In the herald in recent times one of the strongest media voices calling for a better urban environment, for density done well and many of the other topics we talk about has been Jack Tame. He’s currently filling in for Mike Hosking on ZB (and Seven Sharp I believe) and his piece yesterday on housing was fantastic and well worth a listen.
Now can we please have Jack replace Mike permanently?
Processing...
Great commentary from Jack! So much better than listening to Mike’s self indulgent rants!
Auckland could easily accommodate 50,000+ more people within 5km of the Sky Tower (using that as a central point). As Jack points out young professionals should live in apartments (ie in your 20’s) then in your 30’s you have a family move to the suburbs. This process make for a much more liveable city.
Yes please! Hosking is a bit of a dipstick. And that is as polite as I can make it.
I’m personally am getting pretty bitter about the situation regarding housing. As a young person who is finishing his teritary education in half a year, I will be starting a career in the tourism industry with a heavy student loan on my head, therefore the only kind of flat I will be looking for is one where I can live on my own, live in the central city or next to an airport and live in a warm environment, size does not matter to me at all, in fact, the smaller the better as it means it will be cheaper and less difficult to heat. I absolutely refuse to get a suburban house because I do not want to mow the lawns, do the gardening or do any maintenance…
Some older people look at me like I’m mad because I want to live in a “shoebox” So I have bite back any form of retort.
*Sigh*
Its a lifestyle the older generation haven’t grown up with, they don’t understand that many younger people don’t want to live in a big house, but would rather have the city as their playground as to speak. And then they have this crazy idea that we are going to force all of them to live in a shoebox apartment. It’s a hard message to get across that we can have both apartment buildings and larger homes.
Bit of overseas living has broadened Jack’s horizons as it did for me. Love urban living.
I’m in my 50s and live in the suburbs in a house with a garden but totally agree with Jack T. Auckland must ditch ASAP its outdated mentality towards housing and join the real world – apartment living, density done well, all underpinned by walkable/cycleable neighbourhoods and an integrated PT network.
We’re a small family with a young child. There’s absolutely no reason that families need to move out of apartments and to the suburbs when they have children, if city apartment living better supports family life. We gave lived in a city apartment for 8 years or so, and are big advocates of this way of life. We just bought in the SugarTree complex and can’t wait to raise our family there. City living gives us direct access to so many wonderful things. Great public transportation, wonderful public areas, access to the central library, art gallery, Albert Park and The Domain, the museum, the waterfront spaces. The SugarTree complex will be perfect for family living with green spaces and courtyards, cafes and shops, close to a school, close to cycle ways. Bring it on, we can’t wait!
Agree! Loved living downtown when our kids were 9-10. So much activity and entertainment. Library and gallery. Hot chocolate in Vulcan Lane after school. Walking down to the bookshops at night. Swims at the Teps. Ferries a few minutes away for trips across the harbour. All vastly more accessible than being isolated in a car-dependent suburb. And improving all the time now along the waterfront.
Nice one! Sounds like a great life you’ve got lined up there…
Yeah not sure whats with that attitude, I just bought a townhouse and everyone is telling me “oh… well can always move into a bigger place with more grounds when you have children”… I am just wtf? There is a park straight across the road and kids living next door… I was actually considering buying a city apartment at some point, but tried telling them that… and they were like, “that is no place to raise your children”… -_-…?
Not only that, but you get more family time with the kids, rather than having to maintain a large property.
I had a similar experience – living in a 2 bedroom townhouse, the washing machine delivery man walked in the door and said “gee these places are small”.
Yeah it’s small, that’s why we chose to live here. Not only could I not afford anything bigger, it’s more than enough for a young family. Compact living, cheap to heat and easy to maintain.
I’ve never lived in an apartment and I now want to have a house big enough for family visiting from out of town. As I age though, I really want to have a single-level, warm place with a lift to shared spaces where people will be, including I hope community gardens and community amenities. This should be out of the actual city centre but handy using PT to all of those great places Claire has mentioned. Like so many of my generation I do NOT want to be in a retirement village!
