Belvedere at Eastwood

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
lnc said:
More I search on the web,  more it seems that all MR can increase up to 2% per year and does not look like this is something new.  Look like this 2% increase limit was always there at the inception of MR back in 1982. 

And if that's correct, that means we all in the same boat as PP and BP forks.  >:(

Mello in Northwood Pointe has never gone up. One of the bonds was refinanced and it went down. These homes had the same bonds for the entire neighborhood no matter the sq footage of the homes.
 
B8EC504C-EA76-4B84-9D7F-6BEF0F09BBD8_zpsoi8znppf.png


Cake pops, iced coffee, and soba..... Interesting... Wonder how the noodles are served, gets messy with sauce, plates, utensils, etc.
 
DrTravel said:
Seems the Belvedere thread got hijacked to the "Eastwood is way over priced" thread. Time to get things back to "normal". Latest price info

I need to visit the Belvedere models. How small do these backyards feel? It's not as simple as identifying the setback, because these houses' footprints don't have very straight rear walls. The lots appear to be tiny - the equivalent of the smallest lots available on similar Strada floorplans.
 
DrTravel, you're dialed-in to the current pricing environment. Can you compare the Strada plan 3(s) available to the Belvedere plan 3s, both in the mid-$1.2Ms?

There aren't any cul-de sacs in the Belvedere map. IP put the models on larger lots than the current lots for sale. That makes more sense than IP's odd idea of placing the Strada models on the smallest lots available in the development.
 
Perspective said:
DrTravel said:
Seems the Belvedere thread got hijacked to the "Eastwood is way over priced" thread. Time to get things back to "normal". Latest price info

I need to visit the Belvedere models. How small do these backyards feel? It's not as simple as identifying the setback, because these houses' footprints don't have very straight rear walls. The lots appear to be tiny - the equivalent of the smallest lots available on similar Strada floorplans.

The base Strada site is 47' X 72' = 3,385 SF which gives the Plan 3 an 8' setback (rear yard smallest depth). I would never buy a house with this mini-yard. The larger lots ($15K premium) have a setback of 14' and are 47' x 78' = 3,666 SF. An additional 6' deep backyard really makes a difference. Plus you are 12' farther away from your neighbor so 28' instead of 16' - again a huge difference. At 16' you can watch your neighbors big screen TV and "borrow" their wi-fi.

The base Belvedere site is 48' X 74' = 3,552 SF which gives the Plan 3 an 8' setback. Remember Belvedere is slightly larger than Strada so the actual building is a tad bit larger in both directions. Their models are definitely on the premium lots. Not only are they on biggest square lots, they back to a Eastwood Village Paseo (walking path with no neighbors), have sun in their back yards and are not right next to the elementary school. I had to estimate their lot sizes but it should be relatively close to 48' X 84' = 4,032 SF with a 16' setback. I'm sure if you go down there and ask, they can confirm the sizes shown on the engineering plans. Interesting most lots appear to be about 48' X 79' = 3,792 SF with a 14' setback - not bad! What have we come to? A 2,877 SF house on a 3,792 SF lot is not bad!!!

So phase one is really the worst phase to buy in. Smallest lots, dark and small backyard, next to the school traffic, and everybody drives by your house to get to theirs. Think those on Pewter look good so those of you interested in Belvedere might want to wait. 
 

Attachments

  • Belvedere Sites.jpg
    Belvedere Sites.jpg
    167.8 KB · Views: 404
Perspective said:
DrTravel, you're dialed-in to the current pricing environment. Can you compare the Strada plan 3(s) available to the Belvedere plan 3s, both in the mid-$1.2Ms?

There aren't any cul-de sacs in the Belvedere map. IP put the models on larger lots than the current lots for sale. That makes more sense than IP's odd idea of placing the Strada models on the smallest lots available in the development.

The IP design team really does funky things. Just looking at the Strada model homes. Putting them on the smallest lots? Wonder how many people saw their non-existent backyards and left without inquiring about larger lots. Usually builders choose a larger lot and put a tiny sign saying "this lot is larger than yours will be sucker". And then look at their back yard options. Put the largest option (the conservatory) on the largest back yard shown - plan 1. Put the trellis on the smallest yard to make it appear larger rather than smaller - plan 3. I think they originally wanted to show French doors at the conservatory on plan 3 but when they open the doors they almost hit the backyard wall! Redesign time. On the interior, show dark cabinets in large kitchens not the smallest. The kitchen is one of the most important rooms so don't take the smallest kitchen and make it appear smaller. So buyers walk into the kitchen and say "kinda small for a million dollar home" and leave.

