Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 233

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

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    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 ??
    Till now nothing is mentioned on that plot of land. BUT we can't rule out the possibility of something being built there in the future.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    Till now nothing is mentioned on that plot of land. BUT we can't rule out the possibility of something being built there in the future.
    Dear all,
    Thanks for your input and inputs thus far. Any further inputs, and preferably from expert persons in respect of the various issues, will be most welcome.

    On a side note, wonder if any of the active market players (i.e. agents, serial property investors...etc) can provide an opinion if the current price of Belvedere has priced in the below consideration??

    Given property market is entirely a perfectly competitive and efficient market (as compared to stock market as the true investment theorist always argue that current stock prices always factored in all available information, at the point in time, in the stock price), I am not sure if the price already factors this consideration, to in the worse case, I am not sure if the wider public is actually aware of this (I hope this is not the case, being so, would mean the property is currently mis-priced?).

    Any thoughts?

  3. #153
    SLA_Are_Gd Guest

    Smile

    Land is very very precious in Singapore. You can rest assured that SLA, URA are going to make use of very inch of usable land. Esp those with seafront or sea view !

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SLA_Are_Gd
    Land is very very precious in Singapore. You can rest assured that SLA, URA are going to make use of very inch of usable land. Esp those with seafront or sea view !
    What does this mean for Belvedere??
    Any ideas if the current price of Belvedere have already priced in this consideration / information ?

    Of the 3 owners and 5 agents whom I have spoken with, most are not aware of this plot of land in front of Belvedere being "developable" land. Two of owners made very firm statements that they have received very clear representations during the launch that these plots of land are part of the park and in no way, would be developed in the future.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    333

    Thumbs up

    we cannot deny the fact that the architectural design are so wonderful that almost everthing can be possible. so there may still be chance where a residential tower may be build there especially so if you take a close look at Fortredale along fort road or it could probably just simply be the actual site the condo facilities are situated. Just my 2 cents!

    Cheers!

    Pet

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petmail
    we cannot deny the fact that the architectural design are so wonderful that almost everthing can be possible. so there may still be chance where a residential tower may be build there especially so if you take a close look at Fortredale along fort road or it could probably just simply be the actual site the condo facilities are situated. Just my 2 cents!

    Cheers!

    Pet
    Dear Petmail,
    Thanks for your response. I could be misreading/not understanding your response correctly.

    If you are responding to my query below, please could you kindly elaborate on your response in respect of my query ? Thanks!

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default Views on the Blocking Plot in Belvedere - cross post

    Dear all,
    I am cross-posting an extract of an existing discussion in another thread, also discussing on Belvedere in the midst of the recent circulated attachment on Belvedere. For those whom might be interested and also welcome any inputs or views on the same.

    Hi there DW, seems like you are pretty right. however I feel that any future development on that particular plot of land is definitely not an immediate issue as most of the time it will take at least 5-10 years before URA will release the land for sale while keeping it under the stateland control till such time. Just my 2 cents worth!


    Pet

    Dear Pet,
    Thanks for your message and input.

    You have made a valid comment which set me thinking how best to approach the valuation of the Belvedere property. Here are some of my views:- It appears to me,

    1. views on property market tend to be like the stock market, a leading indicator of the economy. More often than not, the perception of the value of the property by the buyers reflects their view on the future cashflow/value which the property is likely to promise;

    2. property market is similar to a stock market, in that ideally, it should factor in all the information available to the market place - that is, in an efficient market price reflects all the information available and KNOWN to each participants at that point in time; save for the property market being more illiquid than stock markets in general - one may argue a property market is not as efficient as stock market resulting in what we sometimes observe as pricing latency.

    3. The view available to a particular property affects its price. If the view available to a property is adversely affected/blocked or changed, the value of the property will be depressed.


    If my above proposed hypothesis of the property market is correct, it would then seem to be the price of Belvedere should, rationally, price in the information and prospect of being completely blocked. In my mind, I envisage Belvedere's value to be split into two phase over time

    Phase 1: From now to the time URA officially announces their intention to put up the plot of land infront for sale ("Event 1"); and
    Phase 2: From end of Phase 1 to the time a developer have successful purchased that plot of land ("Event 2").


    I believe we are now in Phase 1. To my view, this is in effect Belvedere issuing an "option" to the property market to exercise a depression of its price, when Event 1 occur. Belvedere has in effect issued a call "option" to the general public, in that, subject to URA executing Event 1 - their price will fall in such time in the future. This "option" did not come in free, the price of the property should have been rightly been factored at the time the information was available to the public - in this case, during the project launch years back (the land parcel demarcation was already known back then during launch). I am not sure if the market have already priced this information in their purchase back then. If they did, they should have purchased Belvedere cheaper than other similar properties with the possibility of being blocked in the future.

