2010 Irvine New Home Collection

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="fe9000"]Haha, you definitely did!!![/quote]
What can I say, I'm talented like that. No more competing with FCB for you, don't you love it? <!-- s:P -->:P<!-- s:P --> Btw, when is your anticipated closing date? Oh yeah, you should tell Graph how bitter and disappointed I am because I won't be able to earn a few commission dollars off finding you a resale home. haha

Btw, be sure to e-mail as you go through the design center if you have any questions concerning the true cost of upgrade options. Having upgraded 3 homes of my properties I have a very good idea of what things should cost and having worked with so many buyers gives me an idea of the possible value of those upgrades.
 
So did Carmel open yesterday at 2pm?

I'm going to pass by again today to see if I can get into Carmel, if not I'll take a look at Montecito and if I have time, head over to Coronado.

I looked at Carmel's floorplan again last night and as a whole I like Sonoma's better... but the Carmel Plan 3 looks really good. Although for that price, I would rather buy the Plan 2 at Villa Rosa.

I'm probably going to pass by Villa Rosa again just to get a better comparison.

I need to figure out a faster way to post pictures... TinyPic is cool for single photos but 12-15 is a bit time consuming. And I'll make them a bit bigger since 400x300 seems a bit small.

I really think TIC should have done the initial phases with lowball pricing. You can always raise prices for later phases and it will have a positive effect on early phase buyers... but staying flat or lowering them will irritate people (look at Portola). I understand they are using stupid Irvine psychology (or pretension) to maximize profit (or greed) and also as not to undercut current products but they should have at least stuck with the original published pricing.
 
[quote author="irvinehomeowner"]So did Carmel open yesterday at 2pm?

I'm going to pass by again today to see if I can get into Carmel, if not I'll take a look at Montecito and if I have time, head over to Coronado.

I looked at Carmel's floorplan again last night and as a whole I like Sonoma's better... but the Carmel Plan 3 looks really good. Although for that price, I would rather buy the Plan 2 at Villa Rosa.

I'm probably going to pass by Villa Rosa again just to get a better comparison.

I need to figure out a faster way to post pictures... TinyPic is cool for single photos but 12-15 is a bit time consuming. And I'll make them a bit bigger since 400x300 seems a bit small.

I really think TIC should have done the initial phases with lowball pricing. You can always raise prices for later phases and it will have a positive effect on early phase buyers... but staying flat or lowering them will irritate people (look at Portola). I understand they are using stupid Irvine psychology (or pretension) to maximize profit (or greed) and also as not to undercut current products but they should have at least stuck with the original published pricing.
[/quote]

Even though I have seen the models, it would be great if you could post some pics of Montecito!
 
Totally agree. I can't see they have much room for price increases for later phases at this price level. It would have been nice for us but they still got suckers like us to purchase one. Seems to me that TIC are very in tune to this market. That's why they are able to do what they are doing now.
 
I also don't think they can raise prices much, which comforts me a little. Since I was able to afford phase 1 pricing, maybe prices will come down a bit? ( he wishes)
 
You guys are both referring to the The Arbor at Woodbury, an affordable housing complex next to the Sonoma Subdivision. It is restricted to families earning 60% or less of the area median income, and will have 90 one-, two-, and three-
bedroom units.

I took a look at this complex and it looks just like the WB Court--an IAC complex next door. They even have a nice pool and tot lot as well. It looks no different than any other WB IAC place.

Here are the links from the old IHB threads:
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/4380/
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/5568/
Click to expand...

I've been following this forum for the last few weeks. Lots of good points brought up. The apartments were one of my concerns, however it always seems quite when I'm over by sonoma.

I tried to find the apartments on-line but couldn't find Arbor. Where can i find the price range for these apartments? I was able to get info on others in woodbury but not this one?

thanks.
 
[quote author="nytransplant"]
You guys are both referring to the The Arbor at Woodbury, an affordable housing complex next to the Sonoma Subdivision. It is restricted to families earning 60% or less of the area median income, and will have 90 one-, two-, and three-
bedroom units.

I took a look at this complex and it looks just like the WB Court--an IAC complex next door. They even have a nice pool and tot lot as well. It looks no different than any other WB IAC place.

Here are the links from the old IHB threads:
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/4380/
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/5568/
Click to expand...

I've been following this forum for the last few weeks. Lots of good points brought up. The apartments were one of my concerns, however it always seems quite when I'm over by sonoma.

