Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 233

Thread: The Belvedere (D15, Freehold, Keppel Land)

  1. #121
    C X Guest

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Estate Pundit
    Latest transaction for Belvedere,

    18 Aug 08_13-0X__1012sqft__$1325psf__$1,340,900
    31 Jul 08__1X-04__1302sqft__$1267psf__$1,650,000
    Always nice to see you back in action..you must be busy with your work last week right?lol

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C X
    Always nice to see you back in action..you must be busy with your work last week right?lol
    Have been tied up at work and my home 'Super' computer blew the power supply. So have been experiencing internet withdrawal symtoms.

  3. #123
    C X Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Estate Pundit
    Have been tied up at work and my home 'Super' computer blew the power supply. So have been experiencing internet withdrawal symtoms.
    Busy is always a good sign.. how come the power supply blew off?got ask any electrician to check your house power supply?

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Estate Pundit
    Latest transaction for Belvedere,

    18 Aug 08_13-0X__1012sqft__$1325psf__$1,340,900
    31 Jul 08__1X-04__1302sqft__$1267psf__$1,650,000
    No new caveats lodged for Belvedere after 18 August till the latest reflected date 05 Sept 2008

  5. #125
    C X Guest

    Default

    Admin,

    Thank You Very Much for getting rid of that stupid OKT..

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C X
    Admin,

    Thank You Very Much for getting rid of that stupid OKT..

    didn't know there a admin here. But how come D14 still have their posting

  7. #127
    C X Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    didn't know there a admin here. But how come D14 still have their posting
    Every forum sure have admin..maybe it's deleted by Mr.Funny?lol

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default Belvedere may be completed blocked???

    I have made a couple of enquiry on Belvedere and from preliminary discussion from a number other investors, I understood this was one of the most controversial investment which Keppel Land (the developer) made and it was almost by sheer luck they managed to get away with this (or what it appears to be the case). I understand this was in some way or another, in what seems to be a mistake on the developer whom back then purchased the land, not knowing there is/was another plot of land in front which could potentially block off Belvedere’s view completely (and potentially also block part of SeaFront). I understand a number of buyers was sold the idea that the plot of land immediately next to Belvedere was actually a Park (which, apparently, is not the case), and I believe most owners and prospective buyers continue to be under this belief still (which seems to be rather shocking!!).

    I attached extract of the Master Plan 2008 (annotated) which is widely circulated amongst the investor community whom are looking at buying Belvedere and SeaFront. This will have an impact on our view of the pricing of this development, given the risk of another development in front, which is not unlikely at all!!



    I wonder if anyone here can confirm the same or shed some light on this?
    Attached Files Attached Files

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default Belvedere may be completely blocked???

    I have made a couple of enquiry on Belvedere and from preliminary discussion from a number other investors, I understood this was one of the most controversial investment which Keppel Land (the developer) made and it was almost by sheer luck they managed to get away with this (or what it appears to be the case). I understand this was in some way or another, in what seems to be a mistake on the developer whom back then purchased the land, not knowing there is/was another plot of land in front which could potentially block off Belvedere’s view completely (and potentially also block part of SeaFront). I understand a number of buyers was sold the idea that the plot of land immediately next to Belvedere was actually a Park (which, apparently, is not the case), and I believe most owners and prospective buyers continue to be under this belief still (which seems to be rather shocking!!).

    I attach extract of the Master Plan 2008 (annotated) (see attached file Belvedere.pdf) which is widely circulated amongst the investor community whom are looking at buying Belvedere and SeaFront. This will have an impact on our view of the pricing of this development, given the risk of another development in front, which is not unlikely at all!!

    I wonder if anyone here can confirm the same or shed some light on this?

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    I have made a couple of enquiry on Belvedere and from preliminary discussion from a number other investors, I understood this was one of the most controversial investment which Keppel Land (the developer) made and it was almost by sheer luck they managed to get away with this (or what it appears to be the case). I understand this was in some way or another, in what seems to be a mistake on the developer whom back then purchased the land, not knowing there is/was another plot of land in front which could potentially block off Belvedere’s view completely (and potentially also block part of SeaFront). I understand a number of buyers was sold the idea that the plot of land immediately next to Belvedere was actually a Park (which, apparently, is not the case), and I believe most owners and prospective buyers continue to be under this belief still (which seems to be rather shocking!!).

    I attach extract of the Master Plan 2008 (annotated) (see attached file Belvedere.pdf) which is widely circulated amongst the investor community whom are looking at buying Belvedere and SeaFront. This will have an impact on our view of the pricing of this development, given the risk of another development in front, which is not unlikely at all!!

    I wonder if anyone here can confirm the same or shed some light on this?

    hmmmmmm....

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default Clarify.

    Dear Joe,
    Thanks for your reply. I understand you are quite up to date with the property market ongoings (from your other postings) and would be grateful if you can share on your insights in respect on the below. Any inputs will be most helpful.
    Thanks!

  12. #132
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear Joe,
    Thanks for your reply. I understand you are quite up to date with the property market ongoings (from your other postings) and would be grateful if you can share on your insights in respect on the below. Any inputs will be most helpful.
    Thanks!
    I try to see how. Been rather bz these fews days after someone mentioned I should be bz closing deals not bz posting here.....haha...try to get back to you. Cheers

  13. #133
    C X Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    I have made a couple of enquiry on Belvedere and from preliminary discussion from a number other investors, I understood this was one of the most controversial investment which Keppel Land (the developer) made and it was almost by sheer luck they managed to get away with this (or what it appears to be the case). I understand this was in some way or another, in what seems to be a mistake on the developer whom back then purchased the land, not knowing there is/was another plot of land in front which could potentially block off Belvedere’s view completely (and potentially also block part of SeaFront). I understand a number of buyers was sold the idea that the plot of land immediately next to Belvedere was actually a Park (which, apparently, is not the case), and I believe most owners and prospective buyers continue to be under this belief still (which seems to be rather shocking!!).

    I attach extract of the Master Plan 2008 (annotated) (see attached file Belvedere.pdf) which is widely circulated amongst the investor community whom are looking at buying Belvedere and SeaFront. This will have an impact on our view of the pricing of this development, given the risk of another development in front, which is not unlikely at all!!

    I wonder if anyone here can confirm the same or shed some light on this?
    Hi DW,

    When i see your posting,i was shock to read the above..As a belvedere owner,from what i know it's a historical Katong Park..Goverment sold that pcs of land away???i tried logging in with my nick CX,i got problems logging in & not able to see your attached master plan..

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Hi guys, you can view that from the ura website, just looked at it to make sure, DW is right, it is just matter of time when they decide to sell the land, thanks DW for the heads up......

  15. #135
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    I have made a couple of enquiry on Belvedere and from preliminary discussion from a number other investors, I understood this was one of the most controversial investment which Keppel Land (the developer) made and it was almost by sheer luck they managed to get away with this (or what it appears to be the case). I understand this was in some way or another, in what seems to be a mistake on the developer whom back then purchased the land, not knowing there is/was another plot of land in front which could potentially block off Belvedere’s view completely (and potentially also block part of SeaFront). I understand a number of buyers was sold the idea that the plot of land immediately next to Belvedere was actually a Park (which, apparently, is not the case), and I believe most owners and prospective buyers continue to be under this belief still (which seems to be rather shocking!!).

    I attach extract of the Master Plan 2008 (annotated) (see attached file Belvedere.pdf) which is widely circulated amongst the investor community whom are looking at buying Belvedere and SeaFront. This will have an impact on our view of the pricing of this development, given the risk of another development in front, which is not unlikely at all!!

    I wonder if anyone here can confirm the same or shed some light on this?
    Bro, master plan 2003 also the same leh so no new changes to 2008 master plan.

