New property valuations for Auckland were released yesterday and here are a few maps of from the council’s GIS viewer. All are just for residential properties.

Land Value per m²

Completely unsurprisingly it can be seen that urban and coastal land is the most valuable with values doing off further away from there.

It’s worth noting that the areas with the highest land values are also the same areas most suited to intensification she to their amenity values however the are also the same ones with residents that objected the strongest to the Unitary Plan.

Auckland Residential Land Values per sqm 2014

Auckland Residential Land Values per sqm 2014 Legend 2

Percentage change in Land value

Looks like the busway has had considerable impact on the values on the North Shore.

Auckland changes in Land Value 2014

Auckland changes in Land Value 2014 Legend

Percentage change in Capital value

Auckland changes in Capital Value 2014

Auckland changes in Capital Value 2014 Legend

Share this

58 comments

      1. See all that sickly yellow and green colour for land and CV %age changes around the Northern part of the harbour bridge – where Skypath will land on the North Shore?

        By next time around (in 2017), anything within a moderate cycle distance of Northcote point and Skypath will be a deep and brilliant red as far as percentage value (land and or CV) change goes.

          1. Yes well of course that’s because Northcote Point is not in practice proximate to the city except for seagulls. Skypath will change that, and the uptick in value will flow to those who support it and to those extraordinary morons who are working hard to prevent it. So it goes.

  1. Along much of the rail corridors there is currently undervalued land ready for upzoning and redevelopment, all that’s needed to make those areas much more viable are higher frequency and faster train services that are also quieter and not belching out diesel fumes… oh wait!

    Just the job for a public development agency.

      1. Ae, Eastern and Southern too. Both get higher frequencies and more direct destination in and through town.
        The Southern gets a faster trip to the city post CRL, especially K Rd and midtown, but also a direct route to the growing-in-importance Grafton Station.
        But yes nothing on the Western which gets a massive upgrade. Glen Eden will be at the distance Kingsland is now [by time]!

    1. I’d probably take issue with Matt a bit that the areas with the highest land values are the ones most suited to intensification. As Patrick observes the zones along the rail corridors are surely where it’s at. Commutability = Liveability

      1. they are suited to intensification as they are places where people value and want to live due to the proximity to water or good urban amenity. In other words places where if apartments/terraced houses were built they would sell easily compared to someone building apartments out on the urban fringe. They also tend to have good commutes being closer to the centre of the region which gives more choice in how they get around e.g. more buses, cycling, walking etc.

      2. Matt’s point is that where there’s higher value there’s more financial possibility for development. He’s just being realistic about the financial side, while also noting that the often concomitant local desire for nothing to change prevents that.

        My point was that if we are smart with transport investment we can substantially upgrade currently undervalued areas by changing a key driver of place value; connectivity. However it is likely that another step will also likely be required; which is where a Council Development Agency partnering with other players would be very very useful.

        Putting energy into struggling places strikes me as being more productive for the whole city that fighting NIMBYs. But we have to join all the dots; land-use and transportation together.

        1. More that the market will deliver intensification in the redder areas if it’s allowed to work while the more yellow-blue areas are places that likely require more council intervention through investment in infrastructure or direct development for that to happen. New Lynn is a good example of this.

    2. Interesting point – people want to live near railway stations, and can see the added value it offers them while they live there (and their properties when they sell).
      Same can’t be said of living near a motorway on/off ramp though.

      The problem with rail stations, is that because they are so damn useful people want to have one near them even if its not really a good idea for the network so they lobby to have them added.

      Motorway on/off ramps? Not so much.

      1. When a new railway station is planned, cycle infrastructure should also be planned -cycle parks at station and good safe bike lanes into the neighbouring district then stations don’t have to be so close together. One goal we are all concerned about as Patrick indicated is connectivity, so this sort or planning should be aimed at optimising connectivity.

        A developmental agency is definitely an idea worth pursuing for providing affordable and well connected new PT housing areas onto the market.

