Burn That Belly
New member
x
Save the Memorial Park! Vote No on Measure B ballot June 5th
- Thread starter Burn That Belly
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Haha, yah, I would also use "wtf" to describe the current state of the GP. Lol.
As to why not build things people actually need question, I think people do need a place to recreate... Not just a big sports field or cluster of sports fields... but a place to detach from whatever it is they're carrying around (literally or metaphorically) the home/office/shopping mall/etc and just enjoy something peaceful and mesmerizing, even if only for a short while. People can get that at central park in NY, golden gate park in SF, the shrines in Tokyo, museums/parks in Paris... all within a short trip from work/home. Something like that in Irvine would have been awesome. We do have a couple of county wilderness areas to enjoy. I guess that's better than nothing. But I digress. That's just like, my opinion man...
And as far as needing housing, I hear that, 100%. Believe me, I am all for adding housing units for the
working residents of Orange County to live in. The thing is, Irvine is adding houses at a staggering pace, yet prices and rents continue to rise. I don't know what the solution is... I just hope the solution we choose is focused on quality of life over short term profit.
Good point, 5p should build low income housing on the site to give back
A truly world class park would be really cool.
The cemetery did give me somewhat of that same excitement though, of wow we could have a real thing here. Recently visited the punchbowl cemetary in Hawaii, if Irvine one could get close to that would be awesome.
The freeway location seemed really appealing because of the visibility, and away from the disjointed weirdness of GP.
But 5P is doing exactly that. Set aside the massive number of construction jobs they are creating, the commerce that they create by building more infrastructure and offices in the area also means more money for business in the city. And yes, they will profit off of it. The profits are to an American company, almost completely staffed by American residents. Isn't that the whole point of MAGA? Or is it not good for America if a company makes more than XX Million per year?
My biggest problem with the people choosing "No" is that the largest objection to this referendum is that a company is going to profit off of making houses and buildings that people demand. I just don't see a sin in that at all.
Again, I understand that especially for people in that specific area, this isn't in their best interests and they want to vote No. But I just don't see why I am expected to give their interests special weight over the interests of everyone else in the city. This is just standard NIMBY stuff. "We don't want that traffic nearby." "We don't want a bunch of offices near us". I'm cool with people having that viewpoint, but it is morally valueless to me. If the traffic doesn't go here, it will be at Strawberry Fields. Why should I listen to homeowners there, instead of the workers/homeowners/etc who have to travel in and around the 5/405 interchange?
But 5P is doing exactly that. Set aside the massive number of construction jobs they are creating, the commerce that they create by building more infrastructure and offices in the area also means more money for business in the city. And yes, they will profit off of it. The profits are to an American company, almost completely staffed by American residents. Isn't that the whole point of MAGA? Or is it not good for America if a company makes more than XX Million per year?
My biggest problem with the people choosing "No" is that the largest objection to this referendum is that a company is going to profit off of making houses and buildings that people demand. I just don't see a sin in that at all.
Again, I understand that especially for people in that specific area, this isn't in their best interests and they want to vote No. But I just don't see why I am expected to give their interests special weight over the interests of everyone else in the city. This is just standard NIMBY stuff. "We don't want that traffic nearby." "We don't want a bunch of offices near us". I'm cool with people having that viewpoint, but it is morally valueless to me. If the traffic doesn't go here, it will be at Strawberry Fields. Why should I listen to homeowners there, instead of the workers/homeowners/etc who have to travel in and around the 5/405 interchange?
[/quote]
Over the last two decades I've witness the housing formation especially here in irvine from stucco box to now modernism architectures anti cookies cutters, from Mcmansion to smaller yet efficient use of living space. There is currently a huge under served housing for young proffessional. They do yearn for ownership. I hope 5points create and deliver solutions to this desperately under serve segments of want to be owners rather being a lifetime renters.
Love it, what happens when you get too old though? Get the boot or are you grandfathered in?