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by condoinvestor
    Hi guys, you can view that from the ura website, just looked at it to make sure, DW is right, it is just matter of time when they decide to sell the land, thanks DW for the heads up......
    To be honest, I was hoping that I am reading the maps incorrectly as I am really quite keen on Belvedere. I once heard of someone whom was sold the property during launch and made the same enquiry with the developer. She was apparently, repeatedly verbally re-assured by the developer representative, her understanding (as presented herein below) is not true.

    I am now seriously considering the development and is conducting my due diligence on the same... ...

    Any other views ??

    p/s: I have viewed some units at this development with some agents, enquired on the same with some other agents on the phone, discussed at length with a number of owners (whom are selling their units). It appears they are all absolutely certain about the plot of land infront of Belvedere is marked as a Park and not eligible for future developments (I tend to believe they are genunie believers, as they have been faithfully told / advised by the developers/agents during their purchase).

  17. #137
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C X
    Hi DW,

    When i see your posting,i was shock to read the above..As a belvedere owner,from what i know it's a historical Katong Park..Goverment sold that pcs of land away???i tried logging in with my nick CX,i got problems logging in & not able to see your attached master plan..
    Dear CX,
    Given you are the owner of Belvedere, are you able to verify the lot number of Belvedere in the attached PDF file (below post) as per indicated ?? From the Master Plan, it appears Belvedere is not sitting on the plot that nearest to the sea front (i.e. there is another plot in front of Belvedere, which will completely block its view).

    You can probably refer to your title deed (which will specify the land parcel number) and cross check with SLA website to confirm the same?

    To be honest, I am hoping the circulated attachment of Belvedere potentially being completely block is incorrect, as I am very keen to get something there as well!!

  18. #138
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BENTLY
    Bro, master plan 2003 also the same leh so no new changes to 2008 master plan.
    Dear Bently,
    Thanks for your reply. I believed I might have miss out/not understanding your post as intended. Grateful if you can kindly elaborate a little more on the relevance of Master Plan 2003 being the same as Master Plan 2008 in respect of my query below?

    Thanks!

  19. #139
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    To be honest, I was hoping that I am reading the maps incorrectly as I am really quite keen on Belvedere. I once heard of someone whom was sold the property during launch and made the same enquiry with the developer. She was apparently, repeatedly verbally re-assured by the developer representative, her understanding (as presented herein below) is not true.

    I am now seriously considering the development and is conducting my due diligence on the same... ...

    Any other views ??

    p/s: I have viewed some units at this development with some agents, enquired on the same with some other agents on the phone, discussed at length with a number of owners (whom are selling their units). It appears they are all absolutely certain about the plot of land infront of Belvedere is marked as a Park and not eligible for future developments (I tend to believe they are genunie believers, as they have been faithfully told / advised by the developers/agents during their purchase).
    The map is correct and the zoning has not change since 2003, so most likely the piece next lot will be sold for furture development sharing same plot raito of 2.8. But given that this plot of land is bigger than bel, the development can be higger. As for the small piece fronting directly bel, there cant be any building except facilities.

  20. #140
    C X Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear CX,
    Given you are the owner of Belvedere, are you able to verify the lot number of Belvedere in the attached PDF file (below post) as per indicated ?? From the Master Plan, it appears Belvedere is not sitting on the plot that nearest to the sea front (i.e. there is another plot in front of Belvedere, which will completely block its view).

    You can probably refer to your title deed (which will specify the land parcel number) and cross check with SLA website to confirm the same?

    To be honest, I am hoping the circulated attachment of Belvedere potentially being completely block is incorrect, as I am very keen to get something there as well!!
    Dear DW,

    Maybe you should ask yourself whether the small plot of land beside belvedere big enough to build a condo?

  21. #141
    C X Guest

    Default

    Sorry i mean Katong park..