        1. Brendon, yes absolutely.

          And Greg while you are entirely right about the general value of station proximity compared to on-ramp proximity, in practice in Auckland we have enormous problems retaining or accessing this value because we have de-valued it in other ways. Station proximity is only of value while there are services on the lines serving those stations, and because we allowed the services on our existing network to wither away and all but die, the stations lost their economic force.

          We have severed stations especially with motorways and other unpleasant roads, the desire for rail reserve land for our motorway planners is limitless, and this always leads to stranded stations. We are still doing it; Panmure is a recent example. But even the new station at New Lynn is tremendously inaccessible from the dense dormitory areas near it, because of dominating and thoughtlessly designed arterials.

          Existing Stations are often in difficult, disconnected, and disregarded locations, but herein lies the great opportunity. The new high levels of service combined with the very significant reduction in the noise and pollution disbenefit that the new trains bring are a very real chance to hugely uplift these places. The new trains are a very real economic force- but only if we act on the potential.

          Much much more work needs to go into immediate 500m-1km around stations so their potential value isn’t wasted. A public agency is probably the best way to drive this.

          1. Patrick you are right – to a point – with regards stranded stations.

            You do need decent roads near stations if you intend to have integrated modes like Panmure has. You don’t need acres of Park and Ride as well though, but you need good bus and walk up facilities.

            And you don’t need a full on motorway for that – and while EP highway is a de-facto motorway of sorts, it is also a main bus arterial, so you can’t have tons of buses delivering people to Panmure for example with out those kinds of busy (but also severing) roads. What should be happening though is prioritisation of buses using bus lanes and pedestrian access. Which is slowly happening.

            For most of the Auckland isthmus (where the old ACC and adjacent councils like Mt Wellington BC, Ellerslie BC, Newmarket BC were), an examination of historic aerial photos will show that, on the Southern and Eastern rail lines (and Western too I’m sure), are currently no more severed now from each other/with adjacent subjects by roads and motorways than they were when only the trains ran down these corridors.
            The line from Newmarket to Penrose has exactly the same number and type of pedestrian crossings as it had in the 1950’s before motorways were built.
            The one exception is that motorway builders did remove one “under rail” road only crossing near the Ellerslie motorway on/off-ramps, which linked Cawley St to Sultan St – the remains of it can be seen just after the Ellerslie on-ramp going north where there is a rail bridge on the rail – which is the only remnant of where the road ran).

            Same goes for the Eastern Line to Westfield Station. And I think the Western rail line to at least Avondale is pretty much in the same boat too.

            Agreed even then the rot had set in in the early 50’s, with no more rail crossings being provisioned thus locking in the severance already caused by decades of railways and the roads being built adjacently. Which ended up making the severance worse. And once the rail system ran down no one needed to access the stations so even that was lost.

            The yet to be reopened Tamaki Station is a case in point with regards stranding – but it never had good connections to the area except from the south and east (via a road, now called “Jellicoe Road”, but which used to be called “Tamaki Station Road”. No linkage to the west (over the rail line) – but then there wasn’t anything there to link to (except a quarry) until the .late 50’s.

            However, Panmure is in a far better location now than it was before further south of Panmure, near Ireland Road, shame it has a huge motorway adjacent in Te Horata Road, but again the pedestrian linkages at EP and across to WIlliam Harvey (which is how you accessed the old Panmure station) have been preserved and improved. Just no more crossings added.

            One thing is certains, the balkanisation of the Auckland Isthmus into various tin-pot boroughs and councils didn’t help over all planning either – and NZ Railways, and then NZTA (and its forebears) were the only organisations who could drive any major transport changes through the isthmus, and they did. The likes of ACC and Mt Wellington Borough Council simply rolled over like puppy dogs in the face of these guys., especially when the Public Works Act was being waved in the background.

          2. Is it possible to extend that train station customer catchment zone from 2 to 3 km? With good bike infrastructure. Is there any evidence about this from Europe? A 2 km bike ride is faster than a 1km walk. If the catchment has been doubled in radius then the rule of circles mean the catchment area has increased four fold.

  2. It’s amazing how a city with such a significant problem of overvalued housing has just increased the value further, and significantly.

