Converting Home + Sleepout (Mixed Housing Urban) to Two Dwellings

[AshAuck]

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to confirm the process of making a current Home + Sleepout. A legal two-dwelling property. The property is in Manukau, Auckland. I have spoken to Council and also some Architects about options but it seems rather unclear.

The sleepout has an area of 88 square metres (it actually has two bedroom and bathroom with a massive). The main house is 140m square metres. The total land area is 750m square metres and the Zoning is Mixed Housing Urban. I have checked the Unitary planning requirements (ie. Building Height, Building Coverage, Impervious Area, Height in relation to boundary, Yard, Landscaping, Outlook Space, Outdoor Living Space) and both the current Home and Sleepout (converted to a dwelling) meeting all the Unitary planning requirements.

I will need a Building Consent to construct the Kitchen in the Sleepout Given that I comply with all the Unitary plan planning requirements do I need a Resource Consent?

The other question is will Council question any of the existing services ie Stormwater as they would for Sub-division?

I have been told that I need will need to pay a hefty development contribution and also about $13k for the separate water connection.

Please let me know if you have any other question or can point me in the right direction that will be greatly appreciated?

[Shalodge]

http://unitaryplan.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Images/Auckland%20Unitary%20Plan%20Operative/Chapter%20H%20Zones/H5%20Residential%20-%20Mixed%20Housing%20Urban%20Zone.pdf

Two dwellings are permitted in this zone. (assuming compliance with all the standards etc)

Therefore you don't need resource consent.. (but will still need building consent as you say). You can ask (small cost) for a cert of compliance to give comfort (confirms compliance with standards as permitted activity)

Its not a subdivision.. Existing services wont be questioned. You wont get a separate title for the second dwelling . If you want to later try for subdivision be careful now.. Check the standards for subdivision in that area.

You will need a sep water connection at whatever that costs. (In Ak that might include waste water as well?)

You will need to pay a dev contribution for the additional Housing unit.

You will then have a separate dwelling with its own address and services all legal on the title.

[AshAuck]

Two dwellings are permitted in this zone. (assuming compliance with all the standards etc)

Therefore you don't need resource consent.. (but will still need building consent as you say). You can ask (small cost) for a cert of compliance to give comfort (confirms compliance with standards as permitted activity)

Its not a subdivision.. Existing services wont be questioned. You wont get a separate title for the second dwelling . If you want to later try for subdivision be careful now.. Check the standards for subdivision in that area.

You will need a sep water connection at whatever that costs. (In Ak that might include waste water as well?)

You will need to pay a dev contribution for the additional Housing unit.

You will then have a separate dwelling with its own address and services all legal on the title.

Thank you so much Shalodge for answering all the points I was uncertain about. I will keep you updated with how I get along. Cheers, Ash

[John the builder]

council building will want fire and sound separation between households

[AshAuck]

council building will want fire and sound separation between households

Thank you John, the Sleepout is actually completely separate from the main house. It turns out looking at the detailed drawings of the sleepout that the council has (obtained from on the property file) only half the sleepout (on the drawing stated as habitable) had DPM (Damp Proof Membrane) in the concrete slab. The other half, which is labelled workshop does not show any DPM, I do wander if when building they actually just put it on the complete foundation (given it would cost very little) but I dont know how to prove that - any ideas on how to check (sleepout was built by Versatile)?

Based on the drawings this would mean that I would need to apply DPM on the half that does not show in the drawing - are then any products that are accepted by Council for applying to the top of the concrete slab to make it damp proof?

[John the builder]

sorry i thought you said 2 dwellings + sleepout

you dont have to prove DPM the issue is only whether the building is safe and sanitary and it must remain so

you can convert the workshop without consent,

if there plumbing already can you substitute something for the kit sink? or take something from the hpouse?

if you avoid consent then you avoid dev levy. After all the sleepout already causes loads on infrastructure and is occupied by household so you are not creating new household but only a self contained space within the same household

The issues of power and water only apply if you subdivide is this what you want to do? if so establish the units and do thissubdivision separately

[Shalodge]

The previous post by JTB has got to be the most outrageous 'advice' I have ever seen on this forum. It is wrong, misleading and simply illegal..

1. If part of the concrete floor has been damp proved and part not it will be obvious when the weather is wet. I have heard or a product called Sika Top being used (google it). I cant tell you if it is approved where you are .. you will need to enquire.

2. Of course you need a Building Consent to convert a sleepout/workshop to a separate dwelling. You will want a kitchen and bathroom.

3. While you don't need resource consent (assuming you meet standards) you still need to advise council of the existence of the second dwelling so it can be recorded as a separate household and be allocated a street address. This would normally occur during the BC application process anyway.

4. Development contributions are used to fund infrastructure that is installed ahead of anticipated growth. The capital is borrowed and then paid back as additional houses are created and DCs paid. If you don't pay your share then someone else has to.

