Saraca Terraces

Printable View

17-08-09, 16:42
glwk9

Saraca Terraces

Hi,

Recently drove down to Saraca Road to view at those inter-terrace houses. Any comments? Quite a couple of them are empty...

LH - 99 years (not sure when TOP)
Land - about 2000 sqft
large car porch

Thanks.
17-08-09, 20:05
focus

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwk9

Hi,

Recently drove down to Saraca Road to view at those inter-terrace houses. Any comments? Quite a couple of them are empty...

LH - 99 years (not sure when TOP)
Land - about 2000 sqft
large car porch

Thanks.

I am against buying 99LH unless it is in a good location
17-08-09, 21:02
Property_Owner

Quote:

Originally Posted by focus

I am against buying 99LH unless it is in a good location

agree:D :D :D :D
18-08-09, 00:18
jc

This is esp true for landed pty. LH99 ones are :doh:
18-08-09, 12:01
glwk9

What about Thomson Gdns Estate? These are FH but really small in land size but near to amentities and public transport.
19-08-09, 09:51
stl67

Quote:

Originally Posted by glwk9

Hi,

Recently drove down to Saraca Road to view at those inter-terrace houses. Any comments? Quite a couple of them are empty...

LH - 99 years (not sure when TOP)
Land - about 2000 sqft
large car porch

Thanks.

This project has been around for quite a few years. I was there to view some unit in 2007 and already, it has been TOP for a few years.
25-08-09, 22:45
stshm1

If you are interested in Saraca estate, I have the following info that you may have to take notice:

1. The project TOP is 2000. So, you have only 90 LH to go.
2. The estate is next to the CTE facing. Morning and evening traffic flumes is something you have to bear. Weekends too!
3. At the other side of CTE is a camp. There are occasions range firing.
4. Many of the units are left empty.
5. The estate is deep deep inside the entire YCK estate. Walking out to the main road is about 10-15mins.
6. And the prty is abt 1.0x mil to 1.2xmil.

Just my assessment.
28-08-09, 02:25
joseph85

how about westwood park terrace house compared to this saraca terrace, it is quite cheap. about 500+sgd PSF for a 1615sqft inter-terrace. any comment? lease started from 1994. btw TOP is not equal to lease period start date. it starts from the date govt granted the lease to the developer, it maybe way before that.

i checked out the lease tenure is 99 Yrs From 05/05/1997. AVG PSF is 400+ Does that means Saraca terrace is more worthwhile than westwood park since it is cheaper? even cheaper than a suburban condo.
29-08-09, 00:11
proud owner

Quote:

Originally Posted by joseph85

how about westwood park terrace house compared to this saraca terrace, it is quite cheap. about 500+sgd PSF for a 1615sqft inter-terrace. any comment? lease started from 1994. btw TOP is not equal to lease period start date. it starts from the date govt granted the lease to the developer, it maybe way before that.

i checked out the lease tenure is 99 Yrs From 05/05/1997. AVG PSF is 400+ Does that means Saraca terrace is more worthwhile than westwood park since it is cheaper? even cheaper than a suburban condo.

LH landed are alot cheaper than LH condos ...

if you can find a good location .. LH landed can be a better deal ..for own stay .. or rental ...
29-08-09, 09:51
joseph85

Quote:

Originally Posted by proud owner

LH landed are alot cheaper than LH condos ...

if you can find a good location .. LH landed can be a better deal ..for own stay .. or rental ...

i agree, think a LH landed is better than a LH condo, since the latter defintely cant match landed in term of pricing, space, maintenance expenses and prestige.
03-11-09, 21:12
focus

There's a few new landed in Mimosa..
i went into one of them..
it was advertised as 4000sqft built-up..
but when i went in , i found it looks very much in size like a 3400sqft built-up cluster house I saw in Kovan.

So I began to visualise what went wrong and I found the difference. In the Mimosa one, directly above the living room (which might be a size of 300-400sqft), the 2nd and 3rd storey is non-existent (ie, living room height is the height of the whole 3 storey). So, in actual fact, there is missing 400sqft x 2 storey = 800sqft of built-up.

What I would like to know is whether the missing 800sqft is considered in the built-up (since it's in the selling pricE)? I know the actual roof balcony is considered (i take that since it can still be used and walked on), but the airspace of 800sqft cannot be used or walked on. (ie, advertised as 4000sqft built-in but only have 3200sqft useable including the roof balcony)

Is it possible to obtain the floorplan from the agent or do we have to obtain it from somewhere else?
09-11-09, 10:17
durian

For landed, when sellers quote u gross built up space it's all crap. To value the property, add estimated built-up cost to land cost.

Quote:

Originally Posted by focus

There's a few new landed in Mimosa..
i went into one of them..
it was advertised as 4000sqft built-up..
but when i went in , i found it looks very much in size like a 3400sqft built-up cluster house I saw in Kovan.

So I began to visualise what went wrong and I found the difference. In the Mimosa one, directly above the living room (which might be a size of 300-400sqft), the 2nd and 3rd storey is non-existent (ie, living room height is the height of the whole 3 storey). So, in actual fact, there is missing 400sqft x 2 storey = 800sqft of built-up.

What I would like to know is whether the missing 800sqft is considered in the built-up (since it's in the selling pricE)? I know the actual roof balcony is considered (i take that since it can still be used and walked on), but the airspace of 800sqft cannot be used or walked on. (ie, advertised as 4000sqft built-in but only have 3200sqft useable including the roof balcony)

Is it possible to obtain the floorplan from the agent or do we have to obtain it from somewhere else?
09-11-09, 10:57
johnkhaw

For landed properties, URA uses the land area to calculate the psf. You should compare the prices of landed properties in term of land size. Strata titled cluster houses are based on floor area though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by focus

There's a few new landed in Mimosa..
i went into one of them..
it was advertised as 4000sqft built-up..
but when i went in , i found it looks very much in size like a 3400sqft built-up cluster house I saw in Kovan.

So I began to visualise what went wrong and I found the difference. In the Mimosa one, directly above the living room (which might be a size of 300-400sqft), the 2nd and 3rd storey is non-existent (ie, living room height is the height of the whole 3 storey). So, in actual fact, there is missing 400sqft x 2 storey = 800sqft of built-up.

What I would like to know is whether the missing 800sqft is considered in the built-up (since it's in the selling pricE)? I know the actual roof balcony is considered (i take that since it can still be used and walked on), but the airspace of 800sqft cannot be used or walked on. (ie, advertised as 4000sqft built-in but only have 3200sqft useable including the roof balcony)

Is it possible to obtain the floorplan from the agent or do we have to obtain it from somewhere else?
09-11-09, 11:22
focus

Thanks both for your advice.
I was also thinking it's crap to buy at $1000psf (according to land size) even though it's newly completed.

Anyway, bank valuations came in at 1.8mil to 2mil. So I won't be buying it, it's way overpriced.
09-11-09, 12:06
proud owner

Quote:

Originally Posted by durian

For landed, when sellers quote u gross built up space it's all crap. To value the property, add estimated built-up cost to land cost.

not correct

look at Greenwood ... land 1650 sqft ... they are selling at 1800 psf .. does that mean there construction cost is 800 psf ??? assuming bare land is 1000 psf