Rental Property on a Small Urban Section

SUD Case Study 3

Sustainable Urban Design Case Study

This build was to be a small house, a 60m2 ancillary building. Situated in the back garden of an ex-state house, it was to be built for the rental market for the high end market, hoping to attract a professional couple with an easy to maintain section and location close to the central city.

Hamilton Central - Jason Cargo

The Concept

SUD Case Study 3a

The location of the rental property

SUD Case Study 3b

The house to be moved to Hamilton in Te Awamutu

The build would require the removal or demolition of a small one car wooden garage. This was also factored into the build costs.

Subdivision was not possible but the development levy cost is the same. Under variation 20, a balance is trying to be found between retaining the character in homes, and making best use of the land.

Rental Market

A tenant typically has little appreciation for value added energy efficiency attributes in a home such as design for the sun, solar hot water and other improvements that have a capital cost to the landlord but are unable to be regained through an increase in rent.

Jason noted that what appear to be important to tenants are garaging, fencing, heat pump and endless hot water. However, there is little testing of the market to see if tenants would be willing to pay more rent for a cheaper power bill.

Jason had to keep uppermost in his mind that any green design attributes incorporated into the build could not command a higher cost when putting this design together, and was an influencing factor in choosing a property investor contact with background in rental accommodation. However, Jason sometimes felt they weren’t speaking the same language on the original design and if he was to do it all again he would get a designer or architect who was sympathetic to green design.

Original Design

The challenge Jason had in having a meeting of minds with the architect was enhanced by the fact that Jason was attending the Green Home workshops at the same time and so was wanting to incorporate more eco design.

This also had some influence on the design going through eight revisions. The biggest cause for this coming up with the most energy efficient design for a small space. Of main constraint due to the size of this build were:

  • bedroom size – how to get two double rooms in a 60m2 house.
  • designing to lengths available in order to limit construction waste

Also on construction waste, Jason was also interested in having different bins on site for different types of waste, being conscious of what waste was being generated and what was going off the site.

Some smaller builds incorporate a smart design of a deck in a way that makes the house seem bigger and have more living area, in the outdoors. Along with a pergola, this was to have been a technique used to optimize the outdoor living space.

The cladding type and window position were modified before making a final decision. The final design was sent to Right House who gave it the thumbs up in terms of the Home Energy Rating Scheme (HERS).

Three ideas Jason learnt from the workshops which were incorporated into the final design were:

  • Polished concrete floors for thermal pass and passive solar gain
  • Slab edge protection
  • Pergola to provide shaded outdoor living area

Additional sustainability features

  • Window frames – vented, double glazed, aluminium
  • Considering the benefits of one type of glazing over the other were challenging in the design stage.
  • Cladding – cost effectiveness and sustainability was important consideration
  • Summit board – Hardy’s product like a Linea but wider and cheaper
  • Skillion roof – the design appealed as the higher ceiling gives the appearance of space in a smaller home but there were concerns regarding insulation
  • Gas
  • Utilizing the north facing aspect
  • Insulation levels walls R2.6, ceilings R3.6 and 100mm polystyrene in the floor.

Project Stalled

Unfortunately the initial plan didn’t go ahead for two reasons

  • Building costs came in high so funding couldn’t be secured
  • Council’s consent process lasts six months which requires the payment of the development levy, with no extensions

Effectively in having this policy it ensures builds happen. However, the process of requiring action within six months led to the project having to be abandoned.

Given a little more time and flexibility, Jason might have gone ahead with a modification of the plan which would have come into the range of funding that could be secured. This would have included on reworking the design so that the garage was replaced with a carport.

Plan B

SUD Case Study 3c

SUD Casy Study 3d

SUD Case Study 3e

Relocated and retrofitted house for rental property

The 60m2 two bedroom house was bought from a site in Te Awamutu for $10,000 from where it was needed to be moved, which was done through Jack House.

It was placed on site behind the ex state house intended for the original build and instead of demolishing the existing one car garage, it was converted into a one bedroom sleep out to make it a three bedroom rental property, targeting the student market.

Work was completed in January 2010 with three months preparation, with retrofit started in October 2009. The whole site was dealt with at one time, which included concreting the driveway for front house, building a carport for the relocated house, establishing lawns for both, and refitting of the old garage.

Looking on the bright side, having a relocated building brought in worked out beneficially as it meant the building could be future proofed. It was able to be retrofitted relatively easily and there was access under the house and into the roof space, and insulation put into the external walls during repair work.

Unsightly or unhealthy aspects of the relocated building could be dealt with in situ. Asbestos was managed by cutting a line around the outside wall of the building, approximately 50cm from the base, thereby removing all the broken asbestos planks and replacing these with fibrelite boards. A decision was made not to remove the whole lot as the asbestos has to be disposed of.

Costs

Cost for the project totaled $130,000. These included:

  • Development levy cost
  • Insurance, which was difficult to get due to house sitting in removal yards
  • Holding costs
  • Storage costs
  • Transport costs

Sustainability features

  • Re-use of a pre-loved building
  • Tapping into existing services onsite such as the sewer line running through the middle of the site
  • Low VOC paints
  • Insulation in the roof
  • Insulation in walls where the weatherboards were replaced after asbestos was removed
  • Fireplace was removed as chimney got knocked out in the transfer
  • North facing site, which as a key reason for purchase
  • New HWC as the old one was stolen
  • Thermal curtains – the others were donated to Salvation Army
  • Clay soils - Soak hole has been put on site

Soak hole: A soak hole is a pit or covered hole in the ground that is used for collection and then disposal of rainwater into the surrounding soil. Stormwater from residential areas needs to be directed to soak holes if the ground conditions are suitable. Otherwise, stormwater needs to be directed down the kerb and channel. If the site is unsuitable for a soak hole then an application for a stormwater connection can be made (provided there is a system to connect to).

One area Jason found it was difficult to find builders or trades people with some experience in was overflow (section didn’t have good drainage), rain gardens, and water storage.

Looking Forward

Using what Jason learned from the Green Home workshops he has two projects underway this year.

  • Project at home – they already have had insulation put into the walls, ceiling insulation and heat pump installed, which he is very impressed with and are looking to open up the back of the house, and make simple, low cost changes such as installing low flow showerheads.
  • Moving a pre-loved house onto gully section – targeting someone who can’t get into the workforce but wants to be self sufficient.

Contact








Return to main page

Strategy and Research
Level 2, Council Offices
Garden Place
Hamilton City Council
Private Bag 3010
Hamilton 3240
Phone: 838 6537
Fax: 838 6464

  • Email