Not sure anyone at IP knows the value or what a view is. At Vista Scena at the hill above Strada they had the potential to build quite a few homes with a million dollar view from their upstairs master bedrooms and downstairs great room but they put a stinking driveway with parking stalls! WTF. Same could be said about lots 42-46 on Copper Mine - sure they have a view across the street and from their garages and upstairs secondary bedrooms. Their are quite a few more view homes they could have put in along Narrow Path and Culver Drive also with a different street layout. And I like the fact that many homes adjacent to these streets that do have a view put the master bedroom on the opposite side of the house. So instead of looking out to the orchards, you get to look at the neighbors. Note to IP - in non-flat locations, maximize the views!

Of course a bigger issue is where they located their projects in the overall Orchard Hills design. Imagine if they located Strada where they eventually put Entrata, Vista Scena and Corte Bella? Prime location, higher with more views, walking distance (or a view of) to Northwood High School (buyers at Corte Bella are still orgasming about this), walking distance to the future K-8 school, little more elbow room, and more secluded. They should have located Entrata where Terraza is - closer to shopping, Tustin school, apartments, and Portola Parkway. Back in the early 2000s the original plans had high density housing where Terazza and Strada are situated now - that's why Strada has one major entrance. They built the roads and all utilities and then the big real estate market crash. When they started back up, IP didn't change the roads but rather changed their mix of properties which dictated Strada go on the largest piece of dirt available - they knew this was going to be a big seller. So IP maximized their pocketbook but exhibited poor design. Wonder if anyone from IP reads these forums? 
 
DrTravel get your RE license.  You know the ins and outs of every new development.  You can make a killing when these new houses show up as resale.  You would be the most knowledgeable
 
DrTravel said:
Perspective said:
DrTravel, you're dialed-in to the current pricing environment. Can you compare the Strada plan 3(s) available to the Belvedere plan 3s, both in the mid-$1.2Ms?

There aren't any cul-de sacs in the Belvedere map. IP put the models on larger lots than the current lots for sale. That makes more sense than IP's odd idea of placing the Strada models on the smallest lots available in the development.

The IP design team really does funky things. Just looking at the Strada model homes. Putting them on the smallest lots? Wonder how many people saw their non-existent backyards and left without inquiring about larger lots. Usually builders choose a larger lot and put a tiny sign saying "this lot is larger than yours will be sucker". And then look at their back yard options. Put the largest option (the conservatory) on the largest back yard shown - plan 1. Put the trellis on the smallest yard to make it appear larger rather than smaller - plan 3. I think they originally wanted to show French doors at the conservatory on plan 3 but when they open the doors they almost hit the backyard wall! Redesign time. On the interior, show dark cabinets in large kitchens not the smallest. The kitchen is one of the most important rooms so don't take the smallest kitchen and make it appear smaller. So buyers walk into the kitchen and say "kinda small for a million dollar home" and leave.

Not sure anyone at IP knows the value or what a view is. At Vista Scena at the hill above Strada they had the potential to build quite a few homes with a million dollar view from their upstairs master bedrooms and downstairs great room but they put a stinking driveway with parking stalls! WTF. Same could be said about lots 42-46 on Copper Mine - sure they have a view across the street and from their garages and upstairs secondary bedrooms. Their are quite a few more view homes they could have put in along Narrow Path and Culver Drive also with a different street layout. And I like the fact that many homes adjacent to these streets that do have a view put the master bedroom on the opposite side of the house. So instead of looking out to the orchards, you get to look at the neighbors. Note to IP - in non-flat locations, maximize the views!

Of course a bigger issue is where they located their projects in the overall Orchard Hills design. Imagine if they located Strada where they eventually put Entrata, Vista Scena and Corte Bella? Prime location, higher with more views, walking distance (or a view of) to Northwood High School (buyers at Corte Bella are still orgasming about this), walking distance to the future K-8 school, little more elbow room, and more secluded. They should have located Entrata where Terraza is - closer to shopping, Tustin school, apartments, and Portola Parkway. Back in the early 2000s the original plans had high density housing where Terazza and Strada are situated now - that's why Strada has one major entrance. They built the roads and all utilities and then the big real estate market crash. When they started back up, IP didn't change the roads but rather changed their mix of properties which dictated Strada go on the largest piece of dirt available - they knew this was going to be a big seller. So IP maximized their pocketbook but exhibited poor design. Wonder if anyone from IP reads these forums?

Those are some excellent points. Impressed how objective you are since you are a Strada owner. I do believe IP visits this site and takes feedback well. They have certainly improved upon the loft space at Belvedere plan 3 vs. Strada plan 3. But going back to your OH assessment. Being that OH is suppose to be a premium village, I was somewhat disappointed to see all the attached and detached condos. You don't see that mix in Shady Canyon.  :-\
 
Perspective said:
DrTravel, you're dialed-in to the current pricing environment. Can you compare the Strada plan 3(s) available to the Belvedere plan 3s, both in the mid-$1.2Ms?

