Thursday, June 30, 2016

BREXIT AND U.S. REAL ESTATE: IS BRITAIN'S FOLLY OUR FORTUNE?



Last week, Britain voted to leave the European Union, an unexpected and historic decision that has been scrutinized all over the world - and is causing the kind of political hindsight and regret within Britain that has many asking if the vote can be undone. Or redone.

But while Brits wonder what comes next for them, aftershocks are reverberating through the rest of the world. The net worth of the world's top earners got clobbered post vote, and the U.S. stock market took a big hit, dropping sharply as of the next full trading day. American 401(k)s lost as much as $100 billion, according to a speech given by Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

But a run toward "safer" assets as a reaction to Brexit could actually present a huge opportunity for Americans. Looking to buy a house? This could be your best chance in years.

"Britain's decision to leave the European Union could benefit a group thousands of miles away," said the Wall Street Journal. "Several lenders posted rates for 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages of about 3.5% on Monday, nearing a 3.5-year low, and analysts expect coming reports to show that average U.S. mortgage rates have decreased since the Brexit vote Thursday. The main reason: Investors have flocked to the safety of U.S. Treasuries, pushing interest rates lower as riskier assets such as stocks tumbled. Mortgage rates tend to move up and down with 10-year Treasury rates, though the relationship isn't perfect."

Bankrate agrees it's a great time to lock in a rate, with the "average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage…down 10 basis points from a week ago."

Mortgage activity is up in the days since the Brexit vote - "Lenders across the country said refinancing applications since Thursday are up between 10% to 40% compared with typical volume this time of year, said the Wall Street Journal - with buyers looking to take advantage of low rates and new hope for refinancers.

In fact, this may be one of the best opportunities "since the Great Recession - for mortgage borrowers to lower their monthly payments, reduce the term of the mortgage or take out some cash," said the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel. "With interest rates already hovering near historic lows - and then getting kicked down a notch by the "Brexit" surprise - another chance for homeowners to refinance a mortgage at near-bottom rates appears to be under way."

Lower rates have created anticipation of "a miniwave of refinancing in coming weeks" by lenders, said the Wall Street Journal. "In all, 40% of borrowers have loans with a rate of 4.5% or higher, according to CoreLogic Inc., a real-estate analytics firm, meaning they could save about $90 a month on average by refinancing at 3.5%."

Another boon to those looking to buy: an expected rise in interest rates will now likely be delayed until 2017. "Economic turbulence could prompt the Federal Reserve to hold off on raising interest rates until next year, which would likely help keep mortgage rates low," said the Wall Street Journal.

And then there's the popular idea that turbulence in international markets could pump up the interest in U.S. real estate by foreign buyers. Many experts think U.S. home equity could get a boost as demand for American real estate continues to grow.

"Some analysts believe that Britain's exit from the EU could lead to added demand for American real estate, especially in major cities like New York and Los Angeles," said Fortune. "Investors are primed to look at the U.S. real estate market as a reasonable alternative to the London market, which has long been a haven for the global rich to stow their excess wealth."

Source: RealtyTimes, Jaymi Naciri
http://realtytimes.com/consumeradvice/buyersadvice1/item/45687-20160630-brexit-and-us-real-estate-is-britains-folly-our-fortune

5 Most Common Questions About Mortgages—Answered

mortgage-questions

Not exactly sure how a mortgage works? Don’t feel bad—the average home buyer doesn’t either. The whole process is filled with head-scratching questions, from how big a down payment has to be to why your interest rate isn’t as great as you’d hoped. To help clear up some of your confusion, here are some of the most common questions home buyers ask about mortgages, as well as some expert answers.

Q: Do I really need a 20% down payment?

A: The gold standard for a down payment is 20%, but if you don’t have the cash, there are plenty of ways to put down less and still get a house. Topping the list: A Federal Housing Administration loan lets borrowers put down as little as 3.5%, but you’ll need to meet certain qualifications, including a minimum credit score of 500 and steady employment for at least two years.

And if you’re active or retired military (or a surviving spouse of a veteran), a Veteran Affairs loan allows you to put 0% down, says Todd Sheinin, mortgage lender and chief operating officer at New America Financial in Gaithersburg, MD. And those aren’t the only workarounds; some counties and states offer loan programs that enable borrowers with low income to receive a down payment subsidy.

Q: Why is my mortgage’s interest rate offer higher than the one I saw advertised?

A: If you see an ad for a remarkably low rate, take a closer look and you’ll notice a disclaimer (typically an asterisk) saying this is the best possible rate. To nab it, you’ll need a high credit score (750 or above) and a low loan-to-value ratio, which essentially means you’re making a sizable down payment of at least 40% of the home’s price, says Richard Redmond, a mortgage broker at All California Mortgage in Larkspur and author of “Mortgages: The Insider’s Guide.”

But if your borrowing scenario is not that spectacular, you’re considered more of a risk—and your interest rate will rise to reflect that. In addition to your credit score and loan-to-value ratio, it will depend on your loan size, the type of property you’re buying (e.g., condo versus single-family house). Bottom line: Read the fine print when evaluating your loan options.

Q: Is a 30-year fixed-rate loan the best option?

A: While the 30-year loan with a fixed interest rate may be the first mortgage most home buyers think of getting, “there’s no one-size-fits-all loan option,” says Redmond. For instance, although adjustable-rate mortgages have a bad rap, ARMs do make sense in certain circumstances—like if you plan to move soon, before the rates adjust. They may also make sense if you can’t afford a home with a fixed-rate mortgage, since those interest rates are slightly higher.

Meanwhile, a 15-year loan might make more sense than one for 30 years if you have enough cash to cover the bigger monthly bills. Why? Because you’ll end up paying far less in interest. For instance, if you get a 30-year mortgage on a $250,000 loan at 3.58% (the current interest rate), you’ll pay $1,134 per month and $168,628 in interest by the time those 30 years are up. Buy that same home with a 15-year loan at today’s 2.86% (the shorter time you borrow the money, the lower the rate), and your monthly payments balloon to $1,710—but you’ll pay only $43,306 in interest by the time you’re done. (Use realtor.com®’s mortgage calculator to get a rough idea of the numbers before meeting with a lender.)

Q: What is private mortgage insurance, and why do I need it?

A: If you’re using conventional nongovernment financing and can’t afford to make a 20% down payment, you’ll have to pay private mortgage insurance. PMI kicks in if you end up unable to pay your mortgage. Since your lender loses money in this scenario, PMI pays it benefits to offset that loss. You can expect to pay about 0.3% to 1.15% of your home loan in PMI. This can be a sizable sum, but it may make sense if you want to buy a home now rather than wait until you can amass a bigger down payment.

“PMI has a negative connotation, but it’s not the worst thing in the world,” says Sheinin. Another option? Have your lender cover the mortgage insurance. You’ll pay a higher interest rate, but “it’s often cheaper than paying PMI yourself each month,” says Sheinin.

Q: What happens if I can’t pay my mortgage?

A: Depending on the lender, you may have a grace period of a week or more to make the payment, says Craig Jaffe, a financial planner at United Capital in Boca Raton, FL. Miss the deadline and your account becomes “delinquent,” which can immediately hurt your credit score. Know you’re going to miss a payment? Notify the lender in advance to find out your options.

“You might be able to qualify for a forbearance, which provides a period of relief from making the full payment,”  says Jaffe.

Source: Realtor.com, Daniel Bortz
http://www.realtor.com/advice/finance/common-mortgage-questions/?iid=rdc_news_hp_carousel_theLatest

Santa Clara Unanimously Approves Related’s $6.7B City Center Project


Related, Related California, City Place, Santa Clara, Silicon Valley, Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management, 2101 Tasman Drive

Following a deliberation that lasted over four hours, the city council of Santa Clara gave the Related Companies the go-ahead it had been seeking for almost four years—the right to redevelop a 239-acre landfill in the northern part of the city into a mega development that at completion could include 5.4 million square feet of office, 1.1 million square feet of retail space, 1,680 residential units, 700 hotel rooms, 250,000 square feet of food & beverage space and 190,000 square feet of entertainment space. The City Center project promises to be the largest project the Silicon Valley city has ever embarked on, and the final meeting, not unlike the entire process that preceded it, was challenged to the very last minute.

The meeting opened with City Manager Rajeev Batra describing the project in some detail, outlining the process the developer has undertaken with the city, as well as providing a comprehensive overview of the fiscal benefits for the city. In all, the New York-based developer is looking to spend $6.7 billion in total development cost, of which approximately $5 billion would be for construction only. The city of Santa Clara stands to gain nearly $17 million annually in net general funding alone once the project is fully completed, according to Batra.

During Related’s portion of the presentation, the fiscal benefits were summarized at $114 million in total annual recurring revenue to various jurisdictions in Santa Clara at completion. That includes estimated annual allocations of $41 million to the city, $33 million to the school district, $17 million to the county and $14 million to the VTA in addition to an estimated growth in ridership of 52 percent.

