NZ Herald QV Property Report - June 2018

Monday, June 4, 2018

% % HIDDEN % COSTS

WHY KIWIS PAY TOO MUCH FOR THEIR HOMES

INSIDE: LATEST QV.CO.NZ VALUES COVERING 420 NORTH ISLAND SUBURBS Bayleys number 1 residential salesperson nationwide.

We are proud to announce that Trent has been awarded ‘Number 1 Residential Salesperson Nationwide 2017/2018’.

A huge thank you to all who have supported us particularly our owners and developers who have chosen to entrust us in the sale of their properties.

Julie Quinton +64 21 894 071 julie.quinton@bayleys.co.nz Trent Quinton +64 21 894 070 trent.quinton@bayleys.co.nz bayleys.co.nz Bayleys Auckland Residential Team of the Year 2016/17

vipaucklandapartments.co.nz

BAYLEYS REAL ESTATE LTD, LICENSED UNDER THE REA ACT 2008

2

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Inside Insulating rentals carries unforeseen hitches

3

Housing plan goes green

4

Market Watch with Nick Goodall

4

Swapping the office for the road

5

Waiheke’s rental crisis

6

QV Data Report with Rory Milne

6

Cover story — Why do materials cost so much? 8 Rogue landlords

10

What the industry says

11

What your home is worth

12-17

Spotlight on Albany Pokeno Mt Eden

18 20 22

Editor: Steve.Hart@nzherald.co.nz Steve Hart online: http://goo.gl/EtJHJq Contributors: Diana Clement, Greg Fleming, Donna Fleming, Lawrence Watt, Rory Milne, Nick Goodall.

Photos: NZHerald and supplied.

Production: Donna McIntyre.

Cover design / graphics: Rob Cox / Courtney Wenzlick.

Display advertising: (09) 373 6004.

On the web: https://tinyurl.com/HeraldHomes

TRACKING AVERAGE PROPERTY VALUES CITY / REGION

APR 2018

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

$512,326 $1,051,687 $1,233,394 $824,631 $1,232,850 $900,095 $554,452 $469,232 $704,183 $426,458 $459,406 $500,347 $444,814 $244,293 $383,854 $761,400 $642,156

Whāngārei District Auckland Region North Shore City Waitākere City Auckland City Manukau City Hamilton City Taupo District Tauranga City Rotorua District Hastings District Napier City New Plymouth District Whanganui District Palmerston North City Wellington City Wellington Region

CHANGE OVER 3 MONTHS

0.5% -0.3% 0.4% 0.2% -1.0% -0.4% 1.7% 0.4% 0.8% 2.2% 1.3% 3.4% 1.3% 2.5% 1.2% -0.4% 1.2% Source: QV.co.nz / NZHerald graphic

Coming up in this issue . . .

L

ook at the price of building materials, fixtures and fittings — and compare them to what people pay in countries such as Australia — and the perception is we are being ripped off.

This seems to be the case particularly when it comes to wood products such as decking and framing that is grown down the road, sometimes on Crownowned land that’s leased to off-shore companies.

In this edition of the Property Report, Diana Clement explores why we pay through the nose for the basics. And you might not be happy with the reason.

Her findings could save Housing and Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford’s from starting his investigation into the costs of building materials.

The minister says the Productivity Commission estimates we pay up to 30 per cent more for building materials in New Zealand than they do across the Ditch.

Meanwhile, Building Industry Federation chief executive Bruce Kohn says the notion behind an investigation is “ridiculous nonsense”. Find out why in our special report starting on page 8.

Also in this edition, Greg Fleming tracks down one couple who are living in a motorhome that probably cost less than the deposit needed for a home in Auckland.

They have a cosy lounge, central heating, double-glazed windows, and two TVs. Their back yard is wherever they want it to be as they travel around selling their art at local markets.

When it comes to government subsidies, there is always the risk of unintended consequences. What seems to be happening with insulation subsidies is that some suppliers are raising their prices by the amount of the subsidy and then discounting it off — leaving home owners no better off.

Capital Property Investors Association secretary Dean Jackson says members of his association have noted that installers approved for insulation subsidies will typically charge around 30 per cent more than other companies

Online Interactive See OneRoof.co.nz for insights on your suburb — discover how prices have changed since 2000.

which aren’t approved, and then they take this same amount off as “discount”. Find out more in our report opposite.

Also in this edition, the heads of some of the country’s leading estate agencies share their views on the housing market and have a stab at predicting what’s to come for the rest of the year.

Finally, the three suburbs we focus on this time around are Albany, Pokeno and Mt Eden. Albany is coming along in leaps and bounds with plenty of home building on the North Shore. Pokeno, between Auckland and Hamilton, has seen property prices rise by huge amounts during the past couple of years. And Mt Eden, one of the city’s oldest suburbs remains a desirable location for school-aged children.

Experience the

TRUE LUXURY of 10 St Marks, Remuera

Our first stunning apartment at 10 St Marks is now ready to view at 1A Macmurray Road, Remuera. Open Saturday and Sunday from 1.00 – 3.00pm.

Only 5 beautiful apartments remain in the developer’s final release, so now is the time to secure your brand new, luxury apartment in this tightly held location.

FOR SALE Apartments priced from $2,045,000. For more information please visit our website www.10stmarks.co.nz

Karen Spires AREINZ 027 273 8220 | karen.spires@bayleys.co.nz bayleys.co.nz/1670788

Bayleys Real Estate Limited, Ponsonby, Licensed under the REA Act 2008

3

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Opportunists fleece scheme As the deadline looms for insulating rental properties, some operators are taking advantage of landlords, says Diana Clement

L

andlords have a little over a year to insulate their properties as the Healthy Homes Guarantee Act comes into force — and sharks are circling.

Some insulation providers have been said to jack their prices up by the amount of government subsidy and then essentially offer non-existent discounts to cream the grant off for themselves. Or there is no subsidy available so the homeowner is effectively paying their own subsidy.

“It used to be a good deal, but then the prices doubled, so when the government subsidy was applied, it made no difference at all,” says Andrew King, executive officer of the New Zealand Property Investors’ Federation.

When the Herald contacted property investor associations across the country, examples of price gouging and alleged fake subsidies emerged.

Capital Property Investors Association secretary Dean Jackson says members of his association have noted that installers approved for insulation subsidies will typically charge around 30 per cent more than other companies which aren’t approved, and then take this same amount off as “discount”.

Like many landlords, Jackson qualifies for Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes subsidies for homes that are occupied by tenants holding a valid Community Services Card.

Jackson received a $3300 quote after the subsidy was applied for insulating 180sq m of roof cavity in a large block of flats he owned.

“I purchased the Knauf Earthwool insulation from (now defunct) Right House for $1300 and paid one of their installers $80 an hour to install it on a Saturday,” says Jackson.

“My experience is that when the subsidy was on, operators were jacking the price up by adding the subsidy and then taking it off again.”

Auckland property investor Lee Whalee

Jackson says the same company quoted $6700 for a 374sq m underfloor area in another property.

In that case he contacted the not-for-profit Sustainability Trust, which quoted $1897.31 for the same job.

Auckland investor Lee Whalee, who insulated all his rental properties, noticed that prices increased when subsidies became available.

“My experience is that when the subsidy was on, operators were jacking the price up by adding the subsidy and then taking it off again. Net result being subsidy was going to the operator not the client.”

South Island property investor Kerry Beveridge has nearly insulated all his rental properties in recent months.

Beveridge sought two quotes for a large boarding house he owns in Timaru. The first quote was $8496.96, with a $2486.80 “discount” and a net price of $6010.17. The second was $5624, less $209 discount, which came to $5415.

“I would say: get multiple quotes to determine whether that discount is meaningful or not,” says Beveridge.

It’s not just property investors who need to be wary. Plenty of home-owning Kiwis can also be the target of less scrupulous operators and stories of pensioners being ripped off have emerged.

The Wairarapa Times-Age, for example, reported the case of Masterton couple Raymond, 85, and Rosalind New, 77, who were not told by a salesperson that they could qualify for free insulation through other companies and were quoted nearly $6000.

After finding out from a friend, whose home was insulated for free, that they were eligible Rosalind New cancelled the cheque just in time and was able to get free insulation through EnergySmart Wairarapa, funded by the Energy Efficiency &

PHOTO / GETTY IMAGES

What landlords need to do ■ Insulation statements are compulsory with all new tenancy agreements.

■ Insulation for ceiling and floors will be compulsory for all rental homes from 1 July 2019.

■ Installations must comply with regulations and be safely installed.

■ A landlord who fails to comply with the regulations is breaking the law and may be liable for a penalty of up to $4000.

■ Tenants who have a problem with insulation must first talk with their landlord.

■ The Tenancy Tribunal can order landlords to comply with insulation regulations.

■ Some landlords may be eligible for subsidised insulation through the Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes programme.

Source / Tenancy.govt.nz

Conservation Authority (EECA).

Beacon Pathway Incorporated, a society dedicated to improving New Zealand’s homes, has seen aggressive marketing in insulation to households irrespective of the cause of the problem.

“Often industry will advise households that they ‘save money, you don’t need that much insulation’,” says Beacon’s Vicki Cowan.

“If you have damp issues, it could be caused by a multitude of different things — a broken pipe under the house, drying washing inside, not enough insulation, not heating enough, no extractor fans in wet areas.”

Cowan adds that insulation installers will often tell customers not to go above the Building Code.

Yet the code is the minimum “worst house you can legally build in NZ,” she says.

As a result of some of the problems associated with rogue insulation sales, the Community Energy Network, Beacon Pathway and the Toimata Foundation have set up a training programme for Home Performance Advisors (HPA) to become certified.

Cowan says the programme arose from the need to ensure practitioners gave households advice on how to improve home performance by making them warmer, dryer, healthier and more energyefficient. The aim was to offer robust training and

an ongoing professional development pathway.

“HPA prioritises provision of robust, whole of house advice that is independent of sales/ products.”

A public register of certified HPAs is available on Beacon Pathway’s website at Beaconpathway.co.nz.

There could be valid reasons for some of the quotes being higher for insulation provided under the Warm Up New Zealand programme. EECA chief executive Andrew Caseley says: “The cost of insulation under the Warm Up New Zealand programme may be higher than prices charged by some other companies that aren’t subject to EECA’s quality standards and audits.”

Complaints should be addressed to the service provider that did the job, says Caseley.

Citizens Advice Bureau New Zealand received 150 enquiries related to insulation issues in the six months to April. Of those, 10 related to concerns about insulation providers, in particular when clients had been cold-called or felt a provider might be targeting a particular group such as the elderly.

“Issues with providers also included problems with quotes and whether the agreed work was done, payment made and work not completed and difficulties contacting providers — not answering calls or emails,” says CAB national advisor legal and strategic, Sacha Green.

As well as a wide range of prices being quoted, investors and homeowners need to look at the R-value (thermal resistance) of the product being used to ensure the quotes are comparable, says Andrew Bruce, president of the Auckland Property Investors Association.

Landlords and homeowners who want to get insulation installed over the next 14 months could find themselves at the mercy of whatever operator will take their business. King advises investor to get onto the work fast to avoid the rush.

Sustainability Trust’s chief executive Phil Squire says the industry predicts long waiting lists and turnaround times as the deadline gets closer.

The trust is part of a Community Energy Network (CEN). Members of the network have insulated the homes of more than 80,000 families.

Local member organisations can be found at Communityenergy.org.nz. Some deal only with vulnerable families; others will give advice to anyone.

4

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Housing plan goes green Government and iwi plan keystone development, writes Lawrence Watt

T

he sixth Labour Government’s housing development at Unitec is its biggest yet, with more than 3000 dwellings on 29ha, just 9km from Auckland’s CBD. For Waterview residents, the area is a major green space adjacent to the Oakley Creek Walkway, although it is cut off by the busy Great North Rd. The Government has bought the land from from Unitec, and the face of this green space will change.

That change will happen fast, as Minister for Housing and Urban Development and Transport, Phil Twyford told the Herald he would like construction to begin next year, although the project will take up to a decade to complete.

Mt Albert Residents Association co-chair Sir Harold Marshall had wanted the campus to be converted to a park.

But this dream has vapourised and he realises the development is inevitable. He is heartened after a conversation with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern about residents having some input on the final plans, though.

“I hope there will be a space at the table for the concerns of the residents of Mt Albert,” he says.

Twyford agrees about the value of green space.

“It’s a special site. I’ve biked and walked around it many times. It has the Oakley Creek with the waterfall and beautiful bush. It will be a challenging site to develop, but it has these amazing heritage and natural assets that I know the designers will want to preserve and capitalise on.”

Because it’s so close to town, the site will be high-density.

But “with density comes the need for open space, green space, because that is what makes good density work”.

Twyford said the Government’s proposal was 40 per cent affordable, 20 per cent social housing and 40 per cent market housing. That 60 per cent of cheaper units is a keystone in Labour’s plan to provide affordable

Housing Minister Phil Twyford is under pressure to build thousands of homes — fast.

PHOTO / JASON OXENHAM

homes to young people and families.

The Opposition, the media and the Treasury are sceptical of the Government being able to build enough houses on time — but the debate about quality is arguably more significant, in terms of quality of life for home-owners and the wider community.

Marshall told the Herald that getting the ‘software’ right is much harder than building the hardware — and because there is a significant proportion of social housing, planners will need to include iwi and other groups.

Twyford says the first step is consultation with local iwi, Ngāti Whātua, who own adjacent land and, by legislation, the Government must work with. Ngāti Whātua has expressed a wish to be a partner.

“Iwi shares the kind of goals the Government has,” he says. The Government and its partners will be “building a whole new suburb”.

“We want this to be not just a housing development, but a strong and vibrant community. It means really good walking

and cycling (on-site), access to good transport and good shared public spaces. There’s also going to be a need for retail, early childhood education facilities, sports facilities.”

Twyford says the Government will build a light rail station at Pt Chevalier, that parts of the site are within walking distance of the Mt Albert train station and there are frequent buses to it.

“The whole new community will be built around the academic institution of Unitec, which is great,” he says.

Victoria University of Wellington architect, Dr Morten Gjerde favours the European ‘perimeter block’ concept, which are units of two to four storeys on the perimeter, with gardens in front, combined with shared facilities inside the perimeter, large enough to be a significant garden or for active recreation.

Bill McKay, senior lecturer in architecture at the University of Auckland and former Waterview resident, reckons units near Great North Rd could easily be four storeys, and demand for them will not be entirely from the traditional nuclear family of “mum, dad and kids”.

McKay feels that if one thing has to be sacrificed to keep outdoor space, it should be car spaces. McKay says an interesting lesson from Hobsonville Point, which Twyford sees as the standard, is that some people have converted their garages to offices and flats.

He favours extensive walkways and bikeways within the grounds, but it makes sense for people to use the existing shops at Pt Chevalier and Mt Albert rather than replicating them.

“It’s not about roofs over people’s heads, it’s about building a community,” he says.

Actually, Hobsonville Point, despite being just two storeys, is perhaps the development most like Unitec.

Twyford says the next step after working with iwi will be deciding who will lead the project.

“There has been some great work done by the Wairaka Land Company, and we will build on that.”

Wairaka Land Company is a subsidiary of Unitec, see wairakalandcompany.nz/ for details of its proposals.

Investors rumbling on The latest buyer classification data shows that multiple property owners remain a firm presence in the market; with this category securing 38 per cent of sales nationwide in April.

On the face of it, this is only slightly down on a peak of 40 per cent in Q3 2014, but the makeup of these multiple property owners has changed, not to mention the number of sales reducing significantly — from more than 15,000 sales in Q2 2016 to under 10,000 in Q1 2018.

To deliver a feel for sentiment between what is credit related, due loan-to-value ratio restrictions (LVR) and stricter debt serviceability tests, or market related, we split these multiple property owners by whether they registered a mortgage with their new purchase.

Those not requiring a mortgage are affected mainly by factors such as the market outlook, rental yield and availability of properties. Their activity has dropped by 10 per cent (4000 sales in Q1 2016 to 3600 in Q1 2018) in two years, but that’s not as significant as the drop in mortgaged multiple property owners, whose activity is down more than 30 per cent (9100 sales in Q1 2016 to 6200 in Q1 2018).

AUCKLAND SUPERCITY: MOST EXPENSIVE Change Since Last Qtr

Top 10 Suburbs

Value

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

$2,662,800 $2,293,900 $2,089,900 $2,064,350 $2,012,700 $1,893,350 $1,885,300 $1,849,800 $1,842,700 $1,794,350

Herne Bay St Marys Bay Remuera Campbells Bay Stanley Point Epsom Ōrākei Westmere Mission Bay Ponsonby

2.3% 2.7% -0.1% 2.4% -0.7% -0.1% -0.6% -1.4% -1.4% 0.9%

The next question shifts to what types of investors are still willing and able to secure funding for their continued activity, and are we seeing mum and dad investor-types impacted or are more experienced investors with significant portfolios taking a backwards step in the market?

The last few years have witnessed the increasing prevalence of investors diversifying their portfolio across a new area. This was epitomised by Auckland investors buying ‘down the road’ in Hamilton and coincided with the LVR restrictions being tighter in Auckland than the rest of the country. Since the limits were re-nationalised (October 2016)

AUCKLAND SUPERCITY: LEAST EXPENSIVE Bottom 10 Suburbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Wellsford Auckland Central Manukau Ōtara Clendon Park Grafton Red Hill Randwick Park Manurewa East Papakura

Value $520,550 $530,350 $547,750 $555,150 $565,000 $571,050 $600,950 $611,000 $614,900 $615,600

Change Since Last Qtr -1.9% 1.7% 0.7% 1.1% 1.9% 2.8% -0.1% 0.4% -1.8% 1.2%

this behaviour has reduced, in Hamilton and elsewhere.

For other investor types who have remained relatively narrow in their geographic coverage of investments, the clearest long-term trend is the change in activity of those investors with two properties. This group makes up 29 per cent of all multiple property owner sales (the most of any group), consistent with the last two years, but a drop on the 33 per cent we had seen in 2012. This dropping trend in multiple property owner share is evident, but to a lesser degree with investors holding between three and five properties.

Making up for this drop in share are the big-time multiple property owners who are still a smaller part of the market, but have increased from 10 per cent in 2012 to 13 per cent in 2018 (and 14 per cent in 2017). It’s likely these investors have more equity built up and can more easily access a 35 per cent (previously 40 per cent) deposit to extend their portfolio.

Ultimately though, those investors who are in it for the long term and can afford to buy where high quality tenants are resident, are continuing to do so.

THE REGIONS: MOST EXPENSIVE Top 10 Suburbs/Towns 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Value

THE REGIONS: LEAST EXPENSIVE Change Since Last Qtr

Mt Maunganui $879,000 Pāuanui $853,050 Mangawhai Heads $828,800 Matua $820,950 Omokoroa $814,950 Waihī Beach $803,600 Whangamata $773,850 Bethlehem $767,600 Huntington $756,700 Flagstaff $751,850

2.4% 1.7% 1.1% 3.1% 1.5% 0.7% 3.6% -1.9% 0.6% 0.8%

Bottom 10 Suburbs/Towns 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Taumarunui Kaikohe Fordlands Tokoroa Te Kūiti Tūrangi Kawerau Kaitaia Ōhakune Ōpōtiki

Value $145,100 $180,000 $184,600 $189,900 $203,200 $223,100 $224,900 $225,800 $249,300 $258,850

Change Since Last Qtr 3.6% -2.5% -1.9% 2.3% 1.7% 3.9% 6.1% 0.1% 0.9% 1.9%

Source: QV.co.nz / NZHerald graphic.

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Couple live the dream

5

Their home is where they park for the night, and they have all of NZ on their doorstep, writes Greg Fleming

M

any of us — tired of the rat-race, the grid-lock and work demands — dream of quitting the nine-tofive grind and hitting the road.

But, unless you’ve won Lotto or are independently wealthy, it often remains just that — a dream.

Not so for enterprising Auckland couple Carl Rapson and Justine Forster. They are living their dream and loving the result.

Before embarking on their life-changing journey a month ago, Justine had worked as an occupational therapist in South Auckland.

Carl had a high-pressure job as a senior project manager for Vodafone which saw him leaving home at 5.30am to beat the traffic rush hours.

Both agreed there must be “a better way to spend our time on this planet”.

“After 10 years at Vodafone, I was fed up with being just a cog in the corporate wheel,” says Carl.

“There was a round of redundancies and, although I was fine, it made me realise that these corporations don’t really care for the individuals. It was time for a change.”

Together they decided to sell their house and buy a motel — a stepping stone to their freewheeling life on the road.

He admits that both were used to big upheavals, and the couple had worked and travelled overseas for many years.

They ran the motel in Kerikeri for three years, with only one weekend off.

Selling it financed the dream they’re now on and bought them their new abode, a tiny mobile home they’ve christened ‘the Moog’, a German-made, nearly new motorhome they’re driving wherever the fancy takes them.

And a month into their new life, hopping back on the property ladder isn’t a priority.

“We may one day look to buy a house somewhere in the country if we can find one cheap enough, or maybe just a section to park the Moog on,” says Carl.

“As we haven’t seen the whole country yet, we don’t know where we may want to eventually settle down, if ever, but it will be fun searching for our potential future home. We are also open to the idea of tiny house communities and hope there will be changes to the district plans to allow more of this type of communal living.”

Budgeting To help finance day-to-day living costs, the couple plan to sell their photography and artwork at markets as they travel.

Carl says it’s difficult to imagine almost total freedom when you’re stuck in the 9 to 5.

“We now have the ability to go wherever we want, whenever we want, and we can change our plan if the weather is not playing ball or we arrive somewhere and don’t like it.

“It’s still early days and we do need to make a living while on the road, so that will dictate to some extent where we go and when.”

They have a house-sit booked in Wellington in June and are booked to look after their old motel in August. Otherwise they are free to roam wherever they wish.

Both acknowledge the gypsy life isn’t for everyone.

“You need to be passionate about tiny living or at least adaptable. If not, you may find yourself becoming frustrated. There are just so many positives to living in a tiny space compared to a more conventional house. The Moog is only 7.5m long by 2.4m wide — around 19sq m of floor space — smaller than most single garages. There’s no room for clutter.

“We’re so happy that we now don’t have to spend our weekends shopping for furniture and other “stuff ” as there’s nowhere to put it!”

Although the Moog is small, it has defined areas which include a rear bedroom with a double

“We’re so happy that we now don’t have to spend our weekends shopping for furniture and other stuff as there’s nowhere to put it!”

Carl Rapson

bed, wardrobe and cupboard space.

“We have a separate toilet and shower and we have installed a composting toilet to fit in with our goal to live as sustainably as possible. Our kitchen is small but fully functional.”

Justine says it’s amazing how quickly she has adapted to cooking in a small space.

“Everything is within easy reach and luckily my culinary skills are quite basic so I don’t have the need for lots of cooking utensils and gadgets.

“We have a cosy lounge which comfortably fits five people so there’s plenty of room to invite new friends over for happy hour. There’s full gas/240v powered central heating and the windows are double-glazed. We have two TVs, a self-seeking satellite system and a digital control panel where we can monitor our solar and battery usage along with the levels of our water tanks. We also have the whole of New Zealand outside our front door.”

Any advice for those tempted to take to the road?

“You don’t need to have a heap of money in the bank to do what we are doing — but we would recommend that anyone contemplating this lifestyle has at least six months of their planned monthly budget to tide them over until they can build up their income streams and/or find work.”

No day the same A day on the road starts early.

“We want to get the most out of each day. Also for a lot of the free camping spots, you need to

Auckland couple Carl Rapson and Justine Forster ditched their corporate jobs for a life of freedom.

PHOTOS / SUPPLIED

leave by 9am or you’ll get a fine,” says Carl.

“We’ll have our breakfast while going over our plans for the day, normally with an amazing view.

We tend to have a plan, from the day before, of where we will be heading or what we’ll be up to that day. But that often changes depending on the weather and how much charge we have in our batteries, and water in our tanks. If we are staying put, then we’ll often do one of the local walks or get the kayak out and go exploring.”

Does the close proximity put pressure on their relationship?

“Luckily for us, no. And, after spending three years in each other’s pockets at the motel 24 hours a day, we knew we’d be fine.”

However, he admits that if you don’t particularly like being in such close proximity to your partner, then tiny living won’t improve matters.

He also says the experience is paying off in spiritual, if not economic terms.

“As I talk to you, we’re on the shores of a lake in Rotorua with no one else in sight. A couple of days ago we were parked on a beautiful Coromandel beach.

“We didn’t want to wait until we retired to get out and do the things we love to do, such as kayaking and surfing. We already feel the aches and pains of getting older and know this will only get worse.”

ON THE WEB: lifeontheroadnz.com

6

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Locals feel the pinch Rentals in short supply as Waiheke popularity soars, writes Donna Fleming

W

aiheke Island has long been a soughtafter holiday destination, its population swelling from 9000 in the winter months to 45,000 in summer.

And it’s not just Kiwis who’ve fallen for the charms of the Hauraki Gulf island.

Increasing numbers of international visitors are heading there for some R and R during their trips to New Zealand.

