Irvine?s Central Park West on hold until market turns

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
no_vaseline_IHB

no_vaseline_IHB

New member
"Home sales at Lennar Corp.?s Central Park West development in Irvine are being halted until the housing and mortgage markets show signs of recovery. And new construction at the 1,500-home project is being delayed, the Miami-based company said."



http://www.ocbj.com/weekly_article.asp?aID=5371999.4228024.1549275.3076848.7286602.676&aID2=119166



I wonder if Lennar got a NINJA loan on CPW? What do the carrying costs have to be on that monument to urban living that's all things Irvine?



Wait. Nobody moves to Irvine for urban living. Nevermind.



The end of the world is here folks. Here's my guess:



Lennar is mothballing CPW and all thier other properties because if it discounts them, the bankrupcy judgement will price them lower than the comps because they are "distressed". By pulling these off the market and declaring bankrupcy in the next 120 days, they maximize thier asset value - moreso than if they actually sold some, because since there are no sales, that means there are no basis to mark them down other than full list.



At least I think that's what is happening in Bizarroworld.
 
<em><strong>"No Discounts</strong>





The company is opting to postpone sales rather than offload the homes at steep discounts, which is the norm at other projects going up in the county.





Central Park West’s location and unique design should command premium prices, Haddad said. Four of the six home types being built at the project, including the high-rises, have starting prices near or above $1 million. Two other home plans start in the $700,000s, according to Irvine-based Hanley Wood Market Intelligence.





“For that location, the last thing we want to do is engage in a sale program that (emphasizes) heavy discounting,” Haddad said.





Sales to date at Central Park West have been minimal. Not including the high-rises, there have been less than a dozen sales at the project through August, according to data from Hanley Wood."





</em>So 2020 they will begin sales again? I wondered why it smelled like mothballs at the 405 and Jamboree.
 
I don't know if they can move that white elephant at any price, but I suspect we'll find out sooner or later. I made the same observation when they tore up the industrial area to build the Platinum Triangle four years ago, so I guess we'll see.
 
What's the vegas line they get sold to TIC at a discount to be turned into an apartment building? Oh wait, is that technically Costa Mesa or Santa Ana?
 
There are SERIOUS health impacts, especially to children's developing lungs, associated with living within 1mile of a freeway. This project abuts the 405. No way I would raise children there. But I suspect Lennar is not marketing this project to young families.
 
skeptic,



I have read that same survey. I have some real issues with it because it is my opinion that it doesn't normalize the results for income. It is my observation that the more affordable (read: crap) apartments are near the freeway. It is my theroy people at lower income levels get lower levels of health care, because they can't afford it (no insurance) or don't have the resources to take advantage of it (transportation, child care, whatever).



While I don't dispute the results, I have some real issues with the conclusion.



And considering the units start at 700K, this place is pretty far from being affordable.
 
Lennar is insane. It is exactly this type of product - high density, less desirable location, huge hoa, that is going to suffer the most in this downturn.



The carrying costs have to be huge. I can't think that there is any way this will end well for Lennar. The longer they wait, the worse it is going to get.



My office overlooks this site. Used to be a beehive of activity. Much quieter now.
 
Problem is that Irvine Company is trying to make Irvine into LA. It is trying to make a "downtown" area near the airport and make it more metropolitan. Mistake if you ask me but then again I am not Donald Bren.
 
Its going very well for this home seller............check out the ZIP description.............





<strong>5068 SCHOLARSHIP, Irvine, CA 92612





</strong>
 
I love west LA. Nobody who wants to live in Irvine is moving to West LA. Nobody in West LA is looking to move to (by comparison) suburban hell Irvine.



I have no idea who floated this business plan, and I'm really confused on how they got it pushed through, but I would like the recipe for Kool Aid that they are serving in these meetings. I can think of a couple of oppourtunities to serve it.



Ruffies maybe?
 
I wonder what Lennar is going to do with all the material sitting on that site? There is just a huge amount of wood and partially built units. I noticed the other day when I drove past going to Houston`s that its slowed way down as far as people working on the site.

This project and all the money and time they have put into it is a perfect example of missing the top of the market. This must be a huge loss of cash for Lennar. Bet the city of Irvine is not too tickled either. It will be an eyesore for a few years.
 
<p><em>"Ruffies maybe"?</em> </p>

<p>Rohypnol is a woman's worst nightmare. I'm watching you no vas...... keeping my hand over my drink. </p>
 
<p>no vaseline,</p>

<p>Not sure what survey you are talking about. But it is established that growing up near freeways results in permanently reduced lung capacity for children. The percentage reduction in lung capacity may seem small (for example, 5% or so), but are associated with increased deaths from lung related illnesses. Income level has no correlation to lung capacity in this instance.</p>

<p>But you raise a good point re: lower income areas being disproportionately impacted by pollution. There is a whole cottage industry dedicated to this concept -- environmental justice (a mix of civil rights law and environmental law). It is no accident that the most toxic areas are located next to low income areas, or vice versa (chicken and egg thing).</p>

<p>As for what conclusion to draw, here's mine: If at all possible, don't raise kids near the freeway. Or even better, zoning codes should not permit building residences adjacent to freeways. Another option = require that the health impacts be disclosed to prospective purchasers of units like Lennar's (I have a feeling that the building lobby would attack this with full force).</p>
 
<em>"Bet the city of Irvine is not too tickled either."





</em>Lennar is doing a great job of ticking off the city of Irvine. It will be interesting to see what the city will do to get Lennar building.
 
Skeptic,



I have read the study on results of location near freeways vs. pulmanary retardation that you mentioned.



When I was in graduate school I took 12 units on statistcal analysis, specifically how to structure a survey.



It is my contention that the survey does not attempt to correlate income levels with the addresses and proximity to the freeways. I'm not disagreeing with the study, rather, it is my opinion that the freeway isn't the problem. It's being poor AND living near the freeway. They likely didn't consider income coming into the survey portion of the study, so they didn't ask. It's impossible to go back and add that to the survey because you can't reconstitute the data pool. Frankly, they probablly weren't looking for it.



If you go to rural areas, as a percentage basis, they have a higher incidence of respiratory problems and asthma then children in urban areas. And no freeways. The culprit? Substandard housing and poor rural health care.
 
<p>More details:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ocregister.com/money/town-company-market-1917172-homes-stadium">http://www.ocregister.com/money/town-company-market-1917172-homes-stadium</a></p>

<p> </p>
 
<p>no_vaseline,</p>

<p>Maybe we are talking about different studies and/or surveys (I hope so). But you are getting this all wrong. Freeways ARE a serious health problem. The study that I cite below did indeed consider income levels. Being rich won't help kids living near freeways.

<p>Here is a link to a LA Times article on USC's study -- the "largest and longest study of its kind." <a href="http://www.thetransitcoalition.us/newspdf/lat20070126c.pdf">http://www.thetransitcoalition.us/newspdf/lat20070126c.pdf</a></p>

<p>"The [research] team collected extensive information about each child's home, <strong>socioeconomic status </strong>and other facts that might impinge on health."</p>

<p>"In the new study, Gauderman and his colleagues found that by their 18th birthday, children who lived within 500 yards of a freeway had a 3% deficit in the amount of air they could exhale and a 7% deficit in the rate at which it could be exhaled compared with children who lived at least 1,500 yards, or nearly a mile, from the freeway. The effect was independent of the overall pollution in their community."</p>

<p>"The results were also independent of the children's initial health and whether they were smokers. 'This suggests that all children, not just suspectible subgroups, are potentially affected by traffic exposure," Gauderman said ."</p>

<p></p>

</p>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top