Page 45 of 45 FirstFirst ... 515253536373839404142434445
Results 881 to 893 of 893

Thread: The Sea View (D15, Freehold, Wheelock Properties)

  1. #881
    Newbie

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Just chanced upon this blog which highlighted the old Sea View hotel

    This started with a discussion i had with a colleague on Ikea in Katong.
    It seems Ikea's been in SG for a very long time

    http://timesofmylife.wordpress.com/2008/03/page/3/

  2. #882
    Newbie

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cornycow
    hows the court case between wheelock and the comm members? any updates?

    quite interested in this pty.
    Yes, are there any updates? Heard only certain blocks are affected

  3. #883
    Junior

    User Info Menu

    Default

    With the recent CM. Bond investment can be a alternative but must leverge in order to get >8% return.

    Sold The SEAVIEW @$2.25 (1410sqft)in early 2011.
    Use the cash avail to buy straight & perp bond in 2011.

    Cash avail 1.5m
    Ave bond LTV is 55%. So borrowed 1.6m @1.35%
    So total bond invested = $3.1m.
    Coupon per yr = $180k.
    Net return = 180k/1500k = 12% (with leveraging)
    Not yet include the capital apprreciation from par 100 to 102-106.


    *There is risk that bond will become zero if the company is bankrupt ...
    *Rising interest rate will affect the bond price esp Perp bond.
    *Perp bond tend to drop more than straight bond when mkt correct
    *Rising interest rate will affect your borrowing cost
    *Recent Swiber perp bond coupon is 9.75% too risky etc etc

    With the QE3, the new bond issued coupon is getting lower. So need to wait for deep mkt correction (2013?) to be able to buy bond @ attractive price. Stock mkt is too maniplative & volatile.

    rdgs,
    Vic






    a

  4. #884
    Junior

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cbsh38584
    With the recent CM. Bond investment can be a alternative but must leverge in order to get >8% return.

    Cash avail 1.5m
    Ave bond LTV is 55%. So borrowed 1.6m @1.35%
    So total bond invested = $3.1m.
    Coupon per yr = $180k.
    Net return = 180k/1500k = 12% (with leveraging)
    Not yet include the capital apprreciation from par 100 to 102-106.


    rdgs,
    Vic

    a

    Walau.. if only i have your risk appetite... My leverage less than 5% for bonds coz I really scared of leverage in financial instruments. Properties just seem so much safer but too bad I missed the boat in 2009-2010.

    Which bank are you using ?

  5. #885
    Old Newbie

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cbsh38584
    With the recent CM. Bond investment can be a alternative but must leverge in order to get >8% return.

    Sold The SEAVIEW @$2.25 (1410sqft)in early 2011.
    Use the cash avail to buy straight & perp bond in 2011.

    Cash avail 1.5m
    Ave bond LTV is 55%. So borrowed 1.6m @1.35%
    So total bond invested = $3.1m.
    Coupon per yr = $180k.
    Net return = 180k/1500k = 12% (with leveraging)
    Not yet include the capital apprreciation from par 100 to 102-106.


    *There is risk that bond will become zero if the company is bankrupt ...
    *Rising interest rate will affect the bond price esp Perp bond.
    *Perp bond tend to drop more than straight bond when mkt correct
    *Rising interest rate will affect your borrowing cost
    *Recent Swiber perp bond coupon is 9.75% too risky etc etc

    With the QE3, the new bond issued coupon is getting lower. So need to wait for deep mkt correction (2013?) to be able to buy bond @ attractive price. Stock mkt is too maniplative & volatile.

    rdgs,
    Vic






    a
    Net return never take into consideration financing cost of 1.35%?

  6. #886
    Junior

    User Info Menu

    Default

    aiyoyo, I tot some good news for me to buy The Seaview...
    and landed up this thread a BOND thread.

    Perhaps, should start a proper thread in BOND

  7. #887
    Junior

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Est 180k coupon already taken into consideration financing cost of 1.35%.
    If interest rate remain low till End 2014. I should earn at least 500k by 2014.
    My Bond holding are being lent out to bank at a rate of 0.5% to 1.5%. A extra income for me.

    This is the reason why I decide to sell THE SEAVIEW Condo & use my cash to
    invest in Bond with leveraging. The seaview is a good project. But the upside is limited to maybe $1800 to 1900psf in 5 to 8 yrs time.

    With QE3 & NEW CM, I think the rich invest will eventually want to start investing into bond. After 2014, I may start to look into property again.