That’s great for the economy of the island, but not so good for locals looking for homes to rent. The huge demand for short-term holiday rentals has lead to a dearth of long-term properties to rent on Waiheke.

In many cases, landlords can make all the money they require to cover overheads during peak holiday times, and don’t need to rent out their properties for the rest of the year. And now, because there are fewer long-term rentals available, some residents are having to leave the island.

“We are suffering from the success of the visitor market,” says islander Paul Carew. “We don’t have a housing shortage problem, as much as a housing distribution problem. A lot of the owners of rental properties can make so much money just renting them out over the summer — people who get $600 a week in winter can make that amount a night in summer — that they can have them sitting empty for the rest of year. And yet people who live here permanently and support the visitor industry can’t find anywhere to live. They don’t earn enough to buy or to pay the higher rentals.

“We’ve got teachers and police officers and people who work in the hospitality industry who are having to leave because they can’t afford to stay here. These people are the character of the island. Without them it won’t function.”

Other people have agreements with their landlords where they can stay in the home over winter, but have to move out between Labour weekend and Easter, to make way for holidaymakers.

“There are people who end up living in campervans and that is not ideal,” says Carew.

In the meantime, there is a waiting list for emergency housing run by the Waiheke Hope Centre, part of the Living Waters church, with 70 people staying in the short-term accommodation it supplies over the last year.

The housing crisis had led concerned residents, including Carew, to start an initiative aimed at providing long-term, affordable rental accommodation for permanent residents.

Waiheke Island resident Anne Bailey is having to move because her landlord is selling up, and it is a struggle for her to find somewhere on the island.

They established the Waiheke Community Housing Trust two years ago. Funded by donations and personal loans totalling $400,000, the trust has bought land in Onetangi where it plans to build a four-bedroom house and two onebedroom flats that will be rented by locals who either have young children, are disabled or are over 55.

However, the trust has hit a snag Paul Carew getting finance to pay for the building work.

“We don’t fit the bank’s boxes because we are a trust, not a developer or a private family, so they are struggling with what box to put us in,” says Carew, who is the trust chair.

“Once we have built the first place and have rents coming in, we will probably have no trouble getting funding for future places. But getting finance to start things off is a problem.”

One way the trust is raising extra money towards getting long-term rental properties built is constructing “tiny houses” that people can put on their properties as a sleepout.

“These can be useful to many people on the island as a place to put guests. And if they are under 10sq m, you don’t need building consent. We are building them to sell and hope to raise a few thousand dollars with each one, but in some cases they may also be able to help with the accommodation shortage we have.”

Another initiative the trust is planning is to join forces with local real estate agents to collect donations towards

PHOTOS / TED BAGHURST

funding rental accommodation.

“The real estate fraternity has reacted positively to the idea of having a donation to the trust for every sale made on the island. If we can get the agent, the vendor and the buyer to each put in $300 for every sale — and there are about 200 sales a year — that would be a significant amount of money.”

The trust got the idea from the levies imposed in popular US holiday destinations such as Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard. “For every sale on those islands, there is money put into a fund for community development and it works well,” Carew says.

He says it is encouraging to see how much support the trust is getting. “Everyone on the island knows this is an issue and is keen to support us. They regard helping us as an ethical investment.”

One Waiheke islander who would benefit from rental housing provided by the trust is Anne Bailey. She found herself in a property bind after she used money from the sale of her home in the 1990s to fund a facilitating business that gave her great satisfaction but didn’t make a profit.

Bailey hasn’t been able to afford to buy again, and has spent years renting rooms in other people’s houses. It was a huge relief when a friend offered the 73-year-old the opportunity to live in a tiny house on her Waiheke property and living there has been a delight. Unfortunately the friend is now selling and Bailey is struggling to find a year-round property she can afford to rent.

“I don’t want to go back to renting a room in someone’s house, and I don’t want to leave the island. One of the properties the trust wants to build would be perfect for me. I love it here, so I really hope they can get these places built.”

Coast shows strong growth Properties based in well-positioned coastal areas lead the way when it comes to value growth across Auckland’s suburbs.

The latest qv.co.nz E-valuer quarterly property report indicates that many coastal areas continue to rise in value despite a slowdown in investor demand, while value growth across central and southern suburbs has slowed.

Northern and central coastal areas, such as the North Shore, contain large sites which appeal to families. This helps enable value growth even when investor demand dips.

At the same time, values have remained flat or have dropped slightly in many central and southern areas.

This subdued growth can be partly attributed to a lower expectation of capital gains, which has discouraged many investors from purchasing.

The economic climate, with low unemployment and interest rates, also means there is less urgency on people selling their property, so any downward trend in prices has been driven mostly by those under some pressure to sell.

In some developing areas, values have eased due to an over-supply of land coupled with low demand. Developing

DATA REPORT RORY MILNE QV NATIONAL SPOKESPERSON

suburbs containing high value stock, such as Flatbush, have been impacted the most when compared with developing areas containing entry-level housing.

This is partly due to entry-level stock attracting more demand from first home buyers taking advantage of lower deposit requirements for new builds.

With less activity from investors, first home buyers face less competition. Houses are remaining on the market for longer, giving buyers more time to do due diligence.

Despite this, high values mean these buyers may have to adjust expectations on where they might want to live, in particular moving further from the CBD.

If the goal is to keep a short commute, smaller attached units can offer first home buyers the chance to purchase property below $600,000 in a more central location and gain access to the KiwiSaver HomeStart grant.

It’s a similar story in Wellington, where first home buyers in particular seek more affordable homes on the outer fringes, including the likes of Wainuiomata, Taita and Cannons Creek. These sit in the lower-to-mid value range and have had steady value increases over the past 12 months.

Investor activity is relatively high in these regions due to the appeal of comparatively higher yields.

Investors are often in direct competition with first home buyers and this competition is putting upwards pressure on values.

New builds are proving popular, as these are exempt from LVR restrictions. Suburbs such as Woodridge, Whitby, Aotea and Churton Park illustrate this.

Finally, Featherston and Greytown have seen some of the strongest annual value growth across the lower North Island.

For the same price, you usually get larger properties than in the city, which is appealing to a variety of buyers.

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

7

8

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Are we paying too much?

PHOTOS / SUPPLIED, GETTY IMAGES

Building materials in NZ cost up to four times as much as other countries, writes Diana Clement

A

re Kiwis being ripped off blind for building products or are we getting value for money in our country considering the nature of the New Zealand market? There are those who argue black and blue that one or the other statement is true.

Housing and Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford is so concerned about the costs of building materials, he has promised an investigation.

“The Productivity Commission has estimated we pay between 20-30 per cent more for building materials in New Zealand than they do in Australia,” says Twyford.

In the other camp, Building Industry Federation chief executive Bruce Kohn says the notion behind an investigation is “ridiculous nonsense”.

When maverick businessman and founder of 2Degrees Mobile, Tex Edwards renovated his Waiheke home, plasterboard cost $24 a sheet.

“Anywhere else in the world, plasterboard is as cheap as chips,” he says.

Edwards, who spreads his time between New Zealand and London, paid £2.75 (NZ$5.30) for the same quality of plasterboard for his London renovation.

The problems, when it comes to the cost of building materials, start with our tiny market and the tyranny of distance, says Professor John Tookey, Head of Department, Built Environment School of Engineering, Computer and Mathematical Sciences, at AUT University.

“There is a simple rational answer,” says Tookey.

“We are 3000km from the nearest big economy. We have small demand at the end of a very small supply line.

“We have a population the size of Sydney spread over a country the size of the UK. As a result, builders’ merchants and suppliers have to be widely spread,” he says. “We have a huge amount of inventory, ‘forward deployed' at stockists around the country. Consequently NZ has a huge amount of overhead in the system.”

Tookey says there are around 400 builders’ merchants and related businesses.

Kohn adds that builders’ merchants act, in effect, as a storage depot for all the small builders operating with a dog and a ute.

“They can’t afford to hold the stock, so the

Tex Edwards, pictured in London, where a sheet of plasterboard costs £2.75 (approx $5.30). In Auckland it is $24.

If you get a couple of containers of plasterboard that is goosed from China, who are you going to send it back to?

Professor John Tookey merchants hold it. That reflects the geography of the country.”

While there are cheaper building products abroad, it can be comparing apples with oranges, says Tookey. “You can ship in containers from China. But you don’t have the technical support and return to base. If you get a couple of containers of plasterboard that is goosed from China who are you going to send it back to?”

What’s more, comparing prices with overseas countries is fraught with difficulty because of other countries’ dissimilar standards, regulations and sometimes simply different standard sizes.

Never as simple as it seems Material costs are only one of the many strands that make New Zealand’s housing expensive. The others include land supply, infrastructure, labour costs, skills, delivery mechanisms, and innovation.

Matt Curtis, senior research analyst at Branz, says different building regulations in other countries affect material prices. What’s more, quality varies.

“A recent presentation at the Building Officials

Institute of New Zealand conference mentioned how badly Australian new-builds are performing,” says Curtis. “But we still compare our construction costs to Australia. It is not necessarily a fair comparison.”

There is no natural comparison country that is going to make benchmarking meaningful. Canada, says Tookey, gets the halo effect of the United States’ 340 million people over the border. Even the definition of a large order can’t be compared.

“A large order in New Zealand is eight units,” says Tookey. “That is trivial. We are talking about tens of thousands in Australia.”

What’s more, house building is concentrated around Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and Perth, with costs in outlying areas greater.

“So if you had a Bunnings Warehouse in Wagga Wagga, you can fully expect it won’t have as good prices as a Bunnings Warehouse in the centre of Melbourne,” he says.

The bespoke nature of New Zealand building also creates a problem that leads to higher materials prices. Here every single house is individual and there’s no such thing as standard designs.

“That has consequences. You need a standard design for economies of scale,” says Tookey.

Contracts in New Zealand are small with minimal strategic depth, he adds.

“If you go into any group build shop they will take about their ‘standard designs’,” says Tookey.

“There may have 40 of them and any or all elements of the design can be changed.”

Tookey adds that New Zealand’s small market means that the cost of manufacture is high.

“The machinery and investment in infrastructure to manufacture is optimised for relatively small runs because it has a relatively small economy.”

Smoking guns Nonetheless there are a number of “smoking guns” in the world of building materials in New Zealand that suggest we’re paying way more than we should be, says Edwards who has been studying industrialised manufacture of houses in Europe, Asia and the USA. Edwards’ smoking guns are: 1) Rebates and other incentives paid to builders to use certain products, which aren’t disclosed to consumers. “This basically amounts to undisclosed commission.”

2) The minimal $5000 fines for the individuals involved in a price-fixing case in Auckland in 2014 involving Carter Holt Harvey (CHH) fixing timber

9

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Prices to come under spotlight prices with Fletcher Building’s distribution arm.

CHH itself was fined $1.85 million.

3) The HHI ratio of Fletchers core products. The Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI) is a measure of market concentration.

4) A Commerce Commission’s investigation into alleged anti-competitive actions by Winstone Wallboards, a subsidiary of Fletcher. The commission concluded that it didn’t think Winstone had breached the Commerce Act. Edwards' argument is this shows competition law to be weak in New Zealand.

5) The final smoking gun, says Edwards, is the difficulty competitors such as Knauf have moving into New Zealand.

Verney Ryan, co-leader of Beacon Pathway Inc, which reported into building costs, says another problem is the number of hands products pass through before being paid for by the home owner.

“One thing we did notice (in the research), was the way that margins compounded every time that materials changed hands from supplier to

“Once Energy Minister Megan Woods has conducted her market study into the fuel industry, I’d like to ask the commission to examine building costs.”

Phil Twyford merchant through builder to homeowner. By the time we pay for materials as a homeowner, a large bulk of the cost may be made up of margins added on to margins and clipped along the way.

“Sometimes this is not especially transparent to the final purchaser/home owner, either,” says Ryan. “Some of us might understand that a builder or tradesperson adds a margin to product to cover the time to pick it up and deliver it to site, transport it etcetera. But how much is fair is less clear — 10 per cent, 15 per cent, 45 per cent?

“It is not well regulated or understood. As a homeowner, we just see a final invoice for a product and labour — and most unwary homeowners may have no way of knowing what a fair retail price for that product is,” says Ryan.

Benchmarking In its 2013 report into residential construction, the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) commented that the benchmarking of material costs is difficult because homes in the various countries are built in different materials.

‘A load of old cobblers’ Building Industry Federation chief executive Bruce Kohn is dismissive of any suggestion that materials costs are overly high in New Zealand. “It is never simple as a straight statement that material prices are high. We regard (the suggestion that materials prices are high) as a load of old cobblers.”

“What you often see quoted is a complaint by the Productivity Commission that New Zealand building costs are 25 per cent more than Australia. But a report from the NZIER said that is absolute rubbish.

“Their conclusion was ‘we might have expected to find lower building costs due to lower labour costs but we do not find any robust evidence that costs of building is significantly more in New Zealand than Australia’,” says Kohn.

“One of the problems trying to do this comparison is we have two to three levels of pricing. Retail, trade, and volume discount for big developers who pay a bit less. This comparison can get very difficult.”

“Rather, we used published quantity surveyor international cost comparison estimates of what is typically built in different cities. This avoids the need to specify a similar dwelling.”

The authors added that terrain, geological risks and managing climate in different countries all led to differences in building material prices.

While the public and even politicians may believe that the likes of Fletchers and Winstone are bleeding Kiwis dry, the reality is somewhat different say other observers.

“Fletchers and Winstone are highly successful in what they do,” says Tookey. “But if you charge super normal prices you will suck in competitors.

Why would you want to do that?” says Tookey.

“Is it a profit? Yes. Can it be cheaper? Probably.

But at the same time who is going to supply the market in the long term?”

Suggestions of a materials price enquiry was political low hanging fruit, says Tookey.

“It is easy to have a poke at them than anything

else. The practical reality is you are not going to get (costs) down for KiwiBuild unless you have major orders and that needs economies of scale.”

Rebates When Twyford revealed the investigation he said the industry was rife with rorts and anticompetitive practices.

“That is because we effectively have a duopoly in New Zealand. Add to that rebates and junkets given to builders to use certain products. The industry is far too uncompetitive.”

The rorts are one of Edwards’ main complaints about building materials prices, which further hinders competition.

“There isn’t corruption in brown paper bags,” he says. “But there are rebates, which aren’t allowed in other parts of the world. If I am building a house or five houses in a year and I spend $50,000 on Gib, I get rebates from my supplier.”

This and the junkets add to the overall cost of the materials.

However, Tookey says even though it’s almost inevitable that other competitors are being kept out through the use of these types of rebates, it’s natural for companies to protect their interests.

“If you didn’t do it in that way, there would be substantially more competition,” he says.

■ Twyford says the enquiry can’t happen until the Commerce Amendment Bill currently before Parliament gives the Commerce Commission stronger powers to conduct market studies and take action against anti-competitive behaviour.

The Bill would enable studies into market competition and give the Commerce Commission new enforcement tools.

“Once Energy Minister Megan Woods has conducted her market study into the fuel industry, I’d like to ask the commission to examine building costs,” says Twyford.

Small market contributes to big prices A big problem in materials supply, says businessman Tex Edwards, is the small number of players in the market.

“The issue is there are five credible players in building material distribution, but in making commodity materials, there is only a handful.

“Our aluminium windows are the most expensive in the world. The industry pretends there are five operators. But there is only one in the important part of the value chain supplying the aluminium extrusion.”

Steve Evans, chief executive of Fletcher Residential and Land Development disagrees with that argument.

“There is a misperception that Fletcher Building makes every building material in the market and builds the majority of our homes, which just isn’t the case,” says Evans.

“We make a lot of great building materials including insulation, cement, steel products, plastic piping and plasterboard, which are all subject to local and international competition. We do not manufacture timber, glass, concrete and clay tiles, and many other housing components. If you look at all building related markets, we have about 15 per cent market share.”

Using an example of one of Fletcher Living’s new home builds in a suburban area at Karaka, materials amounted to 24 per cent of the cost.

“Fletcher Building supplies about a third of that — or 8 per cent of the overall build cost,” he says.

Raw materials, he says are more expensive to source into New Zealand. Gypsum, for example, is one of the primary cost elements of plasterboard and is 100 per cent imported from Australia.

Steel manufacturing plants are typically three to four times larger in Australia compared to NZ, says Evans.

10

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Three is one too many An extra person enters the equation when landlords hire a property manager, writes Diana Clement

P

roperty managers are the bane of many tenants’ lives. When Consumer New Zealand surveyed members who were tenants, 65 per cent were not satisfied with the service they get from property managers. Only 46 per cent were unhappy with their landlords.

Robert Whitaker, of Renters United, says there’s an additional person in the relationship when landlords hire a property manager.

The property manager is the go-to person when something needs fixing, but often they have to check with the landlord for permission to do anything. This delays getting things resolved.

In New Zealand, 32 per cent of all households are in rented accommodation. And they’re more likely to put up with cold, damp or other issues that are substandard housing than owner occupiers.

Many are too scared to complain, worried they might be given a 90-day notice to quit, providing the notice isn’t what’s known as “retaliatory”.

Changes in tenure rules are on the drawing board with the Government.

Whitaker says there is an imbalance of power between tenants and their property managers or landlords. He compares it to the employer/ employee relationship where rules ensure the latter are treated fairly. That’s not the case with tenants who fear being made homeless if they ask for general maintenance issues to be addressed.

Some of the worst cases where tenants do raise issues make it to the Tenancy Tribunal.

PHOTO / GETTY IMAGES

maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair,” the adjudicator said. The tenant was awarded $900 compensation.

Bond Failure to lodge bonds is another issue.

Landlords and property managers are required to deposit the tenant’s bond with Tenancy Services so they cannot unilaterally deduct money at the end of a tenancy. The tribunal hears many cases where this hasn’t happened.

Illegal dwellings Tenants are becoming more aware of landlords letting unconsented dwellings. The tribunal heard that Fiaavae and Sukhbir Singh found, by checking Auckland City Council records, that the converted garage they rented in Otara had not been approved as a “lawful residential premises”, meaning it couldn’t be let legally.

The adjudicator ordered Taylor Property Management to refund the couple’s $2000 rent.

Agents A common issue is landlords going overseas and failing to appoint an agent under section 16A of the Residential Tenancies Act. In one such case Sarah Davidson, trustee of the Leigh Davidson Family Trust, was ordered to pay $300 exemplary damages to a tenant. Sarah Davidson named her father “landlord” because she lived in Australia, but admitted she was “managing everything”.

Substandard properties If the landlord won’t agree for work to be done, there is little rental managers can do. In one case, Hamilton property management business Ray White arranged quotes for landlord Ricky Sharma after the tenants at a Nawton property told them of drainage issues.

The tribunal heard that Sharma thought the quotes excessive and failed to remedy the problems. “The tenant correctly claims that this is not a relevant consideration and that the landlord has an obligation under the Act to provide and

Robert Whitaker says there’s an imbalance of power between tenants and their property managers or landlords.

PHOTO / SUPPLIED

Quiet enjoyment Another issue is a breach of “quiet enjoyment”.

Havelock North tenant Jennifer Free was awarded $1615 when her landlord moved into a granny flat on the property she rented. The flat was not consented as an independent dwelling. Free also learned she was paying for her landlord’s power and water.

Smoke alarms Working smoke alarms are required in rented properties by law and failing to provide them

proved expensive for Mobile Property Management, which was ordered to pay Flatbush tenant Gareth James $2000. The adjudicator commented: “The effect on Mr James is obviously that his and his family’s safety was put at risk.”

Insulation Since July 2016 landlords have been required to provide insulation statements to tenants. When landlord Feng (Irene) Mei Lao failed to provide the statement, she was ordered to pay $200 exemplary damages to her Mt Albert tenant Mohamed Shiyam.

Lao was ordered to pay another $6,020.44 for other breaches of the Act. Photos showed the property to be damp and mouldy. Shiyam’s infant son was admitted to hospital twice with pneumonia during the tenancy.

The adjudicator questioned whether it was a legal flat and told the landlord to seek clarification from the council before it was let again. Insulation becomes compulsory in all rental homes from July 1 next year.

Notice periods Another issue for tenants is that landlords can give 42 days’ notice if they (or a family member) intend to use the premises as their “principal place of residence”. Jim Brown Rentals wrongly used this rule against tenants Thomas Parkes and Robert Tod. The tenancy adjudicator pointed out that in order to give 42 days’ notice, the property manager can use only one of the allowable exceptions set out in section 51 of the Residential Tenancies Act, such as the landlord moving in. Simply being “needed” isn’t enough.

11

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

INDUSTRY ANALYSIS As told to Donna McIntyre

Market steady as she goes Mike Bayley Managing director Bayley Corporation

S

tability is the word of the moment in Auckland’s residential property market. Relative stability in prices, in demand, and in sales volumes. All three dynamics are neither spectacular nor ‘bubble bursting’. They are stable.

It’s a phase in the property cycle where experienced real estate sales people — who have seen this phase numerous times and know how to operate in its dynamics — add value to the negotiating process for vendors and purchasers.

While some vendors may feel reticent about looking to sell in a stable market after watching several years of doubledigit growth in capital values, and some buyers may be wondering if or when a flood of listings is going to come to market, the market is what the market is. Stable.

We have seen the residential property investment sector thin out from domestic and international perspectives. At the entry to mid-price ranges for homes, some investor demand has been replaced by a higher percentage of first home buyers now the heat has gone out of the market, and they have had a year or two to save deposits.

Many first home buyers, and the real estate agency sector, will be watching the roll-out of the Government’s KiwiBuild Buying off the Plans initiative announced by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Indicative Auckland price caps of $500,000 for a onebedroom dwelling, $600,000 for two bedrooms, and $650,000 for three bedrooms will appeal to first time buyers.

With a stable Government, and a stable economy, the outlook we see for the middle portion of the year for the residential property market in Auckland is . . . stable.

Chris Kennedy CEO Harcourts

T

he average house price in Auckland in April has seen an increase of 4.04 per cent from $1,024,317 to $1,065,739 when reported against figures for the same period last year.

Sales were down 16.51 per cent on April 2017, while new listings were up by an impressive 28.52 per cent compared to last year. Total property on hand in Auckland is also up by 1.44 per cent on April 2017.

The fact that the average price and listings are both up despite sales being down indicates there are still buyers prepared to spend money on the right property.

The increase in price and listings this month represents a picture of the Auckland market holding firm with a core of serious buyers and sellers, who are not being deterred by the noise around the city’s housing climate.

In 2017 we were coming out of four years of intense growth. In 2018, we’re seeing stability, but still plenty of good activity that is returning excellent results for vendors.

To make the most of the market conditions I’d advise sellers work closely with their sales consultant to create the best possible marketing campaign to connect them with the right buyers, for the best result. When the market is quieter a good sales consultant will prove his or her worth.

A lot of people think listing in winter isn’t a great idea, but life doesn’t stop for winter. People still need to move, whether it be for new jobs, for family reasons or just those itchy feet.

As your sales consultant will tell you, focus on the market and your ability to present your home to potential sellers, no matter where the mercury is sitting in the temperature gauge.

Peter Thompson Managing director Barfoot & Thompson

A

quiet confidence returned to the Auckland property market in autumn, laying the groundwork that is likely to see prices and sales numbers hold up through the winter months.

Our sales, and those for the whole market as reported by the Real Estate Institute, show that when compared to their 2017 equivalents, sales numbers picked up measurably while prices started to edge up.

It is not a signal that Auckland activity is about to take off — rather that vendors and buyers are comfortable with where prices are at, and that apprehension about future direction is not holding back sales.

It would not be surprising if activity eased from March and April’s highs during June and July, before returning in August/September as we head into spring and early summer.

The Auckland market solved its nine-year run of increasing prices by going into hibernation in March last year.

Now, after 12 months of limited activity, it is showing signs that it’s ready to resume business.

The fundamentals that led to price rises in the first place remain. These include a growing population, house building not keeping pace with population growth, stable and low mortgage interest rates, banks with mortgage money to lend and a healthy economy.

Current prices and regulatory controls are likely to have a hand-brake effect on prices, but there is scope for sales activity to continue to rise as a greater number of people reach the point of deciding to move forward on their housing intentions.

Carey Smith CEO Ray White NZ

T

he residential market is showing signs of consistency, resulted in strong listings and sales during the past two months. We expect this to continue through this year’s second quarter.

While the increased activity has meant property supply has increased; the number of buyers attending open homes has also increased and this is giving the market a degree of normality consistent with 12 months ago.

The new Government is settled and hasn’t made the dramatic legislative changes around property that were expected.

At this point, it is still unclear how overseas investment legislation will be presented. Other areas, including capital gains and potential property taxes, are yet to surface on the Government’s agenda.

The new Reserve Bank Governor held interest rates at the current low levels. While LVR requirements are still in place, the ability to lend against land value ratios are less stringent for purchasers.

In the main centres, Auckland continues to show strong signs for property owners. This is matched by good stock levels. Wellington is tighter, with days on market being fewer than other centres. Canterbury is balanced.

Generally, the overall stock portfolio in New Zealand continues to increase and this will provide buyers with a greater level of choice.

In the area of rental property, several legislative changes are coming into place.

