NYT said:I'm still curious about what retail will be going into "Potential Retail Center" in pink, ie hoping for a Target, a 24-Hour Fitness... Curious, also, about the word "potential". Does that mean proposed, as in "should happen"? Or does it mean possible, as in "we're still not really sure what the hell we're going to put there"?
Vinster said:I'm not sure if it makes sense for a Target since the Foothill Ranch Target (and Walmart) are close by way of the toll road. And in the future, Portola Parkway will be connected to Foothill Ranch. And don't forget the Target (and new Walmart) at the Irvine Spectrum. There will also be retail in the Great Park development as well as at the southeast corner of Sand Canyon and Irvine Blvd.
It'll come eventually but only after a lot more homes are built (including the Great Park homes north of Irvine Blvd).SoCal said:Ha! I agree with you, Qwerty. It'll never come.
I used to live in that corner-most apartment, ground floor, right on that intersection of Portola Pkwy & Portola Springs Rd. I stared at the "Future Retail Center - Coming Soon" sign out my bedroom window for 3 years. Never saw anything come and go except weeds and myself. The sign will outlive us all.
Vinster said:NYT said:I'm still curious about what retail will be going into "Potential Retail Center" in pink, ie hoping for a Target, a 24-Hour Fitness... Curious, also, about the word "potential". Does that mean proposed, as in "should happen"? Or does it mean possible, as in "we're still not really sure what the hell we're going to put there"?
I'm not sure if it makes sense for a Target since the Foothill Ranch Target (and Walmart) are close by way of the toll road. And in the future, Portola Parkway will be connected to Foothill Ranch. And don't forget the Target (and new Walmart) at the Irvine Spectrum. There will also be retail in the Great Park development as well as at the southeast corner of Sand Canyon and Trabuco.
Also, wasn't the elementary school previously planned for the northeast area (Enclave 4)?
iacrenter said:I just love the BS justifications for 5 foot setbacks by TIC.
"Alternative setback standards are a way of recognizing that housing developments do
not always need to adhere to age-old setback standards in order to provide safe, quality
neighborhoods. Housing styles and needs have changed over the years and will
continue to evolve; alternative setback standards are a way for the City to recognize
and foster this evolution of housing provided it retains the quality of neighborhood
development expected of Irvine." Pg 10http://www.irvinequickrecords.com/S...odaqc55jkyqap2v/1380665512042012101400655.PDF
Why don't they tell the truth? Just write "We are TIC, the RE juggernaut and you (City of Irvine) will acquiesce to our demands! We are maximizing profits by squeezing as many homes as possible into minimum acreage at the expense of privacy and community aesthetics."
IrvineRealtor said:Counterpoint : If you were in charge of design, and hoi polloi were buying everything up as quickly as it has been built, would you change this strategy?
Seems to me it would be a big risk with low probability of reward. Anyone who would try that would be more likely to find a pink slip than a bonus check.
Just my .02c
-IR2