    The inevitable coming collapse in the market is going to be very spectacular.

  3. Where is the money coming from for this bubble? This is insane and reminds me of the unreality prior to the 1987 stock market collapse.

  4. I am relatively new to Auckland and NZ but I do now own a house. If my house CV has increased 30% what will the increase be on my rates (30%?) and how does this relate to the 2.5% vs 3.5% rise (is that on top of the 30% or is the 30% capped)?

    1. the 3.5% increase in rates is the amount of extra revenue the council will need. The total amount is split up based on property values so if your valuation has gone up by less than the average (34%) you should see your rates go up by a smaller amount.

      1. So on average Auckland home owners have seen their main asset increase in value by 34% but they are worried about a 1% extra rise in rates?

        1. Yes thats right.

          My rates went up about 10% each of the last 3 years (yep not 3.5% – a full 10%) so thats a 36% hike in rates but comes with a similar increase in rating valuation.

          And yes people worry about an increase of say $300K in value over three years, and yet most peoples rates will go up about $$250 maximum in any one year. so say $1000 over 3 years maximum increase.
          Hell I’d pay another $1000 more over the next 3 years if it would get the CRL built sooner – because I know whatever I pay now, the city and residents will reap in spades within 5 years.
          It would be worth me paying $1000 over 3 years to avoid being stuck so much time in traffic (or on Pt thats slow ‘cos its stuck in traffic).

          Problem is a lot of older folks and those on fixed incomes (pensions) can’t afford those kinds of rate increases, even though they may have a house and land worth a million dollars or more a $250 a year rate increase is too much for them to manage.

          Rating reforms to allow asset rich but cash poor folks to pay their rates without having to sell down their house prematurely is needed throughout NZ, its not a Auckland specific issue.

          There has been a suggestion to allow councils to tag properties so that the rates (plus interest) are paid when the house is sold either because the own dies, moves to a smaller house, or goes into full time care etc.

          1. Yes poor Baby Boomers. They had to survive childhood with free health and education, then free tertiary education, then full employment and cheap house prices in their early years.

            Now they systematically reduce taxes so that none of those services are available for their children and grandchildren.

            And then they have to pay slightly higher rates when they get older in their magnificent homes in highly desirable areas.

            Poor, poor baby boomers. I am wiping away my tears with my massive student loan bill from IRD and the massive mortgage bill from the bank.

    2. The 3.5% is per year. Compounded, and with the value also pushing up rates, many people will experience close to a 100% rates increase over the next few years. Of course the council doesn’t mention that (somewhat similar to the government never referring to its $4b western ring road). Break down into small lies to downplay the truth.

      Auckland’s property scene is stuffed, largely driven by property investors, especially overseas ones. The sooner the collapse comes, the better.

      1. Your point is valid, in that a fixed percentage increase can be deceptive, but your example of some people having a 100% rate rise in a few years is deceptive.

        At 3.5% increase per year, you’ll find that it takes 20 years for the rates to double.

  5. I agree that railway corridors where the land generally has lower value is ripe for redevelopment and upzoning. However, it is more than quieter and faster trains that will make train travel a viable option. A return trip for a family 6 from Grafton to New Lynn on the train was $48! Never again! Much cheaper to drive sadly. The CRL will need to provide affordable train travel or it will fail Aucklanders.

    1. Yes, Libby, that is absurd. Work is being done on this as part of fare integration and we are assured that that includes family concessions, weekend/holiday concessions [maybe kids free], and daily, weekly, monthly, caps. The last one may mean after say the 10th trip in a week the rest are free, with a HOP card. Effectively making personal travel free for regular users. There will also be fare options designed for visitors to the city etc….

      This process will probably take all of next year to sort through for introduction beginning 2016; we hear.

      1. “the 10th trip in a week the rest are free, with a HOP card” – Exactly what happens in Christchurch.

        More than two trips in a day, rest of the day is free. More than 10 trips in a week, rest of the week is free. Easy to understand.

        AT also need to get ferry monthly passes on HOP so that it is possible to buy an integrated ferry/bus/train monthly. The current situation is crazy.

