-
something to take some of the heat out of the Housing Market??
Assume it will be double glazed and insulated as well??
-
@taniwharugby said in Housing hornets' nest:
something to take some of the heat out of the Housing Market??
Assume it will be double glazed and insulated as well??
It would have to be double glazed and insulated to meet code. The price doesn't obviously include land and thats the real issue. Companies like classic builders buy up big hunks of land like an old golf course and carve it up into subdivisions , the money is in the land not the houses they build on them which I doubt they make much on.
A lot of subdivisions would let you build one of those places because it wouldn't meet the standards of their covenants. I'd be interested to know if the kit includes a floor, A1 homes used to advertise much the same sort of thing and it didn't include a floor which is a pretty significant cost especially on a sloping or engineered site. -
@jegga said in Housing hornets' nest:
@taniwharugby said in Housing hornets' nest:
something to take some of the heat out of the Housing Market??
Assume it will be double glazed and insulated as well??
It would have to be double glazed and insulated to meet code. The price doesn't obviously include land and thats the real issue. Companies like classic builders buy up big hunks of land like an old golf course and carve it up into subdivisions , the money is in the land not the houses they build on them which I doubt they make much on.
A lot of subdivisions would let you build one of those places because it wouldn't meet the standards of their covenants. I'd be interested to know if the kit includes a floor, A1 homes used to advertise much the same sort of thing and it didn't include a floor which is a pretty significant cost especially on a sloping or engineered site.According to the article, which I read. It is double glazed and the insulation is higher then the NI standard. It includes everything except the land, earthworks and the connections to services.
-
@mooshld said in Housing hornets' nest:
@jegga said in Housing hornets' nest:
@taniwharugby said in Housing hornets' nest:
something to take some of the heat out of the Housing Market??
Assume it will be double glazed and insulated as well??
It would have to be double glazed and insulated to meet code. The price doesn't obviously include land and thats the real issue. Companies like classic builders buy up big hunks of land like an old golf course and carve it up into subdivisions , the money is in the land not the houses they build on them which I doubt they make much on.
A lot of subdivisions would let you build one of those places because it wouldn't meet the standards of their covenants. I'd be interested to know if the kit includes a floor, A1 homes used to advertise much the same sort of thing and it didn't include a floor which is a pretty significant cost especially on a sloping or engineered site.According to the article, which I read. It is double glazed and the insulation is higher then the NI standard. It includes everything except the land, earthworks and the connections to services.
I had a look at the Bunnings link and the brochure and missed any mention of the floor being included.
The stuff article was a bit more sceptical about Bunnings claims -
I only scanned the article...I know building regs have changed with regard to insulation and glazing...on the surface, it seems a very good thing, but like you say, getting that on a peice of land AND being able to build on it will be the thing...most sub-divisions have convenants around sizing of the home (ours was 150sqm) so it will be upto Cindy and her team to try and change that...could probably help Cindy and her 10,000 homes thing though
-
@taniwharugby did your subdivision have any covenants about using a concrete floor ? They are quite common too , a few ban seperate garages as well.
The price doesn’t include labour for two builders for the quoted three months which would bump the $97000 up a bit .
-
@jegga nah nothing about concrete floor (which is probably a bit tough given the topography of where alot of people like to live in NZ) or how many levels, we have an attached double garage, which has some gym equipment, couches, bunk beds and a PS4 in it...so we put a carport up too
I think our covenants were the standard ones someone puts when they split up thier property...no living in a caravan while building, no less than 150sqm, no roosters (or other noisy animals) and a few others that werent an issue.
I've just been checking the local rules as I think my neighbour is considering sub-dividing his 4800sqm section...
-
@taniwharugby said in Housing hornets' nest:
@jegga nah nothing about concrete floor (which is probably a bit tough given the topography of where alot of people like to live in NZ) or how many levels, we have an attached double garage, which has some gym equipment, couches, bunk beds and a PS4 in it...so we put a carport up too
The concrete floor rule seems more common in the subdivisions with smaller sections . I think it’s meant to help keep out prefab homes .
The “ this housing company/building technique will revolutionise the industry “ story is one you see pop up once or twice a year. There’s not much margin in those smaller homes which is probably one of the reasons pre fab home companies seem to struggle and go under quite often.
-
@jegga there is a section up the road that was sub-divided, has had 2 building co's try and do packages on them, but ultimately the land price is too high...1 got built on, 1 still vacant.
BUt there is a large 'exclusive' type sub-division about a mile or so away where sections are all
about 2000sqm, house must be >200sqm not including garage and start at $200k per section.And another larger one (about 400 homes, not the KIwibuild one up here, they are elsewhere) but for more 'mainstream' homes in town, with sections from 450sqm to 950sqm, sections start at $160k with strict covenants too, but think they are 130sqm for size
-
The actual cost is double what the original article quoted.
-
The government is taking aim at property investors. Interest on loans will no longer be a tax deductible, whether this will have the desired effect remains to be seen. I would think this will make it less attractive to those who depend on those deductions to balance the books
-
@canefan said in NZ Politics:
The government is taking aim at property investors. Interest on loans will no longer be a tax deductible, whether this will have the desired effect remains to be seen. I would think this will make it less attractive to those who depend on those deductions to balance the books
Personally, I think they're attacking a symptom rather than a cause. In an ideal world, there are enough houses being built that rents are capped and house seller insane price demands get laughed at while people trot off to buy a nice, well priced new house. But that's not where we live.
The issue is if you make being a residential landlord a bad proposition (new tenancy laws, healthy homes standard and now the massive one: no deduction for interest), the market is very likely to respond by getting out of tenancy. So now what. No more houses are being built. The bottleneck is infrastructure. Councils don't seem to be interested in getting houses built (see: 3 kings development) ... so now what happens to the 20,000 people on the priority housing wait list?
It's annoying, because this is a real opportunity missed. If anything wants cross party support (aside from electoral law), it's agreeing broad parameters for investing in residential infrastructure in this country. It won't happen, but the jerking from one direction to another as governments have fundamentally different priorities is damn annoying.
Anyway, this random anorak wearing mouth breather on the internet would consider these things off the top of my head:
- remove the rural/urban boundary (remember, this was a policy platform of Labour's)
- streamline RMA applications for larger scale residential housing
- enable infrastructure to be funded by developers to get areas opened up
- exempt first home buyers from LVR
- consider stamp duty (maybe on houses more than $1M)
and some minor ones:
- allow (as of right) a grid-disconnected house to go up damn near anywhere. If you're self contained, go for it -- sewage system, water tanks, solar+battery, low energy + well insulated = a presumption to build
- hell, open up building consent processing to any council in the country. Resource consents still need to be checked, but why is there a local monopoly?
what's embarassing is the u-turn from pre-election Robertson (no change to the bright line test) to this suddenly being the flavour of the month. 'I was too definitive'. Yeah, right.
-
@nzzp relaxing the RMA to get more houses built is a big one. Unfortunately successive central and local governments have failed to address the infrastructure issue and others around development. So we are years behind now. More developments like Hobsonville Point and Stonefields, which provides higher density housing are needed to address the problem
-
@canefan yep. Council weren't initially keen on the medium density at Stonefields either - it's only after success they got on the bandwagon
I'm cross because this is a second wasted opportunity. Kiwibuild should have been the key to scaling up house production in this country. If you can't tell, I'm a supply side demon when it comes to housing - that's what is going to suppress and keep supressed prices. Chc has more reasonable house prices, and it's because they build enough houses.
But, you can't build houses without infrastructure, and this is where I think Kiwibuild failed. With government support there are (international) businesses that could contract to build 5,000 houses a years if you had sites to put them on. And that's the issue - brownfield development requires massive infrastructure upgrades, and greenfields are very very hard to fine. It appears the government has largely given up on supply side work, which is an absolute pity.
We're at the pointy end of decades of underinvestment (Wellington, looking at you), where Councils prioritise what's nice over what's boring but necessary. There's not going to be an easy way out, but I think this will play out very poorly. My expectation is that rents are going to rise, supply of rentals is going to shrink, and the marginal folk are going to suffer the most in terms of trying to get a place to live. It's another wasted opportunity by another government that isn't serious about house prices because they know it'll cost them the election.
-
@nzzp I'm hopeful (aka deluded) that this is the first set of a series of changes to effect some change around housing outcomes... positive ones I mean!! But I 100% agree that until some meaningful action happens around infrastructure we just aren't going to be building on the scale we need to be.
I'm annoyed we haven't made more progress around different building approaches to speed construction and try and take the edge of our shortage of skilled buildings and associated trades. I think that is one area where the Govt taking the lead as the primary customer can make scaling up that sort of mahi viable.
RMA changes have to happen at lightspeed - and should have changed years ago. Given sweet F all appears to be changing does central Govt need to get more bullish around the infrastructure stuff... ugh that gives me shivers.
If a Govt was like 90%+ sure they had a plan to effect certain change, but knew it was a 100% chance of ending them for the next few terms, would they pull the trigger? At the moment it feels like we talk about the main spokes of the housing wheel but no one knows for sure what'll happen when we kick them in.... hmm bad analogy but if the wheel is already fucked?
-
@toddy said in NZ Politics:
Where did the idea that a deduction for interest is a loophole come from? Journalists or the government?
And if it's a loophole why don't they close it for all, rather than just residential property investors?
I dunno, I think it is misinformation by the government. Other articles have raised this point. Speaking as a home owner and sometime property investor, I can see why they would want to stop interest as a deductible. Investors are basically getting the same benefits as a business owner, however they don't usually contribute directly to the economy (they don't make anything to sell, they don't provide a service). But at least have the guts to call it what it is
-
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@canefan the language on that totally caught me out. We haven't been involved in rentals or anything and the whole 'loophole' framing around claiming interest back just adds fuel to the fire for sure.
Yeah. Don't get me wrong, I think the current rules allow investors to grow large portfolios using the advantage that tax rules provide, and I don't think they should. Fair play to those wanting to get ahead, but owning a dozen or more houses for example, using tax deductibility to make the numbers work, is a bunch of properties taken away from potential home owners, is wrong. At least when you invest in the share market, or a fund, you are investing in businesses that will grow the economy. But making them sound like they have been doing something dodgy is disingenious
-
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@canefan the language on that totally caught me out. We haven't been involved in rentals or anything and the whole 'loophole' framing around claiming interest back just adds fuel to the fire for sure.
annoyed me. It's not a loophole, it's deliberately treating one class of investment differently.
Borrowing to buy shares - tax deductable. I can see a lot of property holding companies being developed, as the money involved with tax deductions will make it worthwhile. Could be buying and selling shares in companies that own property, rather than the property itself - could get around the bright line test altogether.
I'm not an accountant, but these sorts of hard hitting blanket rules often wind up incentivising smart people to avoid tax.
Also, I think this will last 2 (or 5) years, and the next National government will have repealing this as a core plank of their campaign.
Housing hornets' nest