    Bought 500k of Lippomall bond 5.875% LTV 60%
    Cash needed 500k X40% = 200k.
    financing cost = 1.35%
    Net Coupon = 500k X 1.04525(5.875 - 1.35) = $22.6k
    Net yield = 22.6k/200k = 11.3% return


    rdgs,
    Vic

  8. #888
    reporter

    User Info Menu

    Default

    https://www.99.co/blog/singapore/how...erty-buyers-2/

    The most common line from property agents is that it “never goes wrong”. Property always increases in value, because Singapore is land scarce. And sure, that sounds good in theory – but the Seaview and its current $32 million lawsuit is a good example of what can go wrong:

    The Seaview situation

    When the residents of the Seaview first purchased their units, they did so at the exorbitant cost of around $1,600 per square foot. It didn’t seem unreasonable at the time: the Seaview was developed by Wheelock Properties, which has a reputation for quality, high-end properties.

    The Seaview is also within walking distance to Parkway Parade (the neighbourhood mall), and was marketed as the “Ardmore Park of the east.”

    But problems started early, and by 2011 residents were attempting to sue Wheelock Properties for damages amounting to $32 million. And even that amount doesn’t highlight what they’ve had to put up with.

    Lethal swimming pool, falling debris, and apartments that stink

    The Seaview’s problems started within a year of being occupied. Signs of the problems are still apparent, as the trial is still pending. Here’s one of the most obvious:
    Notice the discrepancy the right hand side of the roof, where part of the grille like structure is missing.

    It’s not there because, during the middle of a storm, it fell off and crashed near the swimming pool. No one was out at the time, but “chance of being killed by falling debris” was probably not a highlight of the property brochure.

    Again, this is not an old condominium; and the management informed me that the incident happened sometime within the first year of occupancy.

    Now take a look at the swimming pool:

    Those green patches are not slime. They’re much worse. That’s where the tiles have popped loose, and form razor sharp patches. At one point this cut into a pregnant resident. The medical bills amounted to over $20,000.

    The same happens at the edge of the pool, where people often sit or stand:

    The management discovers new patches of loose tiles every day. It’s gotten to the point where parts of the pool are regularly cordoned off, to avoid someone requiring stitches:

    Swimming Pool Sea View

    When it’s not threatening people, the pool is busy threatening the carpark. This is what you find on the ceiling of the carpark (located under the pool):

    Swimming Pool Sea View

    Those are tiny stalactites, formed from the liquid in the swimming pool. While I am not an expert, I suspect there is no school of architecture that recommends letting the swimming pool leak into the carpark.

    The wooden deck around the swimming pool is thoroughly rotted in parts, and the management explained that at least one resident has put a foot through the platform. Currently, the deck is made of a mismatched, different coloured wood: each darker coloured plank is where a rotted piece had to be replaced:

    The Sea View Flooring

    The wood problem is also in the Seaview’s clubhouse:

    The Sea View Doors

    Those are very welcoming doors, in that they will never close. They are literally too small, and don’t meet in the middle. Tape measures were apparently in short supply when the Seaview was being built.

    All of these issues pale in comparison to the sewage problem. Now I can’t go into someone’s house and take pictures, but it’s not needed in this case – the problem is the stench.

    In the linked article (see The Seaview situation), it mentions that residents complained of “foul smells” and “infestations of flies.” While I didn’t see flies, I can attest to the smell.

    A sickly sweet smell would sometimes seem to come out of the walls. This is due to the lack of a U-trap: a device that separates waste from the kitchen and the toilet. Refuse from the two just merge into a common pipe, and choke up.

    One of the residents complained that the cost of hiring a contractor, every time he needed to clear up the pipes, ran into hundreds of dollars every month. The alternative was for him to go arm deep into the pipes, and clear it himself.

    Other bizarre design decisions include windows that leak, and not using primer before the buildings were painted (primer is the base layer onto which paint adheres. Without it, the paint will crack and peel).

    Financial consequences for residents

    Most residents were torn between openly discussing resale issues, and keeping it quiet. On the one hand, many of them would rather offload their units right now. On the other, they can’t openly say it because it would just drive their property values down even more.

    One resident claimed that he was struggling to sell at around $1,000 per square foot (remember, the original price was around $1,600 per square foot). However, his prospective buyer ran into problems with the bank, which refused to grant the loan due to the Seaview’s pending legal issues.

    Legal frustrations and the “independent contractor” defence

    You’d think this is a clear cut case in court, but it isn’t. Wheelock Properties, like many other developers, can invoke the independent contractor defence. This is basically a claim that certain third parties, hired to build the property, are the ones responsible for the defect – not the developer.

    These independent contractors, to whom the blame might be pushed, can in turn invoke the same defence when they are sued. They might also be able to claim another contractor they hired is responsible, and deflect the legal heat.

    This can eventually result in residents suing small sub-contractors, who probably cannot pay the amounts needed for proper compensation.

    As annoying as that may sound, it’s not unusual turn of events. The independent contractor defence has been used by property developers for a long time.

    This is where the Seaview becomes important: the law firm representing the Seaview is arguing that the independent contractor defence cannot be used in this case. If the courts agree with them, it will be a landmark case: it would shift significant power into the hands of property buyers, as developers would be much more accountable for their work.

    A warning that every property buyer should heed

    The Seaview is a monumental reminder to every property buyer in Singapore: never make assumptions based on the name of the developer. Each and every property development should be viewed in isolation – judge it as a unique case; don’t look at other works by the same developer, and expect the same quality.

    It is also a warning against attractive “early bird” discounts for under-development property. It may be cheaper to buy before you can see the end result. But if the end result is something like the Seaview, the discount will be more than compensated for by the potential losses.

  9. #889
    Ultimate Underdog

    User Info Menu

    Default

    No wonder completed properties that are decent in quality are priced with huge premiums generally.

    Those who buy new properties take a bet and if they win, win double. If they lose, then hard for price gains and may have to deal with lawsuit and risk poor / dangerous finishing.


    Quote Originally Posted by reporter2 View Post
    https://www.99.co/blog/singapore/how...erty-buyers-2/

    The most common line from property agents is that it “never goes wrong”. Property always increases in value, because Singapore is land scarce. And sure, that sounds good in theory – but the Seaview and its current $32 million lawsuit is a good example of what can go wrong:

    The Seaview situation

    When the residents of the Seaview first purchased their units, they did so at the exorbitant cost of around $1,600 per square foot. It didn’t seem unreasonable at the time: the Seaview was developed by Wheelock Properties, which has a reputation for quality, high-end properties.

    The Seaview is also within walking distance to Parkway Parade (the neighbourhood mall), and was marketed as the “Ardmore Park of the east.”

    But problems started early, and by 2011 residents were attempting to sue Wheelock Properties for damages amounting to $32 million. And even that amount doesn’t highlight what they’ve had to put up with.

    Lethal swimming pool, falling debris, and apartments that stink

    The Seaview’s problems started within a year of being occupied. Signs of the problems are still apparent, as the trial is still pending. Here’s one of the most obvious:
    Notice the discrepancy the right hand side of the roof, where part of the grille like structure is missing.

    It’s not there because, during the middle of a storm, it fell off and crashed near the swimming pool. No one was out at the time, but “chance of being killed by falling debris” was probably not a highlight of the property brochure.

    Again, this is not an old condominium; and the management informed me that the incident happened sometime within the first year of occupancy.

    Now take a look at the swimming pool:

    Those green patches are not slime. They’re much worse. That’s where the tiles have popped loose, and form razor sharp patches. At one point this cut into a pregnant resident. The medical bills amounted to over $20,000.

    The same happens at the edge of the pool, where people often sit or stand:

    The management discovers new patches of loose tiles every day. It’s gotten to the point where parts of the pool are regularly cordoned off, to avoid someone requiring stitches:

    Swimming Pool Sea View

    When it’s not threatening people, the pool is busy threatening the carpark. This is what you find on the ceiling of the carpark (located under the pool):

    Swimming Pool Sea View

    Those are tiny stalactites, formed from the liquid in the swimming pool. While I am not an expert, I suspect there is no school of architecture that recommends letting the swimming pool leak into the carpark.

    The wooden deck around the swimming pool is thoroughly rotted in parts, and the management explained that at least one resident has put a foot through the platform. Currently, the deck is made of a mismatched, different coloured wood: each darker coloured plank is where a rotted piece had to be replaced:

    The Sea View Flooring

    The wood problem is also in the Seaview’s clubhouse:

    The Sea View Doors

    Those are very welcoming doors, in that they will never close. They are literally too small, and don’t meet in the middle. Tape measures were apparently in short supply when the Seaview was being built.

    All of these issues pale in comparison to the sewage problem. Now I can’t go into someone’s house and take pictures, but it’s not needed in this case – the problem is the stench.

