sharetrader
Page 17 of 24 FirstFirst ... 7131415161718192021 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 234
  1. #161
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    901

    Default

    Yep. Materials/build/admin/consent fees (same) vs land (different in price) across the regions.
    Last edited by Panda-NZ-; 07-06-2021 at 05:21 PM.

  2. #162
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    901

    Default

    The crown, the rightful & elected representative of the people (rather than Iwi) should release a bit more but its about expanding out from the city and there should be land in other places which is affordable.
    Last edited by Panda-NZ-; 04-06-2021 at 04:16 PM.

  3. #163
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peetter View Post
    I assumed we're talking about build cost on top of the land.
    Yes. In 2009 build cost on my cousin's house (avg spec here in Chch by large group builder) was $1300/m2. Today it's easily double that cost /m2. Even the recent lumber spike in America, timber still costs more in NZ than over there by a long shot.

    Like everything else in NZ (ie pension plans, taxation), also the building development is entirely different to in America. We use land in the most inefficient way vs in N. America new sub divisions follow a 'grided' pattern where more sections can fit per hectare (and their lot sizes are much larger too - how is this so?). You have in Auckland where older, typically larger sections, do the sub-divide route; you lose land in this way of development because every lot has to have a SIDE DRIVE WAY access to the rear dwelling. Horribly inefficient vs a back alley street access that already exists in early sub divisions in all the major cities in N. America.

    Then there's the issue of funding the subdivision development that differs. Local councils are compelled to charge high rates because at the national level, there's little or not funding in the release of crown land. Likewise to the private land owners that sell and all this cost "Developmental Contribution Fees" is paid to local councils, which all adds to the high price. How is this model sustainable compared to N. American models of releasing land for development? It seems like the gov'ts in NZ have taken a stance of non-action and let the private sector try and sort out the lowest cost way of developing land... leading to all sorts of repetitive red tape. ie. You don't need a fire engineer to certify a building all over again and again if the same conventional building materials are used. But that's what local city councils want. A repetition of the same requirement, testing, book reference, blah blah just to get the rubber stamp.

    On a macro level, new subdivisions should have an acceptable whole base geotech report. But again, local city councils want a "site specific" geo tech report for every section before a house is built on (all adds unnecessary cost to building if they simply use the same rib raft foundation to support TC2 or TC3).

    These issues are systemic in NZ building - every area you look at requires some engineer / specialist. Just like when I talk to NZ financial advisers about taxation - they make no comment on it and say they can gladly refer you to a 'tax accountant' ; pile on more fees... unnecessary.

    As for costs building up in Auckland vs Chch? Without a doubt there is a consolable higher cost to build in Auckland. It always has been back in 2009 when my uncle was practicing architect work and when I built our houses here in Chch in that same year. The key reason is labour costs are higher which is a major component in building anything. Unlike in California, NZ does not have cheap Mexican labour and our labour + OSH safety requirements + scaffolding for the most basic builds like on a single story roof, adds to the much higher cost of building.

  4. #164
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panda-NZ- View Post
    The crown, the rightful & elected representative of the people (rather than Iwi) should release a bit more but its about expanding out from the city and there should be land in other places which is affordable.
    Lol not without a protest by the respected local Iwi on any crown land. Look what happened up on the North Shore when Jacinda had to pay $40M? to settle a disputed land deal with Fletcher? Not all Iwis think alike. Canada many years ago had similar issues when trying to develop the oil pipeline across to the Pacific Ocean. A unanimous outcome is virtually impossible and what 1 specific group getting paid for that land, sets the same example for the rest.

    Over the road here in Chch is Wigram Skies - (use to be the old Wigram Airforce base). Under agreement, that crown land was awarded to Ngai Tahu and as everyone I speak to; "How can you not lose when the land is given to you?" The gov't loses out on that revenue (both CCC and national level gov't) - so no wonder the DC fees are so high.

  5. #165
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    901

    Default

    If the land is given for free to a first home buyer that will get affordable homes real quick. That's also an option.

    Sadly you're right the brown tape will get in the way to that concept.

  6. #166
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SBQ View Post
    Yes. In 2009 build cost on my cousin's house (avg spec here in Chch by large group builder) was $1300/m2. Today it's easily double that cost /m2. Even the recent lumber spike in America, timber still costs more in NZ than over there by a long shot.