The institutional style architecture and badlands landscaping currently favored by 5 Points only goes back to Beacon Park. Pavilion Park was quite conventional and the landscaping at PP is nice and lush. I understand institutional style architecture is a more efficient use of space (that's why Chicago housing projects and East German apartment blocks were built that way) but to charge the same amount of money for a three story cube as a conventional house doesn't seem like a good buy to me.
The new 5P homes are also stucco boxes but they are even more boxy than traditional stucco boxes. They are not glass and concrete like real modern homes.
I don't like McMansions either but Toll Bros seems to be doing a pretty brisk business with them in places like Orchard Hills.
I think this oversimplifies the objection. There's no issue with 5P making a profit. The issue is their profit motive does not align with quality of life for current and future Irvine residents. This is demonstrated when one looks at the continuous revisions of the GP plans to add additional housing. While the measure in question does not appear to make a net addition to the number of houses, it does relocate them. The supporting infrastructure (ex: Irvine blvd & surrounding roads, shops/parking, schools, etc) was designed to support X number of houses/residents and a large plot of open land for the cemetery. Swapping that cemetery space for thousands more houses will put additional unplanned demand on the local infrastructure.
The traffic in Irvine continues to get worse... It's becoming more difficult to find parking at the local shopping centers... The lines are getting longer...
5P will sell as many houses for the highest price possible. Great, that's their purpose. However, residents will bear the long term consequences of their short term self interested thinking. Since residents apparently can't rely on their elected officials to put their best interests first, residents are going to have to think critically about measure B
1) Why is it on the ballot?
2) Who stands to benefit most?
3) Who will suffer the unintended consequences?
someguy
Active member
inv0ke-epipen said:
Haha, yah, I would also use "wtf" to describe the current state of the GP. Lol.
As to why not build things people actually need question, I think people do need a place to recreate... Not just a big sports field or cluster of sports fields... but a place to detach from whatever it is they're carrying around (literally or metaphorically) the home/office/shopping mall/etc and just enjoy something peaceful and mesmerizing, even if only for a short while. People can get that at central park in NY, golden gate park in SF, the shrines in Tokyo, museums/parks in Paris... all within a short trip from work/home. Something like that in Irvine would have been awesome. We do have a couple of county wilderness areas to enjoy. I guess that's better than nothing. But I digress. That's just like, my opinion man...
And as far as needing housing, I hear that, 100%. Believe me, I am all for adding housing units for the
working residents of Orange County to live in. The thing is, Irvine is adding houses at a staggering pace, yet prices and rents continue to rise. I don't know what the solution is... I just hope the solution we choose is focused on quality of life over short term profit.
Burn That Belly
New member
x
inv0ke-epipen
New member
Burn That Belly said:
Good point, 5p should build low income housing on the site to give back
inv0ke-epipen
New member
someguy said:
A truly world class park would be really cool.
The cemetery did give me somewhat of that same excitement though, of wow we could have a real thing here. Recently visited the punchbowl cemetary in Hawaii, if Irvine one could get close to that would be awesome.
The freeway location seemed really appealing because of the visibility, and away from the disjointed weirdness of GP.
Burn That Belly
New member
x
inv0ke-epipen
New member
World class parks are clearly possible since they exist, but probably need a world class city first for it to happen. Irvine is no Tokyo or San Fransisco.
BTB I?m dissapointed you used Donald Trump as an example instead of the best Donald, mr Bren, whose empire is so prolific it?s domains are in your signature.
BTB I?m dissapointed you used Donald Trump as an example instead of the best Donald, mr Bren, whose empire is so prolific it?s domains are in your signature.
Burn That Belly
New member
x
Burn That Belly said:
But 5P is doing exactly that. Set aside the massive number of construction jobs they are creating, the commerce that they create by building more infrastructure and offices in the area also means more money for business in the city. And yes, they will profit off of it. The profits are to an American company, almost completely staffed by American residents. Isn't that the whole point of MAGA? Or is it not good for America if a company makes more than XX Million per year?
My biggest problem with the people choosing "No" is that the largest objection to this referendum is that a company is going to profit off of making houses and buildings that people demand. I just don't see a sin in that at all.
