Tauranga - costliest place to build in NZ?

06 May 2011 03:09p.m.

Wal wrote:

I wonder how much Mikey D has benifited by growth in our region.It is people with this attitude who have got Tauranga in the financial strife we are in. Rates have been under charged to get votes for years.
How this, Small home, Cost $103,000.00 Consent cost $17,000.00. Give young people a chance. Selfish.

27 Apr 2011 08:12p.m.

Evan Mayo wrote:

It's all very well the mayor saying the section prices are cheaper, but they are not! Because, a) demand for land in Tauranga as one of the fastest growing parts of NZ, and b) Developers keep the section prices similar to other parts of NZ, which with the TCC infrastructure costs taken out just increases the developers profit. On a different note, TCC charge the same infrastructure costs to houses in areas Tauranga with long establish and paid for infrastructure. I understand that servicing new greenfield sites for Councils is a big drain on public funds and should be passed on. BUT surely property owners redeveloping existing properties within currently areas serviced by existing infrastructure should be encouraged by Councils, as it doesn't require the same level of new capital outlay for new infrastructure.

27 Apr 2011 07:54p.m.

Brett Carroll wrote:

I (a builder) applied for a minor rennovation (to my houise) in Waitakere around 20k total, cost of consent was over 5k I complained to council and did some digging asking for a breakdown from council to justify the charges I have a copy which shows the lady on the front desk where you hand in your plans is charged out at $126/hr and the so called checkers at $130/hr If I charged my office lady out to the public at $126/hr I would be on Target or fair go. I had a meeting with their consents head he stated that the reason for the charges was that the consents dept was NOT RATES FUNDED AND WAS USER PAYS hence the costs were passed on to the user. I then asked him where their office was based he said IN THE COUNCIL BUILDING I then asked him who paid his rates, rent and insurances on the building he uses to work out of as I had to pay it for my factory also who supllied his stationary,computers power, water internet etc. I POINTED OUT THAT THESE ITEMS I WOULD LIKE TO BET COME UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF COUNCIL EXPENSES and therefore how are they not rates funded. My company pays all of these costs but I dont charge my office lady at $126/hr
Somebody out there needs to make these bodies accountable They stopped the use of certifiers (old Waitakere) so we had no option but go to council then they charge obscene costs I have a copy of a similar breakdown from 2002 showing the office lady at $40/hr not a bad pay increase for council
START A CAMPAIGN ON FACEBOOK TO GET COMPLIANCE COST DOWN

27 Apr 2011 06:17p.m.

Mikey D wrote:

What a loaded story. Developers should pay for their infrastructure - that includes the people in the story. What is the alternative, the ratepayers pay for their decision to build? What a joke! Those people have a warped sense of entitlement if you ask me. Why should the greater public have to pay for them? Their build will put increased strain on infrastructure, so they should pay the cost. I'm sick of all these developers trying to place their costs on everyone but themselves. Especially when they will directly benefit from the increased value of the property. Selfish!

27 Apr 2011 05:07p.m.

Andrew wrote:

Interesting that one of the infrastructure costs Stuart is talking about is a new fibre optic network around Tauranga. What a wasted investment when the Government is doing the same with the UFB rollout. I wonder what other wasted infrastructure investments TCC has to cover from consent fees.

27 Apr 2011 04:14p.m.

Adrian wrote:

Hey, look into some of the Auckland costs. Up Torbay/Browns bay way, if you build on a section developed between 1991 and 2006, you could get a bill up around $43500 without Resource Consent fees, if needed, another $4500. The AC haven't given you the full story.

27 Apr 2011 09:04a.m.

Gerry wrote:

The Tauranga mayor said resource consent costs included associated infrastructure costs whereas in other places these costs were built into the section costs. If this is so the costs of sections in Tauranga should be correspondingly lower, is this so? Also, the consent costs for additions and alterations should be about the same as other centres because the infrastructure costs have already bene paid for, is this so?

26 Apr 2011 10:47p.m.

Jack wrote:

God wasn't the mayor smug,"it's an investment" then a little I got you smile.

26 Apr 2011 09:30p.m.

sarah wrote:

@shelley I laughed out loud when I heard the mayor say that. Mmmmm, bet he doesn't live in a $250,000 property in the back of Gate Pa. Considering most of the cost of infrastructure is usually covered by the developer (and the costs to actually subdivide a section!), the money council is creaming off anyone applying for a building consent is nothing less than double dipping!!!

26 Apr 2011 07:41p.m.

Sheila Boddington wrote:

In Waitakere I paid OVER $20 000.00. The payments to council for building consent and resource consent came to about $25 000.00. We are building on scenic drive. Despite the council costs costs, we have no main sewer lines in scenic drive. We have to put in special septic tanks that recycle the water through drip lines - ours cost over $14 000.00. I can send you a detailed breakdown of the cost of the paper work necessary BEFORE you even start to build.