“It’s very exciting times, I’m very pleased to present to you one of the biggest projects in the city of Santa Clara,” said Batra as he opened the meeting on Tuesday evening. His presentation to the council concluded with a resounding recommendation to the city council that that the project be approved.

That approval would come after four hours of discussions and evidence that a few lingering issues were still unresolved.

The city of San Jose, for one, sent one of its city attorney deputies to voice San Jose’s disproval of the project and object to the way Santa Clara managed the communications of the review process.

“There are significant environmental impacts,” said Senior Deputy City Attorney Vera Todorov during the public comment portion of the evening. “For example, the DDA that you’re considering tonight was first made public a couple of days ago. It’s 625 pages long.” Todorov explained that this was insufficient time for the public to review and comment on the project details. But that was just one of San Jose’s grievances.

“[Santa Clara’s] consideration of this project will create dramatically more jobs than housing units in a region that is already suffering from a serious housing shortage. It flies in the face of responsible planning and environmental stewardship,” said Todorov. “The project will require San Jose to bear the burden of providing housing and other municipal services to project employees.”

In closing, Todorov asked the city council to take a step back from the decision and review further options it could take with San Jose and neighboring municipalities.

Senior Planner at Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Melissa Cerezo, also voiced her agency’s objections to the project

“VTA has provided consistent and clear input to the city regarding the projects implications for transportation and mobility. VTA submitted comment letters on the traffic and final environmental impact report, and provided public testimony at all five public City Place public sessions and the June 8th public planning commission hearing,” said Cerezo.

Cerezo went on to say that the VTA had been requesting from the city of Santa Clara to assist in transportation safety planning, signal monitoring and maintenance during the construction of the development. “VTA generally supports intensified development near core transit and works with agencies and the developers to help address transportation demands and impacts of redevelopment. However, VTA continues to have significant concerns that have not been addressed,” she added.

Cerezo went on to outline specifics around the transit center improvements that the VTA would like to see, including improved safety measures surrounding streets and direction of traffic.

The final looming issue was the amount of money the developer was willing to commit to the school district. Representatives from the Santa Clara Unified School District presented the to the city and the developer a counter offer letter to settle a number of open items, and voiced a general appreciation for the work Related had done up to that point.

“This is a tremendous project, things are not perfect, they’re not all what we’d like to be, but I think that we’re close enough,” said vice mayor Teresa O’Neill, concluding her remarks. “I’m going to be optimistic and say let’s go ahead and do this, but we have to realize there’s still many areas to work on.”

“The school district hired a consultant to do a study to figure out how many new students City Place would generate, and it was less than 30 students,” said council member Pat Kolstad. “The Related Corporation volunteered to give double the money that is required by law to the school district for their upfront funds.”

He outlined all the funds the district would be receiving in addition to the tax revenue they would receive annually. “This is more than fair and incredibly generous what this developer is doing for the schools, anything beyond that would be really egregious and unfair,” Kolstad concluded.

He also highlighted the money the VTA would be receiving from Related, which was pegged at $17.5 million in addition to the funding the transportation agency will be getting from property taxes and concluded that it would not be appropriate to put additional financial burdens on this single developer in one city.

Council member Kathy Watanabe added, “What I have appreciated over the years is how the Related Company has listened. Every time that a question has come or concern what direction to go, they made sure to reach out to so many of the community to be able to get feedback, and I think that’s really important. They’ve been transparent and open about their plans.”

“We’re doing our share,” said Mayor Lisa Gillmor. “We don’t have the housing imbalance [San Jose does]…but that was their choice, and that’s their community that they planned. We know Santa Clara is a very attractive community, we know over the years our forefathers and mothers put in the infrastructure in our city to encourage business. We can’t help that we’re so attractive!”

This project will be great project for city, she added. And while she acknowledged that San Jose officials have been communicative, she presented a thick file of documents that had been delivered to her office just hours before the meeting. It was the neighboring city’s last ditch effort to influence the decision and a project that will greatly benefit Santa Clara, and none of the council members seemed to appreciate that gesture by San Jose’s attorneys.

All the council members spoke in favor of the project and jointly praised Related for their efforts to close the gaps that were identified during the approval process. In the final minutes of the evening the council voted unanimously and approved the development.

Source: The Registry
http://news.theregistrysf.com/santa-clara-unanimously-approves-relateds-6-7b-city-center-project/

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Facebook's campus expansion heightens traffic and housing fears

Among the design features of the proposed 962,400-square foot Facebook campus expansion is an effort to disguise cars with parking beneath the buildings as

MENLO PARK -- Facebook's social media empire is rising, and as the tech firm pushes for more office space and a hotel, fears that the growth will drive up housing prices and clog the roads with traffic are climbing too.

Gabriela Murillo, 47, purchased her first home in Menlo Park about 14 years ago, long before the social media giant took over Sun Microsystems' campus off Bayfront Expressway. Since Facebook first moved to the city in 2011, she's noticed her neighborhood has become safer, recalling a time when it was common for security bars to adorn the windows. The value of her home has gone up, too, but she said it's also sad to see neighbors leave because of soaring rents.

When rush hour hits, the roads are already too congested for Murillo to bear.

"I prefer not to go out with a car. If my husband is out already I can ask him to pick up eggs or milk. It takes forever," she said.

Menlo Park isn't the only city that is struggling with housing and traffic woes. Cupertino is dealing with Apple's expansion and Mountain View has both Google and LinkedIn. The booming Bay Area job market fuels traffic throughout the entire region, making it a difficult problem for one city to solve.

"Facebook's arrival to Menlo Park definitely coincided with the overall economy in the region taking off. So a lot of the traffic growth that we've seen not only across Menlo Park, but the South Bay, Peninsula and San Francisco is really due to growth in employment across the entire region," said Nikki Nagaya, Menlo Park's transportation manager.

Working with world-renowed architect Frank Gehry, Facebook wants to build two new office buildings totaling 962,400 square feet, a 200-room limited service hotel, a public green space and a bicycle and pedestrian bridge on the 58 acres it purchased from TE Connectivity. Meanwhile, the company is also converting a 184,460-square-foot warehouse building into office space.

The two new office buildings would hold up to 6,400 employees and the hotel would be staffed with 150 workers. Built in two phases, construction on the project -- if approved -- is expected to be completed by 2020.

Facebook says it works to manage the traffic flowing in and out of its campus. Daily vehicle trips are capped and the company offers other transportation options for its employees, including bikes, trams, shuttles, carpooling and ferries. Partnering with SamTrans, the tech firm is also funding a $1 million study to improve transportation along the Dumbarton corridor, which could help ease regional traffic in the future.

"Facebook is committed to being a good neighbor. We understand that our growth affects the everyday lives of our neighbors, and we want to be respectful and thoughtful about how we approach our expansion. The future of Menlo Park is extremely important to us, which is why we work with city and community leaders to tackle local priorities, including transportation, housing and the environment," the company said in a statement.

About 54 percent of people get to Facebook by making solo trips in a car or motorcycle, which is lower than the city and county average, according to January data from the company. The tech firm has also floated the idea of building thousands of housing units on its campus and a 56-acre site it purchased from Prologis and funded 15 below-market-rate units in the Anton Menlo apartment complex.

But as Facebook expands amid other developments in Menlo Park, traffic in the area is expected to get worse, a draft study on the impact of the project shows. Even with a cap, Facebook's campus expansion could generate 16,329 vehicle trips daily and 13 streets could have "significant" impacts.

Noting that the project for the TE Connectivity site doesn't include housing and that less than 5 percent of Facebook employees live in Menlo Park, the study didn't identify housing and population growth as a major impact. But a separate analysis for the city said Facebook's expansion could have a modest impact on regional housing prices.

Facebook's track record of managing traffic, volunteering, hosting community events and providing donations to local nonprofits and schools might be enough to convince city officials to allow the campus expansion to move forward. As they weigh the costs and benefits, city officials will also negotiate community benefits in an agreement with Facebook.

At a recent Planning Commission meeting about the study, construction workers, nonprofit leaders and some nearby residents said they supported Facebook's expansion.

"Public input is a key part of the decision making. As you saw, there was actually one person who simply put it on the line and said what Facebook does and brings to our community outweighs the elements that are for most part out of their control," said commissioner Henry Riggs in an interview after the meeting. The project is scheduled to go before the Menlo Park City Council for approval in September.

Some Menlo Park workers won't be around to see how Facebook's campus expansion plays out.

For four years, Katie Stern, a second-grade teacher at Beechwood School in Menlo Park, gave herself an hour and half every day to drive to her job from San Francisco.

Looking to buy a home, Stern said she and her husband couldn't find an affordable place closer to Menlo Park with a better commute. The median list price of a home in Menlo Park is about $2 million, according to realtor.com.

The couple decided to move to Novato and Stern is leaving her job at Beechwood after the summer.

"I had several co-workers who were living closer to Beechwood who had to leave the Peninsula and move to the East Bay because their rents tripled," she said.

Starting a new job in San Rafael in the fall, there's one silver lining that comes with moving: a 20-minute commute.