Again, I understand that especially for people in that specific area, this isn't in their best interests and they want to vote No. But I just don't see why I am expected to give their interests special weight over the interests of everyone else in the city. This is just standard NIMBY stuff. "We don't want that traffic nearby." "We don't want a bunch of offices near us". I'm cool with people having that viewpoint, but it is morally valueless to me. If the traffic doesn't go here, it will be at Strawberry Fields. Why should I listen to homeowners there, instead of the workers/homeowners/etc who have to travel in and around the 5/405 interchange?
irvinebullhousing
Well-known member
devhyfes said:
But 5P is doing exactly that. Set aside the massive number of construction jobs they are creating, the commerce that they create by building more infrastructure and offices in the area also means more money for business in the city. And yes, they will profit off of it. The profits are to an American company, almost completely staffed by American residents. Isn't that the whole point of MAGA? Or is it not good for America if a company makes more than XX Million per year?
My biggest problem with the people choosing "No" is that the largest objection to this referendum is that a company is going to profit off of making houses and buildings that people demand. I just don't see a sin in that at all.
Again, I understand that especially for people in that specific area, this isn't in their best interests and they want to vote No. But I just don't see why I am expected to give their interests special weight over the interests of everyone else in the city. This is just standard NIMBY stuff. "We don't want that traffic nearby." "We don't want a bunch of offices near us". I'm cool with people having that viewpoint, but it is morally valueless to me. If the traffic doesn't go here, it will be at Strawberry Fields. Why should I listen to homeowners there, instead of the workers/homeowners/etc who have to travel in and around the 5/405 interchange?
[/quote]
Over the last two decades I've witness the housing formation especially here in irvine from stucco box to now modernism architectures anti cookies cutters, from Mcmansion to smaller yet efficient use of living space. There is currently a huge under served housing for young proffessional. They do yearn for ownership. I hope 5points create and deliver solutions to this desperately under serve segments of want to be owners rather being a lifetime renters.
inv0ke-epipen
New member
Kings said:
Love it, what happens when you get too old though? Get the boot or are you grandfathered in?
Compressed-Village said:
The institutional style architecture and badlands landscaping currently favored by 5 Points only goes back to Beacon Park. Pavilion Park was quite conventional and the landscaping at PP is nice and lush. I understand institutional style architecture is a more efficient use of space (that's why Chicago housing projects and East German apartment blocks were built that way) but to charge the same amount of money for a three story cube as a conventional house doesn't seem like a good buy to me.
The new 5P homes are also stucco boxes but they are even more boxy than traditional stucco boxes. They are not glass and concrete like real modern homes.
I don't like McMansions either but Toll Bros seems to be doing a pretty brisk business with them in places like Orchard Hills.
someguy
Active member
devhyfes said:
I think this oversimplifies the objection. There's no issue with 5P making a profit. The issue is their profit motive does not align with quality of life for current and future Irvine residents. This is demonstrated when one looks at the continuous revisions of the GP plans to add additional housing. While the measure in question does not appear to make a net addition to the number of houses, it does relocate them. The supporting infrastructure (ex: Irvine blvd & surrounding roads, shops/parking, schools, etc) was designed to support X number of houses/residents and a large plot of open land for the cemetery. Swapping that cemetery space for thousands more houses will put additional unplanned demand on the local infrastructure.
The traffic in Irvine continues to get worse... It's becoming more difficult to find parking at the local shopping centers... The lines are getting longer...
5P will sell as many houses for the highest price possible. Great, that's their purpose. However, residents will bear the long term consequences of their short term self interested thinking. Since residents apparently can't rely on their elected officials to put their best interests first, residents are going to have to think critically about measure B
1) Why is it on the ballot?
2) Who stands to benefit most?
3) Who will suffer the unintended consequences?
iacrenter
Well-known member
All you NO on B / anti housing folks, where were you before?
http://www.talkirvine.com/index.php/topic,16052.0.html
You guys better vote NO on Measure D and sign the damn petition next time.
http://www.talkirvine.com/index.php/topic,16052.0.html
You guys better vote NO on Measure D and sign the damn petition next time.
Burn That Belly
New member
x
Burn That Belly
New member
x