Housing crisis in Auckland

Forums › Off topic › Housing crisis in Auckland

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625143 7-Sep-2016 16:03

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

Yes, there certainly needs to be changes to fees and consents and rules, simplification and efficiency to save costs, to encourage new builds. Incentivise builds over renovation as renovation doesnt increase the housing stock. Mandate that immigrants must build, than buy existing. However, while its obvious we need more houses, having a Govt build mass produced boxes at 40% the price of current homes, which are better quality, and make a profit, is a great idea, albeit misguided.

In the UK, they make new builds GST free. This is why people are more likely to demo an old house over there and build new. This also means that the country ends up replacing their old building stock. NZ does have a significant amount of old poor housing stock. So I would like to see a 'conversation' (the current buzz word politicians use) into whether we should make new house builds and materials GST free. NZ also doesn't want to end up with bland boxes. There are some terrible developments in Auckland, that I am amazed have been allowed. But some developers will take liberties with the district plan, to see what they can get away with, as they want to spend as little as possible to maximise their returns..

Although that really has nothing to do with Aucklands problem, as property prices will go up no matter what the condition of the house is, as the price is based on the land opportunity price with the unitary plan.

This seems sensible, although there is always the risk that the house builders will simply replace 15% GST with 15% New Boat Profit!

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1625150 7-Sep-2016 16:11

thinus:

I live in Auckland for mostly these reasons:

Work availability (50+ job listings for my skills, Wellington/Christchurch about 10 each, rest of NZ 1 or nothing)
Education / Opportunities, not just for me but also for my child
Access to Services
Auckland workers contribute more tax. Unless you want your government services to be affected it is actually in your interest to keep Auckland functional. I don't think anyone in the country would not be impacted if there is a serious downturn in Auckland.

I do agree that the Government should be doing a lot more to establish additional business centres on the fringes of Auckland. There just doesn't seem to be enough incentive for businesses to shift anywhere else.

I like Auckland. I love to visit.

Auckland officially generates a lot of tax revenue, but also consumes a lot of tax payer funded resources. The tax expenditure side of the ledger in Auckland must be impressive too.

There is infrastructure investment, then there are health, crime and other social problems. Look at a diabetes map of NZ for example. Those problems chew $$. I'd love to see the overall net tax $ flow.

Mike

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625151 7-Sep-2016 16:12

Geektastic:

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

Yes, there certainly needs to be changes to fees and consents and rules, simplification and efficiency to save costs, to encourage new builds. Incentivise builds over renovation as renovation doesnt increase the housing stock. Mandate that immigrants must build, than buy existing. However, while its obvious we need more houses, having a Govt build mass produced boxes at 40% the price of current homes, which are better quality, and make a profit, is a great idea, albeit misguided.

In the UK, they make new builds GST free. This is why people are more likely to demo an old house over there and build new. This also means that the country ends up replacing their old building stock. NZ does have a significant amount of old poor housing stock. So I would like to see a 'conversation' (the current buzz word politicians use) into whether we should make new house builds and materials GST free. NZ also doesn't want to end up with bland boxes. There are some terrible developments in Auckland, that I am amazed have been allowed. But some developers will take liberties with the district plan, to see what they can get away with, as they want to spend as little as possible to maximise their returns..

Although that really has nothing to do with Aucklands problem, as property prices will go up no matter what the condition of the house is, as the price is based on the land opportunity price with the unitary plan.

This seems sensible, although there is always the risk that the house builders will simply replace 15% GST with 15% New Boat Profit!

When they build bland boxes, they arent building them for you and me. Bland boxes have a market, the lower sector of those that can afford their own home.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1625260 7-Sep-2016 20:04

tdgeek:

When they build bland boxes, they arent building them for you and me. Bland boxes have a market, the lower sector of those that can afford their own home.