    Like everything else in NZ (ie pension plans, taxation), also the building development is entirely different to in America. We use land in the most inefficient way vs in N. America new sub divisions follow a 'grided' pattern where more sections can fit per hectare (and their lot sizes are much larger too - how is this so?). You have in Auckland where older, typically larger sections, do the sub-divide route; you lose land in this way of development because every lot has to have a SIDE DRIVE WAY access to the rear dwelling. Horribly inefficient vs a back alley street access that already exists in early sub divisions in all the major cities in N. America.

    Then there's the issue of funding the subdivision development that differs. Local councils are compelled to charge high rates because at the national level, there's little or not funding in the release of crown land. Likewise to the private land owners that sell and all this cost "Developmental Contribution Fees" is paid to local councils, which all adds to the high price. How is this model sustainable compared to N. American models of releasing land for development? It seems like the gov'ts in NZ have taken a stance of non-action and let the private sector try and sort out the lowest cost way of developing land... leading to all sorts of repetitive red tape. ie. You don't need a fire engineer to certify a building all over again and again if the same conventional building materials are used. But that's what local city councils want. A repetition of the same requirement, testing, book reference, blah blah just to get the rubber stamp.

    On a macro level, new subdivisions should have an acceptable whole base geotech report. But again, local city councils want a "site specific" geo tech report for every section before a house is built on (all adds unnecessary cost to building if they simply use the same rib raft foundation to support TC2 or TC3).

    These issues are systemic in NZ building - every area you look at requires some engineer / specialist. Just like when I talk to NZ financial advisers about taxation - they make no comment on it and say they can gladly refer you to a 'tax accountant' ; pile on more fees... unnecessary.

    As for costs building up in Auckland vs Chch? Without a doubt there is a consolable higher cost to build in Auckland. It always has been back in 2009 when my uncle was practicing architect work and when I built our houses here in Chch in that same year. The key reason is labour costs are higher which is a major component in building anything. Unlike in California, NZ does not have cheap Mexican labour and our labour + OSH safety requirements + scaffolding for the most basic builds like on a single story roof, adds to the much higher cost of building.

    New bespoke build costs in Auckland have been around 4500- 5000 per sqm (bespoke are always higher than group builds). I've recently heard 2 people being given a rough estimate of $7000 per sqm for renovations!

  7. #167
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    5,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nizzy View Post
    New bespoke build costs in Auckland have been around 4500- 5000 per sqm (bespoke are always higher than group builds).
    Not necessarily.

  8. #168
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,940

    Default

    Well it is highly likely

  9. #169
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    5,328

    Default

    Posters should include the post, or at least the (snipped) relavent part of the post they are replying to. I have just read a post which says 'it is highly likely'. Brilliant! What is highly likely, or am I supposed to scroll through prior posts and guess which one is being replied to? This thread in particular is hopeless to follow because so many posts are not attributed to anything at all.
    This is not a text or SMS between two parties messaging each other. It is a forum open to the hundreds of members of sharetrader. It shouldn't be difficult to follow the standard practice of such forums.
    While I don't wish to pick on anyone, scroll through and look at Panda's posts as an example. To know what he's on about means reading previous posts and often a bit of guesswork. (Here's an example from another thread he has posted on 'It's easier when the relationship is not formalised though'). That is all it says. What is it about? Those posts are best ignored, and I'd say they often are by many readers.
    Last edited by fungus pudding; 07-06-2021 at 11:55 AM.

  10. #170
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nizzy View Post
    New bespoke build costs in Auckland have been around 4500- 5000 per sqm (bespoke are always higher than group builds). I've recently heard 2 people being given a rough estimate of $7000 per sqm for renovations!
    $4500 is not uncommon in Auckland - my issue is... how sustainable can that be? My cousin is in middle of their construction sub-divising a lot. For 2 dwellings (they demolished the old house) his build is minimum $4,500/m2. Since he works for My Food Bag - he's betting on the recent share float to fund his home project. With $2M or $3M build costs, the price of the land might not be too expensive in comparison.

    $7,000m2 is insane but not so in 10 or 15 years time...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •