Buying a section and relocatable home

[Dell]

On Trademe, I see a lot of really nice old villas that can be moved to your own property. I like the old kauri villas as they're well built. The price generally includes transporting the house to your section (50 km or thereabouts), and putting the house onto new piles.

This is an example: http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-me-pr...-342230770.htm [/URL] This place has a new roof and wiring.

Or a newer home, such as this:
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-me-pr...-331571022.htm

Assuming one buys a section where the utilities are already at the edge of the section, has anyone done research on the additional costs of septic or sewer, water tanks or connection to city water, etc. ? How does it compare to buying a section and building a new house? Thanks in advance!

[auskiwi]

This thread is a fabulously detailed view of the process...

http://www.enz.org/forum/showthread.php?t=31538

[Super_BQ]

You wouldn't do it unless you really like the house. Cost savings would be buying the house for nothing but getting to compliance is fairly expensive - may not be of any savings at all. Things to consider when relocating to an urban city:

Meeting:
- recession planes
- electrical code
- insulation code
- structural

actually almost every aspect has to get looked at which means lots of paperwork for the engineers and labour for the re-fit.

The situation is entirely different if moving to rural areas where city building codes are far and few.

[ralf-nz]

The situation is entirely different if moving to rural areas where city building codes are far and few.

Just to clarify: There is only ONE Building Code here in NZ!
This is valid in the hinterland as it is in the cities.
Cities and districts amend this by local / regional regulation, e.g. in District Plans.
One has to evaluate and ascertain that the chosen building is suitable for the new site as well. Often just a change of this location makes a building unsuitable when not improved. The reason lies in different wind, snow and / or seismic loads on the same building on different sites.

[Super_BQ]

Just to clarify: There is only ONE Building Code here in NZ!

You could argue that the nationwide NZ building would apply to the most remote places of NZ. But to say that if it is done in practice is not true because in practicality, these codes only applies if it can be enforced. It's easy to say it should be done, but then who would be interested in regulating and monitoring the building process for a batch built 50 kms away from any road?

If relocation of houses was easy, then we would see more people doing it.

[ralf-nz]

Is this hypothetical or do you know personally?

Also, the one NZBC is applicable all over the country; how this is enforced is a different question!

Building up on your argumentation one could easily say that the speed limit of 100 kph is not applicable in the most remote rural regions of NZ because of lack of interest in enforcing it there.

Sorry, I just don't agree!

[Super_BQ]

one could easily say that the speed limit of 100 kph is not applicable in the most remote rural regions of NZ because of lack of interest in enforcing it there.

well not really. What is actually done and what is suppose to be done is the issue. It's fair to say most drivers stay within the speed limits. But in the case of building batches and flats out of nowhere, in practice people pay very little attention to minimum code requirements. This may not include areas such as structural and weatherproofing but things like insulation is one thing that is always left out, likewise with double glazed windows. Also i'm not referring to buildings in rural areas that serve to the public (ie hotels, resorts, etc) because naturally, they have to meet code. To the person that builds a batch (and i've seen many), ensuring the house has RCD circuit breakers is the last thing on their mind when doing electrical work.

[Nikki_d72]

Actually, Super BQ, as a relocated building is treated as an existing structure, most of the building code for new builds does not apply - for example under electrical compliance legislation there was no neccessity for us to rewire our 108 year old home as this is existing - this came directly from the the electrical inspector. We are rewiring, anyway as I don't think I could sleep at night! We have to insulate the ceiling and underfloor to minimum standards (we plan to go beyond the minimum) but there was no requirement to insulate the walls. As Ralf says, there's only one building code and I'm pretty curious as to where you are getting your info (or opinions) from? I would also like to add that in my opinion and experience, the resource consent process in rural areas (especially those deemed to be in any outstanding natural landscape) is actually more difficult than in Urban areas as the district plans are generally very protective of these areas and they have lots of special criteria to meet to protect the visual amenity and rural character of the area.

I would only add that many urban sections (and many rural lifestyle or rural-residential sections) may be covananted to prohibit relocatable homes, so check well before purchase and research costs and the reputation of your moving company carefully! I'll be better able to advise on the cost comparison of newbuild versus relocated once we're finished and a bigger home may be more worth moving than a smaller one to get a saving, as adding an extra room later may cost about an extra $30K or so, whereas getting a 4-bed transported shouldn't cost $30K more than a 3-bed one, if that makes sense! You would have to love the character of the home too, I think to justify the extra work in renovating it - I just spent about a week filling wee nail holes, sanding and getting only half of a small bathroom undercoated (Christmas got in the way...), it has to be a labour of love and it helps if you're handy, I doubt it would work out financially if you had to get tradespeople in to do every wee bit of it.

All the best!

[Nikki_d72]

On Trademe, I see a lot of really nice old villas that can be moved to your own property. I like the old kauri villas as they're well built. The price generally includes transporting the house to your section (50 km or thereabouts), and putting the house onto new piles.

This is an example: http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-me-pr...-342230770.htm [/URL] This place has a new roof and wiring.

Or a newer home, such as this:
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-me-pr...-331571022.htm

Assuming one buys a section where the utilities are already at the edge of the section, has anyone done research on the additional costs of septic or sewer, water tanks or connection to city water, etc. ? How does it compare to buying a section and building a new house? Thanks in advance!

That first one looks a goodie, the roof is a real bonus. Be aware though that they will probably flatten the roof for transport and will only use existing materials to put it back together again, and the masonry chimney will be dismantled and not rebuilt (unless you get it done) so you'll have a wee bit of work to do on the roof after arrival. Just to make you aware, ask the question. also ask if it will be sectioned or not. The deck may not come with it either.

I think given the floor area of the second one it will be cut into two sections for transport on public roads and I'm not sure how bad the damage would be to the tiled roof and plaster walls after that - I think wooden houses are a bit easier - they guys who did ours told many stories of plaster and render damage moving houses, they recommended all-wood ones for that reason. Hope that helps, feel free to PM me for any more details re cost etc, though I can only comment on doing it to a flat rural residential section without mains water or drainage, but the hookup costs for that stuff is the same as for a newbuild so there will be many on here who can advise you of the costs for municipal waste and water connection, I'm sure.

Best of luck whatever you do, building or relocating, it's all fun and exciting! (and stressful - but hopefully worth it...)

[Super_BQ]

I'll be better able to advise on the cost comparison of newbuild versus relocated once we're finished and a bigger home may be more worth moving than a smaller one to get a saving, as adding an extra room later may cost about an extra $30K or so, whereas getting a 4-bed transported shouldn't cost $30K more than a 3-bed one, if that makes sense!

I understand what you mean and shouldn't be an extra $30K just to move a house with an extra bedroom. The only problem I have with relocating old houses is the difficulty in meeting the standard of a newly built house. (this is not to say you can't). Speaking from experience (and i'm roughly speaking), the cost factor it takes to renovate existing houses is like 80% of the cost of to build a brand new house. Just look at a leaky syndrome house where the external cladding has to be replaced - (as much as 80% of the cost of the whole house). I'm not trying to say relocating a house is a bad thing, it's just that to a person that wants the comfort of today's newly built home will pay a lot to retrofit an old dwelling to that standard. Come to think of it, when I look at issues like double glazing, insulation (roof/wall/floor), it's hard for me see any savings compared to building new. But by all means, if you want that old character house look - there's no reason why someone can pay more for it.

Ralf may be able to add some thought but from what I gather, an insulated concrete slab floor (with ie 50mm polystyrene on slab and around perimeter) has more insulation value than a house on piles (where air flows freely under the floor boards).