    If the current buyers have bought it at a discount during the launch compared to similar projects, (which I understand is the case) and now is trying to sell at a similar price as with neightbouring similarly priced properties, I think this is a case of an quasi-arbitrage, simply because the current buyers community is not aware of this information - this points to me the seller is not pricing it fairly/right now.

    When Event 2 happen, price drop would be a foregone conclusion and it will not be necessary for us to outline the obvious here.

    Back to your comment, I tend to think the value and indirectly (note : I make a difference between value and price, they being not always the same) the price of the property is not only affected by what will happen in the near term as the market should always factor in all the available information at this time, to price it correctly. If the public/universe of potential Belvedere buyers is NOT aware of such potential completely blockage in future, the price now probably does not reflect such information as I have presented in the earlier paragraph above.

    My view is, the value of Belvedere now should rightly price in such future possibility (perhaps discounted by a factor of time, at best) as the property has in effect granted an "option" and that "option" did not come free - it came at a cost to the owners of Belvedere whom will be selling the property in future, even though the prospect of it being developed in the next few years may appear to be slim. Again, I understand the owners of Belvedere appears to have got the project relatively cheaper back then.

    As we would have observed by now, we are dealing with the possibility/probablility and chances of development of the plot of land blocking Belvedere. If issues of probability in the time horizon are involved, it is then even more evident that the price of Belvedere should be no different from option pricing model - having Belvedere issued an option to the general public for future price depression.

    It seems to be most buyers or even owners are not aware of the plot of land infront of Belvedere could potentially be developed into another condominum and thereby potentially completely blocking its view (and consequently, as a result of Event 2, driving Belvedere's prices to what I believe would be substantially below current levels). If my postulation is correct, Belvedere is probably mispriced now simply due to an apparent ignorance by buyers, which unfairly caused them to price it at a level which they may not consider to pay for, if they are made aware of such potential blockage and undeveloped land parcel in front of Belvedere.

    My questions are:-
    1. Is the information on the flanking land parcels which will potentially and completely block off Belvedere's view already factored in the current price levels (I understand most owners/agents and buyers are not aware of this yet!)?
    2. If no to Q1 above, does this mean Belvedere is currently mis-priced ?

    Grateful for any views on the above will be most appreciated.

  8. #158
    C X Guest

    Default

    Hi DW,

    The L-Shape in the master plan never show the plot ratio..care to elaborate more? The plot ratio of 2.8 is that big plot of land..

    http://www.ura.gov.sg/dmp08/map.jsf?goToRegion=SIN#

    Sorry im not an expert in land..


    Thanks

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C X
    Hi DW,

    The L-Shape in the master plan never show the plot ratio..care to elaborate more? The plot ratio of 2.8 is that big plot of land..

    http://www.ura.gov.sg/dmp08/map.jsf?goToRegion=SIN#

    Sorry im not an expert in land..


    Thanks
    Dear CX,
    Thanks for your post. The link you have provided is a JSP link and apparently, does not direct me to the Meyer Road stretch. I have attached a screenshot of the Meyer Road stretch plot ratio marking as provided in the Master Plan 2008 URA website. See attached.

    I am not a land surveyor expert and ideally, I would like to have URA to mark each and every plot of land's plot ratio - but it appears that URA is not doing that. I refer to the attachment.

    The entire stretch of land bounded by Fort Road, Meyer, ECP and Peach Garden road has 12 plots of land which size appears to be usable for development - the L-shape plot being one of them. The plot of land marked as green, refered as part of the National Parks is not counted in the aforesaid 12 plots. In the Master Plan 2008, URA have assigned a 2.8 plot ratio marking on the 7th plot, counting from the left. It is then clear and without doubt this plot should have a ratio of 2.8.

    We then observed, URA appears not to make any marking on the remaining 11 plots of land - I then draw the inference that it is perhaps a convention of URA that they do not mark each and every plot of land's plot ratio in the same group on the Master Plan 2008 (if they do, it will probably be very cluttered). From a logical and practical point of view, it would also be appropriate and reasonable if the plot ratio for land plots within the same group/area be the same.

    I then extend my observations to a larger area, the entire east coast area. Further, I observe plot ratio markings convention in Northern, Western and the rest of the Singapore. Land plots do not have their each and individual plot ratios marked on the Master Plan 2008. It is observed that areas bounded by similar roads, in neighbouring areas, have only one plot ratio number assigned to the entire group of land plots in that area (bounded by some common roads or facilities/amenities perimeter).

    From my layman observation and inference, it appears logical to me that the plot of land blocking Belvedere would share the same plot ratio as Belvedere (which, by the way is also not marked or indicated on the URA Master Plan 2008), which is reflected as 2.8 as described above.

    Any views ? or am I missing something ??
    Attached Files Attached Files

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default Request for price information

    Dear all,
    Thank you for your inputs and various point of view in respect of the foregoing discussion below.

    I am taking a slight departure from the argument of Value to Price (note that these may not necessarily be the same, save for the case of a perfectly competitive and efficient market, which will be rather unusual for property markets in general).

    In this respect, I would be grateful if anyone can provide the REALIS print outs of the Belvedere transacted prices from as early as launch prices to the most recent transacted prices.

    I believe we can bring forward our analysis a step further with grounded actual transacted data from URA, if these can be made available.

    Thanks in advance!

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Dear all, the plot ratio determines the building storey height restriction of the development and usually the same within that specific area. 2.8 plot ratio gives you a max of 36storey.

  12. #162
    Owen Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear all,
    Thank you for your inputs and various point of view in respect of the foregoing discussion below.

    I am taking a slight departure from the argument of Value to Price (note that these may not necessarily be the same, save for the case of a perfectly competitive and efficient market, which will be rather unusual for property markets in general).

    In this respect, I would be grateful if anyone can provide the REALIS print outs of the Belvedere transacted prices from as early as launch prices to the most recent transacted prices.

    I believe we can bring forward our analysis a step further with grounded actual transacted data from URA, if these can be made available.

    Thanks in advance!
    To make it simpler,if you think price is too high now,don't buy then.Many areas have high plot ratio but all left untouched for years..Feel scared,don't buy.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owen
    To make it simpler,if you think price is too high now,don't buy then.Many areas have high plot ratio but all left untouched for years..Feel scared,don't buy.
    Dear Owen,
    Thank you for your reply and grateful for your insightful analysis.
    Noted with thanks!

  14. #164
    recession Guest

    Default

    Whoo hoo!!!!!!!!!!! Thaman says that SG will go into technical reccession soon!!!!!!!!!!!

  15. #165
    T. Shanmugaratnam Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by recession
    Whoo hoo!!!!!!!!!!! Thaman says that SG will go into technical reccession soon!!!!!!!!!!!
    It is wrong of you to misquote me. Please be a responsible netizen.

    I said "it is possible". I did not say "it will" or "it will soon".

    I did say "it is too early to make a prediction and much depends on developments in the U.S.".

  16. #166
    Truth Guest

    Smile

    Please do not attempt to play with words.. Be truthful.. Be honest.. Be responsible for what you said !

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    113

    Default

    No new caveats lodged for Belvedere for contract date between 19Aug2008 to 12Sept2008

    13-0X__1012__1325__$1,340,900___18Aug08
    22-0X__1259__1200__$1,510,800___15Aug08
    16-0X__1302__1267__$1,650,000___31Jul08
    17-0X__1238__1260__$1,559,880___01Jul08
    05-0X__1378__1200__$1,653,600___09Jun08
    22-0X__1367__1430__$1,954,810___05Jun08

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Estate Pundit
    No new caveats lodged for Belvedere for contract date between 19Aug2008 to 12Sept2008

    13-0X__1012__1325__$1,340,900___18Aug08
    22-0X__1259__1200__$1,510,800___15Aug08
    16-0X__1302__1267__$1,650,000___31Jul08
    17-0X__1238__1260__$1,559,880___01Jul08
    05-0X__1378__1200__$1,653,600___09Jun08
    22-0X__1367__1430__$1,954,810___05Jun08
    Dear Pundit,
    I was hoping that you would have access to REALIS for provision of the initial launch sale prices as well. Whilst the data provided are pretty recent, unfortunately, it would not be able to present a statistical analysis with the level of significance that is robust enough to form an opinion/assessment. The above data can be considered as gaussian in the grand scheme of things and would not substantial as statistically significant. Nonetheless, its very useful to know.

    If you have access to REALIS, grateful if you can provide the original caveats launched from the original launch, up to and including those most recently transacted ones as well. That will be helpful. Thanks!

  19. #169
    KG Guest

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear Pundit,
    I was hoping that you would have access to REALIS for provision of the initial launch sale prices as well. Whilst the data provided are pretty recent, unfortunately, it would not be able to present a statistical analysis with the level of significance that is robust enough to form an opinion/assessment. The above data can be considered as gaussian in the grand scheme of things and would not substantial as statistically significant. Nonetheless, its very useful to know.

    If you have access to REALIS, grateful if you can provide the original caveats launched from the original launch, up to and including those most recently transacted ones as well. That will be helpful. Thanks!
    Hope your neck won't grow longer n longer for the launching price..

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KG
    Hope your neck won't grow longer n longer for the launching price..
    Dear KG,
    Thank you for your reply.

    I refer to my request for launch prices information which I am inclined to think the intention of such request remains clear, to the extent these launch price information are available, it was sought with a view to provide the basis as the starting point for statistical analysis and testing for significance.

    The information requested is certainly available in the data sources of REALIS and I tend to believe such launching price data do exist, subject to persons who have the access to such data.

    Your reply appears to suggest such certain member group, which perhaps includes but not limited to myself, is expecting prices to fall to levels as of launch price level; and subject to the presumption herein is correct, it remains, however, unclear to me which part of my earlier response seems to motivate the same.

    Thank you for your contribution for which they certainly has been very insightful and an excellent depth of analysis, backed by detailed substantiation and useful facts. That has been most helpful.
    Cheers!!

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    113

    Default

    DW, are you a lawyer by profession?


    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear KG,
    Thank you for your reply.

    I refer to my request for launch prices information which I am inclined to think the intention of such request remains clear, to the extent these launch price information are available, it was sought with a view to provide the basis as the starting point for statistical analysis and testing for significance.

    The information requested is certainly available in the data sources of REALIS and I tend to believe such launching price data do exist, subject to persons who have the access to such data.

    Your reply appears to suggest such certain member group, which perhaps includes but not limited to myself, is expecting prices to fall to levels as of launch price level; and subject to the presumption herein is correct, it remains, however, unclear to me which part of my earlier response seems to motivate the same.

    Thank you for your contribution for which they certainly has been very insightful and an excellent depth of analysis, backed by detailed substantiation and useful facts. That has been most helpful.
    Cheers!!

  22. #172
    Cass Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Estate Pundit
    DW, are you a lawyer by profession?
    He's a cheap buyer looking for cheap gains only.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Estate Pundit
    DW, are you a lawyer by profession?
    His English so good & powerful..

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.X
    His English so good & powerful..

    Ha, bro you are back now as C.X

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    Ha, bro you are back now as C.X
    yes..Got problems logging in from the previous nick for the past few weeks & gotta register with C.X but i still got problems logging in last night @ home..how's your sales man?

  26. #176
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DW
    Dear KG,
    Thank you for your reply.

    I refer to my request for launch prices information which I am inclined to think the intention of such request remains clear, to the extent these launch price information are available, it was sought with a view to provide the basis as the starting point for statistical analysis and testing for significance.

    The information requested is certainly available in the data sources of REALIS and I tend to believe such launching price data do exist, subject to persons who have the access to such data.

    Your reply appears to suggest such certain member group, which perhaps includes but not limited to myself, is expecting prices to fall to levels as of launch price level; and subject to the presumption herein is correct, it remains, however, unclear to me which part of my earlier response seems to motivate the same.

    Thank you for your contribution for which they certainly has been very insightful and an excellent depth of analysis, backed by detailed substantiation and useful facts. That has been most helpful.
    Cheers!!
    Hi DW,

    The market price for Belvedere is about $1***+ psf..depends on stack & level of that unit..as for very high unit,market price range from $1350-$1400++psf..Overall it depends on the seller how much profit he/she wanna make from there.. How to see you in Belvedere as a neighbour..lol

  27. #177
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.X
    yes..Got problems logging in from the previous nick for the past few weeks & gotta register with C.X but i still got problems logging in last night @ home..how's your sales man?

    Can't tell you too much here about my sale. If not some sour grapes reply non stop again. haha. SO course must close deal, if not how to put food on the table. There are lots of buyers out there, not just 1.

  28. #178
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    Can't tell you too much here about my sale. If not some sour grapes reply non stop again. haha. SO course must close deal, if not how to put food on the table. There are lots of buyers out there, not just 1.
    True..but market is very slow & quiet,this year can see more locals buying private property in D15.. every forums sure got sour grapes as usual..

  29. #179
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.X
    Hi DW,

    The market price for Belvedere is about $1***+ psf..depends on stack & level of that unit..as for very high unit,market price range from $1350-$1400++psf..Overall it depends on the seller how much profit he/she wanna make from there.. How to see you in Belvedere as a neighbour..lol

    All depends on the stack and level, stack 1,2,3 high floor are the premier. Btw, C.X told me before, some of the units there are still vacant. Is it still the same now?

  30. #180
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe6816
    All depends on the stack and level, stack 1,2,3 high floor are the premier. Btw, C.X told me before, some of the units there are still vacant. Is it still the same now?

    Alot of units still vacant now,maybe some owner is rich & wanna leave it vacant.. just my personal opinion..Stack 1,2,3 can hear loud noise coming from the ECP highway..
    Last edited by C.X; 25-09-08 at 12:44.

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
  •