We have an investment house with a pre-lodgement nod of approval to build a house on the back, creating a battleaxe block. We haven’t applied for approval, but assuming we do, we planned to build the new house. However, since having the plan drawn two years ago, building costs have increased so much that we now wonder if we are better to move the Queenslander at the front of the block to the back and move another Queensland onto the front.
We realise that privacy issues for our own and surrounding houses will need to be addressed and also that the moved house/s will need to be upgraded to pass building codes. Under the original plan, the existing house would not need any money spent, so moving it will entail costs not needed if we build at the back.
Preliminary costing by the architect/friend is that the new house would have cost $200K two years ago, but would now be closer to $300K (very loose figures).
We plan to keep this property long term, either as is, or as two blocks.
We have renovated many, many houses so the renovating does not worry us, but we have never built from scratch.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
Hi Wylie,
Before I went any further, I would first check with the local council whether they would allow the two Queenslanders on the one block.
Then get some rough estimates of costs involved.
Compare what the two Queenslanders would be worth, against the old one with a new one.
Or for cashflow what each scenario will provide in rental income.
You will really need to do a lot of number crunching to work out which option is best for your situation.
Cheers,
Sue [biggrin]“Be careful not to step on the flowers when you’re reaching for the stars”
Hi there Wylie,
Why are you going to move the front QLDr to the back and put a movable one in the front? Couldn’t you just put the moved one out back and save the cost of moving the both?
Also if you do build new, does the neighbourhood have any/many newer homes in it. A new home in an older home area might look out of place….best house in the worst street sort of thing.
Just a thought.
[8]
Matt
Thanks Sue and Matt. Yes, we do have some number crunching to do. The only reason we could afford to do this is by getting the land for “free”.
Matt’s point is valid. When we first went into this the cost of building new was roughly line-ball with moving the Queenslander and then making it comply with current regulations. It is only because since the pre-lodgement meeting two years ago, prices of building have blown out so much that we think it may be cheaper to move the house back and move another on.
We cannot move an old house to the back of the block past the existing house because of driveway width. Also, the front house is not legal headheight so it would pay us in the long run to raise it anyway. We might as well raise and slide at the same time.
The back house could easily be cutting edge new style or old Queenslander. It is in a character housing area so the front house must fit in with the streetscape, but not the back one because it will not been seen from the street. Also, one side neighbour is a Queenslander and the back and other side are brick and timber townhouses so style is not so much an issue.
I guess I need to start doing some more specific homework to see how the numbers stack up.
Thanks again. I really appreciate your thoughts.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