  22. #142
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C X
    Hi DW,

    When i see your posting,i was shock to read the above..As a belvedere owner,from what i know it's a historical Katong Park..Goverment sold that pcs of land away???i tried logging in with my nick CX,i got problems logging in & not able to see your attached master plan..
    The land in between Belvedere and the road entering ECP is only about 60 meters. What can they built? Play soccer also have problem. Use google to do measurement lah, I didn't go there bringing measuring tape...
    Attached Images Attached Images

  23. #143
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C X
    Dear DW,

    Maybe you should ask yourself whether the small plot of land beside belvedere big enough to build a condo?
    Dear CX,
    Thanks for your reply. This is something which I will have to qualify my views, being subject to further due diligence and consultation with a qualified land surveyor or architect as this is outside my area of expertise.

    Based on the Master Plan 2008 on the website, it appears to me the plot (it is one continuous L-shape plot completely flanking, in what seems to be Belvedere plot of land) of land next to Belvedere is approximately 2 times the size of what appears to be the plan occupied by Belvedere. A quick cross-comparison of the plot length and width seems to make it quite comparable with Belvedere along both arms of the L-shape.

    Seems like it is possible to develop something there?? Any other views ?

  24. #144
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    The land in between Belvedere and the road entering ECP is only about 60 meters. What can they built? Play soccer also have problem. Use google to do measurement lah, I didn't go there bringing measuring tape...
    My fren, 60m is very wide liao, about 10 terrace houses frontage.

  25. #145
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    The land in between Belvedere and the road entering ECP is only about 60 meters. What can they built? Play soccer also have problem. Use google to do measurement lah, I didn't go there bringing measuring tape...
    Dear Joe,
    Thanks for your google maps picture and that has been very helpful.

    When I saw your google map, I cannot help but to also compare what was marked (yellow line) in your map against the development area of Belvedere. It could be that I am missing or misreading your map, but it appears to me the width or area taken up by Belvedere is comparable with

    (i) the empty plot of land infront of Belvedere, and
    (ii) the plot of land immediate west of Belvedere

    I am not an expert in land survey and I would like to qualify my observations here being subject to further comments or inputs from such other expert opinions. I believe the google map is consistent with what is depicted in the Master Plan 2008 on the website and this is a good starting point for me (or us, to whomever might be interested in this specific topic of discussion). Belvedere has 7 stacks, two of which is facing the sea perpendicularly, and the other 5 are facing with a slant towards the sea.

    If my reading of the Master Plan 2008 is correctly, and based on the visual approximation/comparison of Belvedere's plot against the plot next to it, it seems like buildings can be built along BOTH arms of the L-shape (the goggle map marking only show one arm of the L-shape parcel, I believe the other arm of the L-shape would also flank/block Belvedere's sea/city view completely) parcel which is sitting adjacent to Belvedere, which might potentially completely block Belvedere?

    Or am I missing/misunderstanding something here. Grateful for more views and inputs.

  26. #146
    C X Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear CX,
    Thanks for your reply. This is something which I will have to qualify my views, being subject to further due diligence and consultation with a qualified land surveyor or architect as this is outside my area of expertise.

    Based on the Master Plan 2008 on the website, it appears to me the plot (it is one continuous L-shape plot completely flanking, in what seems to be Belvedere plot of land) of land next to Belvedere is approximately 2 times the size of what appears to be the plan occupied by Belvedere. A quick cross-comparison of the plot length and width seems to make it quite comparable with Belvedere along both arms of the L-shape.

    Seems like it is possible to develop something there?? Any other views ?

    Hi DW,

    It might happen as im not an expert in this..before i bought belvedere,i have check with my friend that work in URA n see if there's any projects coming up that will block my high floor seaview,according from him,he says NO..Even if the plot of land which is bigger than belvedere really build a high floor condo,i won't blame him as well coz im very happy staying here now..