Source: San Jose Mercury, Queenie Wong
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_30059181/facebooks-campus-expansion-heightens-traffic-and-housing-fears

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Realtors Reveal: 4 Unbelievable Open House Horror Stories

nightmare-open-house

So you’re having an open house. It’s no big deal—people do this all the time, right? The only thing you have to worry about is steering clear until everyone is gone and then waiting for the offers to roll in. You’ve totally got this.

Or do you?

An open house can be a terrifically efficient way to get lots of potential buyers in the door at once. But sometimes things don’t go as planned. Sometimes open houses are the stuff of nightmares. Check out these true (and hilarious, because they didn’t happen to us) tales from open house hell. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

The dead deal

“I was showing an awesome rental in a beautiful building in the Upper West Side of Manhattan, going for a shockingly low price. I had to ask: Why so cheap? My partner pulled me aside and told me the previous resident had died of old age in the apartment, and his body had stayed there for two months. The apartment had been completely gutted, but there still lingered a faint odor. So, when I was showing the apartment, I had planned to gently and tactfully break this information, but that’s when a neighbor walks in and says she was curious about the apartment ‘because of what happened.’ At which point I had to explain on the spot.” – Emile L’Eplattenier, real estate agent and writer with Fit Small Business.

Lesson learned: Sure, you don’t want to just blurt out that someone died and rotted in the home on the open house flyer. But if your home has a particularly sordid past, the open house is a good opportunity to come clean. Serious buyers will find out regardless when it comes time for seller’s disclosure. And on the chance that nosy neighbors come around asking about it in front of potential buyers, you won’t look like you were trying to hide the home’s history.

———

Curse of the unwanted gift

“I was hosting a busy open house, and the home was vacant, which meant the utilities had been turned off, including the water.  About half-way through the open house I hear a mother shriek from the hall bathroom.  She had allowed her son to use the restroom, and this 5-year-old laid a load that a buffalo would have been proud of—in a nonworking toilet! The mother was mortified and they ran off as quickly as they could.  Thankfully, the neighbors had a bucket on the side of the house, which I filled with water and used to fill the tank on the toilet.  It flushed just fine and all was well.” – Morgan Franklin, Realtor with United Real Estate Lexington.

Lesson learned: Realtors have told us again and again that buyers will use the bathroom during a showing. If you’ve already moved out, it might be for the best to leave the water on for a while (buyers might want to test the plumbing or shower pressure, after all). Or at least pop up some cautionary signs on your toilets.

———

The house of horrors

“Going back a few years to our first year in real estate, we were really pressing for getting listings—hard. We get a call to list a property, agree to meet the owner, and when we roll up—well, I wish we could’ve captured our looks to each other on film. Horrendous. The look, the odor, the whole package. Literally the nastiest house I’ve seen even to this day. Long story short, we list, immediately hold an open house that weekend. And held our breaths.” – Robert Page, The Realty Cousins with Century 21 Alliance Realty Group in Hudson Valley, NY.

Lesson learned: Sometimes you can get lucky. “Who comes strolling in to make a cash offer? The next-door neighbor!” says Page. “We thought looking at this place was bad for a few days. This woman had been looking at this house from her windows for decades and couldn’t take another day of it. She’s since fixed the whole place up and it looks great.”

No, you may not be quite so lucky. If your house is a blighted mess, we hope you’ll take this opportunity to think about your life choices and then, for goodness sake, do some updating before you put it on the market.

———

The looky-loo stalker

“Last year I was hosting four open houses in one day which is typically the max. But so was everyone on my team! We had a total of 14 homes for sale ranging from $980,000 to $11,500,000. And the same buyer went to every single one! We have no idea how he did it, but clearly he wasn’t a (legitimate) buyer for any of the properties. Over the next several weeks he would continue to show up at our team’s open houses and oddly always wore the same outfit and had the same shopping bag from a very well-known retailer.” – Eleonora Srugo, Realtor® with the SLS team at Douglas Elliman

Lesson learned: Don’t expect everyone who walks through the door to make a serious offer. Some people may just be there out of curiosity or boredom, or because they’re a little, well, strange. Thankfully only your Realtor will have to deal with the crazies up close and personal. Just remember to take it on the chin if the number of offers on your home doesn’t quite align with the attendance at your open house.

Source: Realtor.com, Angela Colley
http://www.realtor.com/advice/sell/open-house-horror-stories/

Friday, June 24, 2016

California's skyrocketing housing costs, taxes prompt exodus of residents



This article is not much of a surprise to me. Although as a Realtor I have benefited from the hot housing market, which is the result of the hot job market, it is starting to have negative consequences for the Silicon Valley and California. Many residents had enough and want out. Just recently I signed a listing agreement with seller clients of mine who want to sell their San Jose home so they can move to Oregon. How long will this bleeding of residents from California will continue? What can be done about it? No one has a clear answer.


Living in San Jose, Kathleen Eaton seemingly had it all: a well-paying job, a home in a gated community, even the Bay Area's temperate weather.

But enduring a daily grind that made her feel like a "gerbil on a wheel," Eaton reached her limit.

Faced with the exorbitant rising costs of Bay Area living, Priya Govindarajan and Ajay Patel pack up their apartment in San Francisco, Calif., ThursdaySkyrocketing costs for housing, food and gasoline, along with the area's insufferable gridlock, prompted the four-decade Bay Area resident to seek greener pastures -- 2,000 miles away in Ohio.

"It was a struggle in California," Eaton said. "It was a very difficult place to live. ... It's a vicious circle."

Eaton is far from alone.

A growing number of Bay Area residents -- besieged by home prices, worsening traffic, high taxes and a generally more expensive cost of living -- believe life would be better just about anywhere else but here.

During the 12 months ending June 30, the number of people leaving California for another state exceeded by 61,100 the number who moved here from elsewhere in the U.S., according to state Finance Department statistics. The so-called "net outward migration" was the largest since 2011, when 63,300 more people fled California than entered.

"The main factors are housing costs in many parts of the state, including coastal regions of California such as the Bay Area," said Dan Hamilton, director of economics with the Economic Forecasting Center at California Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks.

"California has seen negative outward migration to other states for 22 of the last 25 years."

A recent poll revealed that an unsettling sense of yearning has descended on people in the Bay Area: About one-third of those surveyed by the Bay Area Council say they would like to exit the nine-county region sometime soon.

"They are tired of the expense of living here. They are tired of the state of California and the endless taxes here," said Scott McElfresh, a certified moving consultant. "People are getting soaked every time they turn around."

The area's sizzling job market and robust economy have created a domino effect: income spikes for highly trained workers, more people packing the area's roads, red-hot demand for housing.

What's more, the technology boom has unleashed a hiring spree that has intensified the desire for homes anywhere near the job hubs of Santa Clara County, the East Bay and San Francisco. The South Bay job market has hit an all-time high after a 5,800-position surge in May, fueling an overall gain of 3,400 jobs for the Bay Area, according to a state labor report released Friday.

The region's soaring housing prices are a key factor driving dissatisfied residents toward the exit door. Several people who have departed, or soon will leave, say they potentially could have hundreds of thousands of dollars left over even after buying a house in their new locations.

"They're taking advantage of the housing bubble right now," McElfresh said. "The majority of the people we are seeing are moving to states that don't have state income taxes."

Thomas Norman, of San Francisco, said he and his wife, Patricia, are seriously considering leaving the Bay Area. They have actively scouted for houses in the Rocky Mountains region, including a trip to Colorado to look for prospective homes.

"The inconvenience of the Bay Area is a major factor," said Thomas Norman, a lifelong Bay Area resident burdened by a two-hour round-trip commute to an East Bay optometry practice. "The traffic is very bad. It is becoming more congested with all the housing that is being added here."

Eaton, who left the South Bay to relocate near Dayton, Ohio, cited the high cost of living as a major factor driving her decision. The struggle to make ends meet became too much.

"You can't get ahead," Eaton said. "It's more than the cost of living; it's the high taxes."

Eaton and her sister had a $724,000 house in The Villages in South San Jose that they sold before moving to Ohio. Their mortgage payments were $2,200 a month, plus $1,000 for association fees in the gated community. They were able to pay $300,000 in cash for their new home in Ohio.

Priya Govindarajan, a San Francisco resident, is planning to leave the Bay Area at the end of June and head with her husband, Ajay Patel, to North Carolina.

Govindarajan, who works in the consumer packaged goods industry, and her husband, who is in the medical profession, determined that their wages aren't going far enough to cover their living expenses.

Living in UC San Francisco housing, the couple pays $2,100 a month in rent. And they have to cough up $1,900 a month for child care.

"My husband's salary would be in the six figures, but six figures is not enough to cover the rent, day care (and) food prices," Govindarajan said. "It all starts to add up."

Govindarajan said she figures they can put down 20 percent on a nice house in North Carolina and have a monthly payment of $1,800 -- which would include the mortgage, property taxes and insurance.

"I get why people want to live in the Bay Area, I really do," Govindarajan said. "But it is so difficult to live here, especially for people coming here for the first time."

Some experts believe the boom in the Bay Area has exacerbated the problem of income inequality and the resentment that can accompany that economic reality.

