Orange City Council restricts accessory housing, short-term rentals

The city council moved forward in restricting accessory dwelling units, which many Chapman students occupy. The council will also continue considering future restrictions on short-term rentals like Airbnb. Photo credit: City of Estacada

The Orange City Council added restrictions to housing like accessory dwelling units (ADUs) — secondary houses that share the lot of a larger, primary house — and short-term rentals made through services like Airbnb.

The new ADU ordinance, which the council passed unanimously during a March 9 meeting, ensures that these types of properties, which were originally intended to address Southern California’s housing crisis, remain subordinate to the primary residence. However, some of these ADUs are occupied by Chapman University students seeking cheaper alternatives for off-campus housing.

Recent Jan. 1 changes in state ADU laws made Orange a target for developers and realtors who purchase homes, add multiple bedrooms and bathrooms and rent to college students. However, Orange City Council’s new March 9 restrictions prohibit more than one bedroom for every 500 square feet, bedrooms with outside access and kitchen utilities in bedrooms. The ordinance will further prevent ADUs with “dormitory” qualities in single-family neighborhoods.

Orange Mayor Mark Murphy told The Panther that the ordinance will not require students currently living in ADUs to move out, nor will it affect Chapman housing properties like the Panther Village or the Chapman Grand Apartments.

“The ordinance is not directed at the students,” Murphy said. “It’s directed at the folks that are buying and building these properties and creating nuisances in neighborhoods.” 

Murphy said the reason behind restricting ADUs is to combat state-driven affordable housing mandates, and Murphy thinks these issues should be left to local jurisdictions. Orange residents have been calling out companies like Young-Lewin Capital that purchase Orange property, build ADUs and advertise to Chapman students.

“I implore you and the Council to decline Young-Lewin's applications to proceed,” Orange resident Lisa Pereira wrote in a public comment to the council. “Not only should they be forced back to the drawing board on their design intent, but they should also compensate the City for the work they've done that wasn't approved by your building and safety group.”

To address a lack of Chapman housing, Chapman purchased land near Panther Village in 2016, which hasn’t begun construction, and the fully-built Chapman Grand Apartments in 2017. Harold Hewitt, Chapman’s executive vice president and chief operating officer, told The Panther that since the funds originally intended for the land near Panther Village went toward purchasing Chapman Grand, the university will move forward with the Panther Village project when it can borrow more money to complete it.

Karmen Pantoja, a senior political science and peace studies double major at Chapman, lives in an Orange house with five roommates. Pantoja said she was concerned about the ordinance’s effect on local Chapman students.

“I feel like Chapman students are not that aware of many of the happenings in the City of Orange,” Pantoja told The Panther. “I’m sure that Chapman will be able to respond to Orange’s pushback on students living in the community, but how will that impact students’ experience?”

Tony Trabucco, president of the Old Towne Preservation Association, argued the Panther Village expansion was needed in order to alleviate neighborhood disturbances.

“We need additional Chapman on-campus housing, coupled with a moratorium on student growth until the housing situation can be mitigated,” Trabucco wrote in an email to The Panther. “Chapman may also need to consider limiting access to cars for some of their students, or provide off-site parking for vehicles for some students living in the surrounding neighborhoods.”

Regarding rentals, the Orange City Council voted 4-3 during the Feb. 23 meeting to consider implementing a one-year program to restrict short-term rentals to only 125 properties in the city, prioritizing those that are owner-occupied and locally owned by Orange residents. Former city council members Mike Alvarez and current member Chip Monaco both voted against considering the program and strongly supported banning short-term rentals in Orange entirely.

Michael Macisaac, a small business owner who owns short-term rentals in Orange, voiced opposition to a possible ban. Macisaac was one of the two election challengers against Alvarez, which resulted in Alvarez’s resignation March 8.

“I am not an absent owner investing in a property just to rent it out as often as possible,” Macisaac wrote in a public comment read aloud during the Feb. 23 meeting. “We typically host Disney families and parents visiting Chapman students ... We host families, not drug dealers and prostitutes. Contrary to the negative comments made about (short-term rentals), I do not have criminals come to my home.”

The council did not take any direct action Feb. 23 regarding short-term rentals. Instead, the council made changes to the ordinance recommended by the Planning Commission. The council tabled a determinant vote for a future meeting.