Petaluma at Eastwood

Inc, I did notice the cell tower proximity to lot 8 and 9. How do we know what a safe distance from it is though?

Looks like the choice is between Irvine Blvd road noise and cancer radiation.
 
acf said:
Inc, I did notice the cell tower proximity to lot 8 and 9. How do we know what a safe distance from it is though?

Looks like the choice is between Irvine Blvd road noise and cancer radiation.

The cancer will be worth it. Just think about how fast your cell connection will be.
 
acf said:
Inc, I did notice the cell tower proximity to lot 8 and 9. How do we know what a safe distance from it is though?

Looks like the choice is between Irvine Blvd road noise and cancer radiation.

I would prefer a lot at current Petaluma location that are more inner, farther away from Irvine Blvd than the extension site. 

We have a cell tower put up in CV about a year after the village opened, see CV cell tower discussion here.  And one TI member post a link for an interesting read from American Cancer Soiciey regarding to cell tower. http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phone-towers
 
Phase 1: 9 homes all sold
Phase 2: 5 homes sold, 1 didn't have a sold button yet (residence 1)

Base property tax: 1.05%
AD tax: $1,150 / year
CFD tax: $1,700 / year
Other taxes: $164 / year
Overall effective tax rate: ~1.4%
Eastwood HOA: $125 / month
 
Inc, it looks like Petaluma I is right by irvine blvd, where as Petaluma II is more inside the community.

ChasingRainbows said:
Phase 1: 9 homes all sold
Phase 2: 5 homes sold, 1 didn't have a sold button yet (residence 1)

Base property tax: 1.05%
AD tax: $1,150 / year
CFD tax: $1,700 / year
Other taxes: $164 / year
Overall effective tax rate: ~1.4%
Eastwood HOA: $125 / month
lnc said:
acf said:
Inc, I did notice the cell tower proximity to lot 8 and 9. How do we know what a safe distance from it is though?

Looks like the choice is between Irvine Blvd road noise and cancer radiation.

I would prefer a lot at current Petaluma location that are more inner, farther away from Irvine Blvd than the extension site. 

We have a cell tower put up in CV about a year after the village opened, see CV cell tower discussion here.  And one TI member post a link for an interesting read from American Cancer Soiciey regarding to cell tower. http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phone-towers
 
acf said:
Inc, it looks like Petaluma I is right by irvine blvd, where as Petaluma II is more inside the community.

That's good to know. 

If Petaluma's sale continues at current pace, they should roll out their extension site by the year end. 
 
San Mateo was the best selling tract at Stonegate (3 phases) and it's safe to assume that Petaluma will be the best selling tract in Eastwood.  I wouldn't be surprised if you get a 3rd phase of Petaluma.  I don't think Marin will sell that well.
 
So "if" the cell tower is not dangerous given the studies shown (Although I have googled other studies that say otherwise), can we all agree that Petaluma II built on lot 8 or 9 is better than the current Petaluma I location near Irvine blvd?

Edit: I guess it depends if Petaluma II is located right next to Jeffery road, or more to the inside of the community. Thoughts?
 
acf said:
So "if" the cell tower is not dangerous given the studies shown (Although I have googled other studies that say otherwise), can we all agree that Petaluma II built on lot 8 or 9 is better than the current Petaluma I location near Irvine blvd?

Edit: I guess it depends if Petaluma II is located right next to Jeffery road, or more to the inside of the community. Thoughts?

From what I have read, you want to be at least a 1/4 mile away from cell towers to be safe.

At the end of the day, cell tower studies are conflicting. Until there are concrete evidence and studies, why would anyone want to put their family at risk of cancer?

A lot of these buyers overlook cell towers at Eastwood, contamination at Beacon Park and get caught up in the hype of Irvine. So sad.

 
fishfinder333 said:
acf said:
So "if" the cell tower is not dangerous given the studies shown (Although I have googled other studies that say otherwise), can we all agree that Petaluma II built on lot 8 or 9 is better than the current Petaluma I location near Irvine blvd?

Edit: I guess it depends if Petaluma II is located right next to Jeffery road, or more to the inside of the community. Thoughts?

From what I have read, you want to be at least a 1/4 mile away from cell towers to be safe.

At the end of the day, cell tower studies are conflicting. Until there are concrete evidence and studies, why would anyone want to put their family at risk of cancer?

A lot of these buyers overlook cell towers at Eastwood, contamination at Beacon Park and get caught up in the hype of Irvine. So sad.

Really?  You are giving equal credence to the American Cancer Society, and some loon on the internet?

Reminds me of the global warming deniers

 
What kind of waves do those cell towers put out? What is the chain of events that happen when those waves hit human body that ultimately yield  cancer in some people?
 
soyi said:
They are going fast, like Chinese green onion hot cakes!

Of course, this is a better alternative than BP. A school will be built in Eastwood just like BP. (walkable)
 
Wait, yesterday they told me that the phase 3 pricing list would come out sometime "next week"....
 
acf said:
Wait, yesterday they told me that the phase 3 pricing list would come out sometime "next week"....

From what I understand, phase 3 just came out Friday. Seems Petaluma is selling faster than Jasmine?
 
soyi said:
From what I understand, phase 3 just came out Friday. Seems Petaluma is selling faster than Jasmine?

Jasmine was selling very fast too but it does looks like Petaluma is selling even better.  Petaluma also has lot of good attribute over Jasmine, farther away from freeway, zoned to Northwood High instead of Irvine High and improve floor plan etc.

If I'm in the market for something like this, I would jump on it right away.
 
Back
Top