There are place’s in Newmarket, Grey Lynn, Mt Eden which already have that type of living, and more are on the way!
Typical patronising stuff from Jack, a young bloke with a big mouth and nothing but hot air coming out of it.
Auckland has no such obsession with the “Quarter Acre Dream”. If we did there would be a large disparity between stand alone house prices and apartments. Having spent a fair chuck of the last two weeks looking at apartment prices I can tell you that no such disparity exists.
Jack says it’s insane that young professionals and people without commitments live in villa’s and stand alone houses. Who the hell does he think he is, Jesus Christ? These people can live wherever the hell they want to. Has Jack stopped to think for a moment that not everyone is like him and people within these categories may not want to live in the central city for a wide variety of reasons?
Apartment life requires less maintenance says Jack. Yeah, if you can afford the Body Corp fees which are normally $2,500 – $3,000 per annum! I guess that doesn’t make much of a difference for rich white people but for normal people the time commitment can be far preferable to the monetary commitment. Jack though fails to recognise this and thinks he is saving money which he is going to use to underline how the compact city model fails by doing the only thing you can do in a compact city, eat and drink.
He then goes on to suggest that the Auckland house crises has been caused by high deposit apartment lending and the inability of apartment buyers to use their kiwisaver. I had to hear it 3 times to confirm such a ludicrous claim but yes that it what he says! Nothing about artificially increasing land prices by putting a ring around the city or overseas buyers, nope it’s all the banks and kiwisaver scheme’s fault!
Like a typical socialist Jack thinks he has all the answers but makes himself look stupid as his claims get more ludicrous the longer the video continues.
As house prices in Auckland skyrocket to an average of $800,000 a two bedroom home 15 minutes from downtown Indianapolis retails for $125,000USD. Pretty obvious which city has it right.
I guess you could say someone is…To use a relatively new internet term…
“TRIGGERED”
If he were proposing that we ban standalone houses and run a bulldozer over all the villas, I would agree with you. But he’s not. What he’s proposing is that we make it _easier_ to develop types of housing that Auckland currently lacks. In other words, loosen up the controls and give people a choice.
Just checked it out on Zillow, currently, there are more than 2 650 houses in Indianapolis that have been foreclosed on and now sold by banks, and just 177 new homes for sale. Plenty of rundown houses in rundown neighborhoods located in the middle of nowhere selling for no more than the price of the land. However, houses located in what walkable area can be found are sold for more than 300 000$, which is 450 000$ in NZ dollars. So basically, houses in Indianapolis are cheap because the location sucks.
What determines the value of single-family houses is the value of the land. Indianapolis is located inland, on a plain that stretches for hundreds of kilometers, you couldn’t imagine a better location to sprawl out. Auckland is surrounded by bays and hills. Just because of that, Auckland’s land supply is greatly limited, which logically would increase its value significantly, making single-family homes much more expensive no matter what you did. Indianapolis also has plenty of motorways that allow to expand the land to develop because they allow faster travel. Though this does reduce land prices and make big houses on big lots less expensive, it also increases significantly infrastructure and transport costs. Indiana’s roads and bridges are deteriorating fast and they are still spending a hell of a lot of money on constructing new ones to keep up with transport demand. Local streets are no better, they’re basically left to go to seed. This form of development also means that households need to have one car per active adult, each car costing an average of 7 000$ USD per year, money that is gone, not invested.
So what people in Indianapolis save on their house, they spend on their cars and in worse life quality. Cars aren’t optional, they are a necessity in Indianapolis.
In reality, where people have the choice, young single professionals largely opt for apartments. Maybe the decision of building houses or apartments shouldn’t belong to planners, and zoning should make no difference between the two. Residential is residential, let the chips fall where they will.
Hey Matthew, $3,000 on body corporate is nothing. That’s the annual cost of just $35,000 of mortgage, which could buy you just about enough land for a single carport on a suburban house in Auckland. Yeah right, sharing the costs of land and common facilities is a rich white conspiracy I tells ya! Come visit my apartment block for brandy and cigars sometime, we can talk shipping futures and where to holiday in the Bahamas… Said no one ever.