"There is a declining middle class in the Bay Area," said Christopher Hoene, executive director of the California Budget & Policy Center, a research group that recently completed a study about income inequality in Silicon Valley. "Widening income inequality can create polarization socially and economically."

In 1989, the middle class accounted for 56 percent of all households in Silicon Valley, but by 2013, that share had slipped to 45.7 percent, the study found.

"The region's middle class has shrunk, while the numbers of lower-income and higher-income households has grown," the report stated. Silicon Valley, for the purposes of the study, consists of Santa Clara County, San Mateo County and San Francisco.

Lower-income residents accounted for 30.3 percent of Silicon Valley's households in 1989, and that number grew to 34.8 percent in 2013. Upper-income residents had 13.7 percent of the share of households in 1989, and that figure swelled to 19.5 percent in 2013, the study found.

"A lot of middle-class jobs have vaporized," said Russell Hancock, president of San Jose-based Joint Venture Silicon Valley. "The support positions, the assembly line positions, the jobs that paid the middle class -- a lot of those have gone away."

A big chunk of the jobs that are being created in the Bay Area are in the high-tech sector, which requires specialized skill sets to fill them. When jobs that would cater to the middle class wane, that can force people to relocate -- in many cases, out of the Bay Area entirely.

"This summer, I have booked more business than in any of the other 27 years that I've been working," said McElfresh, the moving consultant. "People are packing up and leaving."

Eaton, while happy to have escaped the high cost of living and traffic, recently found herself longing for one Bay Area staple -- its mild weather.

"There's a huge thunderstorm overhead," Eaton said while talking to a reporter. "Got to get used to that, I guess."

Source: Mercury News, George Avalos
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_30037774/greener-pastures-beckon-some-beleaguered-residents

Thursday, June 23, 2016

Is it Time to Retire the Real Estate Agent?

I've seen a number of articles like this over the years; suggesting that Realtors are irrelevant. These opinion pieces do make some good points, but they often fail to take into account the overall value that we Realtors provide to the public such as leveraging our local neighborhood and market knowledge to the benefit of the buyers and sellers and knowledge of the overall home buying process.

2016-06-22-1466597770-4094622-bigstockWorriedEstateAgent80162576.jpg

There was a time in the not so distant past when the only way to book a flight or vacation was to call a travel agent. Now, thanks to the internet, you have access to all the same tools and resources that they do. Unless you are planning an elaborate trip, it’s faster and easier to just do it yourself. Many times it is even cheaper.

Selling your home is another example of how times have changed. In the past no one would even consider trying to sell their home without the expertise of a real estate agent. Most of us thought real estate agents were the only ones who possessed all the knowledge, data, and secrets of how to professionally sell a home. When records were kept locally on paper, that may have been the case.

Today, it’s a different story.

Your laptop and hand held device now contain all the same secrets. Could it be that it’s time to retreat from the traditional route and retire the real estate agent?

The Seller’s Objectives

Homeowners with their house on the market have three goals:

1. They want to sell their home as fast as possible.

2. They want to walk away with as much money as possible.

3. They want to close with the least amount of stress as possible.

It may seem obvious, but there is a delicate balance between each of these motivating factors. Personal priorities will determine the correct balance and what a successful sale looks like for each homeowner.
The good news is that today’s online resources can give you more control than ever before to achieve these objectives, with or without the help of a real estate agent.

Been There, Done That

If this isn’t your first home sale, you already know what lies ahead. That is of course, if you go the traditional route and use a real estate agent or even attempt a traditional “For Sale By Owner.” You’ve been through the steps it takes to “stage” your home to make it more appealing to the average buyer.

Let’s not forget the dreaded “Open Houses” with multitudes or no one walking through your home. Meanwhile you need to be absent for the day.

Then there’s picture taking, the spur of the moment showings (always at dinnertime), and all the other trappings, de-cluttering, and time spent maintaining a near perfect home during the selling phase. Now it’s all coming back. Pay attention first time sellers.

This might be called the “Hurry up and wait” phase.
After all the preparation frenzy, you are at the mercy of someone coming to view your home. With or without a real estate agent, this part is stressful and it can take months before you receive an offer.

Unlimited Online Resources at Your Fingertips

Isn’t this the price to pay for having an expert determine your home’s value and walk you through the process? Possibly, but the truth is you have access to all the data you need to find the optimum price, and you don’t have to rely on someone else to do this work. It’s at your fingertips.

Familiar websites like Trulia, Zillow, and Realtor.com all provide deep data on recent sales in your area. You can look at what homes are currently for sale and their list price. You can learn what has already sold in the last 3-6 months and at what price range. All this information offers insight about how to settle on your own list price.

Zillow provides valuable information plus the ability to list your home for free and without a real estate agent. It even allows you to put your home on their site without officially listing it, called “Make Me an Offer.” This is a huge advantage for those who want to eliminate the agent.

Trulia also allows sellers to list their home on their site for free. It supplies the pertinent data you want when deciding upon a reasonable list price.

Realtor.com gives you useful tools and data, but you can only list your home on their site if you hire a Realtor.

Using a website to list your home minus the real estate agent should put more money in your pocket at the end of the transaction. Real estate agent fees for listing a home are typically around 6%. This may be the path for some, if you don’t mind the unknown time period and the effort of staging and showing your home.

OfferPad is a site that affords you even more options and the ability to take full control. Using this platform, sellers can eliminate the time, home improvement costs and anxiety associated with the traditional listing process. This site advertises a service that provides a competitive offer to buy your home within 24 hours and the ability to close on the day of your choosing. Pick 5 days or 60 or anything in between.

OfferPad is an option if you want to sell your home quickly and efficiently. You pay the same 6% you normally would pay to a real estate agent, plus an additional 3% for the service. If you go this route, there are no Open Houses, no showings, no staging, no real estate agents, and no waiting.

What are Your Priorities?

So, is it time to retire the real estate agent?

Only you can make that call. It depends on your priorities: your time frame to sell, your non-negotiable bottom line, your tolerance for stress, and where you fall on the control-freak chart.

The good news is you have multiple options when it comes time to sell your home. Now it’s possible to take control of part, or all, of the sale process from start to finish.


Source: Huffington Post, Toby Nwazor
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/toby-nwazor/is-it-time-to-retire-the-_b_10610052.html

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

L.A. apartment owners charged with allegedly evicting tenants, then renting their units via Airbnb


After years of watching the supply of affordable housing plummet, evictions and demolitions surge and landlords score quick profits with short-term rentals, Los Angeles officials are striking back.

For the first time, the city attorney’s office has filed criminal charges alleging that a building’s owners offered units for rent on Airbnb after booting out tenants, officials said Monday.

The misdemeanor charges, along with civil suits filed against the owners of three other buildings, are intended to send a signal to other landlords breaking city rent control laws as L.A. confronts an affordable-housing crisis.

“Given that shortage of affordable housing, illegally converting rental units to hotels or short-rentals has got to stop,” City Atty. Mike Feuer said at a news conference Monday. “My office is going to intervene to preserve rent-stabilized units and restore those units when we allege they’ve been unlawfully taken off the market.”

It’s unknown how many illegal short-term rentals are operating in L.A., but Feuer said his office has made it a priority to investigate such complaints.

Carol J. Alsman and LSJB Investments LLC, who own a four-unit building at 500 N. Genesee Ave. in the Fairfax district, were charged last week with six misdemeanor counts of violating city zoning, building code and rent-control laws.

The complaint alleges that they evicted tenants under the Ellis Act, a state law that allows landlords to get out of the rental business. The law requires landlords to pay for relocation fees and notify tenants if they intend to re-rent the units within five years.

The owners later rented those units for more than $550 a night through Airbnb and failed to allow former tenants an opportunity to re-rent those units, the complaint alleges.

“Obviously there is a great profit to be made if you could, on your whim, change your apartment unit into a nightly hotel rental,” Feuer said.

The cases underscore the depths of the city’s housing crisis. More than 1,000 rent-controlled apartments in the city were removed from the market last year — a nearly threefold increase since 2013, an analysis of housing data found earlier this year. Evictions from such units have doubled over the same time.

Across L.A., more than 20,000 rent-controlled units have been taken off the market since 2001, city records show.

Tenant advocates say the removal of such units has hurt the supply of affordable housing at a time when L.A. has become one of the least affordable cities in the country.

Three evicted tenants sued the owners of the Genesee building last year after they noticed their units listed on Airbnb weeks after they moved out. The civil case is still pending.

Alsman could not be reached for comment.

Former Genesee tenant Carrie Kirshman said she believes the city attorney filing bolsters her claim that her old apartment was illegally re-rented.

“Landlords need to know that there are consequences to these kind of actions,” Kirshman said.

Randy Renick, an attorney representing tenants at the Genesee Avenue building, said it’s encouraging that the city attorney's office is taking the issue seriously, but said it should also go after short-term rental sites.

“Without Airbnb, none of these landlords would be engaging in this scam,” Renick said.

