• New forum software - please post issues in this thread

New communities in Portola Springs

someguy

Active member
2) Being a pit on one side is bad enough, but on 3 sides would be very bad. I remember when we first saw the site. We exited Lake Forest Dr. from 241 and then turned into Rancho Pkwy and when I saw the construction site, I was turned off right away. Maybe it will be different when the community is built out, but the first impression was important to me.

3) Being known as a luxury home builder, I do believe that TB does use materials that are better than IP. I do prefer the Wolf appliances at IP over the Jenn-Air appliances at TB, though. And both my wife and I do prefer the exterior look of TB over IP. IP's exterior is mainly Mediterranean/early California style (a little bit old fashion) while TB's exterior is more modern style. We also liked the exterior at most the communities at GP.

5) Yes, floorplans are pretty much personal preference in terms of what you need. My wife loves big pantries and the storage closet. Having a huge primary bath isn't important to her, although it can't be too small, because it really is just a waste of space. Big primary shower space, on the other hand, is more important. An additional flex room is not needed for us since there's already a loft. I understand bigger families will find it useful, but not for us, with just one adult kid now. That is why we prefer IP's floorplan over TB's floorplan. Again, just personal preference.

Again, I'm not crapping on The Meadows. I only have two complaints about it. The development is in a pit and it's in a commercial area, both of which are no go for us.
For #3, at these price points both TB and IP use the same builder grade materials, same general trade groups for labor, and aim to build to code and pass inspection with minimal costs. The only difference in terms of build quality is perception as a result of marketing/branding.
 
The plan 2 ra
For #3, at these price points both TB and IP use the same builder grade materials, same general trade groups for labor, and aim to build to code and pass inspection with minimal costs. The only difference in terms of build quality is perception as a result of marketing/branding.
why does ravello look like a big condo when I walk through it though? It really feels “cheap” compared to Evergreen or my favorite, Cetara. Like it says plan 2 starts at 4m plus. Is that the model cause otherwise that’s a joke.
 

sleepy5136

Active member
The plan 2 ra

why does ravello look like a big condo when I walk through it though? It really feels “cheap” compared to Evergreen or my favorite, Cetara. Like it says plan 2 starts at 4m plus. Is that the model cause otherwise that’s a joke.
Cetara is the best out of all cookie cutter homes in Irvine. It's almost ridiculous to believe view lots there were going for 2m back in September 2020. IP as a builder does not want to invest in giving the best product to back their brand up. Shea Homes goes above and beyond to do so. Cetara and Teresina are great examples of that. Shea Homes, also a private company as well.
 

Danimal

Active member
The plan 2 ra

why does ravello look like a big condo when I walk through it though? It really feels “cheap” compared to Evergreen or my favorite, Cetara. Like it says plan 2 starts at 4m plus. Is that the model cause otherwise that’s a joke.
Are you sure you are not looking at the Ravello with view? That view is $1.5 mil premium. 😀
 

CalBears96

Well-known member
The plan 2 ra

why does ravello look like a big condo when I walk through it though? It really feels “cheap” compared to Evergreen or my favorite, Cetara. Like it says plan 2 starts at 4m plus. Is that the model cause otherwise that’s a joke.
Ravello starts at $2.7M. As Daminal said, the remaining ones have city view, thus a $1.5M lot premium. Ridiculous? Absolutely, but some people really want it, I guess. Cielo city view is going to be $1M lot premium as well, I was told.

It's really funny that you mentioned that Ravello looks like a big condo when you walk through when you see the freaking gorgeous view through the backyard and master bedroom windows, while all you see in the Evergreen models are the pools. For me, it's the exact opposite.
 

CalBears96

Well-known member
Cetara is the best out of all cookie cutter homes in Irvine. It's almost ridiculous to believe view lots there were going for 2m back in September 2020. IP as a builder does not want to invest in giving the best product to back their brand up. Shea Homes goes above and beyond to do so. Cetara and Teresina are great examples of that. Shea Homes, also a private company as well.
I haven't seen the Cetara models, but I do agree that Teresina models were impressive inside, nicer than Evergreen and Ravello.
 
Are you sure you are not looking at the Ravello with view? That view is $1.5 mil premium. 😀
Aah, ok then that is way less egregious in terms of price comparison. I just saw the website’s landing page where it had prices but it didn’t specify view lot. still the interiors look poor compared to so many other builders in that price range. I think having ~3500sq ft and not having a den or flex space downstairs is terrible, and the dining room feels super cramped in ravello.

