Read the article below. Often times when I ask my friends how much they paid for their condos, they gave me a lump sum, e.g. S$2m. If they are more sophisticated, they will tell me the per square foot price, e.g. S$1,200 psf. However, when I ask them what is the actual living space, not including aircon ledges, bay windows etc, I draw a blank. Many agents at show flats could not give me the info as well.
I would treat all bay windows and aircon ledges as unlivable spaces. At most, I'll treat bay windows as worth 50% of actual space. Therefore if a property has 1,200 sf of space, including 100 sf of bay windows and 100sf aircon ledge, at most I will say the actual living space is 1,050 sf.
How do we account for balconies and patios? Now this is very important. If the balcony and patio has a view to the sea, or to the swimming pool, i.e. unblocked, then it is probably worth 50% of the actual square footage. Nothing more.
But if the balcony and patio have unblocked view but is not very nice, then perhaps they are worth 25% of actual area. If they are facing a neighbour's washing area, then it's worthless.
A balcony with unblocked view and worth 50% of the enclosed square foot (livable area)
Balcony with a swimming pool view
I would in fact value a balcony with a swimming pool view as no more than 30% of the livable area. This is because unless you are on the ground floor, the swimming pool is not in sight until you come out to the balcony and look down. More often in Singapore's condos, your balcony will overlook your neighbour's living room!
A balcony with no view! Totally worthless!
I recently completed the purchase of an apartment in London overlooking River Thames. The balcony is 200 square feet and worth every penny of it because it has unblocked view towards O2! I tend to avoid balconies with swimming pool views or fully discount it as nil.
Know what you're paying for and be savvy!
Khaw addresses issue of pricey ECs
Jan 7, 2013 - PropertyGuru.com.sg
By Romesh Navaratnarajah:In his latest blog post, National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan has spoken out on the recent controversy over the sale of expensive executive condominium (EC) units, like the 4,349 sq ft presidential suite at CityLife EC in Tampines that was sold for over S$2 million.
Below is Mr Khaw's full statement, published on his blog on 7 January.
In some recent EC launches, super-sized ECs units were offered and snapped up by buyers who did not appear to be from the “sandwiched” households. Understandably, there was public indignation at such deviations (both by some developers and some buyers) from what we had intended ECs to serve.
The developers explained that such super EC units were a minority and that they had priced them low (that was why they were snapped up by buyers who could actually afford private properties). The media reported that one such developer priced its super penthouse at $470psf, while selling the other smaller typical EC units at $770psf.
I was initially baffled by this. Why would the developer short-change itself? Why not sell more normal-sized EC units at a higher $psf, and make more profit? The space for one super penthouse, for example, can be used to build 2 or 3 normal-sized EC units.
As I probed, I discovered that the developer had not short-changed itself.
Let me illustrate: a super EC unit of 3,500 sqft may comprise 2,500 sqft of built-in space and 1,000 sqft of private roof terrace. Now, outdoor roof terraces are actually free space, space that developers do not have to pay development charges. URA allows this to encourage developers to build more outdoor space open to the sky, for the enjoyment of the residents. Developers can use this free space to develop private OR communal roof terraces, and they are NOT counted as GFA (gross floor area).
Communal sky terraces have been effective in promoting greenery and providing useful common amenities for residents in our residential developments. However, the creation and sale of super-sized private roof terraces (at the expense of communal sky terraces), is increasingly prevalent. What is happening at the roof top in the form of private roof terrace is also happening on the ground floor where it is referred to as “private enclosed space (PES)” for the buyer.
Developers’ selling off free spaces to make additional profit for themselves is not improper under current URA rules. But as more developers do so, with larger private roof terraces and PES, communal space in the development that benefits all residents will correspondingly shrink. There is a further downstream problem as some buyers may be disappointed later on, when they find out that these outdoor spaces that they have paid for are not allowed to be covered up or enclosed.
I have directed URA to review this policy and have it fixed.
Source: https://mndsingapore.wordpress.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment