-
@reprobate It's not as straightforward as you say
Yes NZ has plenty of land but the majority want to live in Auckland (not Taumaranui).
The majority want a fucking enormous (by world standards or when compared to what those nasty evil boomers started out in) stand-alone house.
So apart from a few brownfield developments that means building on the city fringes - cue massive infrastructure costs transport, schools, utilities. Longer and longer commutes. Congestion etc
the Unitary Plan tried to encourage density particularly along main arterials but the combination of RMA and nimbyism means these struggle to get off the ground.
One of the main issues is our cities are modelled on LA when we would be better off with Copenhagen.
Personally I would rather Auckland not swallow up all the arable land round Pukekohe etc - we can easily accomodate another 200K within the existing city limits and ultimately would be better off doing so, but it'll never happen when the minimum expectation is 4 bdrm 3 bathroom 2 .5 living areas and garaging for 3 SUV's....
-
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
Personally I would rather Auckland not swallow up all the arable land round Pukekohe etc - we can easily accomodate another 200K within the existing city limits and ultimately would be better off doing so, but it'll never happen when the minimum expectation is 4 bdrm 3 bathroom 2 .5 living areas and garaging for 3 SUV's....
Not only that, but people are just starting to find out the true costs of brown field densification. Infrastructure upgrades are eye wateringly expensive. They get even worse in places like Onehunga, where you have to dig out basalt (sorry, break out basalt) to lay new pipes.
What annoyed me the most when we were looking to buy was the drive to a boring large single dwelling on a tiny site because that's what the plans drove. If you had offered us a 3 bed 130m2 walk up apartment in a 3-4 storey block, we'd have taken your arm off. They just don't exist, mainly because the planning rules are so tough.
-
@taniwharugby said in NZ Politics:
haha maintaining it, while behind flaxes...something they would never come and check on either!
I didn't say that I was going to do it! I just didn't want to in the first place.
Dispersal fields can be pretty good to water orchards and things if you have gravity on your side (which I don't think you have). All of the waste water in our place just put moisture in the soil to water the trees. Never lost one in a drought and didn't water them.
We actually should have subsidies to get some of these things happening. Water is a problem in Auckland and yet are we collecting water in tanks? Electricty is an economic one for some households I would think, but we aren't helping with solar? Infrastructure for waste water also a problem and some of it can be fixed on a micro scale, particularly in more rural areas or larger urban sections.
We have some of the answers already, but politics, restrictions and a lack of innovative thinking gets in the way.
-
@Snowy yeah our section slopes back to front and left to right (just a gentle 5-10 deg slope) but the effluent field at the highest point of the section (which is right at the back of our section)
Obviously the nutrient rich water not only makes all the stuff you plant there grow fast, so do the weeds...
-
@taniwharugby said in NZ Politics:
so do the weeds...
Well there's a new business for you (maybe) in couple of weeks.
-
@nzzp said in NZ Politics:
@Snowy said in NZ Politics:
If they want to improve the housing supply they can start there, and I will do a few eco houses (at the right price) within commuting distance of Auckland that don't need infrastructure other than roads and power (ideally). Wastewater is easy and so is tank water.
Power should be able to go off-grid with some smart design and nothing too special. Could well be cheaper than paying development contributions to Vector!
Solar + Powerwall + smart appliances + wood/gas heating + solar hot water = off grid
Edit: our resident @nta should know the answer
To go off-grid in suburbia is costly but also kind of pointless. You need about 4 days' energy at a minimum (look at your bill, divide kWh / days and figure it out) then you need contingency in the form of a generator anyways.
Most of the Lithium solutions aren't designed to be off-grid, so you're looking at lead acid (AGM) or flow battery (Vanadium or Zinc-Bromide) to suit the need, and the round-trip losses are a bit shit if you don't have much roof space to generate.
HOWEVER, if you're building a lifestyle block and you're looking at upwards of $100K for the network (Vector or whomever) to run power infrastructure to your place, it is a fairly easy decision to go spend $60K getting self-sufficient.
I think the money is better invested in more efficient design TBH. Most households are pissing away 20-25kWh/day on average across a year, and if you had double glazing for cold, awnings for heat, and insulation for both - in a good passive design - you could get away with a lot less in battery costs.