Imagine paying 3m and having your guests come over and they’re like “why are we eating in the breakfast nook?”.

I made fun of the genoa floorplans but again, the models at least look twice as nice as Ravello models.
 

CalBears96

Well-known member
Aah, ok then that is way less egregious in terms of price comparison. I just saw the website’s landing page where it had prices but it didn’t specify view lot. still the interiors look poor compared to so many other builders in that price range. I think having ~3500sq ft and not having a den or flex space downstairs is terrible, and the dining room feels super cramped in ravello.

Imagine paying 3m and having your guests come over and they’re like “why are we eating in the breakfast nook?”.

I made fun of the genoa floorplans but again, the models at least look twice as nice as Ravello models.
Ravello 3 is the only one close to 3500 sq ft and it does have a den and a bedroom downstairs. The dining room for this Plan is more open than Plans 1 and 2, though.

Ravello 2 is in the ~3350 sq ft range and Ravello 1 is 3227 sq ft. Both of these Plans do have a flex space, although not a flex room that you're probably thinking.

I do agree, though, that IP homes aren't suited to host parties as their dining room is relatively small.
 

irviniteeee

Active member
The plan 2 ra

why does ravello look like a big condo when I walk through it though? It really feels “cheap” compared to Evergreen or my favorite, Cetara. Like it says plan 2 starts at 4m plus. Is that the model cause otherwise that’s a joke.
The issue is that IP builds all look the same. Because IP has chosen not to differentiate their products enough, they suffer from "pick-a-size" syndrome. That's not to say their homes are ugly, but I can see why you think they look like big condos. Because the condos, motorcourt homes, and fully detached SFRs by IP all look the same to a certain extent.

I love Cetara, those are amazing homes. Shea puts a lot more design elements into the exterior of their homes generally. IP is more focused on their profit and couldn't care less about styling.
 

trematix

Member
Aah, ok then that is way less egregious in terms of price comparison. I just saw the website’s landing page where it had prices but it didn’t specify view lot. still the interiors look poor compared to so many other builders in that price range. I think having ~3500sq ft and not having a den or flex space downstairs is terrible, and the dining room feels super cramped in ravello.

Imagine paying 3m and having your guests come over and they’re like “why are we eating in the breakfast nook?”.

I made fun of the genoa floorplans but again, the models at least look twice as nice as Ravello models.

I actually thought Genoa models were the worst i've seen out of all the new development homes. Luckily for them, they had the most big lots at the time which is probably why they sold but floor plans weren't great and the models were just as bad, at least my opinion
 

The Motor Court Company

Well-known member
to me all the new floor plans are the same...also we cani
I actually thought Genoa models were the worst i've seen out of all the new development homes. Luckily for them, they had the most big lots at the time which is probably why they sold but floor plans weren't great and the models were just as bad, at least my opinion
Do you have the Genoa floor plans somewhere? I kept reading about how bad they are but cannot find the floor plans online.
 

CalBears96

Well-known member
My wife got the price sheet from Cielo and Azul today.

Apparently, one Cielo home, Plan 2 (homesite 34) has been sold since it's no longer on the price sheet. The price for a Plan 3 home (homesite 35) has increased by $72k, from $2.613M to $2.685M because apparently, that's how much upgrades they've added, which IP claims to be over $163k worth of upgrades. :ROFLMAO: Homesites 31, 32, and 35 remain unsold.

One Azul home has also been sold, Plan 1 (homesite 2). Other than that, there are some price increases on the other homes due to more upgrades.

I wonder if these homes were bought by Chinese cash buyers now that China has eased travel restrictions. 🤔
 

potsticker

Active member
My wife got the price sheet from Cielo and Azul today.

Apparently, one Cielo home, Plan 2 (homesite 34) has been sold since it's no longer on the price sheet. The price for a Plan 3 home (homesite 35) has increased by $72k, from $2.613M to $2.685M because apparently, that's how much upgrades they've added, which IP claims to be over $163k worth of upgrades. :ROFLMAO: Homesites 31, 32, and 35 remain unsold.

One Azul home has also been sold, Plan 1 (homesite 2). Other than that, there are some price increases on the other homes due to more upgrades.