      2. A great thing they could do is children travel free with an adult on weekends. No fare revenue risk really, just extra trips they weren’t carrying before. They do it in Melbourne, called Sunday Family Funday or something.

        1. Yes and in Sydney as well. I also think the journey planner should show the HOP card price against the paper ticket price as opposed to the current more expensive paper price being the only one shown.

      3. I am certainly opposed to having all trips beyond a certain number in a week (e.g. 10) free. A similar system is in Brisbane, where every trip after the 9th in a given week is free. It allows people to rort the system, and travel short trips on their lunch breaks in order to save on their long journeys home.

        It would be much preferable to use the funds to give a fare drop across the board.

        1. Yes the Brisbane system is a bit of a balls up that is wide open to abuse, I’ve heard of office workers who spend their Monday lunchtime making nine cheap one-stop trips up and down the street so that their main commute is totally free for the other four days of the week.

          But that’s not the only way to deliver the same outcome.

          1. Maybe nine one-stop trips should actually only count as one trip with 8 transfers, then you wouldn’t have this.

    2. Libby, Perth has it got it right.

      They have something called the Family Rider pass, which is a ticket that gives a group of up to seven people unlimited travel on the day of purchase, provided no more than two of them normally pay full fare, for $11.80. It’s available every evening, every weekend starting Friday afternoon, and school holidays, and it works on ferries, buses and trains.

      No reason AT couldn’t pilot the exact same thing this summer!

  6. Why is it taking so long for AT to sort out integrated fares? And now Patrick is hinting it will be the end of NEXT year. I have just got back from a five day trip to Melbourne where my MYKI card was put to good use. They have a daily cap of $7.16 in zone one which covers a huge amount of metropolitan Melbourne, almost as far out as the airport. A fixed two hour ticket, as many rides as you like, in zone 1 for $3.58. Zone 1 and 2 cover the whole of Melbourne and the fares are $12.12 and $6.06 as described above. And on the weekend the daily cap is $6.00 travel as far as you want across all the network. So my MYKI card got a lot of use on trains, trams and buses and the cost was very small compared to Auckland.

    Then I saw a sign about fares changing for next year with a web link. I thought the present fares were too good to last so looked at the proposal. From 1 January travel within the central city zone will be FREE on all trams!! Although zones 1 and 2 will remain travel on the entire network, zone 1 or zones 1 and 2 will be at the present zone 1 fares. Travel in zone two will be at the same zone 2 level as at present. Here is the link to “more affordable fares”
    http://ptv.vic.gov.au/1-january-2015-fare-changes/

    What a disappointment AT are in comparison. Can’t get the fares sorted and won’t bite the bullet and make the trips by AT HOP only to save us all time as they are in Melbourne with MYKI.

    1. I hear your frustration but actually compared to both Myki and Opal HOP has so far been actually fairly fast and relatively drama free. We’ll get there, then we’ll forget how crap it used to be….. Just like post CRL Ak, compared to the current version; it’ll be night and day.

    2. Not sure you should point to Melbourne as an example of what to do with integrated ticketing. MYKI came in years late and billions over budget (yes billions). By comparison AT have rolled out HOP quite fast and on budget which is good.

      The reason for it taking so long as it isn’t just changing prices, which can be done easily, but that they have to change the entire fare structure. That means reprogramming the system with all of the new rules they want to create. We should hopefully hear more about integrated fares before the end of the year

      1. Matt, while I agree about the costs of MYKI development it is the integrated fares I am highlighting. Yesterday I took tram from hawthorn to city, train to Broadmeadows and bus from there to airport. Cost $6.06 . Same distance as Auckland airport to my home in Sunnynook. Work out how much that costs for 380 bus, train and NEX even with the wonderful transfer discount.

  7. I would like to extend a heartfelt and sincere thank you to all of the anti-sprawl campaigners. Thanks in part to your efforts I have now made more money out of owning properties than from actually working. Cheers guys!

  8. With merely 350k (is not much nowadays) but suggestion for which area and where I should put the money at? First home buyer to live, working in CBD.

Leave a Reply