Who is waiting for Orchard Hills?

[bones]

.

 

[OpenSky]

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Just for clarification, what I meant by walkability is that you can just take a stroll in the neighborhood.  PP has more of a classic neighborhood feel to it rather then the higher density of SG or CV.    So if you are a person who enjoys strolling without a destination, PP is preferable.

But I agree with OS and Goriot about convenience.  That's what I mean about being closer to things....the view may not be as nice when I do walk within SG but I don't have to walk far to get to where I need to go whether it be the park or school. 

I know people joke about the distance to WB town center from SG versus PP but with the 133...it is basically unwalkable from PP to SG or WB. 

 

[qwerty]

Love my bimmer 

was this you i saw the other day?

 

[bones]

[.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

As I stated previously, SG demonstrate that people care about living in Irvine and things like floorplan and community plans are good selling points over lot size and even driveways. Even with PP opening up, Saratoga is still getting brisk business.  Sausalito is in a really bad position though.

I'm going to disagree with you here. There is no definitive proof that:

1. TIC's floorplans are better.
2. That lot size is not a good selling point.
3. That a driveway is not preferred. If this were the case, why do people pay the premium on it when they have plans with driveways?

This is your opinion on the particular product you are looking at but there are many who prefer a driveway, a bigger lot, a floorplan with more flex space, or even a bigger garage. Why do you think Rosemist and Sagewood sell so well?

PP has no amenities as close as TIC projects yet they are selling well... why? Hmm... lot size? Floorplan? Less density?

You always say "SG demonstrates this or that" but at the same time, you have to acknowledge that PP demonstrates something too.

What I do think SG demonstrates has less to do with subpar floorplans, small lots and lack of driveway but more to do with distance to amenities like the Elem school. If your idea that more density, less curb appeal and no backyard is what sells, then you have to tell me why Portola Springs has slower sales than other TIC projects.

C'mon IC... you're making a huge leap on what Stonegate "demonstrates".

 

[bones]

.

 

[qwerty]

we lived in woodbury place for a year when we first moved to irvine and i still drove to the ralphs there. and i was literally across the street.

 

[qwerty]

SG is for the 99%ers
PP is for the 1%ers.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

And only with the sub $1m set. People with budgets over $1m aren't interested. Case in point: Arcadia and Sausalito. Arcadia sold well before PP opened and people had other options.

And that was my point when I first talked about lot size. If you're paying $1m+, that does become a consideration.

If you're buying an attached/detached condo, it's easy to say you don't care about lot size... because you don't have one.

 

[OpenSky]

 

[Irvinecommuter]

As I stated previously, SG demonstrate that people care about living in Irvine and things like floorplan and community plans are good selling points over lot size and even driveways. Even with PP opening up, Saratoga is still getting brisk business.  Sausalito is in a really bad position though.

I'm going to disagree with you here. There is no definitive proof that:

1. TIC's floorplans are better.
2. That lot size is not a good selling point.
3. That a driveway is not preferred. If this were the case, why do people pay the premium on it when they have plans with driveways?

This is your opinion on the particular product you are looking at but there are many who prefer a driveway, a bigger lot, a floorplan with more flex space, or even a bigger garage. Why do you think Rosemist and Sagewood sell so well?

PP has no amenities as close as TIC projects yet they are selling well... why? Hmm... lot size? Floorplan? Less density?

You always say "SG demonstrates this or that" but at the same time, you have to acknowledge that PP demonstrates something too.

What I do think SG demonstrates has less to do with subpar floorplans, small lots and lack of driveway but more to do with distance to amenities like the Elem school. If your idea that more density, less curb appeal and no backyard is what sells, then you have to tell me why Portola Springs has slower sales than other TIC projects.

C'mon IC... you're making a huge leap on what Stonegate "demonstrates".

I absolutely stated that PP is better if you are buying over $1 M.  But if you are buying over $1 M...you are generally not compromising.  It is when you are in the $600-$800K range that you have to pick and choose what you value. 

I also have not argue that lot size or driveways are not good things...just that people are will to forego them for other things.

We will take Saratoga as an example.  It does not have a driveway and does have a small yard but it was in a good range of $700-800K in Irvine.  You can elect for a driveway with Mendocino but with the smaller lot, the driveway eats into the functionality of the floorplan (IMO).  (I know there are Saratogas with driveways but those are more rare).  Saratoga to me has an good open floor plan and with a conservatory was a good buy at the mid-to-high $700Ks for 2300 square foot property.

Conversely, I don't consider any of the plans under $1 M desirable within in PP.  Also, most of the sub $1M plans within PP have some yards as well.  Maybe not as small as SG but not much bigger.

My point is that lot size and driveway are good things to have but there are plenty of people who are willing to give those things up if if there other attractive features.  For me, the location, school, and floor plan were winning points over small lot size (which I do not necessary consider to be a negative) and the lack of a driveway.

 

[bones]

.

 

[OpenSky]

;D

 

[OpenSky]

 

[bones]

[q..

 

[OpenSky]

 

[bones]

[quote.

 

[OpenSky]

:-[

 

[bones]

[quote author=.