[John Z]

We're in NZ for almost 2 years now, and as an architectural designer, I'm extremely dissapointed in the quality of houses in NZ. To me architecture, or design in general, is a chain of opportunities, and what I see in NZ is a chain of missed opportunities.

We're designing and building our own house and the way this proces has exposed the general kiwi-understanding of sustainable, integrated design / building is mind blowing. One of the key elements that struck me is the understanding of day-night temperature changes. In general the NZ climate is mild, but the way it is very different from Europe is day-night temperatures. That is where you need to look for a healthy, comfortable home.
And then, get rid of the 10 a penny designs offered by the match-stick construction companies. I see 2 basic designs in NZ; the old fashioned romantic colonial style, and the modern material, mix and match box designs. In all price categories same old, same old.
With new houses, when it looks expensive, when it looks big, it is good...?

The architectural firm that is helping me with the design (NZ regulations etc.) told me this may be the first residential building to win an architectural award in NZ, which felt good to me at first, because I hoped to trigger a different understanding in building with it, to make NZ a more beautifull place, but I'm loosing my confidence with so much ignorance, so much misunderstanding in what makes life worth living.

A new house is an opportunity to do something better, not to just ad one more fashionably boring item to the existing stock.

Or is it?

[VileTraveller]

Sounds a little discouraging, but not unexpected - as a landscape architect, I've found that different countries rarely make use of the latest techniques from around the world. New Zealand, with quite a low population base, probably lags behind in primary research when compared to, say, the US or Germany.

I don't know why there is this resistance to accept or build upon research from abroad - obviously, nothing is directly translatable from one climactic zone to the next, but there seems to be a tendency for professions in different countries to re-invent the wheel, every time. For example, I'm a big fan of SUDS (sustainable urban drainage systems), but trying to get local engineers (I'm in Hong Kong) to even look at the possibilities feels like bashing my head against a brick (or should that be concrete) wall ... :uhoh

Well, I hope you can do your bit in pushing the boundaries, as I will certainly try to do when I eventually make the move. Is there a NZ equivalent of LEED or similar green building standards?

[John Z]

There are several green building projects, but I'm not yet familiar with them. One that seemed as a kind of reference to me was the "New Zealand Green Building Council". As a kind of hope I heard about Christchurch that regulations concerning environmental aspects, have sharpened the integration of designs into their surroundings. At least it is concerning colours (maybe materials?), but maybe someone from around Christchurch would know better (I live on the North Island).

As a landscape architect you might be of great help also; it is amazing how little consideration people have for nature (I haven't seen all of NZ yet...;)), it seems so easy to cut down (native) trees "to create a view", instead of designing WITH the natural environment. I simply hate all those neatly cut lawns where there could have been native nature, there is no balance. I don't see respect, I don't see understanding, I don't see creativity, to me it seems such a basic misunderstanding in what the opportunities in New Zealand are.

The opportunities, I think, are nowhere as good as in New Zealand, but how can we make a switch for the good of all? How can we make people aware without pushing too hard? I think there is an enormous challenge here, but although I'd hope the government would lead the way, BY EXAMPLE, there's also a risk of bureaucratic regulations. (And if there's something I hate above all, it is bureaucracy)

If my story sounds discouraging I'd like to balance that by stating it is a challenge, an opportunity, and nowhere better to have that challenge than in NZ. :raebanana

[RJLink]

I am glad you are here John, and don't get discouraged!

[GrumpyGoat]

I am happy that you are slogging through the bureaucracy to make something happen.
Great revolutions (i.e. building revolutions) start with one person doing something different. And NZ really would benefit from a building revolution.

I was just thinking (bemusedly, of course) that there would be MASSIVE interest in sustainable building if there was some Guinness World Record associated with it, as the Kiwis seem to be obsessed with breaking world records (especially if the Aussies hold it).

Can we somehow trick the country into embracing building design innovation by invoking national pride and statistics? You know, NZ could be the world record holder of new sustainable building models!!:laugh

[JandM]

What a brilliant idea! :clap If only...

[sophiedb]

Hubby likes this post! He did a cadetship in an architectural design firm in Whangarei many years ago, before going into engineering and then engineering design instead, but has remained interested in building design (particularly eco/sustainable style). I tend more towards the gardening end of the spectrum and yearn for something beyond a 10x10m patch in the middle of our same-same 70s housing warren, but that's another story..

Anyway he's also just finished a long monologue about how you're completely right and can you desgn us a house one day? :)

[Wooly_Cow]

The main issue here appears to be 'value for money'. Given the relative wealth of the population, I believe there is a perception that innvoative design from overseas is expensive and that 'Kiwi standard' will do.

In fact I believe that good design need not be initially expensive and certainly isn't in the medium to long term. For example building houses with 'thermal mass' i.e. stone, brick, concrete in part of them, so they heat up using the heat of the day and radiate this heat in the chilly evenings and nights, costs a bit more intially (for the material) and takes a bit of design, but ultimately is far more efficient.

I'm sure there are Kiwi designers and hosue building projects that do take into account good or even great design....it's just they seem to get lost in the mass of (sorry for saying this) crap!

So here's a challenge....can anyone post links, photos', names of deisgners / builders that show the best of New Zealand affordable design?

[John Z]

........
In fact I believe that good design need not be initially expensive and certainly isn't in the medium to long term. For example building houses with 'thermal mass' i.e. stone, brick, concrete in part of them, so they heat up using the heat of the day and radiate this heat in the chilly evenings and nights, costs a bit more intially (for the material) and takes a bit of design, but ultimately is far more efficient...........

For comfort, health and economy, it's as simple as that indeed. What I was told by someone who lives here a little longer than me, is that kiwi's move very often and therefore would not be interested in longterm thinking.

From what I've experienced in the few years (almost) we're here now, that is just BS. What I'm going to say now will most probably seem arrogant, insulting or whatever, but IN GENERAL I find people in NZ very immature, especially from a philosophical point of view. And this reflects in how they live, make choices, build houses etc.

Of course I've found exceptions to the rule, but again in architectural design, when you find "something different" and take your time to see what is really going in, again it's just a variation on the same old, same old.

Making a house or a building compliment or complement to a site (and vice versa) is what to me is one of the basic challenges, and yet, the best designs I've seen in NZ all are NOT integrated, but merely reflect the owners wish to express their modern taste for design.

NZ indeed should be a leader, not a follower. But then again, when the clients stick to just following the latest "fashion" it is hard to make a real change...

Again, no matter how silly this may sound, I think the government should lead by example...