I tried to find the apartments on-line but couldn't find Arbor. Where can i find the price range for these apartments? I was able to get info on others in woodbury but not this one?

thanks.[/quote]

I'm sure the folks at the Arbor are upstanding people... you would have more to worry from Woodbury Court, we have had many IPD & Sheriff squad cars here from time to time... shopping carts & noise... The Arbor is from Jamboree Housing: http://www.jamboreehousing.com/index.php but I can't seem to the the property...
 
[quote author="irvinehomeowner"]So did Carmel open yesterday at 2pm?

I'm going to pass by again today to see if I can get into Carmel, if not I'll take a look at Montecito and if I have time, head over to Coronado.

I looked at Carmel's floorplan again last night and as a whole I like Sonoma's better... but the Carmel Plan 3 looks really good. Although for that price, I would rather buy the Plan 2 at Villa Rosa.

I'm probably going to pass by Villa Rosa again just to get a better comparison.

I need to figure out a faster way to post pictures... TinyPic is cool for single photos but 12-15 is a bit time consuming. And I'll make them a bit bigger since 400x300 seems a bit small.

I really think TIC should have done the initial phases with lowball pricing. You can always raise prices for later phases and it will have a positive effect on early phase buyers... but staying flat or lowering them will irritate people (look at Portola). I understand they are using stupid Irvine psychology (or pretension) to maximize profit (or greed) and also as not to undercut current products but they should have at least stuck with the original published pricing.
[/quote]

Here's a way to do multiple file uploads:

http://toolbar.imageshack.us/

Download it and you can upload multiple pics at once. Let me know how it works for you. (I'm also sending you a PM)
 
[quote author="Panda "]http://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/60-Homeland-92618/home/25681224

This Los Arboles listing in Portola Springs seems to have the same square footage and lot size of Sonoma plan 1. Price exactly the same as well at $770,000. Why Los Arboles considered a detached condo, whereas Sonoma is a traditional SFR? Apples to apples comparison which is better?[/quote]

I think they are both about equal. Sonoma has a great floor plan. Sonoma gave me a nice open feel to the unit and it felt bigger than the Los Arobles plan 3. But Sonoma felt more like a cookie cutter compared to the Los Arobles. Los Arobles has much better architecture details. Both units don't have much of a yard. I personally like the setup of Portola Springs better than Woodbury. But woodbury has cheaper HOA and Mello Roos. So again, I think about the same. Oh and Sonoma's location is horrible. I can hear the traffic noise from Sand Canyon at the model home. The model homes are at the furthermost point from Sand Canyon in the whole Sonoma development.
 
[quote author="Panda "]http://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/60-Homeland-92618/home/25681224

This Los Arboles listing in Portola Springs seems to have the same square footage and lot size of Sonoma plan 1. Price exactly the same as well at $770,000. Why Los Arboles considered a detached condo, whereas Sonoma is a traditional SFR? Apples to apples comparison which is better?[/quote]
Slightly different kind of apples. The PS home has a higher HOA of $256/mo and probably has a higher Mello Roos than Sonoma. Also, this builder is actually offering a 3% buyer agent co-op.
 
[quote author="pete423"]
[quote author="Panda "]http://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/60-Homeland-92618/home/25681224

This Los Arboles listing in Portola Springs seems to have the same square footage and lot size of Sonoma plan 1. Price exactly the same as well at $770,000. Why Los Arboles considered a detached condo, whereas Sonoma is a traditional SFR? Apples to apples comparison which is better?[/quote]

I think they are both about equal. Sonoma has a great floor plan. Sonoma gave me a nice open feel to the unit and it felt bigger than the Los Arobles plan 3. But Sonoma felt more like a cookie cutter compared to the Los Arobles. Los Arobles has much better architecture details. Both units don't have much of a yard. I personally like the setup of Portola Springs better than Woodbury. But woodbury has cheaper HOA and Mello Roos. So again, I think about the same. Oh and Sonoma's location is horrible. I can hear the traffic noise from Sand Canyon at the model home. The model homes are at the furthermost point from Sand Canyon in the whole Sonoma development.[/quote]
Since I got builder-blocked at Montecito/Carmel and then also at Coronado... we headed over to Los Arboles to check it out.

I mostly agree with pete about location and the external look of Sonoma but interior wise, Sonoma feels much bigger. The ceilings are higher than Los Arboles and the layout is more functional. Plan 3 in Los Arboles splits the living are and the dining/kitchen which some families may like but it's not conducive to the entertainment aspect.

I prefer the execution of the master baths in Los Arboles as the showers are enclosed and separate (except for Plan 3) but Plans 1/2 have the laundry as pass through from the garage which is a nitpick of mine.

As for the street noise, you won't notice it inside the house but I know what pete is referring to.

