Lighthouse 3 at Sea Breeze: the Project That Explains the $3,200 Rate

Lighthouse 3 has the widest area range in the Sea Breeze catalogue — 40 to 735 m², a factor of 18.4 — and the second-largest gap of all forty projects between what its cheapest apartment works out to per metre and what its largest one can cost. On both counts it looked like the catalogue's most broken row.

It is the opposite. Its own project site publishes a live unit selector, and that selector explains not just this row but the single largest anomaly across all forty projects.

28 apartments left out of 426

The project's own website carries a building-by-building availability count. Read on 5 November 2026 it showed:

Building	Available
Korpus 1	0
Korpus 2	0
Korpus 3	5
Korpus 4	23
Total	28

Twenty-eight of 426 units, so 93.4% sold. Every project guide on this site says the same thing — that no page on this resort publishes how many apartments remain. That is true of the resort's own catalogue. It is false about this project, where the developer publishes the number continuously, as a selector a buyer can click through. The figure was never missing; it was on a different website.

Our master list of all forty projects carries the catalogue figures. The remaining-inventory count is not among them, for any project.

Why $3,200 per square metre never matched the entry apartment

Across this catalogue the advertised rate per square metre is below what the project's own cheapest apartment works out to in 31 of 33 cases. We have reported that repeatedly without being able to say what the advertised rate does describe. Lighthouse 3 answers it.

Divide the entry price by the advertised rate and you get the area of the apartment the two figures agree on:

$275,000 ÷ $3,200/m² = 85.9 m²

The published minimum area is 40 m². So the two numbers are perfectly consistent with each other — they just describe an 86 m² apartment, not the 40 m² one. The rate was never wrong. The pairing is.

	Figure
Published entry price	$275,000
Advertised rate	$3,200/m²
Area those two agree on	85.9 m²
Published minimum area	40 m²
A 40 m² studio at $3,200 would cost	$128,000
Which is below the published "from" price by	$147,000

And the selector closes the chain. The smallest unit on the site, a 40 m² studio, sits in Korpus 2 — the building the selector shows at zero available. The studios are sold. $275,000 is the price of the cheapest apartment still for sale; 40 m² is the size of the smallest apartment ever built. Two different apartments, in two different fields, printed side by side.

The same test across all forty projects

Run that division on every project publishing a price range, an area range and an advertised rate, and the result is not a one-off.

Implied entry area vs published minimum	Projects
Larger than the published minimum	31 of 33
Equal to the published minimum	2
Smaller	0

The two exceptions are Lighthouse 2 and Whitestone Beach — and those are exactly the two projects we had already identified, on a completely separate test, as the only ones whose advertised rate matches their own entry bound ($2,100 against $2,098, and $2,500 against $2,488). Two independent calculations, the same two rows. That is corroboration rather than coincidence.

For the other thirty-one, the implied entry unit is a median of 1.43× the published minimum, running from 1.03× up to 2.50×. Lighthouse 3, at 2.15×, is the fourth most extreme.

So the catalogue is not publishing a false rate. It is publishing the cheapest unit's price next to the smallest unit's area, and those coincide in only two of thirty-three projects. See our price index by district for the comparison that does not depend on either field.

18.4× in area, and the reason is not a mistake

Lighthouse 3's area span is the widest of the thirty-eight rows that parse — wider than Blue Waters, which sits on 17 hectares against this project's 2.3.

Project	Area span	Site
Lighthouse 3	18.38×	2.3 ha
Caspian Dream Liner	16.76×	6 ha
Blue Waters	13.34×	17 ha
Marina Village	12.61×	5.05 ha
The Grand	12.50×	1.55 ha

The project site explains it. Lighthouse 3 is what that site calls Lighthouse I: four 8-storey buildings holding 399 apartments and 27 penthouses — and 399 plus 27 is 426, the catalogue's own unit count, to the unit. The 735 m² top of the range is a penthouse. The 40 m² bottom is a studio. One price range is being stretched across two products.

And the band direction follows arithmetically. Area span 18.38× against price span 4.60× gives 4.00×, which is exactly $6,875 ÷ $1,720 — the gap between the two per-metre bounds. The identity holds to four decimal places on this row: 3.9977 both sides.

"Penthouse" here is not a size class

The project publishes seven penthouse floor plans. Their total areas are:

104, 186, 237, 255, 279, 365 and 724 m²

A factor of seven between the smallest and the largest. So a penthouse at Lighthouse 3 can be smaller than a standard three-bedroom apartment in the same building, and the word tells a buyer about the floor it sits on rather than the space they get. Anyone comparing a "penthouse" price here against a penthouse elsewhere on the resort is comparing labels, not homes.