While we believe this may change the rental yield, it will also make property more attractive to tenants and this makes renting overall more attractive.

Barry Thom and Grant Lynch Unlimited Potential Real Estate

Keith Niederer General manager LJ Hooker & Harveys Group

M

any Aucklanders are restless and frustrated with the city’s congestion — and the new petrol tax will make the regions even more attractive.

Low inflation and no signs of any interest rate hikes are a blessing for many Auckland families and first home buyers who, at the early stages of their mortgage term, have all their eggs in one basket.

Buyers and sellers can have confidence that the market is unlikely to experience a major price reduction or increase.

Wise vendors are meeting the market, often realising it won’t get any better — and taking the money, not the risk.

Rental properties will continue to be in huge demand with vacancy rates low. This may see rents on the rise which is a positive sign for investors.

And with the brightline property rule that started this year on March 29, people who sell a house in New Zealand within five years of buying it must pay income tax on any gains unless it’s their main home or another exception applies — for instance the property was inherited.

If they bought a house between October 1, 2015 and March 28, 2018, the two-year brightline rule still applies.

Also, loan to value ratio will become a permanent tool but it will be calibrated.

If you are thinking of buying or contemplating selling, there is no time like the present. Properties being marketed without a price but with a set date — auction, tender or set sale — are selling, with vendors pleasantly surprised with the result.

Buyers today have access to data, and comparable properties. Open honest communication is paramount from all parties to effect a sale.

T

he last two months have been steady as she goes but a notable change has seen an increase in the number of first home buyers.

With the OCR confirmed as unchanged, rates at the 4-point-something range for the next two to three years will be encouraging for buyers generally.

We also note that many landlords/investors are selling their rentals. This is a bonus for first home buyers. The removal of negative gearing, plus the brightline test going to five years, is having a flow-on effect of potentially increasing the number of homes for sale, but at the same time decreasing the number of homes for rent.

Fewer people are attending open homes, but the percentage of those genuinely looking to purchase is high.

Overall, the balance between supply and demand is favouring the buyer. In specific cases, there is strong competition and premiums are being achieved.

One point of contention is the relevance of certain CVs (council valuations). Historically, market values likely were in excess of this figure. But lately, some properties have sold for less than the CV, causing many home owners anguish. The fact is, the CV is the result of a mathematical algorithm. It is an arbitrary figure. In short, no one made a physical inspection as part of the CV assessment. Broadly speaking, those properties with a high land area are most likely to have a CV higher than the market value.

The legislative, tax, and banking (LVR) changes made in recent times have changed the dynamics of the market place. Put these factors alongside the introduction of the new CVs and you have a recipe for increased due diligence as buyer and seller find a meeting of the minds.

12

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

YOUR HOUSE VALUE

A quarterly analysis of North Island property values WHAT IS “E-VALUER”?

WHAT THE TABLES TELL YOU

E-Valuer is an estimate of market value and forms part of a QV.co.nz E-Valuer report.

It is an automated model which provides an instant estimate of a property’s current market value based on recent sales of comparable properties in the immediate area and other factors.

In the tables, an E-Valuer Report was run for each house in the suburb, and then a weighted average was calculated. The result is an average current value of all houses in the area. This may represent a more robust guide than median or average sale prices which measure only what happens to be selling in the area and can therefore be skewed, depending on which parts of the market is more active – the top or bottom end.

Where there is insufficient data to calculate enough E-Valuer Reports in an area, value is not shown. While CoreLogic has used reasonable endeavours to ensure the accuracy of the information, the accuracy of the data relied upon to assess the estimated value is not guaranteed.

The data for these tables is provided by CoreLogic and gives a comprehensive summary of actual house sale prices and volumes for the periods and areas listed.

The North Island areas detailed generally have at least 500 houses, and sufficient sales, to give meaningful results. Sections are excluded, as are mortgagee sales and “non-market” sales (such as sales to related parties and transfers to trusts). But flats and apartments are included, and are now included in this issue..

Three-monthly median prices have been used to give greater depth and accuracy. They are a useful indicator of trends where the number of sales is high, but offer only a very rough guide in areas where sales are low. For

E-Valuer estimate of median value at 30APR2018

E-Valuer estimate of median value at 31MAR2018

E-Valuer price change in 3 months to 31MAR2018

E-Valuer estimate of E-Valuer price E-Valuer estimate of median value at change in year median value at 31MAR2017 to 31MAR2018 31MAR2016

E-Valuer price change in 2 years to 31MAR2018

E-Valuer estimate of median value at market peak (31OCT2007)

smaller areas, they should be treated with caution.

The average sales price compared to CV (capital value set for councils every three years which may be used as a basis to apportion rates) gives a general guide to what properties may sell relative to a reader’s own CV (which you will find on your rates bill or council website). Negative values mean that on average properties are selling below their latest CV, while positive numbers mean they are selling above. Most CVs are set between July and September in the year given. The tables should be regarded as giving only broad indications of value.

To determine market value of a particular property, visit QV.co.nz for the actual E-Valuer estimate and get advice from valuers and real estate agents.

E-Valuer price Sales price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price change since 28FEB2018 in relation to CV 28FEB2018 (no. of sales in 31DEC2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2016 (no. of sales in 31MAR2015 (no. of sales in change in 3 market peak brackets) brackets) (CV date in brackets) brackets) brackets) brackets) years to (31OCT2007) 31MAR2018

GREATER AUCKLAND RODNEY Arkles Bay

$882,200

$878,600

-1.2%

$881,650

-0.3%

$779,900

12.7%

$531,200

65.4%

-3.9 % (2017 )

$772,500 (8 )

$779,000 (7 )

$746,000 (14 )

$694,000 (23 )

$591,750 (22 )

Army Bay

$908,700

$905,600

-1.2%

$888,600

1.9%

$787,450

15.0%

$581,400

55.8%

-7.7 % (2017 )

$775,000 (3 )

$1,630,000 (1 )

$743,000 (12 )

$763,000 (5 )

$673,000 (10 )

15.2%

Gulf Harbour

$842,050 $686,550

$843,500 $686,500

0.4% 1.5%

$847,450 $672,350

-0.5% 2.1%

$756,700 $592,150

11.5% 15.9%

$572,400 $363,100

47.4% 89.1%

0.8 % (2017 ) 0.8 % (2017 )

$718,000 (15 ) $641,000 (18 )

$741,000 (21 ) $631,000 (14 )

$801,000 (34 ) $647,500 (20 )

$715,500 (60 ) $629,500 (23 )

$633,000 (68 ) $539,000 (25 )

13.4% 18.9%

Helensville Manly

30.5%

$922,250

$931,700

3.6%

$906,600

2.8%

$831,200

12.1%

$570,700

63.3%

-0.5 % (2017 )

$695,175 (22 )

$753,500 (24 )

$742,000 (25 )

$719,000 (42 )

$565,000 (49 )

23.0%

Ōmaha

$1,736,100

$1,716,650

6.2%

$1,570,450

9.3%

$1,366,250

25.6%

$1,016,900

68.8%

13.1 % (2017 )

$2,032,500 (4 )

$1,670,000 (5 )

$1,760,000 (15 )

$1,355,000 (19 )

$1,045,000 (19 )

94.5%

Ōrewa

$911,350 $933,350

$913,950 $945,200

0.1% 1.4%

$928,450 $964,950

-1.6% -2.0%

$845,750 $854,500

8.1% 10.6%

$562,300 $573,800

62.5% 64.7%

-2.1 % (2017 ) 1.7 % (2017 )

$890,000 (46 ) $821,500 (16 )

$937,000 (57 ) $827,000 (21 )

$868,000 (64 ) $897,500 (27 )

$815,000 (84 ) $742,000 (43 )

$709,500 (106 ) $695,000 (55 )

25.4% 18.2%

$1,122,650

$1,139,200

-0.1%

$1,144,500

-0.5%

$1,043,250

9.2%

N/A

N/A

-1.1 % (2017 )

$1,155,000 (23 )

$1,165,000 (31 )

$1,095,500 (38 )

$995,500 (48 )

$869,250 (86 )

32.9%

$792,900 $864,800

$791,950 $863,400

-0.2% 0.8%

$793,050 $854,600

-0.1% 1.0%

$698,950 $756,500

13.3% 14.1%

$528,300 $513,700

49.9% 68.1%

3.2 % (2017 ) 1.6 % (2017 )

$749,000 (21 ) $717,000 (23 )

$739,500 (18 ) $749,500 (30 )

$730,000 (29 ) $721,000 (53 )

$674,000 (25 ) $656,000 (69 )

$539,000 (49 ) $572,000 (67 )

39.0% 25.3%

Red Beach Silverdale Snells Beach Stanmore Bay Warkworth

$771,300

$766,450

-0.6%

$759,150

1.0%

$670,450

14.3%

$492,200

55.7%

4.0 % (2017 )

$672,000 (21 )

$742,000 (32 )

$737,000 (37 )

$686,500 (30 )

$512,000 (42 )

31.3%

$523,400

$520,550

-1.9%

$518,550

0.4%

$440,900

18.1%

$314,600

65.5%

2.7 % (2017 )

$504,000 (8 )

$499,500 (10 )

$517,000 (21 )

$410,500 (16 )

$356,000 (25 )

41.6%

$1,025,600 $1,426,200 $843,950 $905,200 $1,235,350

$1,029,250 $1,424,100 $843,800 $895,750 $1,235,950

1.9% 2.4% -0.6% 1.5% 1.9%

$980,000

5.0% 0.2% 0.4% 2.5% 2.9%

$911,450

84.2%

$922,000 (42 )

90.6% 96.0% 98.3% 104.4%

$1,157,000 (11 ) $775,500 (28 ) $792,000 (35 ) $944,000 (8 )

$1,157,000 (9 ) $744,119 (27 ) $839,300 (40 ) $1,151,000 (23 )

$795,666 (31 ) $1,623,000 (4 ) $776,500 (30 ) $774,500 (32 ) $1,303,000 (10 )

$1,012,000 (47 )

$747,200 $430,600 $451,700 $604,700

1.1 % (2017 ) 1.9 % (2017 ) -0.5 % (2017 ) -1.0 % (2017 ) 4.4 % (2017 )

$940,000 (23 )

$1,286,500 $778,550 $814,650 $1,101,350

12.9% 10.7% 8.4% 10.0% 12.2%

$558,800

$1,421,300 $840,150 $873,600 $1,201,000

$789,000 (59 ) $1,268,000 (9 ) $660,000 (50 ) $660,500 (70 ) $939,000 (23 )

19.1% -8.8% 17.5% 19.9% 0.5%

$796,850 $1,080,550 $1,057,500 $2,064,100

$791,200 $1,076,700 $1,048,050 $2,064,350

-0.8% 0.5%

$776,150 $1,067,100 $1,050,300 $1,880,900

1.9% 0.9% -0.2% 9.8%

$727,750 $974,400 $976,900 $1,712,150

8.7% 10.5% 7.3% 20.6%

$397,100 $565,700 $543,700 $1,028,600

99.2% 90.3% 92.8% 100.7%

2.1 % (2017 ) 3.6 % (2017 ) 0.1 % (2017 ) -2.1 % (2017 )

$832,500 (28 ) $850,500 (22 ) $959,000 (33 ) $2,072,775 (8 )

$774,000 (30 ) $1,105,000 (37 ) $957,000 (58 ) $2,178,500 (12 )

$719,000 (35 ) $959,500 (50 ) $959,500 (54 ) $2,165,000 (7 )

$672,000 (51 ) $853,000 (68 ) $1,008,000 (72 ) $1,706,500 (15 )

$577,500 (50 ) $716,500 (60 )

44.2% 18.7%

$1,678,100 $1,252,800 $1,731,950 $1,410,750 $1,215,400

$1,692,350 $1,254,000 $1,727,000 $1,420,100 $1,227,450

$1,652,400 $1,277,400

$1,495,950 $1,148,350

13.1% 9.2%

$940,500 $671,800

79.9% 86.7%

$1,242,000 (12 ) $1,165,000 (7 )

$1,402,000 (13 ) $1,175,000 (14 )

$1,480,000 (19 ) $1,152,500 (14 )

$1,419,000 (33 ) $1,137,000 (15 )

12.6% 49.1% -0.5% 20.5%

$1,564,250 $1,290,600 $1,110,050

10.4% 10.0% 10.6%

$951,700 N/A $551,200

81.5% N/A 122.7%

4.3 % (2017 ) -6.5 % (2017 ) 4.0 % (2017 ) -2.9 % (2017 ) -5.1 % (2017 )

$852,000 (71 ) $1,390,500 (18 ) $1,248,000 (39 ) $967,000 (17 )

$1,400,500 (20 ) $1,525,000 (4 ) $974,000 (19 )

$1,745,500 (30 ) $1,525,000 (13 ) $1,215,500 (32 )

$1,464,500 (26 ) $1,257,000 (9 ) $987,000 (32 )

$1,272,000 (31 ) $1,332,500 (14 ) $1,026,000 (37 )

$1,158,000 (41 ) $1,130,000 (24 ) $953,000 (48 )

20.9% 35.0% 2.2%

$429,700 $774,600

104.3% 89.7%

-1.6 % (2017 ) 8.9 % (2017 )

Hauraki Hillcrest

$881,050 $1,449,600 $1,549,450 $1,051,200

102.1% 114.2%

$817,000 (75 ) $1,466,500 (38 ) $1,622,000 (22 ) $998,500 (38 )

$800,000 (93 ) $1,204,000 (65 ) $1,309,500 (30 ) $914,000 (51 )

$690,500 (110 ) $1,130,000 (63 ) $945,800 (31 ) $884,000 (47 )

21.1% 15.0% 34.2% 8.7%

107.7% 91.8% 98.5%

1.5 % (2017 ) -4.9 % (2017 ) -2.8 % (2017 ) -5.5 % (2017 ) 4.2 % (2017 )

$844,000 (71 ) $1,550,000 (23 ) $1,315,500 (18 ) $1,015,500 (40 )

Mairangi Bay Milford Murrays Bay

$768,400 $490,500 $746,200 $755,700 $789,200

$836,000 (44 ) $1,300,000 (19 ) $1,269,000 (19 ) $961,000 (25 ) $1,272,500 (18 ) $1,129,000 (27 ) $1,415,000 (11 )

$1,469,000 (26 ) $1,014,000 (27 ) $1,561,000 (17 )

$1,367,000 (27 ) $1,145,000 (35 ) $1,397,000 (16 )

$1,385,000 (33 ) $991,000 (40 ) $1,518,000 (12 )

$1,245,500 (33 ) $1,061,000 (54 ) $1,374,000 (23 )

2.2% 6.4% 3.0%

Narrow Neck Northcote

3.4 % (2017 ) -5.5 % (2017 ) 5.2 % (2017 ) -3.5 % (2017 ) 9.6 % (2017 )

$1,267,500 (4 ) $897,125 (16 )

$1,563,000 (7 ) $916,500 (26 )

$1,201,500 (12 ) $907,000 (27 ) $1,280,000 (6 ) $1,082,750 (24 ) $743,500 (32 )

$987,000 (8 ) $892,500 (40 ) $1,175,000 (16 ) $811,500 (18 ) $695,000 (38 )

28.4% 0.5%

$1,337,000 (8 ) $1,109,500 (6 ) $651,000 (16 )

$1,375,000 (5 ) $1,130,000 (30 ) $1,140,000 (12 ) $954,500 (16 ) $701,900 (24 ) $1,155,000 (6 ) $955,000 (8 ) $1,230,000 (11 )

$1,260,000 (17 ) $1,315,000 (15 ) $1,411,250 (12 )

$955,000 (20 ) $1,192,000 (27 ) $971,500 (18 )

65.4% 2.8% 36.9%

Wellsford NORTH SHORE Albany Bayswater Bayview Beach Haven Belmont Birkdale Birkenhead Browns Bay Campbells Bay Castor Bay Chatswood Devonport Fairview Heights Forrest Hill Glenfield Greenhithe

Northcote Point Northcross Oteha Pinehill Rothesay Bay Schnapper Rock Stanley Point Sunnynook Takapuna Torbay Totara Vale Unsworth Heights Waiake Windsor Park WAITAKERE Glen Eden Glendene

1.2% 2.4% 3.3% -2.1%

$987,000 (17 ) $754,500 (56 ) $709,151 (59 ) $994,000 (15 )

-0.5% 3.0% 0.8%

$1,709,850 $1,340,000 $1,203,350

2.4% -1.8% 1.0% 6.0% 2.0%

$878,000 $1,469,650 $1,552,950 $1,050,750

0.3% 4.6% 0.7% 1.6%

$868,350 $1,445,250 $1,530,300 $1,041,950

1.1% 1.7% 1.5% 0.8%

$814,100 $1,313,600 $1,362,100 $982,050

7.8% 11.9% 14.0% 7.0%

$1,553,050 $1,452,100 $1,560,100

$1,550,050 $1,449,250 $1,566,550

-0.8% 0.4% 2.1%

$1,485,350 $1,420,550 $1,536,600

4.4% 2.0% 1.9%

$1,374,700 $1,300,800 $1,400,650

12.8% 11.4% 11.8%

$1,583,150 $1,086,800 $1,428,600 $1,121,050 $952,600

$1,568,200 $1,089,500 $1,426,450 $1,122,900 $959,050

0.3% 0.6% 1.3% 2.2% 1.6%

$1,586,900 $1,076,800 $1,386,100 $1,088,800 $895,450

-1.2% 1.2%

$1,445,550 $980,100

$843,500 $545,200

2.9% 3.1% 7.1%

$1,286,100 $1,026,900 $816,700

8.5% 11.2% 10.9% 9.3% 17.4%

$738,300 $567,600 $497,800

85.9% 99.8% 93.2% 97.8% 92.7%

$1,407,950 $1,411,850 $1,377,700

$1,411,400 $1,405,400 $1,408,550

2.9% 1.2% 2.9%

$1,343,050 $1,385,500 $1,351,450

5.1% 1.4% 4.2%

$1,254,300 $1,282,350 $1,261,100

12.5% 9.6% 11.7%

$733,900 $738,500 $793,400

92.3% 90.3% 77.5%

-0.4 % (2017 ) -0.7 % (2017 ) -3.3 % (2017 )

$1,580,000 (8 ) $1,225,000 (15 ) $1,330,000 (6 )

$1,642,000 (13 ) $1,294,400 (10 ) $1,130,000 (13 ) $1,585,000 (13 ) $1,385,500 (16 ) $1,325,000 (9 )

$2,027,400 $1,015,800 $1,747,850 $1,040,150

$2,012,700 $1,023,200 $1,757,150 $1,032,800

-0.7% 0.2% 0.9% 1.1%

$2,031,950 $1,021,200 $1,677,200 $1,015,550

-0.9% 0.2% 4.8% 1.7%

$1,788,950 $952,200 $1,502,500 $954,200

12.5% 7.5% 16.9% 8.2%

$1,114,200 $473,900 $934,700 $554,300

80.6% 115.9% 88.0% 86.3%

7.8 % (2017 ) 2.2 % (2017 ) 2.4 % (2017 ) -2.7 % (2017 )

$2,080,000 (3 ) $1,140,000 (13 ) $1,155,000 (17 ) $928,500 (30 )

$1,893,000 (9 ) $1,003,000 (19 ) $1,409,000 (19 ) $922,000 (51 )

$1,480,000 (7 ) $1,034,000 (19 ) $1,237,125 (32 ) $923,500 (52 )

$2,057,500 (8 ) $880,500 (22 ) $1,183,000 (42 ) $872,500 (76 )

$2,050,000 (9 ) $831,000 (30 ) $1,280,000 (59 ) $796,000 (103 )

1.5% 37.2% -9.8% 16.6%

$876,150 $980,350 $1,419,350 $1,195,900

$878,050 $988,300 $1,412,750 $1,197,200

-0.7% 0.0% 3.1% 0.1%

$877,250 $995,800 $1,373,800 $1,169,550

0.1% -0.8% 2.8% 2.4%

$799,550 $899,550 $1,279,350 $1,032,150

9.8% 9.9% 10.4% 16.0%

$432,700 $533,000 $818,500 $583,900

102.9% 85.4% 72.6% 105.0%

-2.3 % (2017 ) 2.0 % (2017 ) 5.4 % (2017 ) -7.0 % (2017 )

$814,000 (15 ) $985,000 (13 ) $1,390,000 (3 ) $1,046,000 (1 )

$819,000 (21 ) $905,000 (14 ) $1,262,000 (5 ) $1,215,000 (1 )

$789,800 (21 ) $917,000 (17 ) $1,095,500 (8 ) $1,189,000 (6 )

$762,000 (27 ) $824,500 (28 ) $1,065,500 (12 ) $885,000 (11 )

$710,000 (35 ) $758,000 (40 ) $886,000 (11 ) $751,000 (14 )

14.6% 29.9% 56.9% 39.3%

$720,150 $764,150

$717,000 $760,850

-1.4% -0.7%

$733,100 $764,850

-2.2% -0.5%

$669,750 $698,250

7.1% 9.0%

$359,000 $388,600

99.7% 95.8%

-4.2 % (2017 ) -1.3 % (2017 )

$670,500 (66 ) $723,000 (21 )

$680,500 (66 ) $734,000 (16 )

$716,250 (58 ) $699,250 (22 )

$628,000 (108 ) $683,000 (28 )

$545,500 (102 ) $589,000 (31 )

22.9% 22.8%

Smart property decisions start here

13.8% 36.7% -6.3%

13

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Green Bay Henderson Hobsonville Kelston Laingholm Massey New Lynn Piha Rānui

E-Valuer estimate of median value at 30APR2018

E-Valuer estimate of median value at 31MAR2018

E-Valuer price change in 3 months to 31MAR2018

$920,600 $771,600

$921,600 $771,650

$925,200 $784,800 $965,750

-0.4% -1.7%

E-Valuer estimate of E-Valuer price E-Valuer estimate of median value at change in year median value at 31MAR2017 to 31MAR2018 31MAR2016

E-Valuer price change in 2 years to 31MAR2018

E-Valuer estimate of median value at market peak (31OCT2007)

$837,050 $713,850

10.1% 8.1%

95.5% 92.0% 91.3%

-2.5 % (2017 ) -1.3 % (2017 )

115.4% 62.3%

E-Valuer price Sales price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price change since 28FEB2018 in relation to CV 28FEB2018 (no. of sales in 31DEC2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2016 (no. of sales in 31MAR2015 (no. of sales in change in 3 (CV date in brackets) brackets) brackets) brackets) years to market peak brackets) brackets) (31OCT2007) 31MAR2018

$977,250

$977,750

-0.7% -0.4% 1.1%

1.2%

$868,250

12.6%

$471,300 $401,800 $511,000

1.1 % (2017 )

$871,000 (8 ) $666,700 (95 ) $944,000 (39 )

$826,500 (12 ) $714,000 (119 ) $945,000 (38 )

$835,500 (12 ) $687,000 (95 ) $952,500 (44 )

$734,000 (14 ) $689,000 (175 ) $817,646 (48 )

$739,000 (15 ) $615,000 (215 ) $768,828 (70 )

$738,500 $807,800

$735,650 $803,700

0.4% -0.7%

$746,400 $830,500

-1.4% -3.2%

$686,450 $742,850

7.2% 8.2%

$341,600 $495,300

4.7 % (2017 ) -3.1 % (2017 )

$675,000 (7 ) $842,500 (6 )

$654,000 (13 ) $742,500 (7 )

$699,000 (6 ) $810,000 (3 )

$634,000 (17 ) $709,500 (15 )

$595,000 (23 ) $580,000 (10 )

$758,200

$756,000

1.5%

$760,600

-0.6%

$703,750

7.4%

$382,900

97.4%

1.7 % (2017 )

$691,000 (63 )

$696,000 (82 )

$716,250 (94 )

$647,500 (144 )

$593,500 (152 )

$753,750 $1,043,750

$750,300 $1,040,300

0.4% 5.2%

$760,900 $992,450

-1.4% 4.8%

$690,600 $898,550

8.6% 15.8%

$352,700 $768,700

112.7% 35.3%

-2.9 % (2017 ) 24.0 % (2017 )

$664,000 (43 ) $1,275,000 (5 )

$695,000 (42 ) $986,650 (5 )

$703,000 (62 ) $792,000 (6 )

$615,500 (83 ) $639,000 (7 )

$557,000 (92 ) $669,000 (10 )

17.9% 8.4% 22.8% 13.4% 45.3% 16.4% 19.2% 90.6% 24.1%

$710,450

$707,200

-0.5%

$702,750

0.6%

$644,500

9.7%

$346,500

104.1%

3.2 % (2017 )

$672,500 (40 )

$657,000 (47 )

$668,000 (41 )

$618,000 (61 )

$541,750 (80 )

Sunnyvale

$730,800

$727,750

0.6%

$742,900

-2.0%

$678,750

7.2%

$369,600

96.9%

3.4 % (2017 )

$675,500 (18 )

$672,000 (15 )

$651,000 (21 )

$575,650 (23 )

$530,000 (37 )

27.5%

Swanson

$834,500

$836,850

0.2%

$845,100

-1.0%

$766,250

9.2%

$460,800

81.6%

0.4 % (2017 )