The problem is that that sort of low spec high intensity housing creates ghettos. You also end up with certain ethnic groups in high concentrations. The whole purpose of immigration is to distribute people evenly throughout society, so we end up with a mix, rather than concentrations of certain ethnic and socio economic backgrounds. It is actually the whole reason why back in mid last century, state houses where build within the existing urban fabric, so there wasn't concentrations of groups of certain people. So you had state houses being built close to luxury houses etc. It also means that in the future these cheaper houses can be improved and their value goes up. It is why housing NZ has had some state houses worth over a million, solely because they are in a good location. With these ghettos, they often end up being bulldozed, which has happened in some areas where their were high concentrations of state houses that attracted crime.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1625261 7-Sep-2016 20:06

Geektastic:

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

Yes, there certainly needs to be changes to fees and consents and rules, simplification and efficiency to save costs, to encourage new builds. Incentivise builds over renovation as renovation doesnt increase the housing stock. Mandate that immigrants must build, than buy existing. However, while its obvious we need more houses, having a Govt build mass produced boxes at 40% the price of current homes, which are better quality, and make a profit, is a great idea, albeit misguided.

In the UK, they make new builds GST free. This is why people are more likely to demo an old house over there and build new. This also means that the country ends up replacing their old building stock. NZ does have a significant amount of old poor housing stock. So I would like to see a 'conversation' (the current buzz word politicians use) into whether we should make new house builds and materials GST free. NZ also doesn't want to end up with bland boxes. There are some terrible developments in Auckland, that I am amazed have been allowed. But some developers will take liberties with the district plan, to see what they can get away with, as they want to spend as little as possible to maximise their returns..

Although that really has nothing to do with Aucklands problem, as property prices will go up no matter what the condition of the house is, as the price is based on the land opportunity price with the unitary plan.

This seems sensible, although there is always the risk that the house builders will simply replace 15% GST with 15% New Boat Profit!

True.Although it would work better as a rebate, so the end customer claims back the GST they either paid for the house from the builder, or the materials and labour if it was a self build, from the IRD, like businesses do.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1625262 7-Sep-2016 20:09

tdgeek:

Geektastic:

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

Yes, there certainly needs to be changes to fees and consents and rules, simplification and efficiency to save costs, to encourage new builds. Incentivise builds over renovation as renovation doesnt increase the housing stock. Mandate that immigrants must build, than buy existing. However, while its obvious we need more houses, having a Govt build mass produced boxes at 40% the price of current homes, which are better quality, and make a profit, is a great idea, albeit misguided.

In the UK, they make new builds GST free. This is why people are more likely to demo an old house over there and build new. This also means that the country ends up replacing their old building stock. NZ does have a significant amount of old poor housing stock. So I would like to see a 'conversation' (the current buzz word politicians use) into whether we should make new house builds and materials GST free. NZ also doesn't want to end up with bland boxes. There are some terrible developments in Auckland, that I am amazed have been allowed. But some developers will take liberties with the district plan, to see what they can get away with, as they want to spend as little as possible to maximise their returns..

Although that really has nothing to do with Aucklands problem, as property prices will go up no matter what the condition of the house is, as the price is based on the land opportunity price with the unitary plan.

This seems sensible, although there is always the risk that the house builders will simply replace 15% GST with 15% New Boat Profit!

When they build bland boxes, they arent building them for you and me. Bland boxes have a market, the lower sector of those that can afford their own home.

GST exemptions are a bad idea. Lots more admin work calculating GST returns. And would allow building materials to be "laundered" through new house jobs. Builder would over quote all of the materials for a new house job by 10% or so. And under quote the labour to keep the cost to the end customer the same. The builder would be able to quickly stockpile materials that they didn't have to pay any GST on. Which they can then use on renovation jobs, by under-quoting the materials and over quoting the labour. Or do cashies without any GST on either the labour or materials. At least people doing cashies currently can't avoid the GST that the material suppliers charge.