For the dollar, I would rather buy Sonoma (or maybe even Montecito) because they are true SFRs and you don't have the saddle of that extra HOA (translates to a difference in final price). And Plans 1/2 in Los Arboles are actually attached at corners (no sharing walls from what I see). The floorplans are a personal preference but overall I liked Sonoma and from the floorplans only, Montecito more.
 
[quote author="irvinehomeowner"]
For the dollar, I would rather buy Sonoma (or maybe even Montecito) because they are true SFRs and you don't have the saddle of that extra HOA (translates to a difference in final price). And Plans 1/2 in Los Arboles are actually attached at corners (no sharing walls from what I see). The floorplans are a personal preference but overall I liked Sonoma and from the floorplans only, Montecito more.[/quote]

I don't believe any of the Los Arboles plans are attached, even in the corners. I could be wrong, but I'll lay a quarter on this one.
 
[quote author="IrvineRealtor"]
[quote author="irvinehomeowner"]
For the dollar, I would rather buy Sonoma (or maybe even Montecito) because they are true SFRs and you don't have the saddle of that extra HOA (translates to a difference in final price). And Plans 1/2 in Los Arboles are actually attached at corners (no sharing walls from what I see). The floorplans are a personal preference but overall I liked Sonoma and from the floorplans only, Montecito more.[/quote]

I don't believe any of the Los Arboles plans are attached, even in the corners. I could be wrong, but I'll lay a quarter on this one.[/quote]

IHO is correct - the Los Arboles Plan 1 and Plan 2 garages are connected. No part of the house itself is, but the garage is.
 
[quote author="Panda "]http://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/60-Homeland-92618/home/25681224

This Los Arboles listing in Portola Springs seems to have the same square footage and lot size of Sonoma plan 1. Price exactly the same as well at $770,000. Why Los Arboles considered a detached condo, whereas Sonoma is a traditional SFR? Apples to apples comparison which is better?[/quote]

I think it may have been a mistake by the agent, but then again, I have seen other Los Arboles models listed as condo. I always thought it was a mistake, because I am sure that these are SFRs. They are all detached, and all have a pretty decent sized BACKYARD, no side yard. Garage attached as well. Am I missing something that makes it a condo?
 
Even when only the garage is attached, it could still be classified as attached homes because an issue with one unit, will affect the other.

If you go to:

http://www.taylormorrison.com/Community.aspx?CommunityID=238&DivisionID=15

And click on 'Site Plan', you will see how 1 and 2s are connected at the front. 3s can only be on corner lots because they have a front entry with a side driveway/garage and I believe a small portion of the house is part of the wall of the plan next to it.

When I toured the models today, I double-checked to make sure I was seeing that attachment correctly... so Deuce owes me a quarter (but I owe him like lunch and then some so it washes).

So I'm not sure how these are officially classed, but the paper handout does say single family residences. The HOA is $256 and I'm not sure if that includes the master PS HOA (which I think is $105).

Distance to other homes is probably similar to Sonoma. The handout also says the lots range from 3500-4000 sft for Los Arboles.
 
[quote author="irvinehomeowner"]Even when only the garage is attached, it could still be classified as attached homes because an issue with one unit, will affect the other.

If you go to:

http://www.taylormorrison.com/Community.aspx?CommunityID=238&DivisionID=15

And click on 'Site Plan', you will see how 1 and 2s are connected at the front. 3s can only be on corner lots because they have a front entry with a side driveway/garage and I believe a small portion of the house is part of the wall of the plan next to it.

When I toured the models today, I double-checked to make sure I was seeing that attachment correctly... so Deuce owes me a quarter (but I owe him like lunch and then some so it washes).

So I'm not sure how these are officially classed, but the paper handout does say single family residences. The HOA is $256 and I'm not sure if that includes the master PS HOA (which I think is $105).

Distance to other homes is probably similar to Sonoma. The handout also says the lots range from 3500-4000 sft for Los Arboles.[/quote]

I don't believe any of the plan 3 is connected. When looking at the site map, there is a distance between the 3 and the two next to it.
 
For the dollar, I would rather buy Sonoma (or maybe even Montecito) because they are true SFRs and you don't have the saddle of that extra HOA (translates to a difference in final price). And Plans 1/2 in Los Arboles are actually attached at corners (no sharing walls from what I see). The floorplans are a personal preference but overall I liked Sonoma and from the floorplans only, Montecito more.
Click to expand...

Many of the lots at Sonoma are zero-lot lines - particularly those in the future phases. Not sure why they did this. How hard is it to leave 5 extra feet from the neighbor?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top