In a statement, Airbnb spokeswoman Alison Schumer said that “we strongly oppose real estate speculators who illegally evict tenants and abuse platforms like ours in search of a quick buck.”

A two-bedroom apartment in the Genesee Avenue building was also listed on HomeAway on Monday for more than $400 a night, a listing on the short-term rental company’s website shows.

The city attorney’s office said it will send a list of Ellis Act properties to Airbnb and other short-term rental platforms to prevent listing of similar properties.

Rent control in L.A. primarily applies to multifamily buildings built before October 1978. When a new tenant moves in, a landlord can set the rent as high as someone is willing to pay, but rent increases in subsequent years would be capped — recently at 3%.

Tenants in rent-controlled buildings have strong protections against eviction to ensure landlords can't kick them out to charge higher market rents.

But under the Ellis Act, passed in 1985, landlords are able to evict tenants if they intend to either take the housing off the rental market or demolish the building to put up new apartments.

The practice has sparked a backlash in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Efforts in recent years by state legislators to amend the law failed amid opposition from the real estate industry.

The San Francisco city attorney’s office in 2014 filed civil suits against owners of two rent-controlled properties for evicting tenants and illegally converting them to short-term rentals. The landlords settled last year for nearly $400,000, according to the city attorney’s office.

On Monday, Feuer also filed civil suits against the owners of three rent-controlled apartment buildings, alleging that the property owners are illegally operating and advertising them as hotels.

They include two properties on Ocean Front Walk in Venice and one on North Van Ness Avenue in Hollywood. The three buildings have more than 120 units, according to the city attorney’s office.

The lawsuits seek a court-appointed receiver to operate the three properties until they are brought into compliance, as well as restitution and civil penalties.

Renting out apartments or houses for short stays is illegal in many residential areas, according to city planning officials. The housing department received dozens of complaints about "illegal usage" of apartment buildings last year, officials said.

Residents have long complained that the city has failed to take action against such rentals. Feuer said his attorneys prosecuted the cases because they were able to substantiate complaints brought forward in enforcement orders filed by the city housing department.

City leaders have proposed changes to rein in short-term rental abuses, such as limiting people to only rent out their primary residence for up to 120 days a year.

Hosts would also be barred from offering apartments that fall under rent stabilization or affordable-housing covenants, and would have to pay the same kind of lodging taxes as hotels, which would go into a city fund for affordable housing.

"Simple regulations that allow honest home-sharing while making it easier to go after rogue operators who are running de facto hotels will help protect affordable housing and the character of our neighborhoods,” Councilman Mike Bonin said.

Source: LA Times, Ben Poston
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-landlords-illegal-rentals-20160620-snap-story.html

Monday, June 20, 2016

Warriors' Steph Curry sells his home court in Orinda for $4.65 million

I had to write about this for the blog seeing how I live and work here in Silicon Valley, particularly seeing how the valley is part of the San Francisco Bay Area. And for us here in the Bay Area, unless they were living under a rock, the Golden State Warriors was engaged in a heated battle with the Cleveland Cavaliers for the Championship and lost the final game. 

Anyhow, the Warrior's start player, Steph Curry his home in Orinda (near Oakland) for a cool $4.65M.

Hot Property | Hot Property

Warriors' Steph Curry sells his home court in Orinda for $4.65 million

Steph Curry may have fallen short in his bid for a second championship, but the Golden State Warriors star has emerged from the playoffs a clear winner in the real estate game.

Earlier this month, Curry sold his home in Orinda, Calif., for $4.65 million in a deal completed off-market. That’s $755,000 more than his reported asking price and, perhaps even better, $1.55 million more than he paid for the property three years ago.

Sitting on more than half an acre, the tree-topped estate centers on a Spanish-style main house that was built in 1963 and renovated in 2008. A front  yard swimming pool and spa, an outdoor kitchen, garden beds and a putting green fill the grounds.

Inside, the 4,700 square feet of interiors feature a contemporary yet classic feel. Arched doors and windows, beamed ceilings and elaborate fixtures are among details of note. Rich hickory wood floors create visual interest against hand-finished plaster walls.

Formal living and dining rooms, an office/den, a family room with a wet bar, five bedrooms and five bathrooms lie within a single story. Two refrigerators, two dishwashers and a professional range highlight and over-the-top chef’s kitchen are included.

Curry has since moved on to Walnut Creek, Calif., where he and his wife, Ayesha, purchased an 8,000-square-foot home last year for $3.2 million.

The 28-year-old point guard helped the Warriors shatter numerous records this season enroute to his second Most Valuable Player award. The former first-round pick out of Davidson College averaged a league-best 30.1 points per game during the regular season and broke his own record of made three-pointers with 402 treys.

Source: LA Times Hot Property, Neal J. Leitereg
http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/hot-property/la-fi-hotprop-steph-curry-orinda-home-sale-20160620-snap-story.html

Home Inspections Must Be Totally Independent


You are about to sign a contract to purchase an older home. The real estate agent has given you the name of a home inspector, and has advised you to use the "specific inspection contingency" clause in the contract instead of the "general inspection contingency" clause. There is a major difference between these two concepts and it may cost you a considerable amount of money if you use the wrong one.

When ever you purchase a house -- especially an older one -- it is imperative you have the house inspected by a professional -- and independent -- home inspector. While you certainly are free to use the inspector recommended by the real estate agent, you should make your own choice.

You should include an inspection contingency in your sales contract. This would read something like this:

This contract is completely contingent upon purchaser obtaining, at purchaser's expense, a satisfactory home inspection, within ___ days from date of contract ratification.. If purchaser is not satisfied, for any reason, and advises seller in writing within said ___ days, this contract shall be null and void and purchaser's deposit shall be immediately refunded to purchaser. If purchaser does not notify seller within said ___ days, this contingency shall automatically expire and the contract shall remain in full force and effect.
This is known as a "general inspection contingency". Basically, if the buyer -- for any reason -- does not like the results of the inspection, the buyer can terminate the contract and the earnest money deposit will be refunded to the buyer. Indeed, many buyers are adding language in their purchase and sales contract to the effect that their deposit will not be cashed until after the inspection contingency has been removed.

The contingency recommended by the broker -- referred to as a "specific inspection contingency" -- is much more limited. Although different contract forms contain different variations on the theme, the thrust of a specific contingency is that if the buyer finds defects in the house, the buyer will give the seller three days in which to agree to make the repairs. Once the seller responds, the buyer then has one or two additional days in which to decide whether to accept what the seller is prepared to do, or to terminate the contract.

I oppose the specific inspection contingency, since I believe it is unfavorable to both buyers and sellers. From the buyer's point of view, if the house is structurally sound, but the roof, for example, has a short useful life, the buyer may not want to complete the transaction faced with a large expenditure two or three years down the road. However, since there are currently no defects, the buyer cannot get out from under the contract.

At first reading, the specific contingency appears to favor the seller, since it does not permit the buyer to terminate the contract for any reason. However, my experience is that when a buyer wants out of the contract at an early stage, it sometimes is better to terminate the contract at this early point in time rather than have continuous hassles all the way through to settlement.

Why should a home seller permit the buyer to inspect the house? While sellers may think that an inspection is not in their best interests, if you really stop and think about it for a moment, it should become obvious that even from the seller's point of view, it is advisable to let buyers have a short period of time in which to cancel their contract if they are not satisfied with the condition of the house.

Clearly, sellers would rather have their purchaser cancel the contract early in the process than wait until the very last minute and raise all sorts of problems on the day of settlement. From my own personal experience, this is a common problem at a real estate settlement where the buyers really do not want to complete the deal, but know they are legally obligated to do so.

Of equal importance, if the purchaser has obtained a satisfactory home inspection report, that same purchaser will be hard pressed to raise issues about the house on the day of settlement. Often, I have heard sellers tell buyers, "You removed the inspection contingency, and if you have a problem with our house, look to your home inspector."

Souce: RealtyTimes, Benny L. Kass 
http://realtytimes.com/consumeradvice/buyersadvice1/item/45329-20160616-home-inspections-must-be-totally-independent

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Buying a Foreclosed Home: Info You Need to Know

foreslosure-sale

If you’re looking to score a deal while house hunting, you may have considered buying a foreclosed home. These are houses whose owners were unable to pay the mortgage or sell the property. As a result, the lender assumed ownership and is now trying to sell it to recoup some of its costs.

While foreclosures aren’t as common today as they were during the height of the housing crisis in 2008, they do still happen. Currently, according to RealtyTrac, 1 in 13,000 homes ends up in foreclosure. In states with the highest frequency, such as Maryland and New Jersey, that ratio shoots up to 1 in approximately every 550 homes. That’s a lot of foreclosed places.

While foreclosure is hardly a pretty story for the home’s previous owners, it can be a bargain bonanza for buyers. Since banks are often eager to unload these properties, they aim to break even with an asking price that’s typically the sum of the remaining mortgage note plus interest, lawyer fees, and penalties. On average, this ends up totaling about 15% below the home’s actual value—and homes often sell for less than asking price.

But buying a foreclosed home does come with risks, so buyers should proceed with caution to see if the gamble is worth it.