Houses would be far cheaper to build, if they only had to comply with the building act and codes. With council rules being kept to the bare minimum. As the building codes cover everything necessary for structural integrity, durability, energy efficiency ect.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625264 7-Sep-2016 20:18

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

When they build bland boxes, they arent building them for you and me. Bland boxes have a market, the lower sector of those that can afford their own home.

The problem is that that sort of low spec high intensity housing creates ghettos. You also end up with certain ethnic groups in high concentrations. The whole purpose of immigration is to distribute people evenly throughout society, so we end up with a mix, rather than concentrations of certain ethnic and socio economic backgrounds. It is actually the whole reason why back in mid last century, state houses where build within the existing urban fabric, so there wasn't concentrations of groups of certain people. So you had state houses being built close to luxury houses etc. It also means that in the future these cheaper houses can be improved and their value goes up. It is why housing NZ has had some state houses worth over a million, solely because they are in a good location. With these ghettos, they often end up being bulldozed, which has happened in some areas where their were high concentrations of state houses that attracted crime.

I dont disagree, but you get that seperation naturally, it always exists. The affluent, middle, and lower class. Bland houses attract lower income people, and the subdivision land prices allow that, i.e. less desirable, or smaller sections. Always been the case. Immigrant wise, I cant speak for all ethnicities, but Asians tend to congregate. In ChCh, Riccarton and Aidanfield have high percentage of Asians. If I immigrated, I'd live where Kiwis gather as well. But if you had a lower price subdivision, of new tidy homes, thats far better than concentrations in rental areas. The buyers are doing well to get a title, so good on them.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625272 7-Sep-2016 20:25

Aredwood:

Houses would be far cheaper to build, if they only had to comply with the building act and codes. With council rules being kept to the bare minimum. As the building codes cover everything necessary for structural integrity, durability, energy efficiency ect.

A previous poster tells us that the Govt can build a better quality home for 40% less, and make a profit. That seems to be the solution to go with

ghettomaster

387 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1625397 8-Sep-2016 08:57

I stumbled across this last night. It's interesting to see Auckland isn't the least affordable city in the country. It's also crazy that outside those two cities, affordability is so much better.

http://www.redcoatsfinance.co.nz/uncategorized/house-prices-to-household-income-ratios/

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1625425 8-Sep-2016 09:16

Is Queenstown a city?

It's certainly in danger of disappearing up its own backside.

'Aspen' syndrome. Most of the jobs are low paid (hospitality, tourism, retail) and the people that work in them can't really afford to live there.

Also worth noting that district has the most finicky planning rules in NZ around housing developments - right down to exterior colours.

Mike

ghettomaster

387 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1625443 8-Sep-2016 09:33

MikeAqua:

right down to exterior colours.

Reminds me of a documentary I once watched about people living in Celebration, Florida - Disney's utopian town. I recall someone in it saying "Now I'm not saying Disney promised us our lives would be better if we lived here, but...". I just about fell out of my chair!

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625451 8-Sep-2016 09:59

MikeAqua:

Is Queenstown a city?

It's certainly in danger of disappearing up its own backside.

'Aspen' syndrome. Most of the jobs are low paid (hospitality, tourism, retail) and the people that work in them can't really afford to live there.

Also worth noting that district has the most finicky planning rules in NZ around housing developments - right down to exterior colours.

Just to mention that rules like that are not uncommon elsewhere in the world! NZ actually has unusually relaxed rules in that it is rarely necessary to get approval for the external appearance or materials choices here.

wsnz

649 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1625896 8-Sep-2016 17:10

tdgeek:

A previous poster tells us that the Govt can build a better quality home for 40% less, and make a profit. That seems to be the solution to go with

Somehow I doubt that would be the case in reality.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625905 8-Sep-2016 17:19

wsnz:

tdgeek:

A previous poster tells us that the Govt can build a better quality home for 40% less, and make a profit. That seems to be the solution to go with

Somehow I doubt that would be the case in reality.

Your right about that

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1626519 9-Sep-2016 12:57

We should seriously be looking at alternative ways of building that are faster than what we do now.

See here for example.

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13