$798,000 (13 )

$784,000 (24 )

$847,000 (17 )

$721,500 (16 )

$647,000 (19 )

23.3%

Te Atatū Peninsula Te Atatū South Titirangi

$971,400 $803,700 $936,100

$967,550 $804,300 $934,850

0.2% -0.1% 0.8%

$951,250 $826,700 $957,450

1.7% -2.7% -2.4%

$889,550 $768,750

8.8% 4.6%

111.4% 98.8%

-1.4 % (2017 ) -1.4 % (2017 ) -1.1 % (2017 )

$857,500 (48 )

$782,000 (69 )

$732,500 (68 ) $682,000 (63 ) $749,000 (70 )

34.6% 0.4%

79.5%

$919,000 (47 ) $806,000 (33 ) $910,000 (53 )

$856,500 (54 ) $725,000 (73 )

6.8%

$986,000 (32 ) $685,000 (40 ) $831,500 (30 )

$970,000 (41 ) $715,000 (47 )

$875,200

$457,600 $404,600 $520,900

West Harbour

$1,043,750

$1,046,600

2.6%

$1,035,500

1.1%

$930,100

12.5%

$546,400

91.5%

-0.7 % (2017 )

$1,027,000 (25 )

$1,002,500 (34 )

$890,888 (33 )

$759,000 (53 )

$744,000 (56 )

38.0%

AUCKLAND Auckland Central Avondale

$529,400

$530,350 $833,950 $981,100

1.7%

$505,800

-1.5 % (2017 ) -2.2 % (2017 ) -3.2 % (2017 )

$435,000 (159 ) $798,500 (28 ) $846,000 (22 )

$415,500 (228 ) $895,000 (43 ) $893,000 (29 )

$372,000 (307 )

$315,750 (342 )

$405,200 $475,000

88.2% 105.8% 106.5%

$410,000 (225 )

$761,900 $917,800

16.9% 9.5% 6.9%

$281,800

$830,300 $987,750

4.9% 0.4% -0.7%

$453,600

-0.8% -1.3%

$758,000 (67 ) $869,000 (44 )

$632,000 (79 ) $746,000 (51 )

37.8% 26.3% 13.4%

Blockhouse Bay Eden Terrace Ellerslie Epsom Freemans Bay Glen Innes Glendowie Grafton Greenlane Grey Lynn Herne Bay Hillsborough Kingsland Kohimarama Lynfield Meadowbank Mission Bay Morningside Mount Albert Mount Eden Mount Roskill Mount Wellington New Windsor Newmarket One Tree Hill Onehunga Oneroa Onetangi Ōrākei Ostend Ōtāhūhū Panmure Parnell Point Chevalier Point England Ponsonby Remuera Royal Oak Saint Johns Saint Marys Bay Sandringham St Heliers Stonefields Surfdale Three Kings Wai O Taiki Bay Waterview Westmere MANUKAU Beachlands Botany Downs Bucklands Beach Burswood Clendon Park Clover Park Cockle Bay Dannemora East Tāmaki East Tāmaki Heights Eastern Beach Farm Cove Favona

$834,200 $980,050

$824,500 (48 ) $914,500 (46 )

11.0%

$671,300

$675,900

0.8%

$661,350

2.2%

$585,150

15.5%

$361,500

87.0%

-1.0 % (2017 )

$633,000 (19 )

$600,000 (31 )

$554,000 (19 )

$522,000 (33 )

$378,500 (38 )

67.2%

$1,026,700 $1,894,650

$1,033,950 $1,893,350

0.0% -0.1%

$1,036,400 $1,844,600

-0.2% 2.6%

$938,800 $1,742,900

10.1% 8.6%

$490,000 $908,100

111.0% 108.5%

-1.7 % (2017 ) 0.3 % (2017 )

$799,000 (17 ) $1,494,000 (23 )

$904,500 (44 ) $1,565,000 (45 )

$1,145,000 (41 ) $1,834,000 (52 )

$853,000 (45 ) $1,613,000 (55 )

$713,000 (53 ) $1,501,000 (87 )

$1,306,900 $1,009,600 $1,685,200

$1,308,000 $1,013,100

$1,366,250 $950,900

-4.3% 6.5%

$1,208,500 $870,650

-2.3 % (2017 )

$1,390,000 (31 )

$1,355,000 (25 ) $1,000,000 (23 ) $1,656,500 (26 )

$810,000 (44 ) $930,000 (25 ) $1,445,000 (37 )

$1,236,000 (22 ) $736,000 (20 )

$1,514,250

$956,000 (13 ) $1,064,000 (6 ) $1,212,000 (13 )

$1,288,500 (22 ) $1,016,500 (12 )

1.0%

91.3% 142.1% 104.7%

-2.6 % (2017 ) 2.3 % (2017 )

$1,657,300

8.2% 16.4% 10.5%

$683,900 $418,500

$1,673,750

1.0% 0.9% -2.3%

12.1% -0.5% -22.7%

$568,300 $1,483,200 $1,446,300

$571,050 $1,479,250 $1,413,600

2.8% -0.8% 0.1%

$559,350 $1,483,000 $1,391,400

2.1% -0.3% 1.6%

$498,900 $1,388,600 $1,237,650

14.5% 6.5%

$317,900 $725,100 $654,100

-1.3 % (2017 ) -3.9 % (2017 ) -1.1 % (2017 )

$481,440 (22 ) $1,190,000 (12 ) $1,240,000 (29 )

$486,000 (37 ) $1,200,000 (23 ) $1,225,000 (55 )

$342,750 (24 ) $1,391,000 (14 ) $1,272,250 (56 )

$434,750 (36 ) $1,343,000 (26 ) $1,045,000 (52 )

$315,000 (33 ) $1,172,000 (25 ) $1,201,000 (66 )

52.8% 1.5%

14.2%

79.6% 104.0% 116.1%

$2,669,100 $1,113,300

$2,662,800 $1,115,000

2.3% -0.1%

$2,540,100 $1,123,000

4.8% -0.7%

$2,201,600 $1,027,500

20.9% 8.5%

$1,466,000 $580,000

81.6% 92.2%

0.5 % (2017 ) -2.8 % (2017 )

$1,353,500 (6 ) $904,000 (15 )

$1,387,000 (15 ) $977,000 (23 )

$2,883,000 (9 ) $875,000 (19 )

$2,310,000 (21 ) $955,000 (36 )

$1,430,000 (22 ) $890,000 (37 )

-5.3% 1.6%

$817,800

$1,147,500 (30 )

44.6% 5.6%

3.2%

$1,156,300

$1,145,650

2.4%

$1,139,050

0.6%

$1,051,200

9.0%

$538,300

112.8%

2.4 % (2017 )

$1,378,000 (6 )

$1,128,500 (6 )

$1,257,000 (11 )

$625,000 (12 )

$954,500 (15 )

44.4%

$1,732,850 $1,062,600

$1,751,950 $1,072,400

-0.4% 0.2%

$1,771,000 $1,060,800

-1.1% 1.1%

$1,516,750 $967,200

15.5% 10.9%

$934,600 $542,100

87.5% 97.8%

-5.5 % (2017 ) -2.5 % (2017 )

$1,361,500 (14 ) $921,000 (5 )

$1,746,000 (26 ) $926,500 (8 )

$1,583,000 (27 ) $1,424,000 (6 )

$1,435,000 (29 ) $1,272,000 (11 )

$1,360,000 (27 ) $702,500 (18 )

$1,323,650 $1,827,350

0.1% -1.4% 1.1%

$1,312,550 $1,800,750 $1,061,000

0.7% 2.3%

11.1% 20.4% 9.8%

117.9% 94.3%

$1,222,500 (23 ) $1,408,000 (9 )

$1,290,000 (21 ) $1,592,000 (21 )

$507,900

108.6%

0.6 % (2017 ) -2.5 % (2017 ) -6.0 % (2017 )

$1,382,500 (12 ) $1,490,250 (4 )

-0.1%

$1,189,150 $1,530,350 $964,650

$606,600 $948,500

$1,065,150

$1,321,500 $1,842,700 $1,059,450

$890,000 (10 )

$569,500 (10 )

$1,210,000 (13 )

$1,135,000 (33 ) $1,537,000 (23 ) $763,750 (22 )

$1,045,000 (21 ) $1,240,000 (25 ) $797,000 (18 )

0.1% 31.1% 32.3% 20.2% 11.7%

$1,106,750 $1,480,700 $983,100

$1,104,150 $1,469,300 $985,350

0.7% 0.7%

0.5% 0.4% 0.9%

$1,000,350 $1,328,650

10.4% 10.6%

$905,700

8.8%

$517,900 $688,600 $475,700

113.2% 113.4% 107.1%

1.0 % (2017 ) -0.3 % (2017 ) -2.2 % (2017 )

$1,207,000 (31 ) $1,359,750 (32 )

0.5%

$1,098,750 $1,462,900 $977,000

$1,315,250 (56 ) $1,530,000 (65 ) $921,000 (64 )

$1,140,000 (37 ) $1,497,500 (62 ) $912,000 (55 )

$830,000 (48 ) $1,140,000 (99 ) $843,000 (90 )

$702,000 (75 ) $1,022,500 (106 ) $768,500 (108 )

71.9% 33.0% 21.5%

$796,100 $993,250 $778,250

$802,200 $997,550 $782,400

0.8% 0.2% 0.1%

$808,150 $975,150 $727,150

-0.7% 2.3% 7.6%

$733,500 $895,100 $688,600

9.4% 11.4% 13.6%

$385,800 $458,400 N/A

107.9% 117.6% N/A

-0.8 % (2017 ) 1.2 % (2017 ) -2.9 % (2017 )

$762,500 (69 ) $1,019,000 (15 ) $722,500 (10 )

$799,000 (75 ) $941,750 (12 ) $794,000 (10 )

$672,500 (90 ) $822,000 (23 ) $767,500 (4 )

$607,000 (129 ) $755,800 (19 ) $567,000 (9 )

18.1% 28.6% 51.2%

$1,068,700 $928,000 $1,431,650

$1,073,250 $929,700 $1,420,300

0.4% 0.6% 1.4%

$1,081,900 $932,750 $1,283,750

-0.8% -0.3% 10.6%

$992,450 $865,800 $1,093,750

8.1% 7.4% 29.9%

$520,500 $464,300 $688,100

106.2% 100.2% 106.4%

$1,115,250 (24 ) $769,500 (62 ) $994,000 (13 )

$1,056,000 (13 ) $787,000 (55 ) $1,019,000 (22 )

$1,108,500 (14 ) $784,000 (67 ) $940,000 (25 )

$823,000 (19 ) $713,750 (84 ) $777,000 (28 )

35.1% 9.6% 21.1%

$1,421,850 $1,862,650 $964,350 $623,600

$1,417,850 $1,885,300 $974,400 $630,850

1.5% -0.6% 2.4% 4.4%

$1,248,750 $1,785,050 $928,750 $619,550

13.5% 5.6% 4.9% 1.8%

$1,071,700 $1,660,550 $812,000 $562,700

32.3% 13.5% 20.0% 12.1%

$739,500 $988,300 $515,500 $298,700

91.7% 90.8% 89.0% 111.2%

1.8 % (2017 ) 2.4 % (2017 ) -1.2 % (2017 ) -1.4 % (2017 )

$717,000 (61 ) $972,000 (11 ) $857,500 (12 ) $1,112,000 (13 ) $782,000 (35 ) $941,000 (10 ) $723,000 (9 ) $1,410,000 (8 ) $878,500 (12 ) $570,000 (16 )

$792,000 (11 ) $1,840,000 (15 ) $777,000 (13 ) $603,000 (23 )

$1,312,000 (7 ) $1,520,400 (22 ) $832,000 (13 ) $647,000 (31 )

$820,000 (17 ) $1,758,500 (24 ) $867,000 (13 ) $664,500 (30 )

0.1% -12.5% 31.9% 14.3%

$820,250 $1,637,100 $1,487,000 $945,500

$825,150 $1,660,050 $1,492,550 $955,900

1.1% -0.2% 1.3% 1.0%

$832,400 $1,625,750 $1,464,000 $916,000

-0.9% 2.1% 2.0% 4.4%

$760,050 $1,476,100 $1,315,950 $830,900

8.6% 12.5% 13.4% 15.0%

$403,300 $915,800 $667,500 $397,500

104.6% 81.3% 123.6% 140.5%

1.8 % (2017 ) 5.0 % (2017 ) 10.0 % (2017 )

$868,000 (8 ) $1,560,000 (20 ) $1,574,000 (19 ) $754,000 (3 )

$906,850 (12 ) $1,272,500 (28 ) $1,592,000 (33 ) $806,000 (2 )

$837,000 (13 ) $1,697,500 (42 ) $1,421,500 (30 ) $957,000 (5 )

$891,000 (19 ) $1,586,000 (32 ) $1,248,500 (32 ) $857,000 (7 )

$722,000 (13 ) $1,610,625 (22 ) $666,000 (12 ) $498,500 (52 ) $646,000 (20 )

$1,810,900 $2,082,000 $1,144,450 $1,235,700

$1,794,350 $2,089,900 $1,148,250

0.9% -0.1% -0.7%

2.2% 1.1% 0.4%

$1,546,300 $1,828,350 $1,058,550

16.0% 14.3% 8.5%

$853,500 $1,058,800 $561,700

110.2% 97.4% 104.4%

5.6 % (2017 ) -3.6 % (2017 ) -4.4 % (2017 )

$2,004,000 (12 ) $1,479,000 (60 ) $1,106,000 (14 )

$1,668,000 (21 ) $1,743,500 (112 ) $1,318,000 (11 )

$1,707,000 (21 ) $1,717,000 (93 ) $1,015,000 (14 )

0.3% 2.7% 2.7% -1.6%

$2,272,400 $1,103,900 $1,732,350

2.5% 0.9% 1.3% 0.9%

$1,082,400 $2,005,400 $1,007,150 $1,521,700

13.5% 14.4% 11.0% 14.9%

$600,800 $1,212,900 $504,400 $927,200

104.4% 89.1% 121.7% 88.5%

$1,068,500 (16 ) $877,500 (4 ) $890,000 (18 ) $1,232,000 (27 )

$1,146,000 (25 ) $899,000 (6 ) $1,030,000 (36 ) $1,639,000 (37 )

$1,385,000 (19 ) $2,590,000 (3 ) $1,007,000 (39 ) $1,239,444 (54 )

$1,327,600 $964,650 $1,004,450

$1,332,050 $965,750 $1,015,750

0.8% 3.1% 0.0%

$1,313,100 $885,500 $1,012,150

1.4% 9.1% 0.4%

$1,185,400 $789,100 $936,550

N/A $516,800 $514,100

N/A 86.9% 97.6%

$1,275,000 (14 ) $940,000 (9 ) $725,500 (6 )

$1,183,000 (27 ) $811,000 (12 ) $772,500 (8 )

$1,345,250 (20 ) $852,000 (14 ) $736,500 (8 )

$1,352,200 $896,100 $1,894,450

$1,353,800 $899,000 $1,849,800

0.5% 0.1% -1.4%

$1,224,200 $926,900 $1,857,600

10.6% -3.0% -0.4%

$1,128,250 $856,800 $1,649,600

12.4% 22.4% 8.5% 20.0%

-0.1 % (2017 ) -10.9 % (2017 ) 1.8 % (2017 ) -0.3 % (2017 ) -1.8 % (2017 ) -4.2 % (2017 ) -3.4 % (2017 )

$1,485,000 (26 ) $1,615,500 (134 ) $1,037,000 (23 ) $974,500 (22 )

$2,302,600 $1,118,150 $1,740,350

$1,228,100 $2,293,900 $1,118,400 $1,747,800

$1,755,750 $2,067,900 $1,143,700 $1,197,750

$528,600 $453,200 $869,900

156.1% 98.4% 112.6%

-4.5 % (2017 ) 5.7 % (2017 ) 4.5 % (2017 )

$1,277,500 (4 ) $867,000 (12 ) $1,618,000 (9 )

$1,182,000 (3 ) $914,000 (19 ) $1,902,500 (16 )

$1,201,450 $1,016,800 $1,320,550

$1,204,550 $1,005,650 $1,321,150 $930,700

-1.7% -0.2% 2.5%

$1,209,250 $990,400 $1,288,450

$1,044,800 $942,250 $1,158,150

15.3% 6.7% 14.1%

1.6% -1.4% 2.4%

$874,250 $525,400 $602,150 $1,142,600

6.5% 7.5% 8.9% 14.3%

82.6% 92.4% 103.3% 96.1%

$1,180,500 (24 ) $924,000 (14 ) $1,090,500 (20 )

$933,900 $556,000 $664,750 $1,275,850 $1,451,550 $892,700 $1,326,100

$659,700 $522,600 $650,000 $474,700

-1.8 % (2017 ) -3.2 % (2017 ) 1.7 % (2017 )

1.0% 1.9% 2.4% 0.4%

-0.4% 1.5% 2.5% -0.3%

$293,100 $335,700 $694,800

92.8% 95.3% 88.0%

3.4 % (2017 ) 4.3 % (2017 ) -1.2 % (2017 ) 10.0 % (2017 )

-2.8% -1.3% -0.3%

$1,284,200 $815,100 $1,223,600

9.9% 8.0% 8.1%

96.5% 87.0% 89.5%

0.2% 3.7% 4.6%

$1,330,400 $1,224,250 $614,350

14.3% 11.5% 15.2%

$718,200 $471,000 $697,600 $792,500

91.9% 102.3% 104.2%

$928,900 $564,500 $661,150 $1,295,600

$565,000 $655,500 $1,306,350

$1,424,800 $891,200 $1,331,100

$1,411,250 $880,700 $1,322,300

$1,520,100 $1,366,700 $713,450

$1,520,650 $1,365,500 $707,650

1.5% -1.6% 0.8% 1.6% 0.3% 1.9%

$1,517,950 $1,316,300 $676,450

Smart property decisions start here

4.9% 12.1%

$674,900 $346,600

-4.3 % (2017 ) 7.1 % (2017 ) -4.9 % (2017 ) 3.9 % (2017 )

$934,000 (42 )

$1,030,000 (53 ) $980,000 (28 ) $689,000 (9 )

34.4% 51.5% 60.6% 9.4%

$1,542,500 (32 ) $1,525,000 (157 ) $781,000 (20 )

29.9% -3.0% 41.6%

$1,119,000 (24 ) $813,000 (16 ) $640,000 (9 )

$935,000 (15 ) $2,411,000 (14 ) $682,500 (44 ) $1,167,500 (72 ) $893,000 (56 ) $820,000 (17 ) $594,000 (10 )

14.3% -63.6% 30.4% 5.5% 42.8% 14.6% 22.1%

$1,588,500 (2 ) $783,000 (4 ) $1,712,500 (16 )

$1,072,500 (6 ) $849,000 (13 ) $1,590,000 (15 )

$1,797,500 (2 ) $913,000 (16 ) $1,395,000 (14 )

-28.9% -5.0% 16.0%

$1,215,000 (47 ) $921,500 (20 ) $1,185,000 (25 )

$1,202,000 (41 ) $921,000 (23 ) $1,252,500 (30 )

$1,115,000 (22 ) $915,500 (22 ) $1,020,000 (43 )

$885,444 (35 ) $777,750 (44 ) $867,000 (53 )

33.3% 18.8% 25.8%

$850,000 (4 ) $525,000 (17 ) $641,500 (8 ) $1,079,000 (10 )

$896,500 (8 ) $519,500 (26 ) $609,000 (15 ) $1,171,500 (18 )

$830,000 (8 ) $518,000 (41 ) $555,000 (28 ) $1,102,000 (23 )

$758,000 (8 ) $380,500 (72 ) $480,000 (27 ) $871,500 (24 )

12.1% 38.0% 33.6% 23.8%

-10.9 % (2017 ) 3.4 % (2017 ) -4.8 % (2017 )

$1,318,500 (6 ) $863,000 (17 ) $1,250,000 (13 )

$1,260,000 (14 ) $795,000 (22 ) $1,170,000 (15 )

0.0 % (2017 ) -2.6 % (2017 ) 4.8 % (2017 )

$1,242,000 (5 ) $1,334,000 (5 ) $702,750 (10 )

$1,272,500 (12 ) $941,000 (13 ) $1,107,000 (13 ) $1,527,000 (5 )

$894,000 (9 ) $589,000 (25 ) $645,000 (19 ) $1,177,000 (17 ) $1,500,000 (9 ) $1,056,000 (28 ) $1,187,000 (15 ) $1,094,500 (4 ) $1,217,000 (11 ) $646,500 (22 )

$1,365,000 (3 ) $851,000 (11 ) $603,000 (21 )

$1,080,000 (21 ) $662,000 (37 ) $976,000 (26 ) $1,002,500 (4 )

22.1% 30.4% 28.1% 23.9%

$705,000 (11 ) $499,000 (27 )

89.2% 40.8%

$1,336,000 (9 ) $682,000 (13 )

$1,265,000 (14 ) $998,250 (36 ) $1,375,000 (70 )

14

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Flat Bush Golflands Goodwood Heights Half Moon Bay Highland Park Howick Māngere Māngere Bridge Māngere East Manurewa Manurewa East

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

E-Valuer price change in 3

E-Valuer estimate of E-Valuer price E-Valuer estimate of median value at change in year median value at

E-Valuer price change in 2

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

30APR2018

31MAR2018

months to 31MAR2018

31MAR2017

to 31MAR2018

$1,037,400 $1,061,350

-0.8% -0.5% -0.3%

$1,061,850 $1,069,650 $873,450

-1.8% -1.6%

$879,250

$1,042,350 $1,053,000 $882,100

$1,220,700 $917,900

$1,217,050 $909,000

1.8% -0.4%

$1,214,200 $927,050

E-Valuer price Sales price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price change since 28FEB2018 in relation to CV 28FEB2018 (no. of sales in 31DEC2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2016 (no. of sales in 31MAR2015 (no. of sales in change in 3

31MAR2016

years to 31MAR2018

market peak (31OCT2007)

market peak (31OCT2007)

(CV date in brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

4.3% 4.0% 8.0%

$582,800 $551,600

$1,045,000 (64 ) $1,102,000 (13 )

$1,048,500 (90 ) $1,218,000 (10 )

$1,039,000 (95 ) $1,050,000 (9 )

$959,500 (116 ) $834,000 (13 )

$837,000 (227 ) $630,000 (17 )

24.9% 74.9%

$526,300

78.9% 90.9% 67.6%

-4.0 % (2017 ) 5.0 % (2017 )

1.0%

$999,150 $1,012,150 $816,650

2.2 % (2017 )

$910,000 (9 )

$917,000 (11 )

$753,000 (11 )

$647,000 (14 )

$631,500 (20 )

44.1%

0.2% -1.9%

$1,102,800 $858,200

10.4% 5.9%

$619,100 $472,900

96.6% 92.2%

-4.0 % (2017 ) -4.9 % (2017 )

$864,000 (17 ) $778,000 (6 )

$944,000 (27 ) $1,062,000 (5 )

$937,000 (29 ) $960,000 (11 )

$930,000 (36 ) $820,500 (12 )

$772,000 (43 ) $690,000 (26 )

years to 31MAR2018

$996,400

$996,800

1.1%

$987,400

1.0%

$889,900

12.0%

$512,000

94.7%

-1.1 % (2017 )

$912,000 (36 )

$855,000 (55 )

$872,000 (40 )

$852,000 (61 )

$759,000 (77 )

11.9% 12.8% 20.2%

$672,200 $965,750

$665,000 $972,700

-1.2% 1.5%

$674,950 $986,000

-1.5% -1.3%

$623,000 $880,850

6.7% 10.4%

$339,800 $455,700

95.7% 113.5%

-1.4 % (2017 ) -2.0 % (2017 )

$639,000 (22 ) $756,000 (19 )

$654,000 (23 ) $855,500 (24 )

$641,750 (36 ) $958,000 (20 )

$611,000 (43 ) $774,500 (26 )

$489,500 (50 ) $715,500 (32 )

30.5% 5.7%

$659,250

$655,000

0.6%

$655,100

0.0%

$591,800

10.7%

$317,000

106.6%

1.5 % (2017 )

$640,000 (38 )

$633,500 (47 )

$621,500 (36 )

$594,500 (64 )

$456,500 (64 )

40.2%

$660,600

$658,500

-0.4%

$649,300

1.4%

$604,100

9.0%

$336,800

95.5%

0.1 % (2017 )

$581,000 (73 )

$595,000 (89 )

$614,500 (134 )

$563,500 (198 )

$447,000 (230 )

30.0%

$613,250

$614,900

-1.8%

$624,150

-1.5%

$559,900

9.8%

$321,400

91.3%

0.7 % (2017 )

$587,000 (5 )

$621,500 (8 )

$638,000 (9 )

$527,500 (14 )

$445,500 (16 )

31.8%

$1,281,950 $1,669,850

$1,281,400 $1,657,150

0.8% 0.9%

$1,286,250 $1,609,050

-0.4% 3.0%

$1,135,950 $1,458,250

12.8% 13.6%

$748,500 $812,100

71.2% 104.1%

-1.2 % (2017 ) -0.4 % (2017 )