    In the linked article (see The Seaview situation), it mentions that residents complained of “foul smells” and “infestations of flies.” While I didn’t see flies, I can attest to the smell.

    A sickly sweet smell would sometimes seem to come out of the walls. This is due to the lack of a U-trap: a device that separates waste from the kitchen and the toilet. Refuse from the two just merge into a common pipe, and choke up.

    One of the residents complained that the cost of hiring a contractor, every time he needed to clear up the pipes, ran into hundreds of dollars every month. The alternative was for him to go arm deep into the pipes, and clear it himself.

    Other bizarre design decisions include windows that leak, and not using primer before the buildings were painted (primer is the base layer onto which paint adheres. Without it, the paint will crack and peel).

    Financial consequences for residents

    Most residents were torn between openly discussing resale issues, and keeping it quiet. On the one hand, many of them would rather offload their units right now. On the other, they can’t openly say it because it would just drive their property values down even more.

    One resident claimed that he was struggling to sell at around $1,000 per square foot (remember, the original price was around $1,600 per square foot). However, his prospective buyer ran into problems with the bank, which refused to grant the loan due to the Seaview’s pending legal issues.

    Legal frustrations and the “independent contractor” defence

    You’d think this is a clear cut case in court, but it isn’t. Wheelock Properties, like many other developers, can invoke the independent contractor defence. This is basically a claim that certain third parties, hired to build the property, are the ones responsible for the defect – not the developer.

    These independent contractors, to whom the blame might be pushed, can in turn invoke the same defence when they are sued. They might also be able to claim another contractor they hired is responsible, and deflect the legal heat.

    This can eventually result in residents suing small sub-contractors, who probably cannot pay the amounts needed for proper compensation.

    As annoying as that may sound, it’s not unusual turn of events. The independent contractor defence has been used by property developers for a long time.

    This is where the Seaview becomes important: the law firm representing the Seaview is arguing that the independent contractor defence cannot be used in this case. If the courts agree with them, it will be a landmark case: it would shift significant power into the hands of property buyers, as developers would be much more accountable for their work.

    A warning that every property buyer should heed

    The Seaview is a monumental reminder to every property buyer in Singapore: never make assumptions based on the name of the developer. Each and every property development should be viewed in isolation – judge it as a unique case; don’t look at other works by the same developer, and expect the same quality.

    It is also a warning against attractive “early bird” discounts for under-development property. It may be cheaper to buy before you can see the end result. But if the end result is something like the Seaview, the discount will be more than compensated for by the potential losses.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  10. #890
    Junior

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reporter2 View Post
    https://www.99.co/blog/singapore/how...erty-buyers-2/

    The most common line from property agents is that it “never goes wrong”. Property always increases in value, because Singapore is land scarce. And sure, that sounds good in theory – but the Seaview and its current $32 million lawsuit is a good example of what can go wrong:

    The Seaview situation

    When the residents of the Seaview first purchased their units, they did so at the exorbitant cost of around $1,600 per square foot. It didn’t seem unreasonable at the time: the Seaview was developed by Wheelock Properties, which has a reputation for quality, high-end properties.

    The Seaview is also within walking distance to Parkway Parade (the neighbourhood mall), and was marketed as the “Ardmore Park of the east.”

    But problems started early, and by 2011 residents were attempting to sue Wheelock Properties for damages amounting to $32 million. And even that amount doesn’t highlight what they’ve had to put up with.

    Lethal swimming pool, falling debris, and apartments that stink

    The Seaview’s problems started within a year of being occupied. Signs of the problems are still apparent, as the trial is still pending. Here’s one of the most obvious:
    Notice the discrepancy the right hand side of the roof, where part of the grille like structure is missing.

    It’s not there because, during the middle of a storm, it fell off and crashed near the swimming pool. No one was out at the time, but “chance of being killed by falling debris” was probably not a highlight of the property brochure.

    Again, this is not an old condominium; and the management informed me that the incident happened sometime within the first year of occupancy.

    Now take a look at the swimming pool:

    Those green patches are not slime. They’re much worse. That’s where the tiles have popped loose, and form razor sharp patches. At one point this cut into a pregnant resident. The medical bills amounted to over $20,000.