Tips on buying a foreclosed home

To find foreclosed homes, you can peruse listings of foreclosures on realtor.com®, which may also be marked as “bank owned” or “real estate owned (REO).” If you spot a home you like, contact the real estate agent on the listing as usual.

The biggest caveat when buying a foreclosed home is that it is typically sold as is, which means the bank is not going to fix any problems. And there may be plenty of them, considering that many foreclosures have been slowly crumbling into disrepair due to the previous owner’s financial strain. And unlike a normal home sale, in which disclosure requirements force owners to reveal a home’s every flaw, there’s no such legal stipulation in a foreclosure. What you see (or don’t) is truly what you get.

That’s why foreclosed homes risk costing buyers a ton of money to renovate that could negate their supposed savings. This is why Eric Workman of the Chicago-based residential rehab lender Renovo Financial suggests that buyers take extra precautions such as the following before making an offer:


  • Research how long the home sat vacant, whether it endured freeze and thaw seasons unattended, or experienced anything that may have caused significant structural damage. Homes in a dire state of disrepair won’t be eligible for a conventional mortgage.
  • Hire a home inspector to thoroughly check out the home for major problems. Have the inspector give you an estimate of how much money it will take to make repairs.
  • You can try to add financing and inspection contingencies to your offer. That way, if you do encounter problems with the home or attaining a mortgage for it, you can back out of the deal without losing your deposit. Just keep in mind that asking for contingencies does not mean the bank will accept them; they’re not the norm with foreclosures.
  • Also hire a professional to conduct a title search, says Ben Niernberg, executive vice president at Northbrook, IL–based Proper Title. This may allow you to avoid all kinds of nightmare scenarios—sometimes the bank will clear the liens, but it isn’t required to do so. For instance, let’s say the IRS has a lien on the property for back taxes. That debt doesn’t follow the owner once he sells. Instead, the lien sticks with the property, making the new owner responsible for repayment.


If you find out the home has problems, you will want to carefully weigh whether it’s worth all the extra work. In some cases it will be; in others, it may be more prudent to walk.

Source: Realtor.com, Margaret Heidenry
http://www.realtor.com/advice/buy/buying-a-foreclosed-home/?iid=rdc_news_hp_carousel_theLatest

Saturday, June 18, 2016

5 Ways Home Buyers Make Their Agent's Job Harder


Buying a home can be a long and challenging process. It’s a big, expensive and infrequent transaction that can cause lots of stress and anxiety.

Some buyers take years to complete a purchase, and they require a lot of hand-holding and make lots of requests. Others are more self-sufficient, and only bring in the agent from time to time.

Good real estate agents can accommodate any buyer at any time — as they should. We’re in the service business, and I always say the customer is always right.

But let’s face it: All buyers (and all agents) are not created equal, and since buyers don’t pay for the agent’s time, there can sometimes be a disconnect.

Here are five buyer behaviors that can make life tough for agents.

Planning a (secret) price swap

It’s one thing for a buyer to ask a seller for a credit if the final home inspection uncovers a problem. But after you have a deal, planning to negotiate the price down without telling your agent is a big no-no. It adds stress and ill will among all parties involved, during what could already be a difficult transaction.

It’s better to be upfront about your intentions. If the deal is not meant to be, it’s better to not go down the path at all.

Making unjustified lowball offers

The seller’s property is on the market for $400,000, and it’s worth close to that, based on recent comparable sales. And yet, a potential buyer offers $300,000 and won’t budge on the price.

It’s not because the home is grossly overpriced or there’s something seriously wrong with it, but simply because the buyer wants a bargain.

Unjustified lowball offers can be a waste of time for everyone involved. The seller isn’t going to swallow $100,000 for no reason, even if the property has been on the market a while.

In fact, a lowball offer will likely just help the listing agent get a small price reduction, thus opening the window of opportunity to another buyer.

It’s certainly okay to offer less than the asking price, but be realistic.

Requiring too much during the showing
It’s typical for a potential buyer to view a property during an open house, then ask for a private showing — even two or three times. That’s par for the course.

However, it’s frustrating when a buyer arrives to a showing with a designer, architect, contractor or just some friends, then spends an hour or two at the home checking out and measuring each room. This is counterproductive, particularly if you do it at one home after another and never make an offer.

Some buyers have even been known to bring their psychic, who, after making a big splash with tarot cards and numerology charts, declares that the property has “negative energy” and isn’t a good fit, mainly based on the numbers in the property address. Did the psychic really need to see the property in person to figure that out?

Buyers typically give themselves an opportunity to gauge their own reactions to a property before bringing in friends, family or hired consultants. To go over a home inch-by-inch on the first or second visit is often a waste of everyone’s time.

Demanding loads of attention early on

Some people are just beginning to think about buying a home. That’s fine; buyers have to start somewhere.

Unfortunately, sometimes buyers are a year or two away from being ready to pull the trigger, yet they make a lot of demands on the agent’s time.

Asking an agent to research city building permits on a house just because you’re curious — and even though the property doesn’t fit your requirements — is probably not a fair request.

Agents can’t be as effective with their active clients if they’re spending lots of time researching tax records or city permits for clients who are years away from being ready to purchase.

Changing your mind repeatedly

It’s fine to shift course based on what you learn during the home shopping process. This is a common part of the buyer evolution process.

Many buyers set out for X but end up with Y after learning the market and seeing where their dollar goes. By the time you’re ready to start making offers and moving in the direction of acquiring a home, you will be laser focused.

But if you find yourself moving around and you’re uncertain about the object of your search, it’s possible you just aren’t ready to buy. That’s fine. Take your time and learn the market.

The home-buying process is a journey, and a good local agent, brought in at the right time, can add so much value. Be mindful that agents work for free until a buyer or seller closes. Agents should be leveraged as a huge resource — when the right time comes.

Source: Zillow Porchlight, Brendon DeSimone
http://www.zillow.com/blog/5-annoying-things-buyers-do-152693/

Saturday Stats

MLSListings Silicon Valley and Coastal Regions Housing Market Overview
(Monterey, San Benito, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz Counties)

San Mateo County Poised for Sizzling Summer

San Mateo County inventory for single-family homes rose 20% year-over-year for the month of May. Additionally, closed sales are up 5%, and median sale price increased by 4%.

In other home counties, single-family homes year-over-year inventory showed gains as well, with San Benito growing 64%, Monterey rising 26%, and Santa Clara up 13%. Santa Cruz County saw an 11% decline. Compared to April 2015, inventory grew 10% in San Benito, 8% in San Mateo, 6% in Santa Clara, 4% in Santa Cruz, and 2% in Monterey Counties.

Single-family home sales rose year-over-year in all counties except Santa Cruz and San Benito, which saw an 11% and 2% decline, respectively. San Mateo County showed the largest gain of 5%, Santa Clara County rose 3%, and Monterey County 2%. May sales showed gains over April except in San Benito County which fell 7% and Monterey County which dropped 3%. San Mateo County grew 19%, Santa Clara County increased 9%, and Santa Cruz County was up 1%.

Compared to May 2015, Santa Cruz County median sales price showed the most strength, growing 16%, with the counties of Santa Clara up 10%, San Benito up 8%, San Mateo up 4%, and Monterey up 2%. Compared to April,
San Mateo County median price grew 5%, both Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties rose 3%, Santa Clara rose 1%,
and San Benito County remained flat to last year.

The year-over-year percent of list price to sale price dropped 4% in both San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, and 1% in Monterey and San Benito Counties. There was no change in Santa Cruz County. Compared to last month, percent of list to sale price dropped 1% in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties but remained flat in Monterey, San Benito, and
Santa Cruz Counties.





Source: MLS Listings
http://www.mlslistings.com/Portals/0/2016/MLSL_MarketDataReport_SFH_May2016_final_061016.pdf?ver=2016-06-10-171104-643

Friday, June 17, 2016

Tiny houses gain popularity in Bay Area

Tired of watching their earnings evaporate every month to cover rent and other basics, Aaron Castle and his fiancee, Candace Anderson, made a decision to go tiny.

They downsized their closets and got rid of many other possessions and today live in a 139-square-foot cedar shingle cottage on wheels that they built. The dwelling is smaller than a two-car garage but has everything they need: a kitchen with a three-burner range and stove, a bathtub, bathroom with a compostable toilet and an upstairs loft that's big enough to fit a king-size bed.

But when it came time to find a spot to park their little abode, the couple quickly ran into problems. City inspectors in Redwood City, where they initially set up, told them they could not live in an RV -- which is what they classified the home -- while parked in a residential neighborhood. They were then cited for blocking a view and then for causing a public nuisance. They are now parked in the backyard of a church in San Bruno but are trying to keep a low profile.

"Tiny houses are a new idea, and it's going to be a couple of years before the bureaucracy makes space for it," said Castle, who is 38 and makes a living as a handyman. "It takes awhile for people to learn."

For a growing number of Bay Area residents, the American dream is no longer a four-bedroom home in the suburbs but a tiny house where floor boards double as closets, the kitchen morphs into the living room and where every square inch has function. The owners say the homes offer a way to save money in the Bay Area's exorbitant housing market, as well as a chance to travel (if the home has wheels) and leave a smaller carbon footprint.

