During the 1990s I developed two residential sites: one an acre surveyed from a suburban title
for city use, the other a residential site leased within a 1,400 acre rural conservation title for
recreational use.
THE WEST AUCKLAND SUBURBAN-RESIDENTIAL ACRE
Rawland 20,000
Subdivision survey 3,500
Legal costs: titles, easements, liens 3,400
Geotechnic assessment 2,200
Engineer’s plans: access and services 3,800
Clearing and earthworks 1,300
Access formation 10,700
Utllities: water, sewer, power, phone 5,100
Road frontage [proportion] $20,000
All-up-cost: ready to build $70,000
Annual ‘provider’ utility charges:
Water and sewerage set charges 600
Electricity and phone line charages 300
Local taxes [rates] 1,200
Annual ongoing costing $2,100
THE NORTHLAND RURAL-CONSERVATION-RESIDENTIAL SITE
Rawland [1/14th proportion] 20,000
Formation of site access 5,500
Legal costs 500
Geotechnic assessment 400
Clearing and earthworks 600
Utilities connections -nil-
All up costs: ready to build $27,000Annual site provider charges:
‘Biocharmonic’ house erected. No
public utility connections–
Local taxes [rates] 300
Access, fencing and maintenance fees 250
Annual ongoing costing $550
Aside from aesthetic, best-use, and social reasoning arguments againstrural-residential develop-
ment, the perverse rural-residential living option is the cheaper alternative; withal being closer to
the sustainable ideal than the suburban arrangement!
Figure 4.4 Suburban-residential and rural-residential compared