$1,187,000 (7 ) $1,787,000 (5 )

$1,155,000 (9 ) $1,910,000 (10 )

$1,131,500 (6 ) $1,331,000 (10 )

$1,120,000 (11 ) $1,499,000 (11 )

$887,000 (15 ) $1,172,000 (28 )

33.8% 52.5%

$1,169,850

$1,170,500

-0.5%

$1,147,500

2.0%

$1,104,850

5.9%

$585,100

100.1%

3.4 % (2017 )

$1,142,000 (7 )

$1,077,000 (15 )

$1,034,500 (10 )

$1,087,000 (21 )

$936,750 (34 )

21.9%

$563,600 $941,050

$555,150 $937,100

1.1% 0.3%

$579,800 $939,000

-4.3% -0.2%

$523,350 $849,950

6.1% 10.3%

$280,300 $467,900

98.1% 100.3%

-3.7 % (2017 ) -3.0 % (2017 )

$543,166 (10 ) $852,500 (16 )

$534,500 (12 ) $839,000 (27 )

$545,000 (24 ) $864,000 (22 )

$510,500 (32 ) $735,000 (25 )

$397,000 (42 ) $702,000 (53 )

36.8% 21.4%

$907,950

$902,350

-0.8%

$921,550

-2.1%

$849,100

6.3%

$448,500

101.2%

-3.8 % (2017 )

$788,000 (16 )

$886,500 (16 )

$886,500 (18 )

$793,500 (34 )

$703,500 (32 )

12.0%

$710,700 $612,650

$712,850 $611,000

-0.8% 0.4%

$709,000 $607,050

0.5% 0.7%

$638,800 $553,100

11.6% 10.5%

$368,200 $323,600

93.6% 88.8%

-2.6 % (2017 ) -1.2 % (2017 )

$672,000 (85 ) $555,000 (19 )

$696,000 (112 ) $612,000 (22 )

$684,000 (112 ) $632,000 (13 )

$614,000 (179 ) $579,000 (23 )

$510,000 (233 ) $378,500 (36 )

$1,238,400

$1,242,200

1.0%

$1,264,950

-1.8%

$1,143,650

8.6%

$706,300

75.9%

6.2 % (2017 )

$924,500 (4 )

$1,028,000 (8 )

$980,000 (8 )

$1,050,000 (9 )

$902,000 (9 )

31.8% 46.6% 2.5%

$1,210,000 $1,291,450

$1,203,550 $1,289,150

-0.4% 1.3%

$1,197,100 $1,264,000

0.5% 2.0%

$1,119,100 $1,169,750

7.5% 10.2%

$633,800 $638,900

89.9% 101.8%

-3.9 % (2017 ) -3.0 % (2017 )

$961,000 (12 ) $1,090,000 (7 )

$1,181,500 (14 ) $1,057,000 (18 )

$1,083,500 (12 ) $1,180,000 (15 )

$1,187,000 (21 ) $1,232,000 (16 )

$951,000 (28 ) $1,043,000 (20 )

$995,500 $820,850

$1,008,200 $818,800

-2.5% -1.2%

$1,026,500 $830,000

-1.8% -1.3%

6.9% 5.7%

$620,800 $487,300

$894,000 (3 ) $842,500 (9 )

$948,000 (8 ) $815,000 (8 )

$962,000 (13 ) $727,000 (8 )

$901,000 (15 ) $679,000 (11 )

$794,750

0.2%

$806,450

-1.5%

5.4%

$449,400

62.4% 68.0% 76.8%

-7.6 % (2017 ) 9.6 % (2017 )

$796,400

$942,750 $775,000 $754,350

-2.9 % (2017 )

$760,500 (20 )

$767,500 (33 )

$801,750 (32 )

$756,000 (54 )

$745,000 (15 ) $658,750 (20 ) $646,000 (53 )

$633,200

$632,150

-0.8%

$642,450

-1.6%

$572,700

10.4%

$330,600

91.2%

-1.0 % (2017 )

$569,000 (21 )

$644,000 (37 )

$626,000 (31 )

$567,850 (58 )

$435,000 (69 )

30.8%

$813,850

$811,950 $786,950 $547,750

0.9% -0.3% 0.7%

$778,950 $799,150 $547,550

4.2% -1.5% 0.0%

$697,800

$458,600 $304,500

53.7% 71.6% 79.9%

2.2 % (2017 ) 0.5 % (2017 ) -4.1 % (2017 )

$740,000 (9 ) $758,000 (10 ) $416,500 (8 )

$755,000 (7 ) $728,500 (14 ) $416,500 (10 )

$664,000 (14 ) $829,000 (16 ) $553,000 (8 )

$567,500 (12 ) $670,500 (16 ) $462,500 (20 )

$612,500 (8 ) $592,500 (24 ) $350,000 (27 )

20.8%

$719,300 $479,500

16.4% 9.4% 14.2%

$528,300

$782,500 $547,000 $694,700

$692,650

1.5%

$693,850

-0.2%

$649,950

6.6%

$391,900

76.7%

1.4 % (2017 )

$682,000 (14 )

$691,500 (14 )

$687,000 (15 )

$655,000 (18 )

$544,500 (22 )

25.3%

$763,600 $616,700

$761,350 $615,600

0.0% 1.2%

$762,900 $612,600

-0.2% 0.5%

$705,450 $553,700

7.9% 11.2%

$444,100 $324,400

71.4% 89.8%

0.1 % (2017 ) -2.1 % (2017 )

$809,500 (12 ) $619,000 (84 )

$756,000 (22 ) $588,000 (94 )

$739,500 (22 ) $604,000 (117 )

$661,500 (24 ) $565,500 (192 )

$643,000 (15 ) $422,000 (177 )

25.9% 46.7%

$674,050 $602,600 $661,700

$672,950 $600,950 $659,800

0.8% -0.1% 2.1%

$667,850 $599,500 $680,550

0.8% 0.2%

$609,900 $540,100

10.3% 11.3%

$406,400 $336,700

65.6% 78.5%

-0.5 % (2017 ) 2.5 % (2017 )

$643,000 (88 ) $531,000 (7 )

$674,000 (121 ) $643,000 (9 )

$605,000 (159 ) $524,500 (8 )

$579,000 (162 ) $473,000 (15 )

$499,000 (147 ) $459,000 (17 )

28.9% 15.7%

-3.0%

$624,150

5.7%

$374,300

76.3%

3.5 % (2017 )

$544,550 (6 )

$649,500 (16 )

$635,000 (13 )

$559,000 (21 )

$444,750 (20 )

22.4%

$709,500 $617,400

$709,750 $617,850

0.6% -0.2%

$715,350 $612,050

-0.8% 0.9%

$638,450 $546,050

11.2% 13.1%

$393,200 $377,600

80.5% 63.6%

-0.2 % (2017 ) 0.6 % (2017 )

$722,000 (33 ) $639,500 (48 )

$739,000 (51 ) $571,000 (57 )

$678,000 (56 ) $569,500 (61 )

$628,000 (48 ) $537,000 (73 )

$564,000 (121 ) $388,500 (98 )

28.0% 64.6%

$323,900 $179,350 $225,950 $484,750

$323,050 $180,000 $225,800 $486,900

$275,400 $172,700 $208,600 $458,150

44.1% 1.2% 5.4% 34.9%

10.2 % (2017 ) 15.2 % (2016 ) 19.1 % (2016 ) 40.8 % (2015 )

$329,000 (31 ) $155,000 (11 ) $211,000 (27 ) $499,500 (52 )

$314,000 (29 ) $164,000 (17 ) $191,000 (35 ) $462,500 (66 )

$292,500 (24 ) $155,500 (26 ) $180,750 (30 ) $485,500 (58 )

$190,000 (40 ) $123,000 (17 ) $165,500 (20 ) $339,000 (69 )

$190,322 (16 ) $146,000 (8 ) $165,000 (21 ) $329,000 (55 )

72.9% 6.2% 27.9% 51.8%

$416,500 $622,400 $766,250

43.3% 30.3% 27.2% 25.8% 26.6% 24.3% 24.6%

$224,200 $177,800 $214,200 $360,900

$448,700 $666,550 $828,800

17.3% 4.2% 8.2% 6.3% 7.7% 7.1% 8.2%

$225,400 $138,100 $177,450 $386,950

$448,900 $664,150 $839,850

4.8% -2.5% 0.1% 2.3% 2.7% 0.2% 1.1%

$344,000 $508,700 $552,800

30.4% 31.0% 49.9%

50.8 % (2015 ) 15.9 % (2016 ) 5.1 % (2017 )

-0.7% 3.5% 4.4% 1.5%

$573,100 $362,450 $702,450 $419,550

6.5% 10.4% 3.4% 5.1%

$492,950 $303,150 $567,200 $354,750

$463,100 $279,200 $574,000 $335,100

31.7% 43.4% 26.5% 31.5%

32.0 % (2015 ) 45.6 % (2015 ) 50.0 % (2015 ) 34.4 % (2015 )

$390,000 (6 ) $664,500 (10 ) $398,000 (31 )

$355,000 (9 ) $586,000 (5 ) $405,250 (32 )

35.9% 65.3% 46.2% 35.4%

Tikipunga Whangārei Heads

$546,050 $397,250 $672,250

$548,300 $397,850 $663,450

13.0% 2.6% 7.2% 6.2%

$244,600 $426,900 $308,300 $531,250

34.8% 37.9% 34.0% 22.5%

57.8 % (2015 ) 40.1 % (2015 ) 41.8 % (2015 ) 39.6 % (2015 )

$350,000 (19 ) $536,000 (6 ) $388,000 (24 ) $640,000 (5 )

$343,750 (16 ) $287,500 (37 ) $510,000 (11 )

$167,000 (15 ) $323,750 (18 ) $275,000 (35 ) $385,000 (8 )

109.6% 65.6% 41.1% 66.2%

$435,750

$439,750

0.9%

$418,800

5.0%

$344,450

$343,700

27.9%

50.6 % (2015 )

$464,500 (12 )

$352,500 (18 ) $576,500 (10 ) $400,000 (15 ) $600,000 (4 ) $436,250 (10 )

$557,000 (25 ) $350,500 (38 ) $619,000 (15 )

Whau Valley

28.4% 29.0% 24.9% 27.7%

$244,800 $397,700 $296,900 $541,600

$308,000 (24 ) $544,500 (14 ) $314,000 (53 ) $251,000 (37 )

$236,000 (14 ) $454,620 (20 ) $294,000 (43 )

$292,200 $534,450 $371,050 $624,600

$503,000 (12 ) $366,000 (16 ) $604,000 (17 ) $387,000 (45 ) $279,000 (29 )

$301,500 (40 ) $431,750 (50 ) $456,500 (32 ) $397,000 (17 )

2.2% 0.8% 2.0% 1.9%

23.8% 32.0% 28.1% 24.3% 34.9%

$345,850 (44 ) $474,500 (78 ) $647,000 (32 ) $499,500 (20 )

32.7% 51.1% 55.2%

$610,100 $400,250 $726,300 $440,800 $330,050

$415,000 (21 ) $634,500 (54 ) $755,000 (21 ) $659,000 (9 )

$410,000 (37 ) $583,500 (62 ) $733,000 (34 )

$613,650 $406,000 $723,450 $440,750 $331,400

$400,000 (21 ) $652,250 (36 ) $708,500 (21 ) $539,500 (10 )

$451,000 (8 )

$304,000 (11 )

$252,000 (11 )

84.3%

COROMANDEL/HAURAKI/MATAMATA Matamata $484,300 $684,150 Matarangi Morrinsville $467,600

$484,950 $671,650 $467,900

-0.5% 1.4% 1.7%

$441,350 $647,000 $439,050

9.9% 3.8% 6.6%

$363,200 $562,400 $347,200

33.5% 19.4% 34.8%

$320,200 $584,500 $315,400

51.5% 14.9% 48.4%

48.2 % (2015 ) 1.7 % (2017 ) 49.6 % (2015 )

-0.8% 1.7% 2.0% -0.1%

$333,150 $776,800 $640,650 $372,100

5.1% 9.8% 8.7% 6.3%

$261,600 $680,550 $526,750 $287,800

33.8% 25.3% 32.3% 37.4%

$233,400 $684,500 $537,000 $266,200

50.0% 24.6% 29.7% 48.6%

64.2 % (2015 ) 6.6 % (2017 ) 3.9 % (2017 ) 55.8 % (2015 )

53.2% 55.9% 54.8% 41.5%

$805,000 (21 ) $525,000 (13 ) $368,000 (20 )

$679,000 (21 ) $559,500 (12 ) $371,000 (23 )

$328,000 (6 ) $661,000 (32 ) $492,500 (24 ) $355,000 (35 )

$329,000 (80 ) $384,000 (28 ) $329,000 (81 ) $251,000 (47 )

$284,000 (53 ) $345,000 (13 ) $279,000 (59 )

$350,150 $853,050 $696,650 $395,500

$449,750 (54 ) $505,500 (20 ) $411,800 (52 ) $321,000 (22 )

$468,500 (55 ) $579,000 (23 ) $390,000 (62 )

$350,450 $875,400 $697,950 $395,250

$435,000 (31 ) $538,000 (13 ) $432,000 (27 ) $341,750 (16 )

Waihi Whangamata

$492,200 $355,200 $784,050

2.9% 0.3% 3.6%

$466,100 $345,800 $703,350

5.0% 2.3% 10.0%

$380,700 $272,550 $581,800

28.5% 29.8% 33.0%

$336,800 $256,700 $533,000

45.2% 37.8% 45.2%

$490,500 (26 ) $311,000 (23 ) $646,000 (40 )

$653,600

2.2%

$600,700

8.5%

$495,750

31.4%

$476,200

36.8%

7.7 % (2017 ) 60.1 % (2015 ) 1.1 % (2017 ) 6.8 % (2017 )

$452,000 (25 ) $302,500 (14 ) $646,000 (37 )

Whitianga

$489,200 $353,700 $773,850 $651,500

$542,000 (44 )

$368,850 $633,350 $548,850

$373,850 $628,600 $545,250

3.1% 1.2% 0.5%

$362,050 $612,900 $524,000

3.3% 2.6% 4.1%

$329,900 $552,300 $473,050

$257,900 $432,700 $364,300

45.0% 45.3% 49.7%

29.8 % (2015 ) 27.1 % (2015 ) 28.6 % (2015 )

$509,100 $487,950 $391,500 $493,250

$506,000 $486,100 $386,600 $490,150

-1.7% -0.6% 0.0% 0.8%

$504,950 $468,850 $374,200 $476,850

0.2% 3.7% 3.3% 2.8%

$452,400 $425,600 $333,650 $430,150

13.3% 13.8% 15.3% 11.8% 14.2% 15.9% 13.9%

$352,200 $332,400 $270,100 $340,600

43.7% 46.2% 43.1% 43.9%

23.3 % (2015 ) 28.9 % (2015 ) 40.4 % (2015 ) 28.0 % (2015 )

$493,450 $492,750

$490,900 $492,150

4.1% -2.4%

$456,450 $489,500

7.5% 0.5%

$410,800 $436,100

19.5% 12.9%

$317,300 $313,500

54.7% 57.0%

26.6 % (2015 ) 26.3 % (2015 )

Maraetai Mellons Bay Northpark Ōtara Pakuranga Pakuranga Heights Papatoetoe Randwick Park Shelly Park Somerville Sunnyhills The Gardens Totara Heights Wattle Downs Weymouth PAPAKURA/FRANKLIN Clarks Beach Conifer Grove Manukau Opaheke Pahurehure Papakura Pukekohe Red Hill Rosehill Takanini Waiuku

1.1% 4.5% 20.0% 27.9% 17.7%

27.9% 19.0%

THE REGIONS

WHANGARĒI/NORTHLAND Dargaville Kaikohe Kaitaia Kamo Kensington Kerikeri Mangawhai Heads Maunu Morningside One Tree Point Onerahi Raumanga Ruakākā

Paeroa Pauanui Tairua Te Aroha Thames

HAMILTON CITY Bader Beerescourt Chartwell Claudelands Dinsdale Enderley Fairfield Fairview Downs Fitzroy

Smart property decisions start here

$354,450 $536,100 $665,100

$534,500 (54 ) $398,000 (22 ) $274,000 (37 )

$241,500 (24 ) $500,000 (41 ) $403,875 (22 ) $262,650 (22 )

$439,000 (60 ) $333,000 (26 ) $691,551 (60 )

$365,000 (49 ) $245,000 (64 ) $544,000 (77 )

$325,000 (67 ) $222,500 (32 ) $458,000 (78 )

61.0% 30.0% 40.1% 39.1% 36.0% 41.0%

$554,000 (51 )

$518,000 (61 )

$406,500 (87 )

$365,000 (72 )

48.5%

$436,000 (5 ) $517,000 (13 ) $547,000 (41 ) $454,750 (16 )

$357,000 (8 ) $524,000 (19 ) $559,000 (49 ) $475,500 (10 )

$389,000 (13 ) $562,800 (11 ) $513,000 (50 )

$261,000 (11 ) $384,000 (17 ) $362,000 (42 ) $332,500 (16 )

67.0% 34.6% 51.1%

$461,000 (48 ) $414,000 (13 ) $480,250 (22 ) $474,000 (15 ) $484,000 (4 )

$480,000 (40 ) $414,000 (9 ) $498,599 (27 )

$490,500 (20 ) $459,000 (51 ) $397,000 (14 ) $444,000 (23 )

$330,500 (18 ) $819,000 (5 ) $472,250 (64 ) $402,000 (29 ) $418,000 (58 ) $351,000 (16 ) $363,000 (43 )

$319,000 (48 ) $262,500 (30 ) $276,750 (40 )

36.8% 44.5% 57.7% 73.5%

$479,000 (10 ) $429,000 (5 )

$476,000 (10 ) $524,000 (7 )

$420,500 (20 ) $510,000 (13 )

$344,000 (21 ) $329,000 (3 )

37.8% 47.1%

15

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

Flagstaff Forest Lake Frankton Glenview Hamilton East Hillcrest Huntington

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

E-Valuer price change in 3

E-Valuer price change in 2

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

30APR2018

31MAR2018

months to 31MAR2018

E-Valuer estimate of E-Valuer price E-Valuer estimate of median value at change in year median value at 31MAR2017

to 31MAR2018

31MAR2016

years to 31MAR2018

market peak (31OCT2007)

E-Valuer price Sales price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price change since 28FEB2018 in relation to CV 28FEB2018 (no. of sales in 31DEC2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2016 (no. of sales in 31MAR2015 (no. of sales in change in 3 market peak (31OCT2007)

(CV date in brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

$753,950 $499,000 $418,300

$751,850 $493,450 $415,400

0.8% 1.0%

2.9% 2.9%

$659,350 $432,250

14.0% 14.2%

$490,700 $323,900

53.2% 52.3%

26.0 % (2015 ) 28.6 % (2015 )

$684,000 (45 ) $475,000 (21 )

$778,000 (65 ) $502,000 (9 )

$724,500 (62 ) $514,500 (14 )

$642,000 (95 ) $449,000 (15 )

$576,500 (88 ) $327,000 (19 )

0.4%

$730,750 $479,550 $407,150

2.0%

$361,100

15.0%

$295,800

40.4%

31.5 % (2015 )

$413,000 (36 )

$451,000 (38 )

$370,250 (52 )

$315,500 (70 )

$256,000 (49 )

18.6% 45.3% 61.3%

$499,700 $490,200

$498,650 $486,500

-0.4% -1.0%

$491,950 $477,200

1.4% 1.9%

$437,800 $431,000

13.9% 12.9%

$333,500 $331,300

49.5% 46.8%

25.9 % (2015 ) 22.2 % (2015 )

$525,000 (27 ) $498,000 (61 )

$489,000 (24 ) $474,000 (65 )

$496,500 (38 ) $450,074 (63 )

$427,000 (37 ) $407,000 (96 )

53.5% 48.7% 58.6%

$544,750

$541,250

0.7%

$524,750

3.1%

$474,650

14.0%

$365,400

48.1%

25.5 % (2015 )

$545,500 (30 )

$514,500 (31 )

$498,750 (40 )

$477,000 (45 )

$342,000 (43 ) $335,000 (90 ) $344,000 (51 )

$759,200 $476,000

$756,700 $473,050

0.6% -0.3%

$734,000 $469,300

3.1% 0.8%

$667,650 $416,500

13.3% 13.6%

$532,000 $317,000

42.2% 49.2%

25.2 % (2015 ) 31.1 % (2015 )

$711,000 (37 ) $445,000 (5 )

$686,500 (40 ) $495,500 (15 )

$702,000 (46 ) $440,500 (18 )

$672,000 (61 ) $411,500 (20 )

$539,000 (57 ) $289,500 (19 )

years to 31MAR2018

$428,300

$429,100

-0.9%

$423,400

1.3%

$374,950

14.4%

$292,900

46.5%

21.3 % (2015 )

$452,500 (24 )

$426,000 (30 )

$455,000 (33 )

$344,000 (51 )

$301,175 (40 )

31.9% 53.7% 50.2%

Nawton

$436,150

$435,800

0.8%

$422,000

3.3%

$377,100

15.6%

$298,100

46.2%

30.6 % (2015 )

$403,000 (55 )

$434,000 (59 )

$398,000 (60 )

$353,000 (91 )

$260,000 (77 )

55.0%

Pukete

$570,900

$567,100

2.3%

$559,500

1.4%

$503,300

12.7%

$369,800

53.4%

25.9 % (2015 )

$545,250 (16 )

$517,000 (21 )

$557,000 (28 )

$492,000 (27 )

$360,000 (30 )

51.5%

Queenwood

$678,500 $718,850

$672,500 $714,500

1.1% 1.6%

$645,150 $701,100

4.2% 1.9%

$585,600 $636,300

14.8% 12.3%

$450,800 $482,800

49.2% 48.0%

26.2 % (2015 ) 21.9 % (2015 )

$673,500 (12 ) $679,000 (18 )

$599,000 (13 ) $742,000 (19 )

$648,000 (11 ) $696,000 (23 )

$540,300 (8 ) $656,000 (17 )

$466,000 (9 ) $507,000 (25 )

44.5% 33.9%

Maeroa Melville

Rototuna Rototuna North

$712,100

$711,400

1.8%

$698,500

1.8%

$637,750

11.5%

$465,300

52.9%

25.1 % (2015 )

$737,000 (27 )

$682,000 (31 )

$680,000 (26 )

$652,000 (26 )

$505,000 (31 )

45.9%

$565,950 $491,400

$562,200 $489,800

1.4% 0.9%

$558,900 $478,700

0.6% 2.3%

$500,000 $432,900

12.4% 13.1%

$371,600 $328,200

51.3% 49.2%

24.2 % (2015 ) 32.1 % (2015 )

$469,500 (22 ) $504,000 (3 )

$507,000 (33 ) $457,000 (11 )

$529,000 (23 ) $532,500 (10 )

$463,000 (39 ) $387,500 (13 )

$359,000 (39 ) $335,000 (11 )

30.8% 50.4%

WAIKATO/WAIPĀ/ŌTOROHANGA/SOUTH WAIKATO Cambridge $674,550 $674,750

0.9%

$541,050 (86 )

$436,000 (68 )

33.7%

63.6%

$354,000 (17 )

$684,500 (66 ) $343,900 (31 )

$644,000 (65 )

8.6%

10.4 % (2016 ) 2.4 % (2017 )

$608,500 (48 )

2.1%

$403,800 $212,500

67.1%

$347,700

$530,700 $260,050

27.1%

$351,600

$628,500 $320,250

7.3%

Huntly

$311,000 (37 )

$286,000 (61 )

$181,500 (92 )

39.6% 95.0%

Kihikihi

$381,100 $583,800 $402,100

$381,750 $582,900 $399,400

0.1% 1.9%

$343,450 $539,350

11.2% 8.1%

$298,000 $458,150

$250,700 $356,100

52.3% 63.7%

$367,850

8.6%

$304,750

$253,100

57.8%

21.6 % (2016 ) 13.8 % (2016 ) 3.4 % (2017 )

$360,000 (8 ) $554,000 (55 ) $390,500 (22 )

$361,000 (6 ) $574,500 (78 ) $364,000 (33 )

$299,500 (18 ) $547,000 (64 ) $359,500 (34 )

$290,500 (18 ) $452,500 (96 ) $286,000 (45 )

$190,000 (6 ) $384,000 (77 ) $246,000 (47 )

89.5% 44.3%

3.1%

28.1% 27.2% 31.1%

$299,700 $659,500

$298,150 $666,450

1.4% 3.8%

$238,900 $598,750

24.8% 11.3%

$183,450 $500,400

62.5% 33.2%

$193,600 $454,000

54.0% 46.8%

78.9 % (2015 ) 14.1 % (2017 )

$284,000 (16 ) $617,000 (23 )

$281,000 (20 ) $655,000 (27 )

$247,000 (26 ) $557,000 (26 )

$167,000 (41 ) $426,750 (34 )

$150,000 (16 ) $362,500 (57 )

