What adds more: an extra bedroom or more land in Woodbury?

For me, part of it depends on the floorplan and how much land.

For the people willing to spend the time, an extra bedroom is easy to add if the land is big enough and the floorplan supports it... but how much will that cost compare to just the house with an extra bedroom.

Generally speaking, people who are looking for 4 bedrooms will look for that specifically over more land.
 
When I sold my house in Feb in Irvine and when looking to buy another house in Irvine, the one thing that mattered more than anything was the house square footage.  Of course, upgrades matter too but it all starts with house square footage.  The lot side didn't seem to matter that much unless the lot is HUGE.  For example 4000sqft vs 7000sqft.  A couple hundred sqft didn't seem to sway the price much. 

Getting more land in Woodbury to add a room later will be tough unless you get one of the odd sized corner lot.  It seem that the houses are already maximized for a given lot in Woodbury.  I would personally go with the extra bedroom therefore more square footage.  I saw that at Sonoma, they are charging $60K extra  for 1900 sqft of additional lot size.  Even if you can get the permits from City and HOA to add on to the house, I think it will be hard to get the money back in resale since the house will be too expensive for the neighborhood.
 
Duh... missed the Woodbury part.

Based solely on that and knowing most of the floorplans, definitely 4 bedrooms because there is barely any room to build an extra bedroom in most of the WB models (the only ones I can think of are the tandem garages in the bigger plans and possible the Cali Rooms in the newer ones).

I think a harder question would be what if the interior square footage of the home were the same? If Montecito Plan 2 (4/3) were the same price as Sonoma Plan 1 (3/2.5), which one would you buy?

EDIT: Actually, based on latest pricing Sonoma Plan 1 and Montecito Plan 2 are the same price... $795k. And this was my 1000th post... wow... I am officially a "Certified Irvine Addict".
 
irvinehomeowner said:
I think a harder question would be what if the interior square footage of the home were the same? If Montecito Plan 2 (4/3) were the same price as Sonoma Plan 1 (3/2.5), which one would you buy?
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on if you need the 4th bedroom or not.  For me, I needed the 4th bedroom, so Sonoma plan 1 never came into consideration.  Even though Sonoma seems nicer, Montecito Plan 2 would satisfy more buyers and potentially have a larger pool of buyers (minus Motorcourt haters) when it's time to sell. 
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Duh... missed the Woodbury part.

Based solely on that and knowing most of the floorplans, definitely 4 bedrooms because there is barely any room to build an extra bedroom in most of the WB models (the only ones I can think of are the tandem garages in the bigger plans and possible the Cali Rooms in the newer ones).

I think a harder question would be what if the interior square footage of the home were the same? If Montecito Plan 2 (4/3) were the same price as Sonoma Plan 1 (3/2.5), which one would you buy?
Click to expand...

Montecito plan 2 because of the bedroom.  Hack, I would even say Montecito Plan 1 over Sonoma because of the Den.  It's just me though.  For me it's the bedroom/den.
 
I believe the original question was a general one and no specific comparision between Sonoma / Montecito.

That said I personally would take the extra room. Primarily because of what I2I said about getting approval
from city and HOA to add rooms. I will not bet on a future approval and buy something now.

I'm told there are areas in the El Camino/ The Ranch/ Deerfield sections of Irvine with no HOA etc where people remodel
homes etc. Don't know what kind of premium they end up with?? But the key is they have no HOA to go through for approval.

fe9000 said:
irvinehomeowner said:
Duh... missed the Woodbury part.

Based solely on that and knowing most of the floorplans, definitely 4 bedrooms because there is barely any room to build an extra bedroom in most of the WB models (the only ones I can think of are the tandem garages in the bigger plans and possible the Cali Rooms in the newer ones).

I think a harder question would be what if the interior square footage of the home were the same? If Montecito Plan 2 (4/3) were the same price as Sonoma Plan 1 (3/2.5), which one would you buy?
Click to expand...

Montecito plan 2 because of the bedroom.  Hack, I would even say Montecito Plan 1 over Sonoma because of the Den.  It's just me though.  For me it's the bedroom/den.
Click to expand...
 
So in general I believe people say that an extra bedroom is worth more than more land.

In that case does the small lots lead to lots of shade in the backyard.  I would figure that even if you had a south face backyard the house behind yours would still keep you in the shade (assuming only 10 - 12 feet between the house and back wall.


 
I would say a bedroom will be worth more than a bigger lot.  Extra SF to a home is worth more than a bigger lot.
 
It's kind of ironic that everyone seem to complain about the small lots, but given the choice people are paying more for larger house square footage...
 
Irvine2Irvine said:
It's kind of ironic that everyone seem to complain about the small lots, but given the choice people are paying more for larger house square footage...
Click to expand...
But at what point will people get tired of the lots getting smaller and smaller?  2,500sf home on a 3,000sf lot?  2,500sf home on a 2,000sf lot?  There's gotta be a point enough is enough (TIC trying to squeeze as many SFRs on an acre).  At some point, the only way to put a 2,000sf+ home on a super tiny lot will be to have the home be 3 stories.
 
I would prefer a larger lot over more bedrooms, because I prefer to have a bit of a backyard.
 
I'd like a large lot with a large house like I grew up in (East Coast) - but - since that is not likely in Irvine.  I'd go with a reasonable lot with a 4/3.
 
gaab said:
I'd like a large lot with a large house like I grew up in (East Coast) - but - since that is not likely in Irvine.  I'd go with a reasonable lot with a 4/3.
Click to expand...

2150 sqft home on 4500 sqft lot.  I'll take that (still small, for big for Irvine).  TIC, build some of these!
 
USCTrojanCPA said:
Irvine2Irvine said:
It's kind of ironic that everyone seem to complain about the small lots, but given the choice people are paying more for larger house square footage...
Click to expand...
But at what point will people get tired of the lots getting smaller and smaller?  2,500sf home on a 3,000sf lot?  2,500sf home on a 2,000sf lot?  There's gotta be a point enough is enough (TIC trying to squeeze as many SFRs on an acre).  At some point, the only way to put a 2,000sf+ home on a super tiny lot will be to have the home be 3 stories.
Click to expand...

Stop giving them ideas, although im sure they have thought about it. At the rate they are going, Orchard hills and laguna crossing are only going to consist of high rise condo buildings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top