There aren't any cul-de sacs in the Belvedere map. IP put the models on larger lots than the current lots for sale. That makes more sense than IP's odd idea of placing the Strada models on the smallest lots available in the development.

Got off on a tangent there. When we first toured Strada, let me tell you what was important to the wife and I - well mainly the boss lady! Others might find these features desirable.

For Plan 1 not a big fan of: having all guests walk past the downstairs bedroom, having to share the downstairs bath with guest and that bedroom, the stairs creating havoc in the furniture layout of the great room (this is a WTF design feature), having to unload groceries from the garage by walking through the great room past where the big screen is, sink in kitchen island, no window in the kitchen, pantry is weak, optional tech desk space seems like a waste and in poor location, bed in master bedroom would be looking straight into the master bath (need the door), no good place to put a big screen in the master bedroom, master bedroom head location (pillow) is directly above the gas stove below (bad feng shui), bathtub projecting into the master bathroom, and laundry between two bedrooms. Overall felt like a detached condo level product and would not buy. Plan 2 did not have many of these "defects".

For Plan 2 not a big fan of: walking straight from the entry into the great room - not only does this mess up the furniture layout in the great room but also bad feng shui flow from front door straight to back yard, oven/microwave location (like to have something adjacent to both sides), like the window in the kitchen but the view is of the side wall 5' away, useless upstairs loft, no window in bath and laundry, laundry next to master bedroom, walking past the toilet (and proximity to) to get to my clothes, plus a few items from Plan 1. Like the kitchen pantry but still would not buy.

For Plan 3 not a big fan of: pantry and relationship to countertops, kitchen a bit cramped, conservatory flow with the great room, no window in bath 2 upstairs, shared walls between master bath and bedroom 2/bath 2 (noise pollution), and loft a bit small. Now recognizing that all homes will have issues (has anyone ever found the perfect home?) - there was a lot we liked about this layout: separate downstairs bedroom/bath, great room works for furniture layouts, kitchen sink window looks out to rear yard, all upstairs bedrooms have private baths, nice size laundry room and master closet, and the fact that their is an exterior courtyard by the front door - riff raff has to get past an exterior door before reaching our front door. So note to IP - we would buy plan 3 but plans 1 and 2 need to go back to the design department.

Really did not look that closely at Belvedere Plans 1 and 2. My take on Plan 3 (not 3X) in comparison to Strada Plan 3: for the first floor still not a fan of having visitors walk past the downstairs bedroom (this is a common with almost all IP plans with bedrooms downstairs), downstairs bedroom closet is useless, kitchen felt cramped with sink in the island and no window, kitchen cabinets don't go all the way up (looks cheap), liked the walk-in pantry and included California Room much better than Strada. Plan 3X has a better downstairs. Overall, I give Strada the edge here. For the second floor liked the fact that all bathrooms had windows, two closets for the master bedroom and the bonus room is actually usable plus you have the option for bedroom #5. Disliked the relationship between bathrooms and adjacent bedrooms (noise pollution again), the relationship between laundry room and bonus room (noise may interfere with my big screen TV), bedroom 2 has windows looking out to the side yard and neighbor's wall, and the master bedroom location is above the kitchen (pillow above stove) and adjacent to the stairs. Note that in Plan 3X they relocate the laundry room to a funky interior location, so no window and shared wall with master bedroom - neither of which I liked. This comes down to a personal choice about how important that bonus room is (particularly the option for bedroom #5). For me, I give Strada the edge here. We toured the model which was a Plan 3X and the wife did not like it. Note that the master bathroom is directly above the California room.

Belvedere Plan 1 downstairs looks like Strada Plan 2 downstairs with a new and improved upstairs. Belvedere Plan 2 is a stretched out version of Strada Plan 2 (the loft and dining room get bigger) with some kitchen modifications.

As for pricing: Strada Plan 3 has a base price of $1.195 million ($444 per SF) although they all have pre-plotted options and Belvedere Plan 3 has a base price of $1.244 million ($433 per SF) although when I went to the prequel event the base price was $1.290 million ($449 per SF) - I even told Elaine that this was a WTF pricing. So I guess if Strada was in EW it would cost $1.166 million or if Belvedere was in OH it would cost $1.276 million. Curiously Plan 3 is the most desired Strada plan while Plan 3 is the least desired Belvedere plan although that may change. My personal opinion is that Belvedere is slightly overpriced but like everything in real estate - it's location, location, location. So the choice is yours.
 
Impressed how objective you are since you are a Strada owner. But going back to your OH assessment. Being that OH is suppose to be a premium village, I was somewhat disappointed to see all the attached and detached condos.

Not a Strada owner yet! I'm enjoying luxury apartment living :(. The feel of the condos is definitely not premium and lowers the perception of the entire village - at least the IP side. Their only premium is the asking price and they ain't selling well. Only a method to maximize corporate profits. I'm not sure IP views OH as a premium village - just take a look at the Eastwood prices. Pretty sure IP markets every new village as premium and the best thing since sliced bread (except for PS). There are many strange things on the groves side of OH as well, i.e. looking at the 261 Tollway from the Vicenza models. I try to be objective and fact based as much as possible. Thanks for your comments. 
 
You should visit ellwood and critique shoppers design.  Then we can watch you two argue.
 
Doc, after reading your posts about the new homes I'm so glad that I was able to find a nice single story home with an 8,000sf lot (even though it's in Tustin Ranch).  These builders just give you less and less for more $$$.  Price of admission if you want a new home I guess.  :-\
 
Spoke with the ladies over at Belvedere today and inquired about looking at site maps, plot maps, grading plans etc.  - anything that would show how big the backyards are for Phase 1, 2, and future phases. They said they didn't have any but they were pretty sure that future phases had bigger lots. I even asked to see the lot plans for those in just sold phases (to get an idea how small the back yards are) and they looked dumbfounded. Are they hiding something or clueless? I'm pretty sure Phase 1 and 2 had the smallest lots in the entire development. Anyhow they have sold 8 out of 11 (only Plan 3s are available) and said they have buyers getting prequalified to purchase at least two of the remaining lots. Off to an OK start.
 

Attachments

  • Belvedere Availability.jpg
    Belvedere Availability.jpg
    193.5 KB · Views: 293
DrTravel said:
Spoke with the ladies over at Belvedere today and inquired about looking at site maps, plot maps, grading plans etc.  - anything that would show how big the backyards are for Phase 1, 2, and future phases. They said they didn't have any but they were pretty sure that future phases had bigger lots. I'm pretty sure Phase 1 and 2 had the smallest lots in the entire development. Anyhow they have sold 8 out of 10 and have buyers getting prequalified to purchase the remaining two lots. Off to a pretty good start!

You can use the city of Irvine's GIS mapping tool to see the lot sizes for Belvedere. They don't look like they get any bigger.
 
irviniteeee said:
DrTravel said:
Spoke with the ladies over at Belvedere today and inquired about looking at site maps, plot maps, grading plans etc.  - anything that would show how big the backyards are for Phase 1, 2, and future phases. They said they didn't have any but they were pretty sure that future phases had bigger lots. I'm pretty sure Phase 1 and 2 had the smallest lots in the entire development. Anyhow they have sold 8 out of 10 and have buyers getting prequalified to purchase the remaining two lots. Off to a pretty good start!

You can use the city of Irvine's GIS mapping tool to see the lot sizes for Belvedere. They don't look like they get any bigger.

You mean I could have created a map that looks like the one found here:http://www.talkirvine.com/index.php/topic,13649.msg286580.html#msg286580(posted in THIS thread 4 days ago) and compare it to the details contained here: http://www.talkirvine.com/index.php/topic,3654.msg267466.html#msg267466

Thanks for the tip...the sites certainly look like they get bigger but like I say "one of us is stupid and it's not you!"
 

Attachments

  • Belvedere Sites.jpg
    Belvedere Sites.jpg
    167.8 KB · Views: 239
DrTravel said:
irviniteeee said:
DrTravel said:
Spoke with the ladies over at Belvedere today and inquired about looking at site maps, plot maps, grading plans etc.  - anything that would show how big the backyards are for Phase 1, 2, and future phases. They said they didn't have any but they were pretty sure that future phases had bigger lots. I'm pretty sure Phase 1 and 2 had the smallest lots in the entire development. Anyhow they have sold 8 out of 10 and have buyers getting prequalified to purchase the remaining two lots. Off to a pretty good start!


You can use the city of Irvine's GIS mapping tool to see the lot sizes for Belvedere. They don't look like they get any bigger.

You mean I could have created a map that looks like the one found here:http://www.talkirvine.com/index.php/topic,13649.msg286580.html#msg286580(posted in THIS thread 4 days ago) and compare it to the details contained here: http://www.talkirvine.com/index.php/topic,3654.msg267466.html#msg267466

Thanks for the tip...the sites certainly look like they get bigger but like I say "one of us is stupid and it's not you!"

Well if you knew about them, then why ask the ladies? Lol. Sounds like one of us IS stupid.
 
acf said:
I like the Mr. Belvedere homes.
Def nice, even tho no option to convert Cali room, they really don't need it. 10 ft ceilings makes it feel so airy.

The lots on the model homes seem just fine.
 
Back
Top