Problem with most new build houses is they're glorified single-brick tents with windows from the 1970s.
-
@dogmeat I agree with most of that, but unfortunately the problem is no longer limited to Auckland. Basically everywhere is poked - Christchurch is slightly better - as far as the cities go. But again, RMA and the nimbys can be overcome via regulation / incentivisation if the governments have the will.
And as far as demand goes, if the option is a super expensive house and an hour long commute from somewhere you don't really want to live, then maybe the high density stuff starts to look a bit more attractive - I think it very much would from a rental perspective at least. -
@canefan said in NZ Politics:
@reprobate said in NZ Politics:
@chimoaus said in NZ Politics:
Whilst NZ housing affordability is very poor many other countries including Australia are in a very similar boat. One saving grace in Australia is that you can move to a regional hot as fuck town and pick up a bargain.
We are the worst. Sure Aussie is bad too, but not as bad and their house prices are dropping right now, while ours are continuing to go up and at an increasing rate.
That's bad. I don't know how they fix that, capital gains tax in Oz didn't have the desired effect of softening house prices did it?
In 1985? The problem in Australia is removing indexation from CGT which created an effective 50% discount. Add to that massive migration, the ability for non-residents to purchase property (and my lawyer has suggested I say that in no way implies it permitted people from certain "communist" countries to move ill-gotten gains into assets in a non-extradition country) and it's small wonder people want to become property barons.
-
@antipodean said in NZ Politics:
@canefan said in NZ Politics:
@reprobate said in NZ Politics:
@chimoaus said in NZ Politics:
Whilst NZ housing affordability is very poor many other countries including Australia are in a very similar boat. One saving grace in Australia is that you can move to a regional hot as fuck town and pick up a bargain.
We are the worst. Sure Aussie is bad too, but not as bad and their house prices are dropping right now, while ours are continuing to go up and at an increasing rate.
That's bad. I don't know how they fix that, capital gains tax in Oz didn't have the desired effect of softening house prices did it?
In 1985? The problem in Australia is removing indexation from CGT which created an effective 50% discount. Add to that massive migration, the ability for non-residents to purchase property (and my lawyer has suggested I say that in no way implies it permitted people from certain "communist" countries to move ill-gotten gains into assets in a non-extradition country) and it's small wonder people want to become property barons.
The problem here in Oz, is also that the entire country is neck deep in property. Between our home loans, our investment properties, our SMSF's, and our super being tied up in those bank stocks, there is simply no way that a large, sector-wide destruction in value will be allowed. Certain pockets sure will ebb and flow, some more than others as you move further away from traditionally desirable areas. But if you're waiting for a 30% collapse to get in, then you're just going to miss the next upswing
One of the big factors across all societies I think is the double income effect. People just have more cash to throw at property now, and the extra psychological security blanket of a 2nd income adds to it. Treating property like an investment asset and allowing the CGT discount is also a mess, as said above.
I don't really see a solution other than adding extra stock in a controlled way that sees prices stagnate rather than decline.
-
@voodoo said in NZ Politics:
@antipodean said in NZ Politics:
@canefan said in NZ Politics:
@reprobate said in NZ Politics:
@chimoaus said in NZ Politics:
Whilst NZ housing affordability is very poor many other countries including Australia are in a very similar boat. One saving grace in Australia is that you can move to a regional hot as fuck town and pick up a bargain.
We are the worst. Sure Aussie is bad too, but not as bad and their house prices are dropping right now, while ours are continuing to go up and at an increasing rate.
That's bad. I don't know how they fix that, capital gains tax in Oz didn't have the desired effect of softening house prices did it?
In 1985? The problem in Australia is removing indexation from CGT which created an effective 50% discount. Add to that massive migration, the ability for non-residents to purchase property (and my lawyer has suggested I say that in no way implies it permitted people from certain "communist" countries to move ill-gotten gains into assets in a non-extradition country) and it's small wonder people want to become property barons.
