Anjuna Lofts and Shop

The project has a recognisable identity of its own. FazWaz presents a two-storey scheme with 23 premises, while Rumavi also reports 23 and describes loft housing alongside commercial units. The broader Anjuna Bay development is not a single 23-unit building: it also markets distinct names such as Anjuna Apartments, Palms, Aurora and Urbana Penthouse. Their sales figures, timelines and amenities must not be rolled into this scheme. Equally, a catalogue showing many more advertisements than 23 is not proof that additional apartments have been built. Listing records can represent a different measure from the physical inventory, and an official unit-by-unit schedule was not available.

For residential use, the most concrete listing is an 81.60 sqm, one-bedroom loft with one bathroom on the second floor. It is catalogued as an apartment with a leasehold offering. This is enough to identify a residential product, but not to conclude how the reported area is divided between enclosed living space and any outdoor component. Interior specifications, the furniture package and whether guests can be accommodated for short stays are not established by the bedroom count. Buyers intending to live here for several months at a time will also want to know how the space performs for cooking, working and receiving visitors rather than judging it from the project name alone.

The other advertised product is a 72 sqm studio-format shophouse. Its studio label is easy to misunderstand because it is a commercial space, not a small apartment. A restaurant operator might need exhaust extraction and service access; a wellness business might care more about plumbing, air-conditioning capacity and privacy; a retail tenant may prioritise visible frontage and convenient customer parking. None of those operating conditions follows from the published floor area. The commercial unit needs to be evaluated on the rights and services offered for a specific business, not on assumptions drawn from the residential portion.

Prices make that distinction unavoidable. FazWaz showed shops from IDR 1.25 billion in the listings reviewed on 16 October 2026. By contrast, the same project page showed one-bedroom residential lofts from IDR 4.63 billion, with individual apartment advertisements extending above that level. These are asking-price references, not confirmed current offers and not an independent valuation. They may exclude transaction costs, furnishing or fit-out expenses, common-area charges and the cost of setting up a legal rental operation. A buyer comparing only the project’s headline “from” figure with competing apartments would be comparing a shop with a home.

The independent databases do not tell an entirely consistent story about floor area. Rumavi includes a 30 sqm one-bedroom loft offered at USD 95,000, whereas the directly identified FazWaz apartment listings use 81.60 sqm and the shop listings use 72 sqm. There may be a separate product release or a cataloguing error, but the public material does not establish which explanation is correct. It would be misleading to promote the 30 sqm option as confirmed inventory in this exact 23-unit scheme. A numbered floor plan, current price sheet and unit classification are needed to connect these descriptions rather than simply blending them together.

The geographical evidence places Anjuna Bay around Thomas Beach in Pecatu, within the South Kuta district of Badung, with the commercial precinct along Jalan Labuansait. The developer also lists an on-site sales office at Jalan Labuansait 10. That office address is useful for locating the wider development but it cannot serve as the legal address of each unit. The exact cadastral lot and reliable coordinates for Anjuna Lofts and Shop have not been established. Within a mixed-use community, being close to the main road may benefit a shop while introducing street noise that matters to a resident. Those are unit-specific questions, not features of the brand as a whole.

Anjuna Bay describes a larger waterfront community intended to combine homes, restaurants, shops, wellness and leisure. FazWaz lists a communal pool, gym, co-working space, restaurant, security facilities, children’s areas and beach access. This is useful context for the proposed living environment, but a masterplan amenity is not automatically a contractual entitlement for every owner or leaseholder. Access could depend on which phase is operating, the services included in a particular contract, guest policies and ongoing management fees. The attractive lifestyle concept has value only to the extent that it is delivered and usable on clearly stated terms.

The completion position is unresolved. More recent versions of FazWaz label April 2026 as the scheme’s completion date, while an older indexed version described April as a projected date. The developer’s official progress page, updated on 17 July 2026, still reported construction work on the wider Anjuna Village retail area, with a later targeted handover. That developer report is not a unit-level certificate for the 23 premises described by FazWaz; nor does it establish that all parts of the project remained unfinished. What is missing is direct evidence of handover and operational clearance for this particular building. A sales label alone cannot bridge that gap.