Not to mention that the body corporate fees cover your insurance, external cleaning, lighting, and short and long term maintenance. These are things you have to pay for anyway with a house, and often more so.
One last question, have you ever been to Indianapolis?
Haha, have you heard of the saying ‘you pay for what you get’. I wouldn’t move there if you paid me my annual salary to be there. It not a lifestyle I want and therefore wouldn’t pay for. I guess you could say its the market at work.
Also Bodycorp fees include insurance and other costs that you already have for your freestanding house, in fact I pay around $5000.00 in bodycorp fees, however this is still cheaper than what I would pay in maintenance, insurance and those pesky other costs that rise up. Mine does also include water and gas in that price of course.
A former colleague was working in Indianapolis (he called it Indiancrapolis…) a number of years back and bought a house there in an average kind of neighborhood. Walking home from the pub one night he had a gun pulled on him. Pretty obvious which city has it right!
Do you even know what the word socialist mean?
“These people can live wherever the hell they want to.” – And some want to choose to live in apartments. What is your problem with that?
In your neolib paradise where the market rules, if people don’t want apartments, developers won’t build them because people won’t buy them.
Just sounds like opinion from Jack to me. I note the way some in older generations like to put down younger ones in this country. Comments such as Jack has a ‘big mouth’, he ‘makes himself look stupid’. Try making an argument without putting others down, it looks like bullying. Or maybe Whaleoil might be a better forum.
I have thought about apartment living, but the thought of sitting around all day with nothing to do but drink and watch tv sends shudders up my spine. At least at present I have a man-cave and garden to potter around in.
At the moment I have an apartment _and_ a man-cave. All the fun of power tools; none of the inconvenience of mowing the lawn.
Hmm I was under the impression you’re not allowed to do anything like that in apartment (even if you bought it). You can’t paint the walls, or put a nail in the wall to hang a painting. You can definitely not do anything involving power tools.
No that is not right unless you were renting. You are entitled to do whatever you want within your own property as long as you don’t unduly disturb your neighbour.
I am helping a client now with extensive renovations to his apartment. He just has to respect the rules put in place and not leave common areas a mess.
Then it depends on the building. I am 100% sure in our building, even people who own their apartment are not allowed to do any modifications.
Which is not nice if you don’t like grey walls.
Is it leasehold? That seems really strange. I would get your lawyer to look into that.
I like playing guitar at a reasonably loud volume, and have never had problems doing that in my apartment. I’ve been very clear with the neighbours that they should tell me if they can hear it, but some good sound insulation in the building construction goes a long way.
“I am 100% sure in our building, even people who own their apartment are not allowed to do any modifications.”
I don’t know your building, but I know you are 100% wrong. You could completely remodel the place provided you stuck to the management body rules on noise and hours of work.
Painting walls and putting in nails prohibited? Where on earth did you get that idea from?
Nup, in an apartment you own everything inside including the walls and ceiling. Can paint and remodel all you like. Exception is heritage listed buildings which have heritage controls that extend to the interior.
Yeah you are right heritage controls might have an effect. But even then it shouldn’t be a blanket ban on any renovations or modifications.
The thought of having to potter around in the garden sends shivers up my spine.
What a strange idea of apartment living you have. I can only assume you have never actually done it.
If you think apartment dweller just sit around and watch TV all day you have another thing coming. When I’m not working, I play video games, study Japanese, read history, run around the inner suburbs. If I want external stimulus Kingsland and Eden Park are only a five minute walk away and town is a fifteen minute bus ride. I hate gardening and have no desire to spend my weekends doing DIY. Different strokes for different folks.
Yep that’s what I do, sitting around all day watching tv and drinkng. Then there”s the shops, the waterfront, the cafes, ferries, people, urban environment… it’s a horrible life.
I’ve got a terraced apartment and the beach. I used to have a 84 sqm man cave that I had built. I don’t miss it. Nor the lawns.
Yet allowing more apartment constrction will in no way infringe upon your ability to do that.
It’s like people don’t understand that you can have apartments AND detached houses AT THE SAME TIME! It’s not one or the other. It’s like they don’t understand that some people want to live in apartments so we should make it easier to build them, but that doesn’t stop people from building detached houses.
Having lived for 8 years in Auckland City Centre apartments, now having moved to a suburban detached house, and possibly thinking of getting a city pad again once we retire, a better apartment attitude for Auckland is very welcome. Forget balconies and minimum apartment sizes. Ensure instead that apartments get enough sunlight, and that sizes VARY in each building. Some tiny ones are okay (even good), if they are mixed up with 2 and 3 bedrooms as well, so families and people on better incomes can also have the apartment choice.
Next year when I retire, my sweetie and I will move to a CBD apartment. We are not gardeners and my DIY skills were beaten out of me by living in a suburban bungalow for 35 years. I am not going to be one of those older people rattling around in a big old house moaning about the rates and the cost of getting the lawns mowed. More older people would move to smaller places if they were available in their neighbourhoods. However, as we have built monomorphic suburbs for decades, it is hard to get that choice.
Good on you Lindsey. I have a feeling you are the first trickle of a deluge of Baby Boomers heading the same way.
Will there be enough of that type of housing for you all with the current NIMBY attitudes?
In a previous life I acted for home owners of leaky apartments. I would never buy an apartment in NZ. Even the “fixed” ones are leaking again. Don’t relax regulations!
Yes. Lucky there are no leaky suburban homes.
And if a private home leaks, usually 30 of your neighbours cannot have a vote and lump a huge capital cost on you that you either pay or sees you have to sell up at a severely reduced rate. I’m a fan of the idea of apartments being available as first home options for people but pretending that there are literally no downsides to them and the conditions they come with is being willfully naive.
There was no “pretending that there are literally no downsides “. Goosoid was simply pointing out the implication was that apartments leak and houses don’t is false. Even the most expensive houses can leak:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10461255
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10572781
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11289240
I’ve also been told that small apartments are more likely to be leaky, whereas most reclads I’ve seen around are for apartments that are higher end:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/68170358/auckland-leaky-apartment-tower-owners-awarded-25-million.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/business/residential-property/7202491/Council-may-have-to-pick-up-20m-bill
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10884966
Yes but the leaky building issue is a tad more complicated in an apartment/body corp situation and potentially very costly, especially if apartments are going to be touted as a solution for low-equity, low-cashflow first home buyers. Just saying “houses leak too” isn’t really addressing the issue, is it?
I don’t know that apartments should be touted as a solution for low equity, low cash flow first home buyers, more that they are part of the solution of making the most of the limited land we have available to house a growing population.
New construction and tightening of the regulations mean that there is a big generation of leaky buildings, the biggest lot is actually plaster cladded freestanding and townhouse homes built in the era 1994 to 2004. Apartments built at this time also suffered from poor design and construction which resulted in leaky buildings. However this is one era, todays construction largely eliminates or at least isolates and minimises any leaky problems with the exterior claddings, and therefore are no longer problems. Construction prior to this didn’t suffer from these problems due to the high quality of construction. Yes there are disadvantages to apartment living, body corporates are a big one for some, or an advantage for others. However there are disadvantages of freestanding homes as well. It comes down to preference and lifestyle choice. Why should we deny people an opportunity to live in an apartment just because you had a bad experience from a building built in the 90’s leaky era?
It’s funny how people try to make it a left/right issue. I know just as many political right thinkers living in some sort of apartment than political left thinkers. In fact I know of apartments which are likely to be bigger than a lot of critics free standing houses.
Yip I’d keep away from any monocladded houses too, especially built after 2000s. It’s an expensive exercise for any owner (stand alone or apartment) to firstly fix it and secondly if you’re lucky enough claim against those responsible. But in my experience, it’s a lot harder in a body corp than as an individual owner of a standalone house. It took 8-10 years for many houses to exhibit signs of building defects, and I’m not sure the current tightening of regulations is enough to stop the current new stock not exhibiting defects in a decade’s time.