  27. #147
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear CX,
    Thanks for your reply. This is something which I will have to qualify my views, being subject to further due diligence and consultation with a qualified land surveyor or architect as this is outside my area of expertise.

    Based on the Master Plan 2008 on the website, it appears to me the plot (it is one continuous L-shape plot completely flanking, in what seems to be Belvedere plot of land) of land next to Belvedere is approximately 2 times the size of what appears to be the plan occupied by Belvedere. A quick cross-comparison of the plot length and width seems to make it quite comparable with Belvedere along both arms of the L-shape.

    Seems like it is possible to develop something there?? Any other views ?
    Given that the plot is bigger than bel., the development will be much bigger than bel. and also since the plot with lenght fronting expressway
    cannot be built in any other way 'cos of buffer set back from expressway'
    the main building will be concentrate in the middle portion of the land, thus pushing up the development to as high as 36 storey allowed. therefor e the next development will definitely be higher than bel. and surely this future development, if have, will be the best development in whole of east coast with no blockage from front and city view. my thought, u says?

  28. #148
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BENTLY
    My fren, 60m is very wide liao, about 10 terrace houses frontage.

    true. The cheapest unit will be the one just 2 meter next to the road. Early bird can still get 20% more discount.

  29. #149
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    true. The cheapest unit will be the one just 2 meter next to the road. Early bird can still get 20% more discount.
    In condo development, u cant build very next to the road but u can built in the very extreme away from the road n push up ur building as high as allowed. the rest of the land fronting will be built for facilities.

  30. #150
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    true. The cheapest unit will be the one just 2 meter next to the road. Early bird can still get 20% more discount.
    Dear Joe,
    Thanks for your input and insight. That has been helpful.

    I noted the Master Plan 2008 is a scaled drawing. My visual comparison of the Width (i.e. Belvedere's plot being a rectangular plot, the shorter sides being referred to as "Wdth" and the longer side of the plot being referred to as "Length" herein) do compares with the dimension of the plot of land immediately fronting Belvedere (the "Blocking Plot") towards the sea.

    If my observation of the above is correct, it appears it might be possible to build something in those dimension without having to be 2 meters from the road. This observation stems from my recent visit to Belvedere. I believe Belvedere's development have quite a far bit of space from the units to the boundary of its plot of land. I was just wondering

    (i) if Belvedere can manage to build units within that plot of land with that dimension, and yet allowing their units to enjoy such certain space from their windows to the boundary of their parcel perimeter, and
    (ii) it appears the Belvedere's land plot's Width is comparable with the Blocking Plot's Width

    perhaps the proposed future development in the Blocking Plot may not have to be 2 meters from the expressway. Again, this is enitrely based on my layout observation of the Master Plan 2008, and recent visitation to Belvedere. Any experts in land surveys of property development inputs will be grateful.

    Granted that Belvedere development has 7 stacks and only 2-3 stacks are facing perpendicular to the sea. The other 4-5 stacks may not be entirely blocked by the portion of the Blocking Plot that is direct facing the sea ("Blocking Plot Sea Facing Arm").

    I further observe the Blocking Plot has two arms, forming an L-shape. The other arm of the L-shape ("Blocking Plot City Facing Arm") is perpendicular to the Blocking Plot Sea Facing Arm, flanking the other 4-5 stacks of Belvedere not facing the sea. If this Blocking Plot City Facing Arm (which on the Master Plan 2008 is a even larger plot of land than Belvedere), this will completely block off all units in Belvedere ??

    Any ideas ??

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 88
    -: 01-06-22, 11:10
  2. Replies: 1052
    -: 14-08-21, 14:06
  3. Replies: 235
    -: 01-08-19, 20:31
  4. Replies: 29
    -: 13-03-10, 08:21
  5. The Tresor (D10, 999 yrs, Keppel Land)
    By orange in forum District 10
    Replies: 0
    -: 02-05-07, 19:48

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •