iacrenter
Well-known member
IrvinePilot said:Don?t let BK influence you into believing that ?timelessness? is a paramount consideration in housing choice. Most modern families will not live their entire lives in the same house and pass it down from generation to generation like a treasured heirloom. When your kids or grandkids inherit your house, they will likely sell it and buy what ever is fashionable and functional at the time.iacrenter said:IrvinePilot said:High density in Irvine is not new. In fact, it began in the late 90s with products like Wisteria in West Irvine (designed by our very own BK) and Cobblestone in Oak Creek. I would say that people still ?want? those high density driveway less products despite their age.Patrick Star said:nytransplant said:I wonder if they are tying to comply with the stat regulations to build more housing in Irvine. In my opinion it is simply the ghettoization of the suburbs. So much for the american dream of the nice SFR and picket fence
This is an excellent point. IHO likes to joke about it, but these new products being offered by TIC are really just sad and pathetic. I mean really --- is anyone planning on buying these as a "family home" that you hope to live out your years in? Where you hope you grandchildren will visit? Heck no. These are transient properties --- half a step above an IAC apartment. And what happens once these properties start turning over? Once the newness wears off in 5-10 years? Who is going to want to buy an aging apartment with a $400 HOA (or maybe more in the future) and $4000 in mello roos?
Serious question here: Do you guys think Irvine is at its peak, or has yet to peak as a community? Or was the peak of this community sometime in the past? Does the new *urban* planning Irvine has embraced translate to this community getting better or worse during the term of the 30 year mortgage most of us would need to sign up for?
As a relatively long term resident, I know what I believe the answer is --- but curious as to what others think?
The notion of buying a ?family home? to grow old and die in is a quaint notion but I don?t think represents modern living. Would I like my kids to have the same childhood I had with shooting my .22 in my parents ? acre backyard and throwing lawn darts straight up into the air and running out of the way before the dart landed? Of course I would but I also recognize the world has changed since that time. Kids today don?t expect to have a ? backyard so not having one shouldn?t cause them any grief.
One could also argue that great neighborhoods will stand the test of time if built with care. Unfortunately most new home construction is built for profit maximization and not architectural aesthetics or ideal urban planning. The way TIC is rubber stamping new neighborhoods with little regard to aesthetics and density, it is inevitable that these villages will be considered unattractive within 30 years. I can't imagine in 50 years we will be saying "WOW, look at these beautiful homes!" when touring WB, WBE, and SonegateEast; unlike touring Pasadena, Floral Park, etc...
These newer villages will attract buyers with young families, who eventually will tire of the
There are some who believe the ideal lifestyle is as depicted on old Norman Rockwell Saturday Evening Post covers and have the inclination and resources to make that possible. But just because you are not one of those, that does not mean your preferences are any less valid than those who subscribe to that fantasy.
I need to accept that modern living in Irvine means:
1) Homes on postage stamp lots with no driveway
2) Oversized mortgage and HOA payments
3) Neighbors who will move out in less than 5 years
This sounds like a great recipe for developing a stable community.