Yes Tasi, however the construction techniques used today are very much different to what they were in the 90’s. And I can assure you that Architects in particular, and to a lesser extent engineers (even though its not their field) are paranoid about watertightness. Working in the field I can confidently say that they will be extremely less likely with todays builds. One thing you will notice is more tilt slab construction of apartment buildings rather than plaster cladding and a greater emphasis on flashings and drainage. With today’s concrete construction even if a leak does occur it’s much easier to fix. Apartment buildings also now require a detailed maintenance plan, which is normally written up by an independent consultant. The maintenance plan must be followed as a consent condition, with regular maintenance any problems with construction can be identified and corrected before it causes further structural problems. With freestanding and townhouses the plaster cladding that was the baulk of the problem is now becoming almost redundant and when it is used, a cavity system is required as per council requirements. Overhangs and eaves are also now almost standard again with the removal of internal guttering on many of these places.
On top of this, council inspectors have been clamping down hard on watertightness issues. No doubt there will always be the odd property that sneaks through, however this will be less likely than even before the leaky building era. Lots of people, businesses and councils lost a lot of money on these. The biggest problem is insuring that the properties that were constructed as leaky during this era are repaired properly and not just patched up like many have been.
I’m a fan of the idea of suburban homes being available as options for families but pretending that there are literally no downsides to them and the conditions they come with is being willfully naive.
Same thing?
In Auckland we restrict new houses and new apartments. Mike Hosking could well say the exact same thing tomorrow, just substituting one good for another.
I suspect Matthew believes that anyone or anything “left” of a neoliberal is a socialist.
Extraordinary that anyone still thinks the world is so simple that everyone is on some sort of line from left to right. Not likely to grasp much with this world view.
I’m a communist living in a suburban home with a mancave and a lawnmower. how is he going to live with that?
And now if only it would be legal to develop those small apartments. When I arrived here I always thought flatting was a work-around for that problem of not having any apartments in (most parts of) this city.
There’s also the problem of having a lot of people who have been burnt by moving into a poorly built apartment. The kind where you could wake up your neighbour by just picking something to wear in your wardrobe. Or by sneezing. Or (perhaps the worst) by going to the toilet. Those people of course will go around telling everybody and their dog to never, ever, move to an apartment.
My apartment is much better sound proofed than the house I lived at in Devonport. Unfortunately my bedroom was right next to my neighbour’s lounge and deck. The worst thing was they had a security light that must have been an army surplus aircraft spotter and it would turn on when their cat jumped on the fence.
In both cases it’s hit and miss. Probably on average apartments are better. But then, if your house is poorly soundproofed, that’s a bit annoying, but if your apartment is poorly sound-proofed, then you are completely stuffed. I know of one development where one half is done properly, but not the other half.
What I’ve also learned: it’s really handy to have ventilation via vents in the ceiling. Opening the windows is a problem, as during the day traffic noise is so loud you’ll have trouble talking to each other, or watching TV (well OK you could use headphones but that’s really weird if you’re not alone). During the night, you better hope traffic is not too intense. Did you know Auckland is the only urban area in NZ where trucks are allowed to use engine braking?
And all of this doesn’t matter in a poorly sound-proofed house in the suburbs, because traffic is not nearly as loud, and there is usually a big air gap between you and your neighbours. Assuming you choose your flatmates wisely.
Well anyway, sorry about all the whining, I think fundamentally Jack is right, but I also think he’s jumping the gun a little bit.
I have lived in an apartment for a number of years, I am close to the cinema, the theatre, weekend markets, beautiful park facilities, the library, the museum, the train station, buses and the casino. I work in the suburbs and cannot understand why people live so far from everywhere. Where some complain of the lack of garden in an apartment, I say i have four council maintained parks within throwing distance, complete with gardens and no back problems. And I will never complain about rates because quite frankly I get my money’s worth, with so many publically funded facilities at my doorstep. You who live in houses are the weird ones. Kudos Jack
excellent summary. Good points