regarding Chapman University's proposed amendments to the Chapman University Specific Plan.  The meeting will be in the Weimer Room at City Hall in Orange.

If you live in Old Towne Orange, or enjoy Old Towne Orange in its current state, you definitely want to attend this meeting!  A few of the highlights from their proposed amendment:

• Increase in student enrollment from 8,700 to 11,560 students (33% increase)
  
• Increase classroom seating capacity from 5,000 to 7,500 (50% increase)
  
• Increase Specific Plan area from 58+ acres to 75+ acres (29.3% increase)
  
• Decrease maximum allowable open space from 30% to 25% of the overall campus
  

There was also a phrase embedded in the document that could be nothing, or it could have a much larger impact.  The phrase is as follows:  "an enhanced circulation discussion".  What does that mean?  Does it imply closing off streets, or multiple streets, to make the campus more contiguous? For whom is circulation being enhanced?  Students or residents?

The list of construction and demolition projects is long (and expected to be completed over the next 10 years), and will impact Old Towne Orange for not just the next 10 years, but for many, many years to come.

So what are your thoughts on the matter?  Has Chapman University's expansion and influence been positive or negative for Old Towne Orange?  I suspect that an argument could be made either way.  I'm anxious to know what YOU think!

On the front page of my website, I publish the current number of "Active" MLS listings in Orange as of that morning.  Many graphs and news articles also include properties that are in "Backup", which indicates that they are under contract (in escrow) but will entertain backup offers in the event that the current escrow fails.   That number will be higher as it incudes both Active and Backup listings.  I think that showing only Active listings gives prospective buyers and sellers a more accurate view of the market.  Is it a Buyer's Market, a Seller's Market, or somewhere in between?

As of this morning, there are 210 "Active" listings in Orange.  But what does that mean?  Is that good or bad?  From a recent historic perspective, when the market was white hot in 2004 and 2005, for example, it was not uncommon for there to be only 75 to 85 properties that were "Active" in Orange on any given day -- clearly not enough inventory to satisfy the overwhelming demand at the time.  

When the market crashed in 2008, the average number of "Active" listings in Orange shot up to over 825 properties!  An increase of 860%!  Over time, that number decreased to about 350-400 properties on any given day, which produced a fairly balanced market.  A buyer could evaluate multiple properties, consider which worked best for them, make an offer, and receive a response (and maybe even some concessions) within a reasonable time.  For sellers, they had to have their homes on the market longer, but could generally negotiate reasonable terms on their replacement property.

Over time, inventory slowly receded, until towards the end of 2012 the average number of Active listings had dipped below 100 properties again.  There were expectations that the number of listings would gradually increase in the spring of 2013, as is common seasonally -- but that year it didn't happen, and prices increased in Orange approximately 27% -- lack of inventory, low interest rates, pent-up demand, and investor activity were all contributors.

Since that time, inventory has slowly crawled back up to approximately 200 properties (although it has been in the 170-180 range for the past few months).

So this morning's count of 210 properties indicates that we still do not have enough inventory to satisfy demand.  Just a little perspective as you look at that number on the home page each morning.

I stand corrected on the City of Orange not putting the number of gallons per unit on the front of the bill -- I just received my latest bill and in the green margin (on the front of the bill) it clearly states 1 unit = 748 gallons.  My bad!

I also noticed that my water usage for the current billing period isn't quite as voracious as I thought, as it covers almost 2 months (57 days to be exact).  



So here's my stats:

• 37 units for the billing period
• 27,676 gallons total for the billing period
• 177,290 gallons annualized
• 486 gallons/day
  
• $1.52/day
  
• Approximately 1/3 of 1 cent per gallon (makes bottled water look pretty astronomical!)
  

At least I'm well shy of the 750,000 - 1M gallons/year that some of the elected officials noted in the recent OC Register article (click to view) are using.  As I've adjusted my sprinklers per the new State of California guidelines, it will be interesting to see the impact on my next billing cycle (dead lawn aside, ha ha!).  Let's hope the elected officials adjust their sprinklers as well!

While driving in the middle of a pounding rainstorm this afternoon, I pulled over to park and check my emails.  There just happened to be a message from the City of Orange indicating that there was now mandatory water cutbacks in effect.  The ironic part (other than the pouring rain outside of my window) was that the City had also sent another message, an hour prior, offering sandbags (and sand) should I have any flooding issues!


In any event, it appears that we'll all be forced to restrict watering our lawns from April-October to twice per week, no more than 10 minutes per station, and not during the day (between 9AM-5PM).  In the winter months, only once/week.  Also, no watering your lawn within 48 hours of a measureable rainfall -- which makes sense.  I have a friend who is very good about reminding people, via FaceBook, to turn their sprinklers off each time it rains -- I think it's a great idea (and now it's the law!).

If you don't have a sprinkler timer with a rain delay feature, I would highly recommend purchasing one.  A few years ago I replaced my timer with a much more user friendly model (click on photo attached to this article).  I liked it so much I purchased one for a rental property of mine as well -- easier for the tenants to "drive" and I would know how to use it too if they ever had questions!  It is much more intuitive than my old unit.  The current unit allows you to delay the sprinklers coming back on for up to 72 hours -- it will come in handy during our current drought season.  And if I notice that my neighbor's lawns are a lot greener than mine in the upcoming months, I'm going to be very suspicious, ha ha!

When listing and selling a house, it is the owner's responsibility to disclose any known defects in the property (although there are exclusions for some trusts and probate situations -- although best to disclose known situations nonetheless) to the prospective buyer of the property.  

I recommend to my clients that they carefully consider whether they would want to know about a potential disclosure item if they were purchasing the property.  If the answer is "yes" then it's a good candidate for disclosure.

Some situations are a "no-brainer" -- for example recent mold discovery and remediation should always be disclosed.  Known asbestos in the house?  Disclose! Inoperative appliances, faulty electrical, plumbing issues, roof leaks?  Disclose! Pets in the house? Disclose!  A death on the property within the past 3 years? Disclose!  Death of someone from AIDS in the house? Technically, one doesn't have to disclose this situation, but a good idea to disclose anyway (and if asked specifically by the buyer, definitely disclose!). A new freeway on-ramp being built next to the house within the next few years?  Disclose! Known sexual offender in the neighborhood (on Megan's List)? Disclose!  Added a room, installed a new water heater, furnace, roof, pool, plumbing, or electrical without proper building permits? Disclose!  Loud noises in the neighborhood (neighbors, trains, planes, motorcycles, freeway noise)?  Disclose!  Poor cell service in the house -- I would disclose.

But there are also gray areas -- the roof leaked 5 years ago, was professionally repaired by a licensed roofer and hasn't leaked since?  Likely not critical to disclose, but wouldn't hurt -- providing documentation that it was repaired goes a long way as well -- and shows that you have nothing to hide.   A roof leak that you repaired recently, but that may or may not have been thoroughly rain tested? Definitely disclose! Cracks in the slab under the flooring that you don't know about or have never seen? How would you know to disclose?  But if you saw the cracks in the floor when the flooring was being replaced, then disclose!

When a buyer closes and takes possession of a house, it is not uncommon for them to find things (mostly small) that were not disclosed by the seller and/or did not become known during a home inspection.  In many cases, the seller was not aware of the situation, and therefore did not have an obligation to disclose. However, if the buyer learns, from discussions with the neighbors for example, that a seller knew about a particular item, and did not disclose it, the buyer may have recourse against the seller.  So always better to over disclose than under disclose!