    The same happens at the edge of the pool, where people often sit or stand:

    The management discovers new patches of loose tiles every day. It’s gotten to the point where parts of the pool are regularly cordoned off, to avoid someone requiring stitches:

    Swimming Pool Sea View

    When it’s not threatening people, the pool is busy threatening the carpark. This is what you find on the ceiling of the carpark (located under the pool):

    Swimming Pool Sea View

    Those are tiny stalactites, formed from the liquid in the swimming pool. While I am not an expert, I suspect there is no school of architecture that recommends letting the swimming pool leak into the carpark.

    The wooden deck around the swimming pool is thoroughly rotted in parts, and the management explained that at least one resident has put a foot through the platform. Currently, the deck is made of a mismatched, different coloured wood: each darker coloured plank is where a rotted piece had to be replaced:

    The Sea View Flooring

    The wood problem is also in the Seaview’s clubhouse:

    The Sea View Doors

    Those are very welcoming doors, in that they will never close. They are literally too small, and don’t meet in the middle. Tape measures were apparently in short supply when the Seaview was being built.

    All of these issues pale in comparison to the sewage problem. Now I can’t go into someone’s house and take pictures, but it’s not needed in this case – the problem is the stench.

    In the linked article (see The Seaview situation), it mentions that residents complained of “foul smells” and “infestations of flies.” While I didn’t see flies, I can attest to the smell.

    A sickly sweet smell would sometimes seem to come out of the walls. This is due to the lack of a U-trap: a device that separates waste from the kitchen and the toilet. Refuse from the two just merge into a common pipe, and choke up.

    One of the residents complained that the cost of hiring a contractor, every time he needed to clear up the pipes, ran into hundreds of dollars every month. The alternative was for him to go arm deep into the pipes, and clear it himself.

    Other bizarre design decisions include windows that leak, and not using primer before the buildings were painted (primer is the base layer onto which paint adheres. Without it, the paint will crack and peel).

    Financial consequences for residents

    Most residents were torn between openly discussing resale issues, and keeping it quiet. On the one hand, many of them would rather offload their units right now. On the other, they can’t openly say it because it would just drive their property values down even more.

    One resident claimed that he was struggling to sell at around $1,000 per square foot (remember, the original price was around $1,600 per square foot). However, his prospective buyer ran into problems with the bank, which refused to grant the loan due to the Seaview’s pending legal issues.

    Legal frustrations and the “independent contractor” defence

    You’d think this is a clear cut case in court, but it isn’t. Wheelock Properties, like many other developers, can invoke the independent contractor defence. This is basically a claim that certain third parties, hired to build the property, are the ones responsible for the defect – not the developer.

    These independent contractors, to whom the blame might be pushed, can in turn invoke the same defence when they are sued. They might also be able to claim another contractor they hired is responsible, and deflect the legal heat.

    This can eventually result in residents suing small sub-contractors, who probably cannot pay the amounts needed for proper compensation.

    As annoying as that may sound, it’s not unusual turn of events. The independent contractor defence has been used by property developers for a long time.

    This is where the Seaview becomes important: the law firm representing the Seaview is arguing that the independent contractor defence cannot be used in this case. If the courts agree with them, it will be a landmark case: it would shift significant power into the hands of property buyers, as developers would be much more accountable for their work.

    A warning that every property buyer should heed

    The Seaview is a monumental reminder to every property buyer in Singapore: never make assumptions based on the name of the developer. Each and every property development should be viewed in isolation – judge it as a unique case; don’t look at other works by the same developer, and expect the same quality.

    It is also a warning against attractive “early bird” discounts for under-development property. It may be cheaper to buy before you can see the end result. But if the end result is something like the Seaview, the discount will be more than compensated for by the potential losses.

    I am quite fortunate to sell to a PRC buyer in Q1 of 2011 for 1590psf (1410sgft). This PRC buyer took only 10 mins to make a decision to buy after viewing.
    Before the PRC , I have many viewing from a few S'porean ,1 Indonesian , 1 Myanmar & 1 Msian. Only one offer from S'porean at $2m. The profit I make + my own cash. I invest into fixed income with leveraging.

  11. #891
    Newbie

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Bro cbsh38584

    You also sold yr unit at the seaview? Your timing always so right, even for your bonds purchase and sale So envy you. Clap clap.

    What's yr latest view on the property market? But many people want to park their money in property but ABSD make buyers think twice or turn off.v

  12. #892
    Junior

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Werther View Post
    Bro cbsh38584

    You also sold yr unit at the seaview? Your timing always so right, even for your bonds purchase and sale So envy you. Clap clap.