89.3% 70.2%

$460,900

$460,200

1.0%

$419,400

9.7%

$359,000

28.2%

$310,300

48.3%

17.5 % (2016 )

$454,000 (65 )

$418,500 (70 )

$402,000 (95 )

$356,720 (111 )

$281,000 (95 )

61.6%

$189,800 $556,800

$189,900 $556,900

2.3% 3.2%

$164,800 $530,950

15.2% 4.9%

$130,300 $469,750

45.7% 18.6%

$142,000 $321,800

33.7% 73.1%

63.0 % (2015 ) -0.4 % (2017 )

$172,000 (64 ) $543,000 (30 )

$166,500 (80 ) $575,500 (28 )

$149,000 (95 ) $531,500 (34 )

$122,000 (111 ) $445,500 (50 )

$91,000 (69 ) $392,400 (43 )

89.0% 38.4%

WAITOMO/TAUPŌ/RUAPEHU $533,500 Hilltop $662,700 Kinloch Kuratau $450,550 $501,150 Nukuhau

$534,100 $660,800 $445,400

2.6% -0.6% 2.2%

$510,100 $622,350 $414,450

4.7% 6.2% 7.5%

$408,500 $544,250

30.7% 21.4%

11.5 % (2016 ) 12.9 % (2016 ) 16.5 % (2016 )

$500,000 (20 ) $635,000 (9 )

$378,500 (31 ) $574,000 (11 )

4.9% 6.4%

$207,050

$383,200 $246,900

30.5% 1.0%

23.1 % (2016 ) 3.7 % (2017 )

$354,000 (5 ) $490,000 (27 ) $242,000 (20 )

17.7% 43.5% 12.4%

$476,700 $234,250

$399,500 (4 ) $526,500 (28 ) $220,000 (15 )

$328,000 (21 ) $453,000 (14 ) $347,000 (9 )

0.7% 0.9%

$390,000 (6 ) $509,000 (25 ) $252,000 (15 )

$377,000 (27 ) $450,000 (25 ) $340,000 (14 )

$500,250 $249,300

9.9% 24.3% 20.4%

22.1% 30.0% -2.8%

$386,000 (11 ) $650,000 (6 )

$405,300 $402,550

$437,300 $508,400 $458,300

$349,000 (45 ) $182,000 (13 )

$343,500 (38 ) $225,000 (10 )

48.2% 12.0%

2.7% 2.3% 1.8%

$373,200 $419,350

10.6% 30.1%

$429,000 $331,300

$231,900

35.4%

$243,900

-5.1% 37.3% 28.8%

6.3 % (2016 ) 20.2 % (2016 ) 20.5 % (2016 )

$343,000 (3 ) $430,000 (19 ) $343,000 (6 )

$388,000 (5 ) $439,000 (20 ) $254,000 (15 )

$273,000 (13 ) $390,000 (16 ) $314,500 (10 )

$330,000 (6 ) $344,000 (28 ) $227,500 (18 )

$282,500 (5 ) $327,000 (17 ) $190,250 (6 )

21.4% 31.5%

$293,600

9.1% 8.5% 7.0%

$368,200 $349,650

$314,250

$407,200 $454,900 $314,100

80.3%

$146,800 $427,000

$145,100 $428,550

3.6% 2.0%

$128,400 $402,950

13.0% 6.4%

$102,350 $328,400

41.8% 30.5%

$131,900 $339,200

10.0% 26.3%

14.7 % (2017 ) 15.5 % (2016 )

$160,000 (21 ) $358,500 (50 )

$154,500 (34 ) $347,000 (57 )

$156,000 (30 ) $351,000 (60 )

$97,000 (29 ) $293,500 (76 )

$51,000 (24 ) $267,000 (41 )

213.7% 34.3%

Saint Andrews Silverdale

Leamington Ngāruawāhia Putāruru Raglan Te Awamutu Tokoroa Tūākau

Ōhakune

$252,150

Omori

$406,800 $451,200

Richmond Heights Tauhara Taumarunui Taupō Te Kuiti

58.7%

$203,100

$203,200

1.7%

$172,400

17.9%

$144,750

40.4%

$176,800

14.9%

45.5 % (2015 )

$168,000 (23 )

$191,000 (39 )

$162,000 (42 )

$133,000 (31 )

$167,500 (14 )

0.3%

Turangi

$226,050

$223,100

3.9%

$194,600

14.6%

$175,900

26.8%

$230,500

-3.2%

21.6 % (2016 )

$182,750 (30 )

$162,000 (26 )

$144,500 (44 )

$138,000 (30 )

$128,000 (19 )

42.8%

Waipahihi

$639,250

$640,550

0.9%

$601,500

6.5%

$517,750

23.7%

$546,000

17.3%

20.8 % (2016 )

$637,500 (10 )

$465,000 (13 )

$602,500 (12 )

$458,000 (19 )

$415,500 (12 )

53.4%

Pukehina Te Puke

$540,200 $812,150 $687,450 $489,200

$543,350 $814,950 $683,300 $487,850

1.7% 1.5% -0.3% 2.9%

$521,250 $775,900 $647,900 $456,350

4.2% 5.0% 5.5% 6.9%

$436,350 $623,100 $495,150 $366,850

24.5% 30.8% 38.0% 33.0%

$350,600 $558,800 $544,200 $316,400

55.0% 45.8% 25.6% 54.2%

14.2 % (2016 ) 9.1 % (2016 ) 13.2 % (2016 ) 14.0 % (2016 )

$486,000 (19 ) $824,000 (17 ) $647,000 (9 ) $509,000 (31 )

$512,000 (28 ) $826,000 (17 ) $535,500 (10 ) $522,500 (28 )

$525,338 (36 ) $590,000 (25 ) $515,000 (19 ) $460,000 (47 )

$405,000 (53 ) $460,000 (35 ) $493,000 (16 ) $338,500 (76 )

$330,000 (54 ) $496,500 (22 ) $573,500 (10 ) $316,000 (56 )

47.3% 66.0% 12.8% 61.1%

Waihi Beach

$806,400

$803,600

0.7%

$731,250

9.9%

$616,100

30.4%

$617,500

30.1%

11.8 % (2016 )

$745,000 (24 )

$695,000 (24 )

$839,000 (17 )

$588,000 (46 )

$494,000 (17 )

50.8%

$554,500 $763,550 $560,900 $459,000

$552,000 $767,600 $559,350 $460,100

1.2% -1.9% 0.4% 0.7%

$541,050 $752,150 $549,700 $445,600

2.0% 2.1% 1.8% 3.3%

$456,450 $646,300 $472,350 $386,700

20.9% 18.8% 18.4% 19.0%

59.4% 53.6% 61.1% 59.4%

45.9 % (2015 ) 38.3 % (2015 ) 52.6 % (2015 ) 52.0 % (2015 )

$483,446 (18 ) $807,000 (37 ) $490,000 (13 ) $453,000 (14 )

$533,000 (18 ) $776,500 (38 ) $485,000 (21 ) $462,500 (24 )

$512,750 (22 ) $801,000 (39 ) $545,000 (25 ) $420,000 (31 )

$407,000 (46 ) $643,000 (67 ) $435,000 (35 ) $391,000 (55 )

$335,000 (23 ) $571,500 (56 ) $367,000 (46 ) $286,000 (45 )

44.3% 41.2% 33.5% 58.4%

$504,950 $515,300 $515,850

$503,600 $515,700 $513,100

-0.5% 1.0% 0.2%

$491,450 $507,500 $505,600

2.5% 1.6% 1.5%

$432,750 $439,950 $433,000

16.4% 17.2% 18.5%

$346,300 $499,600 $347,300 $288,600 $326,300 $344,600 $324,700

54.3% 49.7% 58.0%

38.3 % (2015 ) 40.8 % (2015 ) 48.2 % (2015 )

$455,000 (17 ) $555,500 (12 ) $436,500 (16 )

$470,000 (19 ) $492,000 (8 ) $466,000 (13 )

$467,500 (40 ) $444,000 (21 ) $537,000 (25 )

$405,000 (24 ) $428,000 (18 ) $376,500 (31 )

$300,000 (37 ) $304,250 (16 ) $338,500 (23 )

$810,850 $616,400 $872,100 $695,300

$820,950 $618,800 $879,000 $698,850

3.1% 0.2% 2.4% 1.3%

$805,300 $606,750 $817,800 $681,250

1.9% 2.0% 7.5% 2.6%

$689,400 $528,100 $697,600 $582,900

19.1% 17.2% 26.0% 19.9%

$547,800 $441,600 $551,500 $462,100

49.9% 40.1% 59.4% 51.2%

45.7 % (2015 ) 43.5 % (2015 ) 42.1 % (2015 ) 42.3 % (2015 )

$649,000 (28 ) $563,000 (17 ) $646,000 (98 ) $643,000 (15 )

$709,000 (33 ) $579,000 (17 ) $703,000 (131 ) $670,500 (19 )

$713,500 (24 ) $508,500 (14 ) $603,000 (165 ) $591,000 (16 )

$707,000 (32 ) $538,000 (30 ) $569,000 (172 ) $613,000 (26 )

$470,500 (42 ) $325,000 (23 ) $449,000 (157 ) $482,000 (32 )

51.7% 82.6% 29.0% 37.9%

$726,950 $695,100 $441,400

$728,100 $695,500 $441,550 $697,600

0.9% 0.5% -0.5%

$694,950 $690,800 $428,850 $700,200

4.8% 0.7% 3.0%

$602,450 $606,900 $378,200

20.9% 14.6% 16.8%

$487,900 $464,200 $278,600

49.2% 49.8% 58.5%

40.7 % (2015 ) 37.6 % (2015 ) 41.2 % (2015 )

$651,000 (37 ) $663,500 (134 ) $356,000 (9 )

$630,000 (41 ) $670,000 (169 ) $455,000 (7 )

$564,500 (64 ) $584,000 (234 ) $333,000 (21 )

$422,000 (53 ) $443,500 (206 ) $262,000 (17 )

54.3% 49.6% 35.9%

-0.4% 3.1% 2.5%

$614,050 $511,000 $493,300

13.6% 20.9% 19.3%

$475,200 $420,300 $379,800

46.8% 47.0% 54.9%

38.0 % (2015 ) 45.1 % (2015 ) 41.2 % (2015 )

$691,000 (65 ) $560,500 (30 ) $577,000 (47 )

$698,000 (55 ) $565,000 (37 ) $563,000 (43 )

$581,500 (32 ) $654,000 (198 ) $390,000 (13 ) $669,500 (51 )

$610,500 (78 ) $476,500 (53 ) $483,250 (116 )

$465,500 (66 ) $377,000 (45 ) $357,000 (72 )

48.4% 48.7% 61.6%

18.0% 12.9% 15.3%

$235,750 $127,750 $337,350 $283,000

42.2% 44.5% 35.7%

$228,400 $124,400 $325,100

46.8% 48.4% 40.8%

9.6 % (2017 ) -3.6 % (2017 ) 4.5 % (2017 )

$367,000 (13 ) $187,300 (5 ) $412,500 (15 )

$359,500 (10 ) $181,750 (6 ) $404,000 (21 )

$222,200 (11 ) $175,500 (8 ) $376,000 (25 )

$169,000 (5 ) $103,000 (4 ) $294,000 (15 )

117.2% 81.8% 40.3%

$381,500 $199,900 $459,350

37.5% 29.6% 48.4% 30.1%

$263,900 $387,100 $203,000 $404,400

47.5% 27.7% 46.1% 47.7%

15.6 % (2017 ) 4.6 % (2017 ) 9.1 % (2017 ) 2.2 % (2017 )

$429,500 (4 ) $393,000 (7 ) $211,000 (3 ) $589,000 (15 )

$495,750 (2 ) $408,500 (10 ) $224,350 (9 ) $579,000 (21 )

$378,000 (6 ) $332,000 (9 ) $212,000 (10 ) $527,000 (12 )

$227,500 (8 ) $125,000 (15 ) $321,000 (27 ) $286,500 (18 ) $301,750 (21 ) $186,000 (11 ) $419,500 (24 )

$228,500 (6 ) $372,000 (7 ) $118,000 (4 ) $377,000 (14 )

88.0% 5.6% 78.8% 56.2%

$306,900 (12 ) $388,500 (20 ) $326,000 (23 ) $320,000 (17 )

$315,400 (12 ) $342,500 (26 ) $343,000 (37 )

$297,500 (11 ) $309,500 (16 ) $339,000 (35 )

$226,500 (22 ) $275,000 (36 ) $304,000 (51 )

$181,500 (8 ) $219,500 (15 ) $223,500 (18 )

69.1% 77.0% 45.9%

$345,750 (18 ) $462,000 (15 ) $322,000 (10 )

$317,000 (40 ) $444,000 (29 ) $301,000 (15 )

$236,000 (35 ) $375,500 (26 ) $261,400 (16 )

$236,000 (17 ) $367,000 (13 ) $187,750 (4 )

35.6% 33.8% 105.1%

WESTERN BAY OF PLENTY Katikati Omokoroa

TAURANGA Bellevue Bethlehem Brookfield Gate Pa Greerton Hairini Judea Matua Maungatapu Mount Maunganui Ohauiti Ōtūmoetai Papamoa Beach Parkvale Pyes Pa Tauranga South Welcome Bay ROTORUA Fairy Springs Fordlands Glenholme Hillcrest Kawaha Point Koutu Lynmore Mangakakahi Ngongotahā Ōwhata Pukehāngı̄ Springfield Utuhina

$697,800 $618,400 $586,250 $338,850 $186,900 $453,650

$618,050 $588,450 $335,300 $184,600 $457,800 $389,150

0.1% 0.7% 2.0% 2.8% -1.9% 3.8%

$599,400 $574,150 $284,200 $163,450 $397,000 $327,600

$396,050 $497,100 $295,950 $598,050

$494,400 $296,600 $597,400

8.8% 1.1% 2.0% 2.4%

$443,650 $252,300 $550,050

18.8% 11.4% 17.6% 8.6%

$320,400 $418,150 $407,400

$313,350 $414,150 $404,000

3.4% 3.2% 2.4%

$274,450 $362,850 $362,700

14.2% 14.1% 11.4%

$222,700 $300,050 $289,800

40.7% 38.0% 39.4%

$212,300 $283,400 $273,900

47.6% 46.1% 47.5%

5.7 % (2017 ) 15.5 % (2017 ) 9.0 % (2017 )

$394,150 $503,150 $388,100

$388,450 $502,250 $379,500

2.8% 1.1% 6.6%

$348,350 $474,050 $322,650

11.5% 5.9% 17.6%

$288,850 $393,150 $267,900

34.5% 27.8% 41.7%

$267,800 $370,000 $250,700

45.1% 35.7% 51.4%

1.0 % (2017 ) 6.1 % (2017 ) 11.8 % (2017 )

Smart property decisions start here

$491,000 (10 ) $385,000 (4 )

$541,000 (39 ) $557,000 (55 )

73.2% 43.9% 33.4%

16

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT E-Valuer estimate of median value at

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

E-Valuer price change in 3

30APR2018

31MAR2018

months to 31MAR2018

31MAR2017

to 31MAR2018

$301,500

$297,650

5.9%

$249,650

WHAKATĀNE/KAWERAU/ŌPŌTIKI $229,250 Kawerau Ōpōtiki $261,800

$224,900 $258,850

6.1% 1.9%

$179,400

Whakatāne

$416,400

$370,350 $713,850 $230,300 $524,750

Western Heights

E-Valuer price change in 2

E-Valuer estimate of median value at

31MAR2016

years to 31MAR2018

market peak (31OCT2007)

market peak (31OCT2007)

(CV date in brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

brackets)

19.2%

$202,400

47.1%

$204,900

45.3%

11.9 % (2017 )

$303,500 (12 )

$303,250 (14 )

$262,000 (25 )

$197,000 (23 )

$137,000 (3 )

121.5%

25.4% 19.4%

$125,400 $173,550

79.3%

32.5%

128.1 % (2015 ) 28.9 % (2016 )

$221,000 (35 ) $274,000 (20 )

$212,000 (43 ) $225,000 (21 )

$167,500 (66 ) $182,500 (24 )

$129,250 (56 ) $209,000 (23 )

$92,000 (19 ) $184,000 (15 )

140.2%

49.2%

$148,500 $195,300

51.4%

$216,800

1.4%

$379,300

9.8%

$325,100

28.1%

$317,700

31.1%

20.6 % (2016 )

$403,000 (56 )

$380,000 (76 )

$352,750 (82 )

$302,000 (122 )

$294,000 (73 )

37.1%

$365,500

4.6%

$256,500 $515,700

$361,500 (24 ) $529,500 (16 )

$349,000 (24 )

41.3%

42.5% 37.2%

21.8 % (2016 )

23.0%

$265,550 $500,550

37.6%

3.1%

$321,700 $575,100

13.6%

$707,400

$311,000 (32 ) $471,500 (12 )

$255,000 (43 ) $539,000 (25 )

$248,000 (27 ) $264,000 (10 )

100.6%

-1.1% 4.1%

10.1% 15.2% 9.8%

$173,250 $385,550 $217,600

31.6% 35.7% 27.9%

$178,200 $364,200 $271,200

23.2 % (2016 ) 29.1 % (2016 )

2.6%

9.0 % (2017 )

$194,000 (28 ) $499,000 (19 ) $302,500 (6 )

$222,000 (35 ) $476,500 (14 )

3.1%

$207,200 $453,800 $253,400

28.0% 43.6%

$280,800

$228,050 $523,000 $278,250

$197,500 (30 ) $402,000 (12 ) $304,000 (9 )

$172,575 (50 ) $434,000 (15 ) $249,500 (16 )

$151,000 (29 ) $360,500 (17 ) $247,000 (9 )

28.5% 38.4% 22.5%

$544,400 $662,550

$540,400 $661,800

3.1% 3.5%

$479,350 $587,600

12.7% 12.6%

$403,600 $495,450

33.9% 33.6%

$375,800 $465,200

43.8% 42.3%

8.8 % (2017 ) 22.4 % (2016 )

$544,500 (26 ) $627,000 (49 )

$494,000 (30 ) $609,000 (75 )

$332,000 (39 ) $504,000 (122 ) $334,000 (23 )

$346,750 (32 ) $454,000 (78 ) $497,500 (18 )

57.0% 38.1%

$414,500

E-Valuer estimate of E-Valuer price E-Valuer estimate of median value at change in year median value at

E-Valuer price Sales price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price change since 28FEB2018 in relation to CV 28FEB2018 (no. of sales in 31DEC2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2016 (no. of sales in 31MAR2015 (no. of sales in change in 3 years to 31MAR2018

48.9%

LOWER NORTH ISLAND

GISBORNE/HAWKES BAY Akina Bluff Hill Flaxmere Frimley Gisborne Greenmeadows Havelock North Hospital Hill Inner Kaiti Mahora Mangapapa Maraenui Marewa Mayfair Napier South Onekawa Parkvale Pirimai Raureka Riverdale Saint Leonards Tamatea Taradale Te Hapara Waipukurau Whataupoko TARARUA/WAIRARAPA Carterton Dannevirke Featherston Greytown Lansdowne Martinborough Masterton Pahiatua Solway TARANAKI/WHANGANUI Aramoho Bell Block Castlecliff Frankleigh Park Gonville Hawera Highlands Park Inglewood Merrilands New Plymouth Saint Johns Hill Spotswood Springvale Strandon Stratford Tawhero Vogeltown Waitara Wanganui Wanganui East Westown RANGITIKEI/MANAWATŪ Ashhurst Awapuni Feilding Fitzherbert Highbury Hokowhitu Kelvin Grove Marton Milson Palmerston North Roslyn Takaro Terrace End

5.0 % (2017 )

$540,500 (14 )

$345,000 (12 )

45.8%

$644,750

$640,900

2.0%

$539,450

18.8%

$469,300

36.6%

$471,700

35.9%

4.8 % (2017 )

$537,000 (13 )

$599,000 (17 )

$467,950 (26 ) $584,500 (82 ) $552,000 (23 )

$344,850 $425,250

$339,900 $422,250

2.8% 1.7%

$304,150 $368,750

11.8% 14.5%

$264,000 $310,900

28.8% 35.8%

$321,400 $297,700

5.8% 41.8%

12.5 % (2017 ) 20.7 % (2016 )

$307,000 (12 ) $418,250 (16 )

$302,000 (9 ) $394,070 (20 )

$337,500 (8 ) $335,000 (21 )

$242,000 (9 ) $277,000 (22 )

$288,500 (14 ) $259,000 (15 )

6.4% 61.5%

$279,200 $242,800 $387,550

$277,800 $245,400 $386,900

5.1% 11.0% 7.8%

$252,800 $213,200

$212,350 $169,150

30.8% 45.1%

$239,500 $194,700

$255,000 (26 ) $201,000 (9 )

$209,500 (27 ) $169,000 (14 )

$213,000 (16 ) $137,500 (4 )

42.6%

$270,400

5.1 % (2017 ) 13.8 % (2017 ) 6.9 % (2017 )

$263,500 (22 ) $222,000 (9 )

$271,300

16.0% 26.0% 43.1%

$269,000 (22 ) $248,500 (7 )

$328,450

9.9% 15.1% 17.8%

$363,000 (22 )

$384,875 (20 )

$322,250 (36 )

$286,000 (35 )

$230,500 (24 )

26.3% 80.7% 57.5%

$371,400 $451,350

$368,700 $445,900

3.1% 6.7%

$322,050 $378,900

14.5% 17.7%

$270,350 $311,250

36.4% 43.3%

$261,900 $288,600

40.8% 54.5%

12.4 % (2016 ) 11.5 % (2017 )

$357,000 (13 ) $514,000 (17 )

$407,000 (19 ) $472,000 (23 )

$330,100 (28 ) $374,000 (35 )

$271,000 (21 ) $293,000 (30 )

$383,500

$381,700

4.0%

$330,600

15.5%

$277,050

37.8%

$264,400

44.4%

9.1 % (2017 )

$392,000 (17 )

$376,500 (22 )

$341,500 (30 )

$290,000 (41 )

$230,000 (11 ) $297,500 (26 ) $265,000 (33 )

55.2% 72.8% 47.9%

$397,200 $400,700

$397,050 $395,500

1.8% 4.8%

$347,100 $351,300

14.4% 12.6%

$292,250 $290,400

35.9% 36.2%

$283,200 $272,300

40.2% 45.2%

27.0 % (2016 ) 4.8 % (2017 )

$390,750 (16 ) $422,000 (15 )

$402,500 (22 ) $385,000 (15 )

$289,250 (22 ) $355,000 (19 )

$279,500 (24 ) $276,025 (22 )

44.2% 45.3%

7.9%

$374,200

$370,300

2.0%

$327,100

13.2%

$268,950

37.7%

$270,500

36.9%

25.4 % (2016 )

$365,500 (18 )

$393,000 (28 )

$352,000 (24 )

$313,500 (28 )

$271,000 (23 ) $290,500 (16 ) $236,250 (16 )

$367,800 $385,500

$362,350 $381,400

4.0% 1.2%

$325,550 $333,950

11.3% 14.2%

$282,250 $278,650

28.4% 36.9%

$311,400 $270,200

16.4% 41.2%

4.7 % (2017 ) 24.3 % (2016 )

$328,000 (7 ) $382,000 (17 )

$261,000 (6 ) $350,000 (24 )

$374,000 (5 ) $309,000 (21 )

$297,500 (4 ) $302,000 (26 )

$214,000 (9 ) $244,000 (14 )

53.3% 56.6%

$405,900 $542,500 $272,950

$405,400 $539,200 $270,950

4.5% 4.2% 5.1%

$356,600 $472,050 $242,250

13.7% 14.2% 11.8%

$305,150 $404,000 $205,800

32.9% 33.5% 31.7%

$289,500 $364,600 $245,800

40.0% 47.9% 10.2%

2.7 % (2017 ) 7.3 % (2017 ) 6.4 % (2017 )

$414,000 (21 ) $512,000 (44 ) $264,000 (31 )

$379,500 (22 ) $495,000 (71 ) $262,000 (45 )

$361,000 (21 ) $417,500 (73 ) $233,250 (50 )

$305,750 (32 ) $375,000 (88 ) $202,000 (37 )

$259,250 (20 ) $354,750 (76 ) $205,000 (21 )

59.7% 44.3% 28.8%

$304,000 $419,750

$301,050 $416,100

3.0% 2.3%

$253,600 $374,850

18.7% 11.0%

$218,950 $327,350

37.5% 27.1%

$228,200 $370,200

31.9% 12.4%

53.9 % (2015 ) 3.5 % (2017 )

$266,500 (24 ) $397,000 (20 )

$295,000 (35 ) $410,000 (21 )

$224,000 (48 ) $362,000 (25 )

$226,000 (29 ) $338,000 (27 )

$206,125 (28 ) $281,000 (22 )

29.3% 41.3%

$382,550 $188,700

$379,950 $185,950

$285,300 $155,150

33.2% 19.9%

$268,300 $169,800

41.6% 9.5%

$343,000 (46 ) $180,000 (47 )

$305,500 (44 ) $157,000 (47 )

$264,000 (59 ) $139,500 (32 )

$238,000 (44 ) $122,500 (28 )

