Laguna Altura homes

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
freedomcm said:
irvinehomeowner said:
So do all these toxic freeway ailments apply to Quail Hill too?

One thing to note... the wind moves away from LagAlt to the north.

I like the location of LagAlt too... I just don't care for the wok layout, the lack of a 3rd space, the distance from schools and the exorbitant HOA for a gate and very little amenities. QH is a better value if you can find the right home.

the SFD at Quail are uphill, and over a mile from the 405.

While LA is almost a mile from the 405, it has two negatives:  it is a mile closer to the 5, and is in a bowl, where the particulate will settle.

What about the apartments?  And since we are on the topic what about if say you are close (lets say less than a mile) to the 73 in Aliso Viejo?  or say the 133 in Foothill Ranch or MV/RSM/etc?  or West Irvine/Portola Springs or someday Orchard Hills?
 
Wouldn't it be nice if the developer pays for the MR for the life of the loan and then the first few years of the HOA to offset the health risk and compromised location.
 
I've read the same articles on health concerns...  and it is a valid concern.    First, the 133 doesn't get as much traffic as a regular freeway (which is the closest hwy to the development).    I would actually argue that a street like Jamboree or Culver (and soon to be Jeffrey and Sand Canyon) would create just as much traffic as that portion of the 133 (which doesnt really bottle neck until the lanes merge).      They do have a set-back and a buffer from the hwy, and I'm guessing (I haven't measured) that is is at least 500 yds from the 133.  On the other side, unless you are in the Sienna homes closest to the 405, it's not that close (you can drive up to the cul-de-sac that ends ath the trail on that side of the development).    Also, you may not realize it, but LA is elevated over the road (you may not realize it because of the wok effect of the zombie barriers).

Really, what are the options with regards to air quality?  Maybe Newport, CDM, Laguna, Dana Point?    I think I could live with it and would like to stay in Irvine.  There are worse places.  Rossmoor, which is considered a very desireable area, is flanked on two sides by the 605 and the 405.  And there isn't much of a buffer.  (That part of Rossmoor would cause me greater concern that LA does).    I also grew up in Arcadia (now popular with the Chinese/Taiwanese) which is not a cheap place to live and has excellent schools.    Do you think Arcadia is nice?  I used to ride my bike around Arcadia/ Pasadena growing up.. and its rough.    Air quality (check AQI in the summer) in the SGV can be VERY bad.  Nonetheless, Arcadia and South Pasadena are very desireable... and you have San Marino (the ultimate unicorn).    If you are in general saying LA is bad because of general proximity to 405, then MANY parts of Irvine are bad. 

We all love to hate Irvine... overrated schools, bad air quality, small lots, uninspiring elevations, and overall poor value prop... so what's the deal?  I figure we just have to pick our poison and make a decision for ourselves.    Either that or we all move to John's Creek...

 
akim997 said:
Really, what are the options with regards to air quality?  Maybe Newport, CDM, Laguna, Dana Point? 

Thank you! ive been saying this for the longest time, you live a southern california where there are millions of cars and freeways everywhere.  Outside of living next to the beach, you are SOL. 
 
IndieDev said:
Isn't "The Walking Dead" based in the Atlanta area? Isn't that where Johns Creek is?

:-\
Nice.

I think this was mentioned before, but in the comic book... for a length of time, they are prisoners at a town run by a crazy guy (The Governor) who holds gladiator human/zombie fights to entertain the residents... the town is called... wait for it...

Woodbury
 
qwerty said:
akim997 said:
Really, what are the options with regards to air quality?  Maybe Newport, CDM, Laguna, Dana Point? 

Thank you! ive been saying this for the longest time, you live a southern california where there are millions of cars and freeways everywhere.  Outside of living next to the beach, you are SOL. 
But doesn't living close to the beach expose you to sun cancer/salt water/sand contaminants/sewage?

/hypochondriac sarcsasm
 
irvinehomeowner said:
qwerty said:
akim997 said:
Really, what are the options with regards to air quality?  Maybe Newport, CDM, Laguna, Dana Point? 

Thank you! ive been saying this for the longest time, you live a southern california where there are millions of cars and freeways everywhere.  Outside of living next to the beach, you are SOL. 
But doesn't living close to the beach expose you to sun cancer/salt water/sand contaminants/sewage?

/hypochondriac sarcsasm

probably. you are going to die from something it, i guess i would rather it be skin cancer from the sun vs lung cancer from the pollution. although my golden brown skin can take the pounding better than all of you yellows and whiteys. so i guess i would take my chances with the beach.
 
qwerty said:
although my golden brown skin can take the pounding better than all of you yellows and whiteys. so i guess i would take my chances with the beach.

Not true. Darker the skin, more sensitive it is.
 
Cubic Zirconia said:
qwerty said:
although my golden brown skin can take the pounding better than all of you yellows and whiteys. so i guess i would take my chances with the beach.

Not true. Darker the skin, more sensitive it is.

that is opposite to what i have always been told/believed. check this out
http://www.skincancer.org/prevention/are-you-at-risk/skin-types-and-at-risk-groups#panel1-4

says the lighter the skin the more likely you are to get cancer? im kind of like a #4 on their scale.
 
@akim, 133 is terrible during the weekends and summer months. The festivals draw over a million visitors. Laguna Beach is heavy on tourism and that stretch is the only access for visitors. I drive that stretch regularly and leaving the beach is a nightmare. Try the morning rush when almost the entire Laguna Beach population use 133 to get to work and going home.
 
qwerty said:
Cubic Zirconia said:
qwerty said:
although my golden brown skin can take the pounding better than all of you yellows and whiteys. so i guess i would take my chances with the beach.

Not true. Darker the skin, more sensitive it is.

says the lighter the skin the more likely you are to get cancer? im kind of like a #4 on their scale.

OK, I confused- dark skin has more melanin production, hence more sensitive, but when it comes to cancer, darker the better.
Back in sun now- you are good!
 
Truth: I was kidding about the African lineage (although it is very possible... haven't gone to familytree.com)... but I am probably darker than most of the members here.

No need to worry about skin cancer... we can always use the Force:
images

 
qwerty said:
akim997 said:
Really, what are the options with regards to air quality?  Maybe Newport, CDM, Laguna, Dana Point? 

Thank you! ive been saying this for the longest time, you live a southern california where there are millions of cars and freeways everywhere.  Outside of living next to the beach, you are SOL. 

Of the studies on ill effects on health and school performance, most have used 500m from the freeway as a cut-off.  Personally, I would choose not to be closer than half a mile or so.  and I agree that Jeffrey, etc are just as bad as 133 or 261, etc, so personally, when I look at houses, I put a smaller buffer there.

That means that most of Irvine (and costa mesa and HB, etc) are still okay places to live.  But backing up to the 405 or the 5, definitely a NO....
 
Developers learned by planting a dense grove of trees in an 10' zone they can build much closer to the freeway. This veil of trees although only 10 deep does buffer some noise and block visibility. Buyers who are not sophisticated easily fall into this illusion or trap.
 
Back
Top