The developer name calls for a similar distinction. Anjuna Bay is an identifiable public-facing development brand and the name attached to the project on both property portals. The company signing a purchase or long-term lease, however, may not have that exact name. A brand site and an agent’s listing do not prove who holds the land title, which legal entity controls the project, or who is entitled to receive each payment. The official developer material also discusses Anjuna Village, a much larger retail precinct with changing unit counts. Without a site and title plan, its stock cannot safely be treated as the inventory of Anjuna Lofts and Shop.

Leasehold is the term applied to the residential apartments in the available listings. In practice, this points to contract-based rights over a defined period rather than direct ownership of Indonesian land. Rumavi publishes a 30-plus-20-year structure, but the actual contract, starting date, renewal conditions and lessor’s legal capacity have not been produced. A quoted second period is not necessarily an enforceable extension. Commercial premises may be even more different: the official Anjuna Shop page explicitly discusses renting retail spaces, which should not be interpreted as a transfer of land ownership or proof that every shop in the wider development follows identical terms.

Indonesian property rights provide the framework, not the answer for this project. Hak Milik is land ownership and is not a title that a foreign individual can simply acquire directly. Hak Pakai is a regulated right of use, and Hak Guna Bangunan concerns building and use rights held by eligible parties under Indonesian law. Whether either registered right exists beneath these premises, who holds it, and how a buyer’s lease connects to it remain to be verified. If a structure involves an Indonesian company, that still does not mean the foreign buyer personally owns the land. The signed documents and land record decide the substance of the deal.

Residential occupation, nightly accommodation and retail trading are also separate legal questions. A one-bedroom apartment may suit a resident without automatically being approved for tourist letting. Indonesia’s OSS business classification system distinguishes ordinary property activity from apartment-hotel accommodation services, and the correct permissions depend on the actual operator and use. A shop space may require additional operational approvals depending on whether it hosts a café, salon or retailer. Neither a booking-platform projection nor a shop label supplies that authorisation. Buyers should budget for the consequences of the permitted use rather than assuming their preferred business model is allowed.

Building permission and usability require their own evidence. The Indonesian PBG framework concerns approval for the building, while SLF addresses fitness for occupation or use. No project-specific PBG, SLF, land-use approval or comparable official verification was available in the reviewed public documents. This does not establish that a required permit is absent; it means its existence and scope have not been demonstrated here. For a mixed-use property, the permitted division between residential and commercial functions is particularly consequential. A completed-looking premises and a permission to operate a particular business are different things.

The published sales payment schedule is made up of six portions: a 10% booking amount followed by 35%, 25%, 15%, 10% and 5%. The source is a property listing rather than the executed purchase agreement. Because the advertised April 2026 date is already past, the relevance of those instalments to current stock and resales is uncertain. A sequence of percentages says nothing by itself about escrow, whether funds can be released before milestones are met, cancellation provisions or remedies for late delivery. The controlling document is the agreement with the actual counterparty, not the graphic used to market a launch.

The investment economics of a loft differ from those of a shop even when they sit in the same building. A residential owner needs evidence of lawful occupancy, rental restrictions, operating fees, repairs and realistic demand for that exact layout. A shop buyer needs to know whether a suitable tenant can be secured, how much fit-out will cost, what commercial activity is allowed and how rent-free periods or service charges affect net income. The wider development’s projections of returns are promotional scenarios, not observed income for these particular units. A location with tourist footfall can be promising while an individual shop remains vacant or an apartment is restricted from nightly stays.

Anjuna Lofts and Shop is therefore best considered as a defined mixed-use opportunity with several points still awaiting documentary proof. The publicly listed one-bedroom loft and the shop category make the offer tangible, and the Pecatu setting explains why both uses might attract interest. Yet neither a completion badge nor a developer masterplan settles the land rights, delivery status, operating permissions or cost structure. Those are the details that determine whether the product works for a particular buyer and whether it remains saleable when the time comes to exit.