But cities have been slow to address these Lilliputian dwellings, creating a patchwork system that can quickly become a massive headache for anyone looking to build one. Then there is the challenge of finding a suitable location for a tiny house, since most cities require residential dwellings to be at least 350 square feet.

In San Bruno, where Castle and Anderson live, mobile homes can only be inhabited if they are located on the same parcel as a detached single-family home and are at least 320 square feet and 40 feet long, restrictions the couple's home does not meet. The city does not have an RV park.

"The biggest hurdle is finding a place to put the tiny house because most zoning doesn't allow for a tiny house on wheels, either on its own land or in someone's backyard," said Elaine Walker, co-founder of the American Tiny House Association, a clearinghouse of information about tiny houses. "Are they an RV? Are they a home? Most cities have not yet addressed the issue."

Many tiny house enthusiasts prefer homes on wheels because they can be moved. But most Bay Area cities ban tiny houses on wheels in backyards unless the person living in them works as a caretaker for someone on the property or is cared for by someone living in the main house. And RV parks often won't allow them unless they can meet appropriate length, width and electrical and plumbing requirements, which can add thousands of dollars to the home's cost.

Nevertheless, municipalities are slowly becoming more receptive to the idea, said Tiny House Association's Walker. But local governments can do more by eliminating square-footage requirements and creating special zones where tiny house communities can set up, as has recently been done in Rockledge, Florida, Walker said.

"This movement is about individuality, self-expression and creativity, but the biggest obstacle is governments' perception of what density housing can look like," said Keri Gailloux, a San Francisco resident and a member of a group trying to form an eco-village of tiny homes in the North Bay. "It doesn't have to be a block of apartments but something interesting where people work in community and have a sharing environment."

When Heather Stewart and her business partner, Luke Iseman, approached the city of Oakland with their plans to build a tiny house village out of cargo containers, they were shocked that the city wanted around $3,000 for just the permits.

Today, the business partners operate their village inside an Oakland warehouse and get around city prohibitions by calling their project a "24-hour maker space," although it's technically in violation of city zoning ordinances.

"The city has been hesitant to look beyond condos to solve the demand for housing," Stewart said.

Rachel Flynn, Oakland's director of planning and building, said the city shut down the tiny house village out of safety concerns and because the dwellings didn't meet minimum standards, which require secondary dwelling units to be at least 170 square feet and not have wheels.

"We're not against innovative thinking and do consider green solutions, but we need to make sure no one gets hurt or sick," Flynn said.

Some Bay Area cities are also looking into tiny houses as a solution to homelessness, through opportunity villages consisting of tiny homes where people can have access to private sleeping quarters along with a communal area for showers and bathrooms.

San Jose has identified suitable parcels of land for such a purpose. But it has also seen a backlash from residents who said they support the idea but not in their neighborhoods, a problem that has also surfaced in Oakland.

Regardless of the challenges, the trend toward tiny houses shows no signs of abating.

"It gives us the opportunity to live without the stress of paying a mortgage but owning something," said Robert Smith, 23, who is building a 300-square-foot home he plans to put on a friend's property in Livermore. "This way, we don't have to worry about the government ever taking it away."

Despite having to repeatedly pick up and relocate since building their home, Castle and Anderson, the San Bruno couple, who blog about tiny living at canander.com, say not paying rent or a mortgage has freed them to spend more time volunteering, reading and hanging out with family and friends. And they are saving, something they haven't been able to do in a long time.

"It's the first time in awhile that I've had some extra money in my wallet," Castle said.

Source: Mercury News, Karina Ioffee
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_30019791/tiny-houses-gain-popularity-bay-area

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Lagging Demand for Luxury Homes May Mean Deals for Buyers


forsale
A surplus of high-end homes for sale is giving more bargaining power to buyers.

In the U.S., the inventory of homes priced from $500,000 to $750,000 rose 15.9% in March compared with the same period last year, according to the National Association of Realtors. The inventory of homes over $1 million rose 12.6% year over year. Inventories dropped in April, likely due to the seasonal pattern of spring sales and perhaps some buyers taking advantage of deals, but real-estate agents say they are still seeing more expensive homes sit longer than midrange and lower priced homes.

Behind slowing sales at the upper level: Stock-market volatility has made wealthy buyers more cautious, and there are fewer foreign buyers than last year due to the dollar strengthening and other economic issues overseas, says Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist.

“The stock market has come back up, but we don’t know yet if that means the upper-end home buying market will begin to return,” Mr. Yun says.

Year over year comparison of high-end home values.

What also could be happening is simply a “normalizing” of the home market, says Brad Blackwell, executive vice president and portfolio business manager for Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. That’s good for jumbo borrowers, who now have a wider choice of homes and won’t have to bend to sellers’ demands that waive financing and inspection contingencies to compete with cash buyers.

However, the thresholds for looser inventory differ widely by location as different market forces come into play. In suburban Hartford, Conn., homes priced between $300,000 and $450,000 are selling briskly, but listings of $600,000 to $800,000 often stall depending on location and whether they are priced reasonably, says Jessica Starr, agent/owner of Simsbury, Conn.-based Starr Realty, a team affiliated with Keller-Williams Realty. “A lot of people bought at the peak of the market [prerecession] and are taking a loss,” she adds.

Hartford is a good example of how local conditions impact the upper end of home sales. A number of big companies, including General Electric, are moving their headquarters from the area. That may create a glut in inventory, but other affluent, less geographically driven buyers, such as doctors, may swoop in for bargains in family friendly neighborhoods, Ms. Starr says.

In Portland, Ore., homes priced from $300,000 to $600,000 sell in five days with 10 to 20 offers, but listings start to sit on the market at $750,000 and get really challenged above $1 million, says Shannon Baird, a broker with Portland-based Living Room Realty. For example, a grand 1920s Tudor-style home with five fireplaces and a marble-floored ballroom was first listed at $1.6 million, but sat for five months and is finally set to close in June for $1.425 million, she says.

One of the biggest hurdles is changing the mind-set of homeowners attuned to quick sales and bidding wars, Ms. Baird says. One recent $840,000 listing had four counteroffers starting at $770,000 before buyer and seller agreed on $815,000. These days, Ms. Baird advises sellers to review their asking price and consider lower offers after 14 to 21 days.

In San Francisco, Maggie Visser, an agent with the San Francisco-based Paragon Real Estate, says stock-market gyrations have definitely slowed sales to tech-industry employees, many of whom cash out stock options to buy. Also slackening in the Bay Area is the market for newly constructed condo units, where sales had been driven by Chinese buyers, Ms. Visser says.

Here are a few things to consider when financing a more expensive home:

• Low interest rates. A bigger mortgage costs less now than it may in the future. Jumbo mortgage average interest rates are still near record lows—3.72% for the 30-year fixed rate and 2.87% for a five-year, adjustable-rate mortgage on the week ending June 10.

• More cash on hand. Lenders require higher down payments and more cash reserves as borrowers reach higher loan amounts, or “tiers.” For example, Wells Fargo will lend up to 89.9% on amounts up to $1 million, 80% on amounts between $1 million to $2 million, 75% on loans between $2 million and 2.5 million, and so on.

• Budget for all costs. Home buyers who are trading up should make sure they can also afford higher property taxes, homeowners’ insurance, and maintenance, Mr. Blackwell says. “It’s also always important for buyers of luxury houses to factor in the increased cost of furnishing that home,” he adds.

Source: Realtor.com, Anya Martin
http://www.realtor.com/news/trends/lagging-demand-for-luxury-homes-may-mean-deals-for-buyers/?iid=rdc_news_hp_carousel_theLatest

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

San Jose councilman reverses support of homeless housing project

A San Jose City Councilman has come up with the "genius" idea for a homeless camp in a neighborhood close on Senter Road near Tully. As you can imagine many residences complained and raised bloody hell with the city so the project is a no-go for the moment. But in my opinion this is a classic example of NIMBY. Part of the nimbyism is due to the fact that a homeless camp in the neighborhood will almost certainly bring down property values.

The church on the proposed site has been razed.

SAN JOSE -- After being hammered by a storm of public pressure including threats of a civil grand jury complaint, Councilman Tam Nguyen has reversed his support of a homeless housing project on Senter Road.

Nguyen, who in January supported rezoning the land for a transitional housing community, said Friday the project doesn't have enough safeguards and neighbors weren't engaged. Now, he wants the city to treat homeless housing like medical marijuana dispensaries -- keep them away from schools, churches and liquor stores. San Jose's pot ordinance limits collectives to 1 percent of the city, mostly industrial sites.

Coincidentally, Nguyen's district has the most medical cannabis shops.

The proposed development, called the Renascent Place, is a 162-unit complex for chronically homeless individuals. It would be built on county-owned land at 2500 Senter Road that's inside city limits. Santa Clara County teamed up with Charities Housing, a nonprofit housing developer, to propose the project.

A team of eight to 12 employees would provide supportive services on site and the facility would have 24-hour security, according to planning documents. The lease would be for 85 years. The city's Planning Commission in April unanimously approved the project permit, but a group of neighbors appealed. The City Council on Tuesday will consider whether to deny the appeal.

Nguyen thinks the city should uphold the appeal. But Mayor Sam Liccardo, Councilmen Charles "Chappie" Jones and Johnny Khamis support the project, while calling for a plan to increase community engagement. Nguyen criticized the project managers for a lack of outreach and not having a "safety plan" to protect residents. Though Nguyen's January memo supporting the land-use change cited on-site managers and 24/7 security as important safety tools, he now says that's not enough.

"The way they are doing it does not provide a safe environment for the homeless or the neighborhood," Nguyen said. "They did not consider other criteria like crime activity and dumping." City housing officials counter by saying having "more eyes on the street" will actually deter crime and improve safety in the neighborhood.

"We know that activation of sites and providing more eyes can make the neighborhood safer," said Ray Bramson, San Jose's homeless response manager. "The potential of the project is not only benefitting the residents that are living there but improving the entire area."

Nguyen said public pressure didn't factor into his decision to oppose the project, but emails show a group of residents threatening to file a civil grand jury complaint against the councilman unless he met with them.

The threat came from Delbert Ng, a retired electrical engineer who lives on Albany Circle, not far from the project's property line.

"The main concern is the size of the project and high concentration of the most problematic chronic homeless," Ng said. "These are severely mentally ill and drug and alcohol addicted individuals. And it's not a lockdown facility, so they can come out into the community."

Patricia Ramos-Anderson, who doesn't live near the site but said her parents own property there, said the community wasn't informed about the new development. But city records show there were at least five community meetings with more than 100 attendees.

Homeless advocate Jennifer Loving, who directs the nonprofit Destination: Home, says building more homeless housing is the only solution to end homelessness.

"People are speaking out against things that haven't even happened yet," Loving said. "We need to do projects if we want to end homelessness. The council asks for solutions and we deliver responses to end homelessness and people don't like them. But the projects that are being proposed are good, solid projects."

Nguyen, who just returned from a trip to Portland where he slept in an outdoor tent city, says that experience taught him the importance of keeping homeless housing projects away from neighbors.

"The neighbors want to protect the value of their property -- that's natural," Nguyen said.

But Bramson said the focus should be to transition people back into the community. Affordable housing needs to be near transit and services to be successful, he added.

"Residents are less likely to have vehicles and need to be in places to access what they need for everyday life -- things like shopping for groceries or getting to a pharmacy," he said.

If the housing project is approved Tuesday, city leaders will also ask to apply for a $14 million grant under the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program to improve transit, trails and other infrastructure.

Source: Mercury News, Ramona Giwargis
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_30007401/san-jose-councilman-opposes-homeless-housing-project-ahead

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Down Payment Assistance Programs Save Qualifying Homebuyers More Than $17,000 on Average Over Life of Loan


NEW ORLEANS – June 9, 2016 — RealtyTrac® (www.realtytrac.com), the nation’s leading source for comprehensive housing data, today released a joint report with Down Payment Resource analyzing the impact of down payment assistance on the cost of buying a home — including the down payment and monthly house payments for a median-priced home in 513 counties nationwide. The report was released at the National Association of Real Estate Editors 50th Annual Journalism Conference in New Orleans.

The report found that across all 513 counties analyzed, buyers using available down payment assistance programs can save an average of $17,766 representing 41 percent of a year’s wages compared to buyers who do not use down payment assistance.

The total savings breaks down to an average savings of $5,965 on the down payment for a median-priced home, and an average savings of $11,801 on monthly house payments over the life of the loan for a median-priced home.

The report combined public record sales deed data for single family homes and condos collected by RealtyTrac with average down payment assistance data collected from 2,477 down payment assistance programs across the country by Down Payment Resource along with the latest average weekly wage data available at the county level from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“Saving for a down payment can be difficult for prospective first-time homebuyers given the absence of substantial wage growth in recent years combined with the burden of student loan debt many are struggling under,” said Daren Blomquist, senior vice president at RealtyTrac. “Even just a 3 percent down payment requires 14 percent of annual wages on average across the 513 counties we analyzed, and in 67 counties a 3 percent down payment requires more than one-fifth of annual wages.”

“Homeownership programs not only help buyers overcome the initial cost of purchasing a home, but also produce a compounding positive impact on the homeowner’s saving and wealth-building capability,” said Rob Chrane, CEO at Down Payment Resource. “In fact, these programs are now the last frontier in the fight to preserve homeownership affordability. Rates are never going to be substantially lower, and home prices continue to trend higher.”

Markets with biggest down payment assistance savings

Markets where buyers using down payment assistance programs can realize the biggest total dollar savings compared to buyers not using down payment assistance were Kauai County, Hawaii ($80,148 total savings over the life of the loan); Placer County, California, in the Sacramento metro area ($78,539); San Francisco County, California ($77,411); Orange County, California in the Los Angeles metro area ($74,268); and Shasta County (Redding), California ($70,806).

Other markets with total savings of more than $50,000 over the life of the loan included counties in Miami, New Orleans, Seattle, Orlando, and New York.

“Any ability that buyers have to assist with current down payment requirements is positive — especially when we consider our region’s first time buyers who are sometimes facing an uphill battle as to whether to continue paying escalating rents, or save towards a down payment on a home,” said Matthew Gardner, chief economist at Windermere Real Estate, covering the Seattle market. “However, Seattle’s housing market remains incredibly competitive and many buyers are either paying cash or have substantial down payments. These buyers are seen as lower risk than those using down payment assistance and are therefore more likely to win in a multiple-offer situation.”

Markets where buyers using down payment assistance programs can realize the biggest savings as a percentage of average annual wages compared to buyers not using down payment assistance were Kauai County, Hawaii (191 percent of annual wages); Shasta County (Redding), California (176 percent); Sevier County (Sevierville), Tennessee (161 percent); El Dorado County, California in the Sacramento metro area (160 percent); and Allen County (Lima), Ohio (157 percent).

“While down payment assistance programs are beneficial for assisting buyers in achieving the American Dream of homeownership, current low available housing inventory is creating an inability to leverage such programs to the benefit of buyers,” said Michael Mahon, president at HER Realtors, covering the Cincinnati, Dayton and Columbus markets in Ohio. “Couple current market conditions with certain sellers and agents restricting access to viewing of properties in consideration of marketing programs to create hyper-sensitivity regarding property availability, and we have what many are considering a potential environment of disparate impact relating to the inability of the Protected Class Buyers under the U.S. Fair Housing Act to leverage such down payment assistance programs in achieving their family goals of homeownership.”

Other markets with total savings of more than 130 percent of average annual wages included counties in Orlando, Los Angeles, Miami, Nashville and Memphis.

Average assistance covers 3 percent down in 82 percent of counties

Across all 513 counties, the average down payment assistance available through down payment assistance programs was $12,434, nearly twice the average 3 percent down payment of $6,424 on a median-priced home.

“These programs often make the difference between buying a home or not,” added Chrane of Down Payment Resource. “In most cases, the assistance results in a greater financial cushion by preventing homebuyers from liquidating their savings and retirement accounts to come up with a down payment.”

Average down payment assistance available was higher than a 3 percent down payment on a median-priced home in 422 of the 513 counties (82 percent), including Los Angeles County, California ($39,964 average down payment assistance compared to $15,450 for 3 percent down on a median-priced home); Cook County, Illinois in the Chicago metro area ($8,058 average assistance compared to $6,090 for 3 percent down); Harris County, Texas in the Houston metro area ($16,521 average assistance compared to $5,985 for 3 percent down); Maricopa County, Arizona in the Phoenix metro area ($19,067 average assistance compared to $6,750 for 3 percent down); and San Diego County, California ($25,262 average assistance compared to $14,460 for 3 percent down).

Markets where average assistance does not cover 3 percent down

Average down payment assistance was lower than a 3 percent down payment on a median-priced home in 91 of the 513 markets (18 percent).

Major markets where a 3 percent down payment on a median-priced home was higher than the average down payment assistance available included New York County (Manhattan), New York ($13,917 average down payment assistance compared to $34,500 for 3 percent down on a median-priced home); Fairfax County, Virginia in the Washington, D.C. metro area ($5,000 average assistance compared to $14,100 for 3 percent down); Salt Lake County, Utah ($5,313 average assistance compared to $8,078 for 3 percent down); Montgomery County, Maryland in the Washington, D.C. metro area ($4,680 average assistance compared to $11,550 for 3 percent down); and Baltimore County, Maryland ($6,173 average assistance compared to $6,210 for 3 percent down).

Other markets where a 3 percent down payment on a median-priced home was higher than the average down payment assistance available included counties in Philadelphia, San Francisco, Chicago, Kansas City, Des Moines, Portland, and St. Louis.

Source: RealtyTrac, Realtytrac Staff
http://www.realtytrac.com/news/home-prices-and-sales/2016-down-payment-assistance-affordability-analysis/