61.3% 55.1%

$486,200 $309,200

$224,400 $379,500

47.7% 51.8%

$273,000

33.6%

$335,337 (22 ) $579,000 (23 ) $313,000 (44 )

$257,000 (30 ) $468,000 (22 ) $291,000 (45 )

$197,500 (16 ) $425,500 (30 ) $274,000 (49 )

$185,500 (13 ) $366,000 (24 ) $243,250 (22 )

64.2% 47.7%

38.7%

9.8 % (2017 ) 2.3 % (2017 )

$304,500 (18 ) $540,500 (14 )

17.9%

$206,150 $425,550 $262,900

60.8% 35.4%

$364,650

4.6% 3.5%

25.4% 18.5%

3.6 % (2017 ) 6.6 % (2017 ) 7.2 % (2017 )

$384,000 (33 ) $190,000 (40 )

$331,450 $576,150

$336,850 $170,250 $264,300

12.8% 9.2%

$334,100 $580,000 $367,500

3.5% 4.0% 6.4%

$513,600 $317,050 $205,800 $336,900

$506,400 $314,650 $205,600 $333,250

5.0% 3.8% 4.3% 5.0%

$436,250 $279,050 $192,200 $297,800

16.1% 12.8% 7.0% 11.9%

$379,550 $232,350 $172,550 $252,200

33.4% 35.4% 19.2% 32.1%

$345,500 $241,600 $164,200

46.6% 30.2% 25.2%

2.0 % (2017 ) 5.6 % (2017 ) 3.3 % (2017 )

$489,250 (14 ) $340,700 (59 ) $172,500 (18 )

$397,500 (26 ) $258,000 (71 ) $171,500 (30 )

$342,000 (29 ) $259,000 (55 ) $196,500 (12 )

$280,000 (17 ) $196,500 (47 ) $141,000 (15 )

74.7% 73.4% 22.3%

$248,000

34.4%

5.5 % (2017 )

$317,000 (33 )

$419,000 (21 ) $295,500 (80 ) $146,000 (16 ) $294,000 (22 )

$271,000 (43 )

$230,750 (26 )

$198,311 (18 )

59.8%

$208,000 $454,900 $173,750 $444,250

$206,800 $452,950 $173,100 $447,950

3.3% -0.6% 2.5% 1.5%

$183,150 $434,250 $148,850 $428,050

12.9% 4.3% 16.3% 4.6%

$156,250 $405,600 $119,850 $396,800

32.4% 11.7% 44.4% 12.9%

$184,900 $346,000 $152,800 $351,200

11.8% 30.9% 13.3% 27.5%

22.1 % (2016 ) 8.7 % (2016 ) 22.4 % (2016 ) 5.2 % (2016 )

$156,000 (20 ) $428,500 (36 ) $158,000 (33 ) $418,500 (14 )

$179,000 (26 ) $445,500 (42 ) $137,000 (37 ) $368,000 (20 )

$149,500 (15 ) $416,000 (45 ) $131,000 (21 ) $408,500 (22 )

$156,000 (15 ) $357,000 (45 ) $95,500 (28 ) $319,000 (17 )

$194,650 $263,600 $581,550

$190,700 $262,350 $576,550

2.8% 1.5% 0.2%

$166,900 $245,500 $564,750

14.3% 6.9% 2.1%

$141,800 $240,000 $528,500

34.5% 9.3% 9.1%

10.8% 9.0% 20.8%

23.1 % (2016 ) 13.2 % (2015 ) 4.2 % (2016 )

$149,000 (44 ) $241,500 (68 ) $487,000 (13 )

$161,500 (36 ) $216,750 (70 ) $541,500 (21 )

$134,000 (32 ) $206,500 (62 ) $431,500 (8 )

$83,000 (27 ) $219,000 (59 ) $507,000 (15 )

9.0% 13.2% 56.0% 36.1% 103.0% 5.0% 19.7%

$352,150 $508,900 $549,150 $368,050

$352,100 $507,650 $552,800 $367,500

0.6% 0.9% 2.1% 1.3%

$336,750 $491,650 $521,650 $332,150

4.6% 3.3% 6.0% 10.6%

$303,300 $456,450 $475,500 $291,000

16.1% 11.2% 16.3% 26.3%

$172,100 $240,700 $477,200 $267,300

$170,000 (25 ) $404,000 (35 ) $149,000 (31 ) $434,000 (9 ) $168,500 (42 ) $230,000 (51 ) $607,000 (4 )

$394,800 $414,200 $312,600

31.7% 28.6% 33.5% 17.6%

8.4 % (2016 ) 5.3 % (2016 ) 9.1 % (2016 ) 11.4 % (2016 )

$344,000 (29 ) $437,500 (22 ) $476,000 (23 ) $344,500 (14 )

$307,000 (20 ) $411,000 (25 ) $544,000 (26 ) $400,000 (18 )

$339,500 (24 ) $416,000 (29 ) $427,000 (30 ) $329,000 (15 )

$272,000 (29 ) $469,500 (30 ) $449,000 (19 ) $292,000 (21 )

$267,000 (28 ) $377,000 (23 ) $334,500 (36 ) $299,000 (15 )

28.8% 16.0% 42.3% 15.2%

$334,400 $302,500 $597,550

$335,650 $304,900 $599,250

$322,000 $272,500 $575,200

4.2% 11.9% 4.2%

$298,850 $236,800 $513,700

12.3% 28.8% 16.7%

$276,500 (10 ) $234,000 (33 ) $433,000 (17 )

$298,500 (14 ) $222,500 (20 ) $355,500 (18 )

22.9% 27.6% 20.5%

$223,300 $300,100 $220,500 $179,800 $182,300 $314,400

19.2% 30.7% 26.0% 5.6% 16.3% 27.2%

$241,000 (35 ) $263,500 (10 ) $356,500 (13 ) $279,000 (31 )

$226,000 (37 ) $191,000 (16 ) $447,000 (11 ) $299,000 (30 )

$242,000 (45 ) $164,500 (20 ) $346,000 (9 ) $235,000 (17 )

$204,000 (29 ) $157,500 (10 ) $317,000 (8 ) $261,000 (25 )

23.3% 52.4% 20.2% 8.4%

15.0% 14.1% 3.8%

18.7% 27.8% 13.6% 10.5% 28.9% 23.3% 11.9%

$251,500 (34 ) $240,000 (14 ) $381,000 (7 ) $283,000 (22 )

$165,100 $185,850 $385,200

$222,200 $208,350 $345,350 $251,400 $147,250 $172,000 $357,300

18.2 % (2016 ) 6.3 % (2016 ) 3.3 % (2016 )

$189,850 $212,100 $399,900

5.4% 0.9% -1.8% 1.9% 1.2% 1.0%

5.5% 13.2% 5.1% 3.6%

6.2 % (2016 ) 17.0 % (2016 ) 12.8 % (2016 ) 4.0 % (2017 )

$310,000 (20 ) $268,500 (40 ) $424,000 (15 )

$250,050 $235,300 $373,150 $268,200

32.7% 15.6% 41.7% 23.2%

$331,000 (19 ) $257,000 (26 ) $449,000 (19 )

$263,850 $266,250 $392,300 $277,900

$252,900 $263,700 $422,800 $214,100

$367,000 (19 ) $284,000 (24 ) $428,500 (16 )

$265,750 $269,050 $393,150 $279,500 $191,850 $215,550 $397,400

-1.6% 3.0% 4.5% 3.0%

16.6 % (2016 ) 22.5 % (2016 ) 5.8 % (2016 )

$166,000 (39 ) $188,750 (50 ) $410,000 (31 )

$171,000 (53 ) $198,750 (38 ) $374,000 (39 )

$166,000 (32 ) $170,000 (49 ) $347,125 (43 )

$161,000 (29 ) $164,000 (37 ) $335,000 (39 )

$111,000 (15 ) $185,000 (21 ) $330,000 (36 )

49.5% 2.0% 24.2%

$339,300 $370,450 $357,400

$340,600 $369,300 $357,650

0.6% 2.3% 3.3%

$312,600 $334,750 $329,300

$257,300 $282,200 $275,100

32.4% 30.9% 30.0%

32.8 % (2015 ) 30.8 % (2015 ) 16.9 % (2016 )

$282,500 (20 ) $351,000 (45 ) $314,000 (89 )

$297,588 (27 ) $344,550 (46 ) $349,500 (102 )

$298,000 (24 ) $319,000 (60 ) $319,000 (140 )

0.8% 2.4% 1.2% 1.7%

$541,100 $283,250 $455,600 $425,600

$246,950 $414,650 $371,000

$477,800 $242,600 $398,100 $336,500

20.9% 27.5% 22.3% 34.1%

19.8 % (2015 ) 31.0 % (2015 ) 20.3 % (2015 ) 26.9 % (2015 )

$602,000 (16 ) $315,750 (24 ) $468,500 (50 ) $424,000 (47 )

$554,000 (21 ) $309,550 (18 ) $512,000 (54 ) $447,000 (49 )

$540,300 (17 ) $266,500 (19 ) $410,000 (53 ) $438,500 (56 )

$240,000 (15 ) $240,000 (30 ) $252,500 (88 ) $477,000 (18 )

9.2% 6.9% 6.0%

16.4% 25.2% 17.4% 21.6%

$275,500 (28 ) $277,500 (52 ) $255,000 (111 ) $462,000 (15 )

17.7% 46.3% 24.4%

$577,800 $309,300 $486,850 $451,100

$276,800 $290,850 $288,300 $496,300

23.0% 27.0% 24.1%

$580,250 $310,200 $487,300 $454,800

9.0% 10.3% 8.6% 6.8%

$241,000 (34 ) $410,000 (71 ) $393,500 (46 )

$275,000 (29 ) $383,000 (67 ) $360,000 (51 )

$217,950 $370,300 $378,800

$217,550 $370,100 $377,200

2.2% 1.3% 2.6%

$184,550 $339,000 $348,400

17.9% 9.2% 8.3%

$155,100 $300,100 $307,450

40.3% 23.3% 22.7%

$183,700 $284,100 $300,000

18.4% 30.3% 25.7%

8.6 % (2017 ) 25.9 % (2015 ) 26.6 % (2015 )

$225,500 (36 ) $359,500 (26 ) $410,000 (42 )

$315,900 $318,350 $381,650

2.0% 1.0% 1.3%

$285,500 $295,550 $349,200

10.6% 7.7% 9.3%

$250,450 $256,800 $309,750

26.1% 24.0% 23.2%

$241,200 $251,400 $298,200

31.0% 26.6% 28.0%

37.9 % (2015 ) 26.4 % (2015 ) 28.4 % (2015 )

$297,500 (35 ) $332,000 (30 ) $359,000 (29 )

$181,000 (35 ) $324,000 (31 ) $334,500 (46 ) $285,500 (38 )

$153,000 (34 ) $275,000 (31 ) $306,000 (44 )

$317,800 $320,950 $381,700

$181,000 (47 ) $336,000 (30 ) $356,500 (40 ) $320,000 (33 )

$127,500 (26 ) $261,500 (26 ) $268,000 (40 ) $218,500 (30 )

$328,600 (36 ) $341,000 (34 )

$308,500 (38 ) $343,500 (28 )

Smart property decisions start here

$385,000 (31 )

$240,000 (47 ) $243,500 (26 ) $290,000 (35 )

$225,500 (22 ) $297,500 (28 )

54.7%

58.3%

26.2% 14.8% 22.3% 17.8% 76.9% 37.5% 53.0% 36.2% 47.2% 20.7%

17

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT E-Valuer estimate of median value at 30APR2018

E-Valuer estimate of median value at 31MAR2018

E-Valuer price change in 3 months to 31MAR2018

$356,050

$355,400

1.1%

$331,050

7.4%

$228,950 $329,500

$226,850 $328,550

2.8%

$194,450 $288,150

16.7%

2.9%

14.0%

Ōtaki Ōtaki Beach

$310,000 $390,500 $392,000

$309,000 $389,350

Paraparaumu

$530,300

Paraparaumu Beach

West End HOROWHENUA/KĀPITI Foxton Foxton Beach Levin

E-Valuer estimate of E-Valuer price E-Valuer estimate of median value at change in year median value at 31MAR2017 to 31MAR2018 31MAR2016

E-Valuer price change in 2 years to 31MAR2018

E-Valuer estimate of median value at market peak (31OCT2007)

$290,500

22.3%

$282,900

25.6%

26.4 % (2015 )

$365,000 (31 )

$348,500 (30 )

$292,000 (32 )

$277,000 (33 )

$220,500 (28 )

65.5%

$157,100 $242,150

44.4%

$171,700 $250,400

32.1% 31.2%

47.8 % (2016 ) 29.4 % (2016 )

$213,000 (18 ) $276,000 (37 )

$231,000 (23 ) $295,750 (28 )

$180,000 (35 ) $238,000 (37 )

$165,000 (15 )

35.7%

$209,000 (33 )

$125,500 (12 ) $222,000 (17 )

69.7% 24.3%

$224,600 $271,900

$237,100 $262,000 $276,500

30.3% 48.6%

27.4 % (2016 ) 8.8 % (2017 )

$263,000 (120 ) $342,000 (30 )

$267,000 (129 ) $361,500 (28 )

$249,000 (177 ) $326,000 (29 )

$186,000 (174 ) $254,500 (40 )

$198,000 (131 ) $244,500 (36 )

E-Valuer price Sales price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price in 3 months to Median price change since 28FEB2018 in relation to CV 28FEB2018 (no. of sales in 31DEC2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2017 (no. of sales in 31MAR2016 (no. of sales in 31MAR2015 (no. of sales in change in 3 (CV date in brackets) brackets) brackets) brackets) years to market peak brackets) brackets) (31OCT2007) 31MAR2018

$269,300 $334,150

$394,350

2.7% 4.4% 4.5%

$338,550

14.7% 16.5% 16.5%

$284,100

37.6% 43.2% 38.8%

42.6%

8.5 % (2017 )

$353,000 (16 )

$362,000 (13 )

$320,000 (21 )

$260,000 (27 )

$223,000 (20 )

32.8% 39.9% 58.3%

$525,950

1.7%

$474,300

10.9%

$386,750

36.0%

$355,900

47.8%

3.3 % (2017 )

$539,000 (59 )

$464,000 (71 )

$450,000 (42 )

$344,500 (82 )

$339,000 (61 )

59.0%

$589,850 $594,800

$587,950 $594,050

1.8% 1.7%

$533,900 $544,400

10.1% 9.1%

$445,250 $446,950

32.0% 32.9%

$409,400 $415,700

43.6% 42.9%

4.4 % (2017 ) 2.3 % (2017 )

$563,750 (46 ) $525,000 (27 )

$553,875 (52 ) $529,000 (27 )

$504,500 (44 ) $526,835 (22 )

$382,000 (75 ) $394,000 (49 )

$377,000 (69 ) $402,000 (49 )

$608,800

$600,850

2.3%

$543,350

10.6%

$452,600

32.8%

$414,900

44.8%

4.7 % (2017 )

$543,000 (17 )

$550,000 (19 )

$599,000 (25 )

$417,000 (19 )

$392,000 (18 )

49.5% 30.6% 38.5%

$574,000 $642,750

$569,100 $645,800

1.9% 1.8%

$514,300 $579,600

10.7% 11.4%

$430,500 $464,700

32.2% 39.0%

$378,900 $420,800

50.2% 53.5%

3.3 % (2017 ) 6.4 % (2017 )

$526,500 (36 ) $629,000 (11 )

$514,000 (57 ) $562,000 (19 )

$511,500 (50 ) $592,250 (20 )

$415,500 (68 ) $454,000 (17 )

$376,500 (54 ) $432,000 (27 )

39.8% 45.6%

$826,650 $405,900

$826,300 $400,850

-1.1% -0.7%

$793,100

4.2% 2.4%

$675,650

N/A $285,200

$767,000 (19 ) $383,500 (12 )

$294,000 (9 )

$559,000 (24 ) $260,000 (11 )

36.9%

$407,200 (6 )

$788,000 (16 ) $408,000 (8 )

$592,000 (24 )

40.6%

10.9 % (2016 ) 11.8 % (2016 )

$765,000 (17 )

$315,650

22.3% 27.0%

N/A

$391,500

$322,100 $621,500

$312,350 $601,550

-6.3% -2.4%

$277,450 $602,250

12.6% -0.1%

$246,050 $503,900

26.9% 19.4%

$222,800 $463,400

40.2% 29.8%

26.5 % (2016 ) 5.7 % (2016 )

$316,500 (6 ) $632,000 (5 )

$316,500 (12 ) $648,000 (6 )

$279,000 (15 ) $566,500 (8 )

$249,000 (13 ) $508,000 (13 )

$202,500 (9 ) $465,000 (9 )

56.3% 35.9%

$690,400

$690,750

1.3%

$647,350

6.7%

$553,300

24.8%

$512,500

34.8%

16.2 % (2016 )

$639,000 (9 )

$680,000 (11 )

$687,000 (11 )

$509,000 (13 )

$482,000 (9 )

32.6%

Rānui Titahi Bay

$732,150 $391,950

$736,700 $386,650

1.6% -1.6%

$693,600 $343,900

6.2% 12.4%

$589,000 $292,450

25.1% 32.2%

$560,800 $265,900

31.4% 45.4%

13.0 % (2016 ) 11.9 % (2016 )

$704,000 (9 ) $358,000 (12 )

$577,750 (10 ) $391,000 (14 )

$511,000 (9 ) $342,000 (15 )

$555,250 (12 ) $303,000 (13 )

$657,000 (8 ) $264,000 (15 )

$469,800

$469,000

0.5%

$433,950

8.1%

$359,200

30.6%

$335,900

39.6%

20.3 % (2016 )

$493,000 (20 )

$460,030 (24 )

$428,000 (37 )

$359,500 (53 )

$294,500 (28 )

7.2% 35.6% 67.4%

Whitby

$678,350

$679,150

1.3%

$618,550

9.8%

$527,450

28.8%

$491,900

38.1%

11.3 % (2016 )

$577,000 (27 )

$637,000 (53 )

$639,000 (50 )

$527,000 (71 )

$460,500 (68 )

25.3%

UPPER HUTT Birchville

$446,700

$445,200 $442,050 $469,500

-0.3% 4.2% 4.7%

$408,400

9.0%

$323,000 $358,100

42.8% 36.9% 31.1%

$407,000 (9 ) $450,500 (16 ) $488,500 (12 )

$395,000 (14 ) $407,500 (19 ) $464,000 (11 )

$374,000 (21 ) $401,500 (16 ) $408,000 (14 )

$310,000 (20 ) $312,750 (14 ) $373,000 (16 )

$299,000 (14 )

7.3% 7.1%

31.3% 28.3% 29.5%

14.9 % (2016 )

$412,000 $438,450

$338,950 $344,650 $362,600

$311,700

$445,750 $472,950

$361,750 (14 ) $343,000 (15 )

36.1% 24.5% 42.4%

$532,700

$532,300

5.4%

$482,450

10.3%

$410,800

29.6%

$372,700

42.8%

12.2 % (2016 )

$578,250 (8 )

$562,000 (5 )

$526,500 (12 )

$409,000 (17 )

$355,500 (8 )

62.7%

$591,950 $447,900

$589,450 $453,100

4.2% 3.3%

$537,800 $408,150

9.6% 11.0%

$462,100 $341,650

27.6% 32.6%

$426,100 $319,600

38.3% 41.8%

21.3 % (2016 ) 14.9 % (2016 )

$510,000 (14 ) $425,250 (22 )

$534,500 (27 ) $422,000 (19 )

$552,000 (19 ) $395,000 (13 )

$479,500 (30 ) $324,750 (16 )

$472,000 (9 ) $307,000 (11 )

$453,200 $440,350

$450,000 $437,000

4.1% 5.0%

$416,200 $393,550

8.1% 11.0%

$340,300 $323,400

32.2% 35.1%

$315,400 $299,400

42.7% 46.0%

17.9 % (2016 ) 29.6 % (2016 )

$451,000 (39 ) $376,750 (10 )

$414,000 (47 ) $444,000 (7 )

$395,000 (41 ) $496,250 (3 )

$335,750 (56 ) $349,000 (15 )

$332,000 (44 ) $307,000 (10 )

8.1% 38.5% 35.8%

$506,150 $627,900 $650,950

$509,050 $624,950 $647,250

0.3%

$486,800 $590,050 $604,350

4.6%

$398,650 $519,050 $519,600

27.7% 20.4% 24.6%

$366,200 $480,200 $468,100

39.0% 30.1% 38.3%

8.5 % (2016 ) 12.4 % (2016 ) 12.9 % (2016 )

$442,000 (14 ) $542,000 (14 ) $704,000 (7 )

$529,000 (17 ) $590,000 (15 ) $549,000 (12 )

$433,500 (20 ) $546,000 (15 ) $454,000 (19 )

$388,000 (19 )

2.5% 2.7%

$489,000 (17 ) $709,000 (15 )

$377,000 (19 ) $433,000 (22 ) $437,500 (16 )

$808,050

$807,100

-0.4%

$786,600

2.6%

$706,350

14.3%

$695,300

16.1%

11.7 % (2016 )

$820,000 (12 )

$821,000 (21 )

$782,000 (20 )

$582,050 (16 )

$662,000 (13 )

23.9%

$569,800 $562,800 $616,200 $405,050

$566,950 $555,100 $616,000 $404,550

1.8% 2.4% 2.4% 2.2%

$539,100 $513,800 $582,000 $375,250

5.2% 8.0% 5.8% 7.8%

$446,850 $424,300 $460,250 $292,650

26.9% 30.8% 33.8% 38.2%

$409,800 $372,200 $410,100 $283,300

38.3% 49.1% 50.2% 42.8%

5.1 % (2016 ) 10.8 % (2016 ) 9.3 % (2016 ) 20.8 % (2016 )

$588,000 (6 ) $529,000 (23 ) $568,000 (12 ) $434,000 (21 )

$639,000 (15 ) $524,000 (27 ) $540,500 (18 ) $373,000 (31 )

$547,000 (11 ) $497,000 (9 ) $622,000 (15 ) $402,000 (33 )

$424,000 (11 ) $427,650 (18 ) $429,000 (23 ) $308,000 (35 )

$422,000 (15 ) $347,000 (11 ) $371,250 (28 ) $247,000 (34 )

39.3% 52.4% 53.0% 75.7%

$602,100 $650,100 $415,100

$598,200 $645,400 $412,400

1.4% 3.0% 1.3%

4.5% 5.1% 9.8%

$464,100 $499,250 $316,750

28.9% 29.3% 30.2%

$408,400 $432,400 $305,300

46.5% 49.3% 35.1%

12.9 % (2016 ) 12.4 % (2016 ) 19.2 % (2016 )

2.2% 0.9% 1.1% 1.7%

$292,350 $259,200 $399,650 $476,600

40.1% 40.5% 32.0% 28.7%

$264,000 $255,400 $352,300 $434,900

55.1% 42.6% 49.8% 41.0%

19.5 % (2016 ) 22.8 % (2016 ) 15.2 % (2016 ) 5.9 % (2016 )

$391,000 (11 ) $483,150 (40 ) $292,000 (40 ) $326,750 (34 )

$362,228 (72 ) $538,000 (22 ) $587,250 (10 )

$350,500 (74 ) $528,625 (12 ) $608,500 (16 )

$347,000 (24 ) $334,000 (101 ) $513,500 (18 ) $579,000 (15 )

$450,500 (14 ) $599,500 (30 ) $302,000 (63 ) $319,000 (20 )

$330,950 $497,750 $582,100

13.6% 10.1% 6.0% 5.3%

$579,750 (10 ) $702,000 (24 ) $399,000 (53 ) $394,000 (11 )

47.7% 29.4% 36.6%

$409,550 $364,300 $527,600 $613,150

$577,500 (11 ) $625,000 (24 ) $399,000 (36 ) $399,000 (19 )

$614,000 (7 ) $587,000 (43 ) $375,500 (56 )

$410,300 $369,950 $533,250 $621,950

$572,350 $614,300 $375,750 $360,500

$261,000 (86 ) $437,000 (20 ) $481,500 (26 )

$229,000 (78 ) $362,000 (15 ) $444,000 (27 )

22.1% 58.2% 48.6% 32.3%

$688,100 $612,400 $784,200 $754,500

$682,000 $610,800 $788,250 $760,250

-0.2% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%

$671,150 $582,800 $752,600 $719,900

1.6% 4.8% 4.7% 5.6%

$564,000 $504,450 $663,000 $603,950

20.9% 21.1% 18.9% 25.9%

$460,500 $404,700 $538,400 $513,900

48.1% 50.9% 46.4% 47.9%

32.8 % (2015 ) 42.8 % (2015 ) 41.7 % (2015 ) 39.4 % (2015 )

$687,500 (13 ) $720,000 (4 ) $733,700 (15 ) $734,000 (30 )

$675,500 (12 ) $630,500 (16 ) $684,500 (24 ) $737,000 (35 )

$642,500 (3 ) $625,397 (18 ) $648,000 (26 ) $674,500 (34 )

$500,500 (10 ) $566,500 (22 ) $625,820 (31 ) $618,500 (53 )

$504,000 (11 ) $455,000 (21 ) $559,000 (35 ) $581,000 (38 )

36.4% 58.2% 31.3% 26.3%

$872,300 $839,200 $609,600

$862,000 $843,850 $611,200

-0.5% -2.1% 0.7%

$860,000 $806,150 $580,000

$738,200 $696,350 $479,800

16.8% 21.2% 27.4%

$597,500 $555,100 $401,300

44.3% 52.0% 52.3%

$666,500 (26 ) $739,000 (27 ) $607,000 (48 )

$759,000 (35 ) $767,500 (31 ) $604,500 (53 )

$683,888 (29 ) $633,500 (34 ) $535,500 (62 )

$820,400 $1,157,250 $966,800 $644,850

-0.7% 1.0% 1.0% -1.6%

$797,850 $1,148,700 $925,900 $621,250

19.3% 17.9% 21.8% 18.6%

$552,200 $819,700 $674,200 $435,900

48.6% 41.2% 43.4% 47.9%

$761,500 (44 ) $957,000 (8 ) $958,750 (26 ) $714,888 (7 )

$694,000 (74 ) $933,500 (20 ) $877,000 (37 ) $531,587 (10 )

$711,190 (60 ) $999,000 (5 ) $771,075 (44 ) $544,750 (10 )

$615,000 (88 ) $821,000 (15 ) $714,000 (61 ) $551,000 (7 )

$594,500 (22 ) $533,757 (18 ) $424,600 (56 ) $532,000 (77 )

23.1% 56.8% 47.3% 43.1%

0.7% 4.4% 3.8%

$687,550 $981,500 $793,500 $543,600

31.3 % (2015 ) 36.3 % (2015 ) 43.2 % (2015 ) 38.4 % (2015 )

$732,000 (19 ) $837,000 (19 ) $625,500 (56 )

$822,450 $1,161,900 $969,500 $651,000 $698,850 $742,600 $587,100

0.2% 4.7% 5.4% 2.8%

0.2% 41.7% 46.8%

$691,900 $742,400 $580,400

$573,800 $625,550 $461,100

49.0% 50.7% 54.3%

32.0 % (2015 ) 41.9 % (2015 ) 47.4 % (2015 )

22.1% 18.6% 23.6%

50.0% 48.4% 45.4% 52.6%

38.5 % (2015 ) 37.2 % (2015 ) 31.9 % (2015 ) 32.3 % (2015 )

$621,000 (10 ) $620,000 (45 ) $466,500 (40 ) $558,000 (26 )

$737,100 $795,950 $587,850

$465,900 $528,000 $560,000 $396,500

$754,450 (14 ) $656,000 (33 ) $592,000 (35 ) $697,000 (15 )

1.2% -1.2% 0.1%

$579,900 $641,350 $686,900 $489,500

$644,550 (9 ) $787,000 (27 ) $556,000 (20 ) $682,000 (19 )

$680,500 (12 ) $743,000 (41 ) $537,750 (46 )

4.1% 6.3% 2.3% 2.9%

20.6% 18.7% 25.9% 20.5%

$464,500 $492,500 $376,200

$698,850 $783,350 $814,450 $605,100

$668,500 $717,800 $556,650 $671,350

3.5% 3.4% 4.3%

$704,150 $778,600 $818,350 $607,650

-2.0% -0.9% 0.1% 0.6%

$955,000 (17 ) $676,550 (42 ) $486,985 (15 ) $585,000 (20 ) $538,250 (32 ) $404,000 (37 )

$675,700 (25 ) $751,000 (9 ) $532,000 (7 )

$629,000 (24 ) $630,000 (15 ) $467,000 (17 )

$519,500 (18 ) $577,000 (44 ) $542,000 (17 ) $392,000 (13 )

31.3% 17.1% 38.6% 35.7%

$1,264,300 $740,150 $596,350

$1,273,600 $735,950 $595,450

0.1% 1.6% 1.3%

$1,283,650 $701,550 $546,950

-0.8% 4.9% 8.9%

$1,113,450 $619,350 $470,750

14.4% 18.8% 26.5%

$935,500 $485,700 $397,800

36.1% 51.5% 49.7%

$1,190,000 (12 ) $654,000 (5 ) $595,500 (48 )

$961,000 (11 ) $749,000 (6 ) $599,000 (43 )

$795,001 (19 ) $616,635 (12 ) $446,000 (73 )

$996,000 (19 ) $515,000 (11 ) $406,000 (67 )

$529,500 $1,017,850 $410,350 $710,150

0.3% -0.6% 1.0% -0.4%

$497,400 $968,900 $384,150 $649,500

6.5% 5.1% 6.8% 9.3%

$434,350 $854,650 $344,950 $577,500

21.9% 19.1% 19.0% 23.0%

$420,100 $714,500 $331,700 $479,200

26.0% 42.5% 23.7% 48.2%

30.0 % (2015 ) 30.5 % (2015 ) 45.0 % (2015 )

$480,440 (54 ) $936,234 (11 ) $419,000 (21 ) $669,000 (9 )

$452,000 (55 ) $852,000 (11 ) $292,250 (30 ) $565,402 (8 )

$446,500 (57 ) $747,000 (13 ) $274,000 (19 ) $549,000 (10 )

$300,000 (121 ) $756,000 (22 ) $275,500 (34 ) $616,000 (9 )

$328,000 (46 ) $657,000 (13 ) $238,500 (19 ) $538,500 (9 )

19.5% 27.0% 46.7% 46.5%

Wellington Central Wilton

$527,750 $1,015,500 $413,000 $707,950

27.4 % (2015 ) 35.7 % (2015 ) 46.8 % (2015 ) 37.4 % (2015 )

$741,000 (22 ) $815,500 (18 ) $571,000 (10 ) $963,500 (10 ) $652,500 (8 ) $563,500 (58 )

Woodridge

$700,600

$698,100

1.1%

$638,050

9.4%

$549,850

27.0%

$470,600

48.3%

42.5 % (2015 )

$581,500 (6 )

$581,500 (10 )

$577,000 (5 )

$554,000 (18 )

$555,000 (9 )

Raumati Beach Raumati South Waikanae Waikanae Beach

GREATER WELLINGTON PORIRUA Aotea

Ascot Park Cannons Creek Papakowhai Paremata Plimmerton

Ebdentown Elderslea Pinehaven Silverstream Totara Park Trentham Wallaceville HUTT Avalon Belmont Boulcott Eastbourne Epuni Kelson Maungaraki Naenae Normandale Petone Stokes Valley Taita Wainuiomata Waiwhetu Waterloo WELLINGTON Aro Valley Berhampore Brooklyn Churton Park Hataitai Island Bay Johnsonville Karori Kelburn Khandallah Kilbirnie Lyall Bay Miramar Newlands Newtown Ngaio Northland Paparangi Seatoun Strathmore Park Tawa Te Aro Wadestown

Smart property decisions start here

5.9% 7.1%

16.8 % (2016 ) 18.8 % (2016 )

33.5 % (2015 ) 33.4 % (2015 ) 36.1 % (2015 )

$591,000 (20 ) $687,500 (30 ) $655,500 (16 ) $594,000 (7 )

56.6%

22.7% 17.2% 25.2% 60.9%

10.2% 46.2% 37.6%

42.5% 75.7% 24.2% 4.8%

18

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

SPOTLIGHT ON . . . ALBANY

New capital of the Shore Albany’s growth is opening many doors, writes Greg Fleming

T

oday Albany is a bustling, businessfriendly suburb of head offices, with a world-class stadium, new swim centre, great schools and a growing university.

It’s a long way from the rural idyll of old, a suburb considered remote until the Auckland Harbour Bridge was built in 1959.

Yes, the strawberry fields and orchards have gone but in their place is a thriving, family-friendly suburb, with great amenities, and offering plenty of choice for a wide range of home buyers.

Over the last decade, Albany often has been called “the new capital of the Shore” and it seems the prediction is finally coming true.

“Albany is a thriving mix of retail and lively entertainment and has easy access to motorways heading north, south or west,” says Sheryl Campbell, branch manager of Albany Bayleys.

“With new developments offering a unique style of apartment living, and with new businesses relocating to Albany each week, the suburb offers a wealth of employment and business opportunities,” she says.

There are various apartment developments in the market — including Rose Gardens, OKLA and Library Lane. Campbell says that 13 per cent of sales last year were apartments.

She says Albany and the wider area provide a range of housing options including residential homes, small lifestyle properties, and a growing number of apartment and small townhouse style developments that appeal to everyone from downsizers and first home buyers to investors.

“People love the area primarily because of the proximity to everything. All aspects of life are catered for and accessible within Albany.”

Campbell says buyers are also attracted by the area’s high-quality schools. And the presence of Massey University provides a great rental opportunity for property investors.

Albany Primary School, Albany Junior and Senior High Schools, and private schools Pinehurst and Kristin have a reputation for delivering highlevel academic, creative arts, and sports programmes.

The park-and-ride bus station, which has 1100 parking spaces, means city workers can be in downtown Auckland in under 20 minutes.

And that commute time is likely to get shorter after Auckland Mayor Phil Goff announced the dedicated Northern Busway lane will extend to Albany and then on shoulder lanes to Silverdale.

“Albany is a thriving mix of retail and lively entertainment and has easy access to motorways heading north, south or west.”

Sheryl Campbell

PHOTOS / TED BAGHURST

Come summer, it’s an easy drive from Albany to the many great beaches on the Shore.

The retirement sector of the market is also strong.

“New retirement developments in Albany are built to exceptional standards. They are spacious and luxurious with quality fittings,” says Campbell.

After a drop in sales over the second half of 2017, activity levels have found a base and Campbell expects volumes to continue to improve this year.

“Encouragingly the North Shore experienced an upturn over the December 2017 quarter with sales activity increasing by 8 per cent, outperforming the broader Auckland market.

“This reflects the ongoing appeal in the North Shore.”

NME0038

One kilometre dawdle to school.

One jog from the lookout.

One train from late night karaoke.

One doer-upper to keep you busy. .co.nz

Buying. Selling. Search for your property ones under All things property

19

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

RECENT SALES 146 Attwood Rd, Paremoremo, Albany is a solid family home with three bedrooms, two bathrooms and a pool.

The home has French-style fittings, and features a generous use of timber and saligna floorboards. Its CV is $1,025,000 and it sold for $1,350,000.

41 Kinleith Way, Albany is a home that was recently refurbished throughout to a high standard. There is a master bedroom with en suite and walk in wardrobe. And

PROPERTY PRICES there is a large family dining area, as well as four bedrooms, two lounges, two bathrooms and two garages.

Its CV is $1,150,000, and it sold for $1,526,000.

7 Wicklam Ln, Albany is a home offering spacious onelevel living plus four large living areas. The four bedrooms include a master with en suite. As well there are two bathrooms and two garages. Its CV is $2,010,000 and it sold for $1,938,000.

Prices range from $500,000 through to $2 millionplus with the average price for Albany in the 12 months to December 2017 being $1,200,000, says Sheryl Campbell of Albany Bayleys.

Section sizes range from 400sq m through to 10,000sq m for some lifestyle properties.

RENTS With high demand for short-term rentals, there are not a lot of long-term rentals around. Two-bedroom homes can be found for around $450 a week, but more typically would be $500 upwards. Threebedroom homes start at $600 a week but can hit $1000 if high quality and in a good location.

SCHOOLS Albany Primary School, Albany Junior High School, Albany Senior High School, and private schools Pinehurst and Kristin.

BEST STREETS Any of the streets bordering the North Shore Golf Course are excellent — St Andrews Way, Oak Manor Drive.

Other good streets include The Landing, Clemows, Attwood Rd, Paremoremo Rd, Elmore Rd and Hardens Lane which has lifestyle properties, many with beautiful water views. $1,526,000: 41 Kinleith Way, Albany.

$1,350,000: 146 Attwood Rd, Paremoremo.

LOCAL ATTRACTIONS Albany Stadium Pool opened last year. It’s a great place for families who want to have fun in the water; it also has a state-of-the-art fitness centre and small group fitness classes.

Albany Lakes Civic Park covers 6.5ha park and has a floodlit path around two artificial lakes. Other features include 17,000 plants and a bridge with an ornate wrought iron balustrade.

PHOTO / TED BAGHURST

$1,938,000: 7 Wicklam Ln, Albany.

BAYLEYS ARE EXPERTS IN SELLING THE GOOD LIFE

Bayleys Albany.

Specialists in Residential and Lifestyle Properties selling the Kiwi Dream.

Contact us on 09 414 0950 bayleys.co.nz BAYLEYS REAL ESTATE LTD, ALBANY, LICENSED UNDER THE REAA 2008

20 June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT SPOTLIGHT ON . . . POKENO

Steady growth south of Bombays

PHOTOS / TED BAGHURST

Newfound popularity is a huge turnaround for Pokeno, writes Greg Fleming

Y

ou might know it because of its famous bacon or gigantic icecreams but Pokeno is now a much sought-after area thanks to its handy location (53km southeast of Auckland and 72km north of Hamilton) and its laid back rural lifestyle.

“A new subdivision opened recently which will double the size of Pokeno,” says Ben Jameson sales team leader at Bayleys Counties, Rural and Lifestyle.

“Right now, supply is slowly outstripping demand which is keeping prices steady.”

The town has seen an influx of buyers unwilling or unable to pay the prices on the other side of the Bombay Hills.

As a result, Pokeno has become one of the fastest growing towns in New Zealand, and has a raft of new infrastructure coming on board in the next decade.

It’s newfound popularity is a huge turnaround for the town, which was hit hard when SH1 bypassed it for a new route in the early 1990s, Pokeno struggled for many years.

Jameson says Pokeno appeals to young families and retirees who want to be near Auckland for family. Many commute to Auckland (it’s a 90-minute trip at peak times,

“The modern subdivisions have revitalised the town with new families attending the school and becoming a part of the local community.”

Ben Jameson but just 45 minutes off-peak), while empty nesters are attracted to the area’s low crime rate and affordable prices.

“It’s also a good stepping stone suburb for home buyers wanting modern construction in a quiet rural setting,” says Jameson.

He says the range of properties on offer in Pokeno means the town is seeing an increasingly diverse culture.

He adds that planning for civic development, a supermarket and retail growth are all under way.

Jameson says it’s a welcoming, vibrant, family-friendly community — close to urban amenities at Pukekohe and Manukau but also far enough away to have a relaxed, rural feel.

“Pokeno offers great lifestyle fringe living,” says Jameson.

“The modern subdivisions on the outskirts of Pokeno have revitalised the town with new families attending the school and becoming a part of the local community.”

As a result of the influx of new residents, Pokeno’s small

town attractions are set to expand as the town and civic centre grow.

The town’s proximity to beaches in Raglan and Tauranga add to its appeal.

If you want a little exercise, there are many native bush walks in close proximity and a variety of water sports are on offer at the Waikato River.

It’s also a magnet for car clubs, and on weekends gleaming rides can be spotted parked along the main drag.

LOOKING FOR THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE TO AUCKLAND’S CENTRAL SUBURBS? www.harcourtscharlton.co.nz

09 631 5402 There is a lot to like

harcourtscharlton

harcourtscharlton

21

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

RECENT SALES Ben Jameson of Bayleys Counties has sold the following properties, which are indicative of Pokeno’s current price.

A four-bedroom home at 10 Dornal Pl, with separate lounge and high-end kitchen with walk-in pantry sold for $760,000, slightly above its CV of $750,000. Its position at the end of a cul-de-sac allows privacy.

A spacious four-bedroom home at 26 Helenslee Rd,

PROPERTY PRICES Price-wise, the average for a residential home sits at around mid $700,000s but can extend up to $950,000 for some properties. The average section size is a large 600sq m. But in old Pokeno (the original town centre with the coffee shop, ice cream parlour, takeaways and petrol station surrounded by original residential housing) a threebedroom home can be bought for around $550,000, while fringe lifestyle blocks can fetch between $900,000 and $1.2 million.

Also, 1000sq m-plus sections are available from $345,000.

Bayleys’ Ben Jameson says the feedback from buyers has been good, with many loving the rural vibe and small community living Pokeno offers.

Pokeno, with significant outdoor landscaping and playground sold for $845,000 (its CV was $765,000). The home looks over a lake with views to the north.

A four-bedroom home at 8 Springburn Pl, occupying a commanding site with a rural outlook, sold for $735,000.

Its layout allows for almost al fresco dining with stacker doors opening from the kitchen and dining area. Its CV was $725,000.

RENTS Rental returns range from $500-$560 a week.

SCHOOLS Pokeno Primary and Tuakau College. Private schools such as Kings College and Strathellan can be accessed by bus and train.

$760,000: 10 Dornal Pl, Pokeno.

BEST STREETS Quality subdivisions are Helenslee and Hitchen.

Best streets would include Westmuir Cres, Mark Ball Dr, Parkgrove Cres and Millbrae Pl.

LOCAL ATTRACTIONS Pokeno Farmers Market, is held on Sundays, homemade produce, crafts and entertainment. It attracts visitors from around the region.

$735,000: 8 Springburn Pl, Pokeno.

$845,000: 26 Helenslee Rd, Pokeno.

Pokeno in history. Pokeno was a crucial site during the 19th-century New Zealand Wars.

Queen’s Redoubt, one of the two largest European campaign forts in New Zealand, was the launching pad for the July 1863 British invasion, which began the Waikato War. The Queen’s Redoubt visitor’s centre is open 10am-2pm Sunday, coinciding with the market.

PHOTO / TED BAGHURST

High Performance Agency.

Ray White Mount Eden T 09 638 7477 | E mteden.nz@raywhite.com | W rwmteden.co.nz 447A Mount Eden Road, Mount Eden, Auckland J T Realty Limited Licensed (REAA 2008)

22 June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT SPOTLIGHT ON . . . MT EDEN

A desirable address

PHOTO / TED BAGHURST

Pretty as a picture, Mt Eden is also appealing because of being in the grammar zones, writes Greg Fleming

M

t Eden is one of Auckland’s best-loved and most-sought after suburbs. Its distinctive bungalow houses, most built between 1870 and 1930, reflect the architectural influences of the colonial villa.

And while its character has changed over the last 50 years, it retains an arty, cosmopolitan ambience. It’s also one of Auckland’s prettiest suburbs. Many of the original volcanic basalt rock walls are still visible, as are trees planted a century ago.

The main shopping precinct, Mt Eden Village, has the feel of a small town English high street, while offering up-to-theminute stores and cafes; even a village art trail.

“Mt Eden has always been a desirable area due to the close proximity to the CBD, with easy access to public transport heading north, south as well as east and west,” says Ray White’s Jared Cooksley.

“It offers a great cafe, restaurant and bar scene and the undeniable attraction of some of the homes positioned within the double grammar zone.”

There’s also a dozen parks and reserves suitable for a wide range of leisure activities.

But it’s the suburb’s proximity to some of Auckland’s most desirable schools that has long been a draw card for buyers. Auckland Grammar, Auckland Girls, Epsom Girls

Grammar and Mt Albert Grammar are options for those with college-age children. Junior schools include Auckland Normal Intermediate, Mt Eden Normal Primary School, Maungawhau School and the private school Ficino.

“Home owners residing within the double grammar zone often stay only as long as required for the children to complete their education,” says Cooksley.

In-zone properties are also likely to appreciate faster and return a greater long-term capital gain says REINZ’s chief executive Bindi Norwell.

She believes that recent changes to school zones will keep driving demand up for property in Mt Eden.

“As Auckland continues to experience unprecedented population growth, we understand that ending out of zone applications may be a necessity given the growth schools are facing.”

Cooksley says Mt Eden was once a suburb with many early 1900s villas and bungalows on generous sections which suited buyers with growing families who enjoyed the space for a garden or kicking a ball around with the kids, but that is changing.

“Many of these homes have been subdivided to allow for the growth of townhouses for families looking for an easy care lifestyle.

“The 1960s to 1970s saw a growth of brick and block units which allowed younger families to move into the area. More

One sneaky peek at next-door’s valuation

recently we are seeing a steep growth of brand new multilevel apartment style living which provides modern and efficient living with communal areas.”

He notes that many of these new apartments are close to eateries and public transport, so there’s no need for buyers to own a vehicle.

The city end of Mt Eden especially is experiencing strong growth in this new style of living, while the Three Kings end of Mt Eden Rd is undergoing redevelopment from the old quarry to medium-to-high-density housing.

Cooksley estimates that potential rental income – if buying for investment purposes — can range from $470 to $820 a week for a two-bedroom unit or apartment, and anywhere between $570 to $1570 a week for a three- or fourbedroom house.

The apartment market offers a more affordable entry point for those wanting to get into this sought-after area.

Norwell estimates buyers may save more than $900,000 in Mt Eden by purchasing an apartment instead of a house.

“Apartments have come a long way in the last 20 years to having top-end fixtures and fittings, eco-friendly/energy saving features and extensive communal areas,” she says.

“An apartment may not be the property that a young couple end up living in their whole life, but it allows them to build up equity. Further down the track if they plan a family, they can then look to make the next step to a larger home.”

Zoom in on the latest Property Valuations OneRoof’s valuation data is second-to-none. Browse the estimated value of NZ properties nation-wide, or simply search for those that fall within your price range.

Buying. Selling.

Search for your property ones under .co.nz All things property

23

June 4, 2018 | PROPERTY REPORT

RECENT SALES A fully renovated home on a half site at 7 Queens Ave sold for $1,639,600. It sits on a sunny, level section, and has open plan dining and a family area with a modern kitchen deck and a front veranda. There are four bedrooms and three bathrooms. Its CV was $2,150,000.

31 Ashton Rd is in zone for AGS, EGGS, MAGS, AGGS and only a stroll to the village and transport. It has open plan living, a renovated kitchen and bathroom and a separate toilet downstairs. There are four bedrooms and one bathroom in the two-level unit. It sold for $1,100,000

PROPERTY PRICES and had a CV of $1,240,000, 13 Mont Le Grand Rd sold for $2,235,000, above its CV of $1,850,000. It had been renovated to a beautiful standard, and has open plan living, with a designer kitchen taking centre stage.

305 Mt Eden Road is a villa dating back to the late 1800s. It has had only three owners and is one of the oldest homes in Mt Eden. There are three bedrooms, two bathrooms and its section is 991sq m. It sold for $2.3 million. Its CV was $2.5 million.

Two-bedroom cross-lease units sell from $600,000 to $900,000-plus. Prices for twobedroom stratum apartments range from $700,000 to more than $1 million.

A three-bedroom freehold house costs between $1.1 million and $2 million-plus, while you can expect to pay in excess of $4 million for a luxury four-bedroom family home.

RENTS Rents range from $470 to $820 a week for a twobedroom unit or apartment, $570-$1570 for a three- or four-bedroom house.

SCHOOLS

$2,235,000: 13 Mont Le Grand.

Auckland Grammar, Auckland Girls, Epsom Girls Grammar and Mt Albert Grammar are options for those with college-age children. Junior schools include Auckland Normal Intermediate, Mt Eden Normal Primary School, Maungawhau School and the private school Ficino.

BEST STREETS Bourne St, Pentland Ave, Woodside Rd, Pencarrow Ave.

LOCAL ATTRACTIONS Mount Eden (or Maungawhau, meaning the mountain of the whau tree' in Māori) is the second highest natural point in the Auckland region. The English name honours George Eden, first Earl of Auckland.

$1,639,600: 7 Queens Ave.

$2.3 million: 305 Mount Eden Rd.

Eden Park This is New Zealand's largest stadium. It has been home to Auckland cricket since 1910 — hosting test and one-day cricket matches —and has been the home of the Auckland Rugby Union since 1925, hosting major international rugby games.

$1.1m: 31 Ashton Rd. PHOTO / TED BAGHURST

Bayleys Pukekohe — where town meets country.

Come and meet the team at 8 Massey Avenue, Pukekohe Or call us today 09 238 5313

Bayleys Real Estate Ltd, Pukekohe, Licensed under the REAA 2008

Properties for sale

The Vulcan: thevulcan.co.nz

Outlook: youroutlook.co.nz

Elevenpaora: elevenpaora.co.nz

NXN: nxnkingsland.co.nz

The Grounds: thegrounds.nz

Mason Square: masonsquare.co.nz

Hereford St: vipaucklandapartments.co.nz

SOL: solapartments.co.nz

Hopetoun St: vipaucklandapartments.co.nz

If you’re looking to buy or sell an Auckland apartment then visit us at our office, 8 Hereford Street, Freemans Bay. Julie Quinton +64 21 894 071 julie.quinton@bayleys.co.nz

Trent Quinton +64 21 894 070 trent.quinton@bayleys.co.nz

BAYLEYS REAL ESTATE LTD, LICENSED UNDER THE REA ACT 2008

Meet the rest of the VIP team

Ellis Prince – Salesperson

Diane Jackson – Salesperson

Jon Fisher – Salesperson

Jo Darbyshire – Salesperson

Zoe Tietze – Marketing Coordinator

Ethan Holm – Personal Assistant

Helena Read – Project Analyst

Stevie Tietze – Customer Relations

bayleys.co.nz

vipaucklandapartments.co.nz