The top unit also has three published areas. The catalogue says 735 m², the selector's unit list says 733 m² for unit 607 in Korpus 1, and the penthouse plan table says 724 m². The spread is 11 m² — small in itself, and worth noting because it is the third project in this series where the developer's own pages disagree with each other on an area.

Eight floors is a maximum, not a uniform figure

The catalogue gives Lighthouse 3 eight floors. The selector gives each building separately, and they are not the same:

Building	Floors as listed
Korpus 1	0–5, plus a penthouse level
Korpus 2	0–6
Korpus 3	0–7
Korpus 4	starts at floor 2, runs to 7

So "8 floors" is the tallest case. Four buildings holding 426 units averages 106 per building, or about 13 per floor in each — ordinary, and nothing like the figure a project total divided by a floor count would suggest. This is the same trap we corrected on Lighthouse 2, where the project's own site publishes 16 buildings against the catalogue's single project row.

At 426 units on 2.3 hectares the density is 185 per hectare, which is high for a delivered low-rise scheme on this resort.

What the services page publishes, and the one thing it does not

The project site lists the operating side in unusual detail for this resort: a restaurant, Shore House, seating more than 500 guests with a terrace and two VIP halls; Rose Bar Beach, Chilai Bar, Fish Box and Jini Coffee; an event hall; gyms on the first floor of the buildings; a spa zone with sauna, hammam and massage; a beauty salon; tennis, basketball and mini-football; and one private outdoor pool with a second planned, with no date or size given for the second.

What it does not publish is the figure that recurs every month. No service charge, no maintenance fee, no management company named, and no parking count. On a delivered building where 93.4% of units are sold and the amenity list runs to four food and drink outlets, a gym and a spa, the service charge is the number that determines what owning here costs — and it is the one field absent from the most detailed project site on the resort.

What to ask

1. What is the monthly service charge per square metre, and what does it cover? Not published anywhere, on a delivered building with a restaurant, gym and spa.
2. Which of the 28 remaining units are they, and at what price each? The selector gives availability and area; it gives no prices.
3. Is the $275,000 the cheapest available unit or the cheapest ever sold? The arithmetic says it buys about 86 m², and the 40 m² studios are in a building shown as sold out.
4. How many parking spaces exist, and is one allocated to this unit? 426 units on 2.3 hectares, and no count published.
5. Which floor is this "penthouse" on, and what is its area in the contract? The published penthouse plans run from 104 to 724 m².
6. Which area figure is contractual — 735, 733 or 724? Three sources, all the developer's.

The Grand and Caspian Dream Liner are the two projects whose rate sits furthest outside its own bounds, and the division above applies to them in exactly the same way.

Sources

• Lighthouse's own project site, 2.lighthouse.az, read 4 and 5 November 2026 — the /about page gives Lighthouse I as four 8-storey buildings with 399 apartments and 27 penthouses, "construction completed", on Sea Breeze Resort about 150 m from the sea. The /apartment selector gives per-building availability (Korpus 1: 0, Korpus 2: 0, Korpus 3: 5, Korpus 4: 23), the floor ranges above, a smallest unit of 40 m² in Korpus 2, a largest of 733 m² (unit 607, Korpus 1), and penthouse plan totals of 104, 186, 237, 255, 279, 365 and 724 m². The /services page gives the amenity list and the Shore House capacity. The site publishes no prices, no completion date, no ceiling heights, no parking count and no service charge.
• Sea Breeze official project page, lighthouse-3, collected 25 October 2026 — 426 apartments; 40–735 m²; 8 floors; delivered; fit-out; $275,000–$1,264,000; from $3,200/m²; 2.3 ha; second coastline. Held in .claude/seo/data/seabreeze-official-2026-10-25.csv with the other 39.
• The implied-entry-area test was computed in code on 5 November 2026 over the 33 of 40 projects publishing all three of a price range, an area range and an advertised rate. The division is price_from ÷ per_m2_from, compared against area_min with a tolerance of 0.5 m². A first run reported Lighthouse 2 and Whitestone Beach as falling outside the published range; they sit exactly on the minimum, and the tolerance was added so the result reads correctly. All other rankings and the span identity were computed over the same collection.

Not verified: the service charge; the parking provision; the prices of the 28 remaining units; whether the $275,000 is the cheapest available or the cheapest ever sold; which of 735, 733 and 724 m² is the contractual area of the top unit; how the 27 penthouses are distributed across the four buildings, since the selector shows nine penthouse units in Korpus 1; and whether the availability counts have moved since 5 November 2026. Every per-square-metre figure here is our own division of the developer's published prices by the developer's published areas, labelled as such, and no broker listing was used for any figure.