The problem here in Oz, is also that the entire country is neck deep in property. Between our home loans, our investment properties, our SMSF's, and our super being tied up in those bank stocks, there is simply no way that a large, sector-wide destruction in value will be allowed. Certain pockets sure will ebb and flow, some more than others as you move further away from traditionally desirable areas. But if you're waiting for a 30% collapse to get in, then you're just going to miss the next upswing
Agreed - no government is going to destroy the retirement assets people believe they've built up. It would be electoral suicide until the majority of them are renting because they can't buy.
One of the big factors across all societies I think is the double income effect. People just have more cash to throw at property now, and the extra psychological security blanket of a 2nd income adds to it. Treating property like an investment asset and allowing the CGT discount is also a mess, as said above.
I don't really see a solution other than adding extra stock in a controlled way that sees prices stagnate rather than decline.
Stopping this unfettered immigration would be a great start. Then we could focus on fixing the underlying productivity issues in our economy rather than counting on plane loads of people to add demand.
-
Housing affordability really is one of the major issues along with inequality (partly caused by property) in our rich countries. I am extremely fortunate that I am mortgage free after getting on the ladder early and not borrowing too much and making loads of extra payments. I also live in a very modest small home that only has 1 shower and toilet.
I would rather live in a small house mortgage free then get into stacks of debt. I think the banks have a lot to answer for as well. They were allowing people to take out enormous mortgages with next to no deposit and locking them into huge debt for 30 years.
I am hopeful with Covid showing how many people can work from home that people will move to more regional areas and more affordable land will become available.
I know many people hate the idea of it, but should people be considering community land/tiny home style setups where you can get a house at a very affordable price and live there relatively cheaply whilst you save for something bigger. We tend to think of people who live like this as hippies, but I wonder if a community of like-minded individuals living this way wouldn't be that bad.
-
@chimoaus said in NZ Politics:
I would rather live in a small house mortgage free then get into stacks of debt. I think the banks have a lot to answer for as well. They were allowing people to take out enormous mortgages with next to no deposit and locking them into huge debt for 30 years.
We just bought a place in recognition that we'll unfortunately be working in this city for at least the next decade. The bank said I could have almost five times what I wanted as a loan. How the hell would people pay that off?
The sad reality is Australians are going to have to get used to medium/ high density living if they want to live within 50km of a major population centre. Anything less is a pipe dream for the average young couple.
-
@antipodean sounds like where Auckland is heading
-
@antipodean By working full time for 30+ years. Banks and builders have done well marketing the dream home as it is very difficult to buy an old house that needs some TLC when you can have a brand-new mansion now. We can easily justify the expense in our heads and many people go straight to the top of the ladder. Then Covid happens, lose your job, mortgage stress etc etc.
One interesting thing I read was that visits to rest homes directly correlate to how much money the old person has left. Also, the more siblings there are the more often they visit as they are competing for what is left. Pretty fucken sad but a reality.
I guess eventually many people will inherit wealth from baby boomers. I was thinking recently that it seems a little odd that inheritance doesn't go to the grandchildren as they are the ones who need it the most. I will likely be in my 60's before I get anything from my folks. By then I don't really need it. Would anyone consider giving their inheritance to their kids or grandkids?
-
Not that long ago, half a mil could just about buy you an entire street in Tok. Now you are looking at 370k + per house. But the Waikato region as a whole is getting insane. Matamata and Cambridge, you won't get much change out of 750k for a 3 or 4brm home in a nice area. Even a 2brm shit hole prob 450k +.
If you didn't get into the market at least 5 years ago, you are basically fucked now.
-
-
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
Housing can be fixed if the political will is there, but it isn't because the votes aren't there either.
Mate, I agree with a fair bit of what you say on here and the bits I don't agree with you argue well. I also admire that you're out there trying to make positive change - but this is a massive cop-out. It basically reads like an admission that being in power is more important than staying true to your principles.
I'd encourage you to have a look at the Labour election manifesto, particular the sections on equality and opportunity, and then consider that not addressing housing is directly contradictory to them. Alternatively maybe replace these sections with 'do whatever is expedient to stay in power'?I genuinely don't see how you guys think you can address things like child poverty while ignoring the skyrocketing of every households biggest weekly expense.
NZ Politics