I wonder if these homes were bought by Chinese cash buyers now that China has eased travel restrictions. 🤔

Would you be able to post a pdf of the price sheets? I'd like to see it and it's also good to be able to come back to this thread years later and see what the initial phases of projects are selling for.
 

bones

Well-known member
My wife got the price sheet from Cielo and Azul today.

Apparently, one Cielo home, Plan 2 (homesite 34) has been sold since it's no longer on the price sheet. The price for a Plan 3 home (homesite 35) has increased by $72k, from $2.613M to $2.685M because apparently, that's how much upgrades they've added, which IP claims to be over $163k worth of upgrades. :ROFLMAO: Homesites 31, 32, and 35 remain unsold.

One Azul home has also been sold, Plan 1 (homesite 2). Other than that, there are some price increases on the other homes due to more upgrades.

I wonder if these homes were bought by Chinese cash buyers now that China has eased travel restrictions. 🤔
Wonder how Azul is doing. I was over at GP for LNY and checked out Daybreak (Pulte). They're the largest ones in their newest neighborhood. I was surprised to see that they're 70% sold given the market (opened this summer too I think) + MR. They're not that comparable to Cielo (no views, alley loaded, some driveways, largest is 3200sf, and cheaper) but interesting given they're in the same general area.
 

CalBears96

Well-known member
Wonder how Azul is doing. I was over at GP for LNY and checked out Daybreak (Pulte). They're the largest ones in their newest neighborhood. I was surprised to see that they're 70% sold given the market (opened this summer too I think) + MR. They're not that comparable to Cielo (no views, alley loaded, some driveways, largest is 3200sf, and cheaper) but interesting given they're in the same general area.
Both Cielo and Azul haven't sold many homes since October.

I didn't pay much attention to Azul, so I can't give specifics, but this is how Cielo has fared.

1. Released homesites 1, 2, 35, 36. Homesites 1, 2 and 36 were sold. Homesites 1 and 2 are view lots.
2. Released homesites 3, 4, 33, 34. Homesites 3, 4 and 34 were sold. Homesites 3 and 4 are view lots.
3. Released homesites 5, 6, 31, 32. Homesites 5 and 6, both view lots, were sold.
4. Supposedly, homesites 7 and 8 were released via email. I only saw homesite 9 released on price sheet. Homesites 29 and 30 were supposed to be released next. They were shown on sales map.
5. Price sheet only showed homesites 31, 32, 33, and 35. Homesite 9 removed from price sheet. Homesites 7-9 and 29-30 removed from sales map.
6. Homesite 33 was sold, leaving homesites 31, 32, and 35 on price sheet. And that's where we're at.

Basically, since the grand opening in July, Cielo has released 12 homes and 9 have been sold. However, 6 of the 9 homes are view lots and they pretty much sold immediately. The view lots are looking down at Highland Park and Portola Springs (the road).
 

CalBears96

Well-known member
Would you be able to post a pdf of the price sheets? I'd like to see it and it's also good to be able to come back to this thread years later and see what the initial phases of projects are selling for.
These are all the Azul price sheets I picked up since grand opening in July.
 

Attachments

  • Azul 2022-07-16.pdf
    42.4 KB · Views: 17
  • Azul 2022-09-02.pdf
    66.1 KB · Views: 6
  • Azul 2022-10-08.pdf
    62.4 KB · Views: 5
  • Azul 2022-11-09.pdf
    61.6 KB · Views: 5
  • Azul 2022-12-12.pdf
    63.9 KB · Views: 7
  • Azul 2023-01-20.pdf
    63.2 KB · Views: 17

CalBears96

Well-known member
Would you be able to post a pdf of the price sheets? I'd like to see it and it's also good to be able to come back to this thread years later and see what the initial phases of projects are selling for.
And these are the Cielo price sheets.
 

Attachments

  • Cielo 2022-07-22.pdf
    55.2 KB · Views: 14
  • Cielo 2022-09-10.pdf
    60 KB · Views: 4
  • Cielo 2022-09-22.pdf
    71.1 KB · Views: 3
  • Cielo 2022-10-21.pdf
    64.8 KB · Views: 4
  • Cielo 2022-11-18.pdf
    76.7 KB · Views: 5
  • Cielo 2022-12-18.pdf
    74.3 KB · Views: 5
  • Cielo 2023-01-21.pdf
    70.4 KB · Views: 22
Top