5. The same applies to water connections. Part of the 'connection fee' is a capital contribution to the cost of the pipes, pumps and plant previously installed in anticipation of growth which is recovered from new connection fees as that growth occurs.

The consequences of trying to avoid paying DCs or building houses without building consent are severe. If you are intending to rent then the Tenancy tribunal has recently hit landlords who rent unpermitted premises very hard indeed. I would not even bother. However the value in a well build and legal second dwelling is high both in terms of rental income and capital gains. Changes to the AUP encourage the sort of infill development you are proposing as a means of addressing the housing shortage. Do it right and it is a 'no brainer'.

My name is Russell Orr I am an RMA Commissioner and Chair of the Whakatane District Council hearings Committee. I have been in local Government for 14 years. I have no idea who 'John the Builder' is and he wont tell you, but I do know that if he is identified he can expect any property he owns or anything he has built, even a chook house, to be looked at very carefully by Council.

[John the builder]

The previous post by JTB has got to be the most outrageous 'advice' I have ever seen on this forum. It is wrong, misleading and simply illegal..

I rely on the law what do you rely on?

1. If part of the concrete floor has been damp proved and part not it will be obvious when the weather is wet. I have heard or a product called Sika Top being used (google it). I cant tell you if it is approved where you are .. you will need to enquire.

even if the floor has dpm then it might still get wet and you might like to correct that but it is not a requirement of the building act except the building must be safe and sanitary. It is already approved for occupoation and part of the ,main dwelling,(s42A and s112 of the building act)

2. Of course you need a Building Consent to convert a sleepout/workshop to a separate dwelling. You will want a kitchen and bathroom.

s115 and the change of use regs 2005)

you can have self contained spaces in the same building which is defined as all the buildings on a site under the same ownership. There already is a bathroom the question is whether sink needs one and this sanitary fixture could be borrowed from somewhere else. (change of use regs again.....schedule 1 exemption 35)

3. While you don't need resource consent (assuming you meet standards) you still need to advise council of the existence of the second dwelling so it can be recorded as a separate household and be allocated a street address. This would normally occur during the BC application process anyway.

why and who says that you need a street number?share a letter box? numbders only affect council when they want to send out the rates, maybe there isnt a building consent? (bluff act 201

4. Development contributions are used to fund infrastructure that is installed ahead of anticipated growth. The capital is borrowed and then paid back as additional houses are created and DCs paid. If you don't pay your share then someone else has to. (council rort and kill development act 2018(CRAKA 201 and the bluff act 201

5. The same applies to water connections. Part of the 'connection fee' is a capital contribution to the cost of the pipes, pumps and plant previously installed in anticipation of growth which is recovered from new connection fees as that growth occurs.

the charges for water that comes through the pipes pays for the pipes. It is arguable whether an existing occupied building is increaseing loads on infrastructure iof the number of bedrooms is the same?

The consequences of trying to avoid paying DCs or building houses without building consent are severe. If you are intending to rent then the Tenancy tribunal has recently hit landlords who rent unpermitted premises very hard indeed. I would not even bother. However the value in a well build and legal second dwelling is high both in terms of rental income and capital gains. Changes to the AUP encourage the sort of infill development you are proposing as a means of addressing the housing shortage. Do it right and it is a 'no brainer'.

by do it right you mean do it my way and get charged 100k in dev levys and unnecessary works. Part may pay for connection but most goes to coffers... Using the RTA is a low blow and abuse of that act. If what is done is actually legal then how can it be unlawful?(CRAKA again/....)

My name is Russell Orr I am an RMA Commissioner and Chair of the Whakatane District Council hearings Committee. I have been in local Government for 14 years. I have no idea who 'John the Builder' is and he wont tell you, but I do know that if he is identified he can expect any property he owns or anything he has built, even a chook house, to be looked at very carefully by Council.

now you are being simply nasty and you do your other good work a disservice. So refute the above or perhaps you should stick to RMA where you have experience and leave the building act to others. In this case the RMA is satisfied.

[Shalodge]

Now and again I offer insights into how Local Government works and the effects of the RMA. My general approach is the we are all part of our local Government and we all need to be informed and engaged or else we will be captured by the extreme ends of the spectrum including idealists and nutters.

I wont be back for a while I have better things to do with my time. Good luck with your second dwelling AshAuck.

[John the builder]

back to the nutters then?

[John the builder]

actually I for one do appreciate the perspective you bring but attacking others for a contrary view is unfair..............

[AshAuck]

Thank you Shalodge and John the builder for the advice!

[elguapo]

My name is Russell Orr I am an RMA Commissioner and Chair of the Whakatane District Council hearings Committee. I have been in local Government for 14 years. I have no idea who 'John the Builder' is and he wont tell you, but I do know that if he is identified he can expect any property he owns or anything he has built, even a chook house, to be looked at very carefully by Council.

Typical huff and puff of someone who has spent too much time working in local government. Nice little threat there too.