    What's yr latest view on the property market? But many people want to park their money in property but ABSD make buyers think twice or turn off.v

    I will buy back in 2016/7 & probably in the East D15 again. When the MRT in 8 yrs time. it will surely appreciate if one have the holding power.
    If for own stay. Sea avenue (5th storey high - TOP in 2005 if I am right) just opp Marine parade library is a good location & quite affordable
    at 1100-1200psf.

  13. #893
    reporter

    User Info Menu

    Default Re: The Sea View (D15, Freehold, Wheelock Properties)

    Unit at The Sea View fetches $1,900 psf

    By Timothy Tay
    / EdgeProp

    March 11, 2019


    The URA Realis caveats lodged for the week of Feb 19-26 have thrown up some interesting transactions, particularly of older condos in prime District 15.

    One such transaction was at The Sea View, which was also the most profitable deal for Feb 19-26 (see Gains & Losses Table on EP15). This was for a 1,410 sq ft, three-bedroom unit on the 21st level of one of the 23-storey blocks in the condo project on Amber Road. It fetched $2.68 million ($1,900 psf).

    The previous owner had purchased the unit when the project was first launched in 2005, and paid just $1.22 million ($867 psf), according to a caveat lodged then. Hence, the owner had seen the price of the property more than double over the past 14 years.

    Another unit at The Sea View also changed hands in February: It was for a 1,647 sq ft, four-bedroom unit on the sixth floor of a neighbouring block that went for $3.05 million ($1,852 psf). The previous owner had purchased it in a resale for $2.8 million ($1,700 psf) in April 2011. Hence, the capital appreciation was just 8.9% over the eight-year holding period.

    The 546-unit project was developed by Wheelock Properties and completed in 2008. When The Sea View was first launched in mid-2005, units were sold at an average of $773 psf, based on caveats of transactions from June to September 2005.

    In the Amber Road neighbourhood today, new, freehold projects include the 92-unit boutique development, Nyon at 12 Amber Road, which features units priced in the $2,300 to $2,400 psf range, and was launched over the weekend of March 2-3. Another upcoming high-end condo in the vicinity is the redevelopment of the former Amber Park condo by City Developments Ltd.

    “The private resale condos in the Amber Road and Meyer Road area in District 15 are likely beneficiaries of the stiff competition among expected new launches this year,” says Eugene Lim, key executive officer of ERA Realty. “There are usually some spillover effects from new launches which tend to draw attention to the area.”

    Meanwhile at Hawaii Tower on Meyer Road, a 2,239 sq ft, three-bedroom unit on the sixth floor of one of the blocks changed hands for $2.7 million ($1,206 psf), based on a caveat lodged on Feb 21. The previous owner bought it in 1995 for $1.39 million ($621 psf). He had seen the property double in value over the past 24 years.

    Completed in 1984, Hawaii Tower is a 135-unit private condo sitting on a sprawling freehold site of 192,340 sq ft. The condo had made a third collective sale attempt in 2010, with an asking price of $700 million. Owners at Hawaii Tower had made a fourth collective sale attempt in 2017, but it did not materialise.

    The units at Hawaii Tower are large, with typical units ranging from 2,230 to 2,250 sq ft. There are also six penthouses of 4,390 sq ft each. Owners enjoy views of either the quiet bungalow neighbourhood on one side or unobstructed views of the sea and Marina Bay on the other.

    In the Meyer Road neighbourhood, several condos were successfully sold en bloc in the area in 2017. They were the former Albracca, which was launched recently as One Meyer by Sustained Land. The 66-unit new condo features compact two- and three-bedroom units of 614 to 1,033 sq ft with indicative prices in the $2,500 to $2,700 psf range.

    Meanwhile, UOL Group and Kheng Leong Co, which purchased the former Nanak Mansion en bloc, are planning to launch the new luxury, 56-unit project called MeyerHouse, sometime in 2Q2019. The project will feature large units, with three-bedroom apartments from 1,850 sq ft; four-bedroom apartments above 3,000 sq ft; and penthouses from 5,200 sq ft. Prices have yet to be disclosed. However, UOL has indicated that it will be positioned as a luxury project, equivalent to its Nassim Park Residences.

    “Buyers today have to consider factors like the relatively higher selling prices at new projects - a consequence of competitive land bids in 2017 and 2018,” observes ERA’s Lim. “Some property hunters have turned to older properties in the area because the older developments have larger unit sizes. As they are buying these units at a lower price psf, and as the units are intended for their own stay, they have also budgeted in renovation costs."

Posting Permissions

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