[John Z]

One NZ company that comes close to what I think should be NZ architectural design is faeron-hay (http://www.fearonhay.com/#/home).

Although I feel they're still followers, a lot of their work is integrated, respectfull. At least they're inspirational, I think.

[norma]

There are several green building projects, but I'm not yet familiar with them. One that seemed as a kind of reference to me was the "New Zealand Green Building Council". As a kind of hope I heard about Christchurch that regulations concerning environmental aspects, have sharpened the integration of designs into their surroundings. At least it is concerning colours (maybe materials?), but maybe someone from around Christchurch would know better (I live on the North Island).

You might already be aware of these, but if not:



Waitakere City Council claims to be NZ's first eco city and has initiatives promoting sustainable building. It also funded the development of a green roof on its Central Civic Building:

http://www.waitakere.govt.nz/AbtCit/ec/ecoinit/greenroof.asp

DOC's new eco-friendly head office building

http://www.doc.govt.nz/about-doc/news/media-releases/2007/new-eco-friendly-doc-building-opens/

[newarrival]

I "need" to ask you something, John Z......
Do you really say that the average house in Europe is designed following sustainable, integrated design as to your first post?
In my whole circle of friends I know of no- one whose house was build like that or in any way out of the normal range.., yes, there is double glazing, insulation and central heating- but that about covers it, in my experience.
I honestly know no one with a house that sticks out of the crowd regarding its design in this matter, but then, maybe I don't know the right people.
When I look at all those small houses that are build on even smaller plots in some of the towns, I cannot really see a big difference to the way the houses in the new areas are build here....., although we also used to wonder why some of the plots are so small (or houses so big)- but again, it is a question of money, I guess.

In the time we've been here I already met at least two people with houses that are energy- efficient..., one who did the whole building by himself, using clay and hay, and the other one (in Dunedin) which is built to catch as much sun as possible, keep it in the walls and floor and ceiling and then release it during the night.

Maybe I misunderstood your point, and I am not saying that everything is perfect here etc.- I was just wondering:uhoh

[Super_BQ]

I've said it once and i'll say it again. The reason why kiwi houses lack little change is because virtually everyone treats their homes as vehicles for making money rather than as a home to live and improve their dwelling. That's clearly shown statistically for the average kiwi moves house every 6 or 7 years. Any energy saving ideas with a payback of 10+ years is taken out of the equation because it cuts into the profit. Central heating could be an extra 20% of the value of the house which no way the original home builders could re-coupe that back (ie. such home selling for $500K vs. $400 for the non-central heated home).

I myself have seen and experienced the same attitude with local architects and builders. (early stages of designing our house). The concepts I imply from N. America are never taken seriously and if it costs a lot to do, you are a fool for over capitalising the home. Yet, no one cares if one spends a fortune on their race car.

I've not found 1 single architect in Christchurch that truly understands about home comfort like in N. America. The closest i've found was an HRV outfit in Chch called Avon Electric that uses the same N. American HRV system for fresh air ventilation (also meeting Canada's R2000 compliance). However, he knows of the standard and the problem and finds over 99% of houses built in NZ fall under the "breathable home" category, entirely different to the air tight homes in US/Canada. Though the NZ building act allows for provisions to build such air tight homes, kiwis feel that the limitation of window coverage is too restrictive compared to the breathable design homes with huge window coverage.

...and I should mention that no window can ever have the R-value of a fully insulated wall. The true test of home comfort is not when it's sunny outside. This reminded me of a friend that came over from Canada mentioned how sunny and hot it was in the car but once you roll down the window, that cold air outside just robs all the heat.

[John Z]

I "need" to ask you something, John Z......

Thank you for asking! Yes, you may have misunderstood ;)

First let me state that this is not a black-white story, it is one with many nuances in all directions.

My point is not that all houses or even a lot of them, in Europe are well designed (from whatever point of view).

However, like the green roof building in Norma's post, so much is presented as new, innovative when in reality it is only new to the not so well informed. And I think that nobody should measure himself/herself against false standards.

New Zealand offers UNIQUE opportunities and it is beyond my understanding why people (clients/designers) would choose to build houses that could have been built anywhere, that not are taking advantage of the unique qualities of the spot AND are not contributing to make that spot more beautifull.

In the Netherlands we did not have the opportunities of beautifull sloping landscapes to work with, that's why to me this is a designers dream. Here we have a palet to work with that has colours never seen in the Netherlands, and yet the paintings are even worse than in the Netherlands. (Or Germany, or Italy, or Norway etc.)

Of course there are energy efficient houses in NZ, of course there are beautifull houses in NZ. The point is they are only variations on 1 theme, while this country has quite a lot more themes than 1 to work with. Let alone that there are so many ingredients in each lot that each one has such an interesting palet.
The beautifull houses that there are in New Zealand however are too fashionable, too little unique, too much variations of the same old (mostly post-modernism styles)

I hope this somewhat answers your remark. It is quite complicated to explain so many nuances in text alone when also our vocabularies and interpretations are different.

But please, come back for more if neccesary!:)

[John Z]

....... The reason why kiwi houses lack little change is because virtually everyone treats their homes as vehicles for making money rather than as a home to live and improve their dwelling.........

I think I can agree with your whole story, but also I do not approve that it actually happens. As a society we should build for the future, the long term, not for short term profit.

When we allow this kind of "behaviour" it reflects to everything we do in society; to our neighbours, to our family (!), to our childrens future.

Very close to my hate for bureaucracy comes my hate towards (especially modern) politics. I don't think it's a $1.000.000,= question to find out why. ;)

[John Z]

....Can we somehow trick the country into embracing building design innovation by invoking national pride and statistics? You know, NZ could be the world record holder of new sustainable building models!!:laugh

Along with these posts it comes to mind that sustainable building in itself should be "award / prize worthy". With the reputation (of being clean, nature friendly) being better than reality, NZ could benefit in many ways...:raebanana

[VileTraveller]

"Winning a prize" is sort of why developers go for things like LEED standards in their buildings - it's great publicity for them and boosts their income. It's no coincidence that LEED and similar green building ratings come in Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum ratings! ;)

Are there no regulations in NZ relating to felling of trees? I thought there was some kind of restriction on cutting native bush, at least. Regulation can go wrong (easily), of course - here in Hong Kong it's incredibly difficult and time-consuming to fell trees for development. Unfortunately, this also means no-one is willing to plant trees if there is any chance that they might want to build on that land later. There are many huge areas of land which have stood empty for over a decade, with not a single tree planted, for this very reason. Even more disturbing when you consider how little land this place actually has ...

New Zealand Green Building Council (http://www.nzgbc.org.nz/main/) - ah, yes, these people, if they are anything like members of other Green Building Councils around the world, are the hope for the future. Their Green Star rating system looks similar to LEED. These ratings systems by themselves don't mean much, because they can become a box-ticking exercise to score brownie points, but if the consultant really works with the developer to implement the guidelines in the spirit they were intended, they can really make a difference. And it's amazing how much more involved all the consultants (architects, engineers, landscape architects) and even contractors can become if the Green consultant is good and gets them excited! :bluebanana

[Nolan]

I was given ealier this year while in NZ a book with above titlle with subtitle Sustainable Urban Development, Building and Architecture in NZ, edited by Johann Bernhardt, published May 2008.

The city of Waitakere and Mayor Bob Harvey are great advocates of the smart and green design you may be looking for.

I found the book a great read and motivation for if/when the future opportunity of creating a home in NZ for my family.

If a career (change) opportunity presented itself somewhere in the green residential construction or refab industry, I or OH would jump on it.

Cheers - Nelson bound hopeful

[newarrival]

John, thanks for the reply and your explanation..., I think I am a bit confused with the "sustainability" and on the the other hand "design" side of things.
Of course it might be great to have some exceptional designs if you are looking into building your own home, but, as with many other things, isn't that a question of money as well as of desire?

And, what might sound a bit negative here, for someone like us Immigrants, the views are so much more spectacular than for someone who grew up here, don't you think? Having said that, I have met (especially since we moved up here) quite a lot of Kiwis who know exactly how lucky they are to be able to live in this country (well, I think we/ they are lucky, anyway- there are other opinions around, I know that)and this area.

Regarding the "colonial" style, I am one of those ignorant people who do like that style:exit

[John Z]

For a Green Consultant I think you need both of these: :bluebanana:raebanana

I've been informed that you need a permit to cut down native trees, or that you can contact the council if you're suspicious of a "criminal act", but I don't see myself doing that. It's too late anyway...

Where we live you can hear the chainsaws about every weekend somewhere down the gully. It is one of the more prestigious places around Hamilton, with native bush as an asset, and yet people want to live here to ad the address to their name.

A typical (true) anecdote about this place:
When we came to see if we wanted to live here the owner told us what a great environment it was to live. I thought "Yes, I can see that, great native environment, lots of space...". Then he went on: "There lives a lawyer, there lives lawyer, there lives a judge...".

:cool:

[John Z]

I was given ealier this year while in NZ a book with above titlle with subtitle Sustainable Urban Development, Building and Architecture in NZ, edited by Johann Bernhardt, published May 2008......

Sounds like a book I want to ad to my collection of typical NZ stuff. I try to get any information that helps me get a better understanding of NZ, books (I love (collect) good books with pictures...) are a great way to sit on the deck, in the native environment and take it in from another perspective, like a multi dimensional experience :laugh

Thank a lot!

[RJLink]

SuperBQ, thanks for the insight on why NZ is slow to adopt - it makes sense now.

[veronica]

one of the reasons for the poorer standard of housing is often money. not all Kiwis that can afford to build their own home have lots of money and that is reflected in what they build. The wages here aren't great and people like to spend money on leisure pursuits not just bricks and mortar.

[John Z]

...
Regarding the "colonial" style, I am one of those ignorant people who do like that style:exit

Thank you for your confession Renate ;)

I'll tell you my concern with colonial style. Are you sitting comfortable? Cuppa tea?

Before architecture, my career was in psychiatry (I'm multi-disciplinairy). The thesis I wrote was a constant back and forth between these two. There are intergrated personalities, there is integrated design. Are they related? Yes.

When I wrote the thesis we were living in a 18th century mansion, 14 rooms, the works :laugh We restored the building and I got to understand what is important in old buildings. But, once you understand that, you also start to see the importance of growing, of change.

I learned to respect old buildings from many points of view, including from a material point of view. Old buildings are not built to the max, there is a lot of material in it that is the result of absence of static calculations, but also a lot of "decadent material". And that is one of the reasons why I think it is "absurd" to build old style in new buildings. Another one is from a psychiatric point of view; when you live constantly in a fake old building it influences your mind, the way you accept the world around you, the way you interprete the world around you, the way you will (start to) ignore certain aspects of life, it becomes scary when you look from the outside in.

I've been in the middle of it big time and I know it is absolutely true, it worries me, because it is fashionable in these "scary times" to fall back to the good old times and the romantic ideas that come along with it.

Concerning people who are aware of what they have here in NZ I see quite a discrepancy in what people say and what they do. I really, really hope to get to know a lot of people who enjoy making an effort to make the world a better place without the aesthetics first. Real beauty comes from within, in people as in design :cheers

[John Z]

one of the reasons for the poorer standard of housing is often money. not all Kiwis that can afford to build their own home have lots of money and that is reflected in what they build. The wages here aren't great and people like to spend money on leisure pursuits not just bricks and mortar.

Yup, that is one of my concerns (too). In the Netherlands a lot of people chose "brochure houses" because they thought an architect is too expensive.

SuperBQ's explanation puts that in a new perspective for me, because I think I see the same behaviour concerning avoiding an architect, but for a completely different reason?

it is one of my beliefs that an architect should be able to design a house that is optimised for any client. I used to have my signature stating: "I do not compromise, I only settle for the perfect mix". That is how I live, and how I design. And how I think any designer should work.

How shall we call it, "Budget Maximizing"? :)

[James 1077]

From my personal point of view I can honestly say that I haven't seen a new style house in New Zealand that I would live in (or even look at twice - other than to wonder why anyone would build such a thing). That is one of the main reasons that we live in Devonport and have bought a 1910 settlers cottage that looks good.

Yes the design may be silly inside (south facing living room) but from the outside it looks good and that is what is important.

We'll probably be moving again in 5 years or so time to a larger house (when we can afford it) so there is no point doing any work on the house that won't increase its value or provide payback within that 5 year period (monetary payback or comfort or both).

So we have spent some money updating the bathroom - which will definitely pay for itself when we come to sell the place. We have added an HRV system as this may pay for itself but, more importantly, it will make the place more comfortable by filtering out the allergens and so reducing the number of asthma attacks my son has and help reduce my wife's hayfever suffering. We have changed the lighting as this will pay for itself and generally looks better aesthetically. And we will be adding in a gate and doors under the house for safety.

We would like to open plan the living room & kitchen; move the laundry down under the house and move the bathroom within the house to a more sensible location. But these will cost lots of money and so we'll only do it if it can be virtually guaranteed to repay us when we sell the property in 5 years time.

[newarrival]

John, that sounds very complicated and, in my opinion, far too academic:cool:
I am not sure if that really applies to all the people living in old houses, but, then again, I am no expert.
I just like the look of the "older style" hoses which use a lot of wood, have the verandas around all four sides etc..., but I do, too, like old furniture...., and don't feel like I am stopping in my tracks because we look at our old wardrobe every day?!:uhoh

Veronicas explanation is a very good one, I guess..., and I really wonder if people coming from other countries just don't see or cannot understand that a lot of those related issues are a question of money and not a question of taste or choice?!:o

[Sam B]

So why did we decide to build an old-style new house? Because in truth, I have always thought new houses that are built in an old style back in Britain were the height of naff, although I don't agree with any of John's more philosophical theories. It's because:

a) we wanted to live in a place where there wasn't a house, so we either needed to move one there or build one.

b) moving one turned out to be a no-goer as nice houses don't come up for moving much and they have to be all sawn up.

c) we looked at all sorts of options for a modern eco-house but could not find any company or builder that remotely knew what we were talking about and it was starting to look very expensive

d) We know NOTHING about design, buiding etc, and would have been able to contribute little to the process.

So we went for what we knew and liked. And I'm glad we did. It's great. Like a villa but warm. Yippee!

[incredible hulse]

Interesting topic John and one I can relate to as we are currently dealing with architects on a pretty extensive renovation. We've also just moved from a colonial property!

Whilst I agree that some of the attitudes to what I would consider basic design and build concepts (such as heating!) can be treated dismissively I don't think this is a design specific and put it down to more of the 'that's how we do things here' attitude that is common in NZ.

From a customer perspective however I expect the architect to deliver to my brief. I personally don't care if this doesn't win design awards or doesn't stimulate their creative juices - I'm quite happy for them to do this but in their own time and not when I'm paying 120 dollars an hour for the pleasure ;)

I think in real terms architects/designers are expensive (esp. when on a kiwi wage) and for this reason I am quite happy to rein mine in if I feel they are going off on a tangent for little apparent gain to me.

As others have mentioned the cost of the whole build process I think dictates the deliverable and in the mind of some this would equate to the dropping of what I would class as bare essentials (heating, proper double glazing, insulation, etc), whereas to us it will probably mean the dropping of some of the eco ideas we had looked at such as geothermal heat pump and solar water.

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but for us it is more important that the house is liveable and comfortable for us as a family (whilst still not looking like a shed)rather than what it looks like to the neighbours.

[John Z]

Interesting topic John and one I can relate to as we are currently dealing with architects on a pretty extensive renovation. We've also just moved from a colonial property!......

Sounds like you've been quite bussy in NZ building history already then. Do I understand right you're renovating a "newer" house? Is there a style/period to it, perhaps even a name?

I've enjoyed restoration of old buildings, but there's not so much to restore around here. Having said that, when I look up in Hamilton (city) I see a lot of old façades, that could make for a very interesting street, but in a way I think people don't get what gives a city "warmth". I don't believe it is a matter of money, or in a way maybe it is, it is the other way around; being able to make the most of a dollar, 1000 dollars, 1000,000 dollars?

Can I ask why you've decided to restore a house/building instead of building new from the ground up? (There's nothing wrong with that, I expect there's an interesting story behind it...)

While what we're doing for our own house is seemingly new to NZ (nothing revolutionairy in techniques or materials), there seems to be an extra cost to it, which I'm very well willing to pay. I prefer to pay 20-30% (?) more knowing I'm adding long term quality to NZ than live in a house that makes me popular in the ladies room.

In the Netherlands I had a column in a monthly magazine where I discussed these kinds of subjects and it is amazing how it's the same all over the world to what kind of people become defensive and what kind of people get a sparkle in their eyes when they read what I have to say.

I know I could make everybody happy, but that's not my goal. I do not compromise...:bluebanana

What I'd like you to consider in your design is making it adaptable for future improvements, eco friendly techniques, or even ones that don't exist yet. It is how you make your house approachable, adjustable,..."friendly". ;)

For example, in our own house we've designed doorsized openings on the first floor where we can ad future structures so they will be integrated without having to break anything out of the "existing" structure.

[ColeyNZ]

I realise that I may be of a minority but I love kiwi homes. I know that there needs to be better regulations and they are coming and I do know that you have to be mindful of what you are buying but overall I love the flow that Kiwi homes have.

In the US, when a community is built, there is a list of things that are done. See what you think of these:

1. Sub-divide to the smallest possible lot. In the US, specifically the east coast and the north east, the average size lot within 10 miles of a CBD is around .20 of an acre.

2. Bulldoze everything! Remove every tree, bush, and sometimes even the top 10 inches of soil, all to sell at profit. So that when "phase 1" is complete you have a big parking lot.

3. Offer 4 designs of different homes. Let the exterior be customizable, but charge a 500% markup. These make it so that the interiors are as plain as possible. Each room white drywall with flat 7 foot ceilings, minimal windows (windows are expensive), fight to get 6-panel doors, standard contractor grade stuff everywhere. At least most contractors in the US focus on having a nice kitchen.

4. Advertise your community as "city living in the 'burbs"... because the walls are so thin, every sound your neighbour makes, you will hear it. Why? Because Americans do not use brick anymore. Everything you see will be stick built wrapped in vinyl siding with just enough insulation for code.

5. Your house will not focus one iota on the indoor/outdoor living convenience nor on the sun or anything else. The only effect will be for curb appeal at no expense. This will be further aggravated by the community management board that will tell you what you can and cannot do on your property. These same people will also ask you for annual or monthly dues and eventually you will notice that you community fees keep on going up and up because they have no oversite. And if you don't pay, they have a contract saying that they can sue you out of your home.


This scenario doesn't cover all homes or all situations but it is applicable to about 75% of the homes in the suburbs, on the east coast, North East and other areas.

[John Z]

I realise that I may be of a minority but I love kiwi homes. I know that there needs to be better regulations and they are coming and I do know that you have to be mindful of what you are buying but overall I love the flow that Kiwi homes have.

............................

5. Your house will not focus one iota on the indoor/outdoor living convenience nor on the sun or anything else. The only effect will be for curb appeal at no expense. This will be further aggravated by the community management board that will tell you what you can and cannot do on your property. These same people will also ask you for annual or monthly dues and eventually you will notice that you community fees keep on going up and up because they have no oversite. And if you don't pay, they have a contract saying that they can sue you out of your home.


This scenario doesn't cover all homes or all situations but it is applicable to about 75% of the homes in the suburbs, on the east coast, North East and other areas.

You like horror stories, do you? :laugh

I don't think there's an issue with the KIWI houses per se, my issue was with "fake old", and indeed "curb appeal" (Thank you for that expression...).

I totally can make a translation of your story to the Western Europe real estate attitude, although not as extreme as your description, it was one of the reasons to move away to NZ.

But, I'm not long enough in NZ to go to the full extend of this, I see subdivisions here that to me only could be possible for maximum short term profit. And they must be council approved...

[ColeyNZ]

We're in NZ for almost 2 years now, and as an architectural designer, I'm extremely dissapointed in the quality of houses in NZ. To me architecture, or design in general, is a chain of opportunities, and what I see in NZ is a chain of missed opportunities.

We're designing and building our own house and the way this proces has exposed the general kiwi-understanding of sustainable, integrated design / building is mind blowing. One of the key elements that struck me is the understanding of day-night temperature changes. In general the NZ climate is mild, but the way it is very different from Europe is day-night temperatures. That is where you need to look for a healthy, comfortable home.
And then, get rid of the 10 a penny designs offered by the match-stick construction companies. I see 2 basic designs in NZ; the old fashioned romantic colonial style, and the modern material, mix and match box designs. In all price categories same old, same old.
With new houses, when it looks expensive, when it looks big, it is good...?

The architectural firm that is helping me with the design (NZ regulations etc.) told me this may be the first residential building to win an architectural award in NZ, which felt good to me at first, because I hoped to trigger a different understanding in building with it, to make NZ a more beautifull place, but I'm loosing my confidence with so much ignorance, so much misunderstanding in what makes life worth living.

A new house is an opportunity to do something better, not to just ad one more fashionably boring item to the existing stock.

Or is it?


Now that I have re-read your posting for the 4th time, it finally clicked. I understand your frustrations though. I personally have liked alot of the designs that I have seen here NZ but there does need to be more of an emphasis on quality.

I would love to see your house btw. Once we return in March, we are going to be getting a section probably in Coatesville or Kemeu and I would like to have it custom built. One because of my F/MIL are going to be moving in with us in 2011/12 ish and second, I would like to take advantage of the views. Because this will ultimately be my dream house I'm not going to hold back on expense as well.

If you could PM with some more details that would awesome.

Dan

[veronica]

well we live in one of the older (original) christchurch villas and love it draughts an all.If we were to rebuild I would like to take the good bits of the older designs and incorporate them into a newer house. While I agree that change is important if things aren't working I also am not in favour of throwing the baby out with the bathwater!!! If somethings not broke then why fix it. Yep in an ideal world I would like to build the perfect eco house, solar powered etc. exactly to a design to suit our family, but in that ideal world I would have a much bigger plot and much more money!! and once having built it you could bet your life that with new technology and ideas it would be out of date as soon as we moved into it.....

[John Z]

............. you could bet your life that with new technology and ideas it would be out of date as soon as we moved into it.....

:nice1

I like the nuances in your story. It is not a black or white world.

To me, as a designer, it is a challenge to make dynamic concepts, that allow "growth", whatever that may mean.

[incredible hulse]

Sounds like you've been quite bussy in NZ building history already then. Do I understand right you're renovating a "newer" house? Is there a style/period to it, perhaps even a name?

<snip>

Can I ask why you've decided to restore a house/building instead of building new from the ground up? (There's nothing wrong with that, I expect there's an interesting story behind it...)

John - I would call the current style as a mess. I believe the property started as a bach (60's maybe) and evolved several times from there (last time in the 90'). The reason we are restoring are 2 fold, both relating to the location (beachfront).

First is we could not knock down and rebuild due to new planning laws. Secondly - cost ! Land value alone for the section is in excess of 500K (and hence purchase cost is in excess of this), and when you add demolition, design and build costs for a 320sqm property there wouldn't be much change from 1.5 million (a figure we don't have!!).

At the end of the day I think it is to do with money. If you ask anyone if they would like an eco friendly heating system over a standard one I'm sure the reply would be close to 100% affirmative. If you then tell them a geothermal heat pump is going to cost them 30K above a standard electric system I think the figures would be close to 10%.

We're now looking a wood pellet furnises btw running radiators but again this may blow out of budget especially as the relative costs are excessive in NZ

[John Z]

........ If you then tell them a geothermal heat pump is going to cost them 30K above a standard electric system I think the figures would be close to 10%.

We're now looking a wood pellet furnises btw running radiators but again this may blow out of budget especially as the relative costs are excessive in NZ

It sounds like an adventurous challenge. I'm from a family of castle owners, back to the 10th century, and I like to read the changes over time like a book. Especially what the seventies have done to buildings however, I could do without, without a doubt.

I think it is good when money is a concern (not when you can't afford basics...). The most expensive houses I have seen, also were the ugliest ones. When the basic concept of a design is really strong, it will allow for future changes without damaging the power of the whole design.

When I was still studying architecture, I had a fellow student from Iran. He showed me (traditional) air condition concepts that were simple and effective. I'm a fan of the organic design concepts of Frank Lloyd Wright (and Gaudi) and incorporating those concepts with low tech ("anti consumerist") solutions is what can provide multiple fun factors in a design, with the fun of lower building costs included.;)

[mylesdw]

Catalogue houses are quite easily identifiable: they just look dull. Architect designed houses on the other hand come in four styles: Disney, civic, abattoir and dropped-from-a-great-height. :-)

[John Z]

Catalogue houses are quite easily identifiable: they just look dull. Architect designed houses on the other hand come in four styles: Disney, civic, abattoir and dropped-from-a-great-height. :-)

The object of good architecture is to design IN STYLE,
not in A style.

You skipped too many lessons....;)

[dharder]

The most expensive houses I have seen, also were the ugliest ones.

I find the combination of too much money and too little taste a really unfortunate one in all areas, not just architecture...

A couple of streets down from where we live, there is a whole new 'estate' type street, where all houses where built at the same time. None of them have any gardens, all have built up their sections to the max, and you should see their entrance portals... with columns and everything.

It says lots about the people who think those houses are desirable, but it always amazes me that this could possibly be what people WANT to say about themselves!

Well assuming of course that taste is objective and all that... :)


Daniela

[John Z]

I find the combination of too much money and too little taste a really unfortunate one in all areas, not just architecture...

A couple of streets down from where we live, there is a whole new 'estate' type street, where all houses where built at the same time. None of them have any gardens, all have built up their sections to the max, and you should see their entrance portals... with columns and everything.

It says lots about the people who think those houses are desirable, but it always amazes me that this could possibly be what people WANT to say about themselves!

Well assuming of course that taste is objective and all that... :)


Daniela

Yup, it's a fashion all over the world, in real estate. It builds upon fear AND conservative money.

The last town where we lived before moving to New Zealand was "Brandevoort", a NEW town in the south of the Netherlands. We made the mistake that "not being poor" would be acceptable there.

Google it, and I'm sure it is a variation on what you just described.

I'm afraid it won't be long untill we see this in urban NZ too. On a smaller scale, but nevertheless...

Concerning "taste" you might like this one:

there is objectivity in taste; either one has taste, or one has not.

Cheers, John.

[ColeyNZ]

I find the combination of too much money and too little taste a really unfortunate one in all areas, not just architecture...

A couple of streets down from where we live, there is a whole new 'estate' type street, where all houses where built at the same time. None of them have any gardens, all have built up their sections to the max, and you should see their entrance portals... with columns and everything.

It says lots about the people who think those houses are desirable, but it always amazes me that this could possibly be what people WANT to say about themselves!

Well assuming of course that taste is objective and all that... :)


Daniela

This is the norm in much of the US for these "estate" houses. They build them up to look like castles... in the front but with plain vinyl siding everywhere else and then they cram these 400-600m2 homes onto 800-1100m2 lots. Then sell them for $400k (starting).

[Super_BQ]

This is the norm in much of the US for these "estate" houses. They build them up to look like castles... in the front but with plain vinyl siding everywhere else and then they cram these 400-600m2 homes onto 800-1100m2 lots. Then sell them for $400k (starting).

I personally don't mind the vinyl siding houses because they provide the benefit for added wind thermal break & insulation, easily replaced and repaired, and best of all, doesn't cost a fortune. The options we have in NZ is pretty much brick and plaster over brick or the expensive Hardy wood/concrete composites.

There's also good reason why N. American houses are build close together among the neighborhood. By having a higher lot coverage and houses close to each neighbor, the overall neighborhood increases energy efficiency on a macro level. During seasons with the cold winds, the nested houses serve as a way so the wind doesn't completely rob the heat out like they would do in houses in NZ (where the houses are situated so far apart). Wind just blows like a tunnel between the houses. The only level NZ city councils have considered on the macro level is the highly restricted 'recession planes' where one house doesn't completely block the sun of the neighbor's house. Yet, they don't consider days where there is no sun, every house in the neighborhood struggles to keep warm.

That is why exotic architectural designs aren't the norm in N. America because they simply don't meet the minimum energy efficiency standards. "Lean-To roof (flat roofs) don't meet the R value. Mass walls of glass facing the sun may look good, but never in any way can have the R value rating of a fully insulated wall. Pretty much in every way, the standard vinyl style home in America is pretty damn efficient - that is one claim no one can make for NZ homes.

BQ

[incredible hulse]

then they cram these 400-600m2 homes onto 800-1100m2 lots. Then sell them for $400k (starting).Is that just the same with NZ though - only smaller houses, smaller sections !

[miep]

We've built both here and in Amsterdam using an architect and the experience was very different.

We had real difficulty convincing our architect here that bigger wasn't better and that we rather have a smaller house with quality materials than some opulent modern shack. He just couldn't get it into his head that we didn't want aluminium joinery or single glazing or a tin roof and that we did want central heating, passive solar design, solar hot water, extra insulation, sustainable materials and a future proofed house. And that we wanted the house to enhance and blend in with the landscape rather than stand out.
Of couse we had discussed all this before we hired him and he was really enthusiastic about our approach but I'm afraid it didn't last very long.

Apart from a (an almost total!) lack of technical knowledge I think one of the main differences between here and in Holland was one of attitude; the one we had here just wasn't interested in anything new (to him) and certainly not any ideas from overseas whereas the ones in Holland loved researching and we had to hold them back from using untested materials and techniques. Here the stock answer was that nothing european would ever work in the "kiwi conditions". This opinion was of course never backed up with any research or technical knowledge or even experience. This was not just the architect but pretty much everyone involved in the build. And we weren't asking for weird things or anything, this would be said when I asked about where to get sturdy window hardware rather than the feeble aluminium stuff and things like that.

I did all the research on passive solar design myself including calculating the ideal depth of the eaves which the architect then had the nerve of changing because it looked better!

We had lots of dicussions about form follows function and vice versa and tried to explain that we expected him to take up the challenge to design something that looks good but also works well.

And aesthetics really do count for us, I can't bear the look of UPVC windows, they may be more efficient and require less maintenance than wooden window frames but we still got wooden ones.
As to vinyl siding:eek: and there only being bick/plaster and Hardy products to build with here........ I'm happy to report that there are alternatives for that. We have concrete block walls with insulation on the outside and partly clad in macrocarpa weatherboards and some with Corten steel and lots of large north facing windows with lovely thick curtains. We considered cedar weatherboards for a while because they go such a nice grey but oiled Mac was around half the price if I remember correctly and they're greying nicely too.


We are very happy with the house we have now but that only happened because we took charge and filled in the gaps left by the architect. We would have enjoyed the process much more if we didn't have to do that.

[John Z]

We've built both here and in Amsterdam using an architect and the experience was very different......

Miep, that's an impressive story! I always see any design proces, no matter in architectural, industrial or graphic design, as a journey, with architecture being the most invasive.

So, I hope it was a pleasant one for you guys after all. I have been challenged to stop our own project; the amount of negative energy it was producing, to me was reflecting into the house. A house should, above all, be a happy house, a safe haven, a place that gives and receives. Although I am not happy with the way external experts are dealing with the job, I know the essence, the core of the project already is strong enough to make it a good house, a good home.

I love to listen to Shirley Bassey, when she sings "A house is not a home...".

Please take care, John :cheers

[miep]

<snip> I have been challenged to stop our own project; the amount of negative energy it was producing, to me was reflecting into the house. A house should, above all, be a happy house, a safe haven, a place that gives and receives. Although I am not happy with the way external experts are dealing with the job, I know the essence, the core of the project already is strong enough to make it a good house, a good home.

I love to listen to Shirley Bassey, when she sings "A house is not a home...".

Please take care, John :cheers
Wow! That sounds intense!
How far into the build are you?

[John Z]

Wow! That sounds intense!
How far into the build are you?

Hi Miep,

we're checking the last bolts in the design (!), it really comes that close when you want it to be "perfect" and "different". And I don't design to make things different, just for being "different", although I want to make a difference.
I hope when this is over the professional people we're dealing with understand what I want to make future projects more smooth, as it should be.

I'll send you a PM to have a first impression. :-)

Cheers, John.

[miep]

I did the bolts thing too! I settled for m12 dome head nuts with 50mm round washers in stainless as we're so close to the sea:laugh

[Andy-Dee]

Blimey - I though I was obsessive over 'big knobs' - for my kitchen cabinets, I'm clearly a novice!!

I'd love to see some of the more contempary and eco friendly house building threads - please feel free to share - we'll send enough 'virtual' love and good wishes to drive out any negative vibes.

[Super_BQ]

We had real difficulty convincing our architect here that bigger wasn't better and that we rather have a smaller house with quality materials than some opulent modern shack.

I've ran into the same problem here in Christchurch. Architects don't seem to want to know; they say 'it's un-necessary', or 'it's over capitalising'. Yet neither can say they can built homes to meet the WHO standard of keeping houses at room temperatures year round.

I'm at the point of giving up on building a house that is different. It's been such an uphill battle that we're going to see a few of the high volume builders in town and just accept what is normal. My reason being is that to build a comfortable home would require a radical change in the building (air tight construction + mechanical ventilation). DVS and HRV systemsare not effective choices under the current building scheme. Underfloor heating in the concrete foundation is far from having a small carbon footprint.

BQ

[VileTraveller]

My theory is: always buy (or build) the smallest house you can get for your money. Quality over quantity.

And a big garden. ;)

[John Z]

My theory is: always buy (or build) the smallest house you can get for your money. Quality over quantity.

And a big garden. ;)

I like that approach, at least the quality over quantity part. With a specific defintion of "smallest" I could deal with that too though ;-)

If "smallest" means, the minimum size you feel happy, healthy, comfortable with?

Cheers, John.

[John Z]

I've ran into the same problem here in Christchurch. Architects don't seem to want to know; they say 'it's un-necessary', or 'it's over capitalising'. ....

I don't exactly understand this BQ; aren't you the boss of your design? Any specific input in a design makes it more interesting...

Cheers, John.

[John Z]

For anyone interested: I just found this book for only $10,= at Whitcouls:

New Dreamland
Writing New Zealand Architecture
Edited by Douglas Lloyd Jenkins.

ISBN 1-86962-118-2

[VileTraveller]

I like that approach, at least the quality over quantity part. With a specific defintion of "smallest" I could deal with that too though ;-)

If "smallest" means, the minimum size you feel happy, healthy, comfortable with?
Many people set their budget and try to get the biggest house they can for their money - I feel that, if you think small, you will get a better quality of build in a better area. Obviously there are comfort minimums, but after living in Hong Kong for a while you'd be amazed just small those minimums can be ...

[Familyofmonkeys]

Many people set their budget and try to get the biggest house they can for their money - I feel that, if you think small, you will get a better quality of build in a better area.

Unfortunately builders certainly seem to assume this is wha people want :uhoh

We are in the final stages of planning and are close to selecting a preferred builder for our house. We have a modest budget, but a larger than average family, so we eventually took all of the bits we liked from many of the house plans we liked, and removed all of the dreadful wastes of space, creating our own design that maximised our available useable space by having no corridors.....each builder we have approached has assured us it should be a pretty cheap build due to the very simple design and uncomplicated framing that will be required.

But, when it comes to the important details it is like banging our head against a brick wall. Most builders seem more concerned with selling us their fancy bathrooms or kitchens, and choice of tiling, door nobs, light switches, towel rails, carpets or blinds and don't seem to 'get' it when we want detailed discussions about insulation, insulating the floor slab, windows, thermal mass, heating etc. We have pretty much sorted out the uPVC windows ourselves (low-e, argon filled).....incidently costing less than the equivalent thermal break aluminium windows available here :) Builders try to sell designs with big windows for solar gain....but no consideration for thermal mass to retain the heat when the sun goes down, and what about those days where there is little sun? We plan to have a more 'European' style house....windows yes, but only where they are well placed for good lighting and where solar heat can be absorbed efficiently. It is a real shame the most efficient forms of heating are so expensive.....our preferred option was a ground source heat put for a underfloor hydronic heating system, but we are having to settle for an air to water heat pump instead as the pay back for the ground source is over 40 years. The air to water is a shade more efficient that solar (in Canterbury) over the whole year if the outside until is located on the North side of the house. We also considered some of the very efficient wood burning boilers (imported from Germany or Italy) but despite the manufacturer being able to supply comprehensive emmisions and performance data, we would have to apply for resource consent and test data carried out in NZ (as we have less than 2ha) which again works out too expensive for us. Since there is no point having solar hot water if we have an air to water heat pump that will also give us very cheap domestic hot water during the warmer months, we plan to have a wetback on a woodburner for the colder months...not really neccessary in a house with central heating, but I have a hankering the sit round a toasty fire, plus we still have an option during power cuts.

I've rambled a bit, but my point is that there is a real reluctance and red tape (even with goverment depts etc) to embrace 'better' technology here and it seems like an uphill battle when all you want to do is build a warm energy efficient home on normal persons salary, when some superior and affordable technology exists.

[VileTraveller]

I've rambled a bit, but my point is that there is a real reluctance and red tape (even with goverment depts etc) to embrace 'better' technology here and it seems like an uphill battle when all you want to do is build a warm energy efficient home on normal persons salary, when some superior and affordable technology exists.
That seems to be the problem wherever you go - no government is ever willing to believe that foreigners could possibly have invented something good! Better to re-invent the wheel instead ... :roll

[petri]

We have pretty much sorted out the uPVC windows ourselves (low-e, argon filled)

Just make sure they are easily replaced.. We have about 35m2 of windows in our living room, about 1.7x2.5 m argon filled windows (double or triple, I don't remember). 10 years old and several them of have leaked already and there's condensation inside.

I'm still waiting for the window manufacturer to pay a visit but a friend who just built a house suspects it's the force of wind that have caused the windows to bend more than usual and caused it. He chose air filled windows because they have so much longer lifespan. (Not talking about NZ build quality but something that will keep you warm when it's below -30C ;-)

[incredible hulse]

It is a real shame the most efficient forms of heating are so expensive.....our preferred option was a ground source heat put for a underfloor hydronic heating system, but we are having to settle for an air to water heat pump instead as the pay back for the ground source is over 40 years.


We're having the same problems. Did look at ground source and then wood pellets but the costs were too excessive. I'm not convinced the heat pumps are up to running radiators and even diesel boilers are ridiculously priced over here. We are now probably going diesel/oil but I will import myself (saving over 2000 dollars after shipping (from UK) and duty !!) and I am also trying to import radiators - either from UK, Turkey or China - I can get radiators delivered for example from the UK for approx 2000 dollars and being quoted around 3800 dollars here.

I do know someone who got 2 ground source heat pumps from China for less than half the cost of a single one here and he's had no trouble from the one currently installed

[Super_BQ]

Not to step on anyone's toes but yesterday I had a brief look at some of the houses being built out in a new sub-division in Aidanfield (Chch). The difference in build quality was shocking between the 4 outfits. (Stonewood, Contract Homes, Fowler, & Mike Greers).

There's a misconception that all houses are built to the minimum standard and all prices from each firm would produce the same quality of home. As i've been told before, sometimes the city council inspectors don't know what to look for when inspecting the house and quite often the house gets the completion noticed despite having potential issues. As of importance, by 2012 all building projects must be supervised by a LBP and not any of the Master Builders or CB associations. Likewise, all city building inspectors too must have be a Licensed Building Practitioner.

Out of the 4 builders, we all agreed that Mike Greers was the worse. How you say "cheap" or the level of standard was as minimum as you can get. But usually the lowest price wins, which is why the majority of housing projects in the sub division are with Mike Greers. I shall elaborate on the cheapness.

1) From the outside, it doesn't appear the brickwork cladding was that detailed. There's a requirement to have part of the cement grouting open on every 3rd or so brick that sits on the foundation and on the top at the eaves level. The gaps were too varying to let the condensation out. Some were 2" and some were 4" vertical - no time spent to neatly grout the holes. My wife's 1st response was how easy the insects would crawl into the wall cavity LOL

2) Where the bricks sit on the foundation, it does not appear they used any of the black mul-seal sealant (that perimeters all around the foundation). From what I gather, since 2004 I thought the sealant was a requirement by city council. Because of the nature of concrete and bricks, they have a tendancy to suck moisture in so that mul-seal serves as a barrier. Without it, over time the bricks will go moldy and discoloured. What I also found suspicous is along the edge of the foundation they hand troweled cement along the face of the foundation which would cover any evidence of any black mul-seal sealant - though the other issue using the cement is to cover the roughness of the foundation's footing. When they take the boxing off, the concrete probably has lots of air pockets which left a "rough face finish". So the cement is pretty much like window dressing. Most builders today do not know the term "prim-face finish" which the vibrator should fix.

3) Though not a requirement, we did not see any 7mm plywood on the exterior corners of the walls. (Braces the timber framing). It's interesting to see because when we visited Mike Greers at their office, they did tell us they use 7mm plywood for frame bracing.

4) The interior walls appear to be made of "B" grade timber framing which is full of knots. Though not a concern to the new home owner that is selling withing 4 or 5 years, over time the timber frame could twist leaving the Gib board uneven for the walls. Likewise with the timber battens on the ceiling.

The best of the lot we found was Fowler Homes. Definitely a lot more detail and time spent. Full black mul-seal, plywood corners, better timber grade. I would also give hats off to their electrician and data cabling in the house as the wiring was very neatly dressed. Ceiling battens were the metal type - far superior to the wood version in keeping the ceiling dead flat.

Since we're in an international forum, I would like to express that the reason for this 'cheapness' in NZ home has a lot to do with affordability. We know people in Australia having a new house built and for the price they are paying, it is a joke how expensive houses are in NZ. Likewise in Canada, for the same price you pay, you get twice the comfort and quality than one in NZ. Also with higher population in those countries, they benefit from economies of scales.

BQ

[James 1077]

Just make sure they are easily replaced.. We have about 35m2 of windows in our living room, about 1.7x2.5 m argon filled windows (double or triple, I don't remember). 10 years old and several them of have leaked already and there's condensation inside.

I'm still waiting for the window manufacturer to pay a visit but a friend who just built a house suspects it's the force of wind that have caused the windows to bend more than usual and caused it. He chose air filled windows because they have so much longer lifespan. (Not talking about NZ build quality but something that will keep you warm when it's below -30C ;-)

Part of the problem in the past with uPVC windows is that they weren't designed for NZ's high UV level. This meant that they deteriorated quickly. I'm not sure if things have changed but I know of lots of people who were hurt by it - which is why aluminium is much more popular even though it is more expensive.

[John Z]

Not to step on anyone's toes but yesterday I had a brief look at some of the houses being built out in a new sub-division in Aidanfield (Chch). The difference in build quality was shocking between the 4 outfits. (Stonewood, Contract Homes, Fowler, & Mike Greers).
...............

I think that's a very usefull piece of info mate! :cheers

[Super_BQ]

Today I discovered a good alternative to the PVC windows. I can't remember the brand name but what they are producing is a FULLY THERMAL BREAK aluminium framed windows. In the past, i've only known the partially broken aluminium framed windows and the very very expensive fully broken ones that use mostly glue to hold between the inside frame and the outside.

The guy out at Peter Ray Homes informed me that this new product looks pretty much like ordinary aluminum framed windows but inside, there lies a nylon like material that completely separates the outside and inside framing. Thus not having to use the very expensive PVC windows.

The cost of these windows I was told was only 40% more than the standard aluminium framed windows. To go something like the NK PVC, the cost was more like 2 - 3 times more and as the previous post mentioned, PVC still has yet to be proven against NZ's strong UV light.

But don't bet that aluminium is at all bulletproof. For the Veulux windows, the metal flashings and covers have already faded in colour in the house we're in (only after 5 years).

[Familyofmonkeys]

Part of the problem in the past with uPVC windows is that they weren't designed for NZ's high UV level. This meant that they deteriorated quickly. I'm not sure if things have changed but I know of lots of people who were hurt by it - which is why aluminium is much more popular even though it is more expensive.



The cost of these windows I was told was only 40% more than the standard aluminium framed windows. To go something like the NK PVC, the cost was more like 2 - 3 times more and as the previous post mentioned, PVC still has yet to be proven against NZ's strong UV light.


Most of the issues with uPVC windows dates back from the late 1980's and early 1990's.....unfortunately the bad rep for those problems remains. Did you know that many of the structures in antarctica have uPVC windows....the UV there is higher than NZ and they are still performing well. The same applies to many buildings built across the world at high altitude, where the UV is also very high.

[Jo Jo]

Most of the issues with uPVC windows dates back from the late 1980's and early 1990's.....unfortunately the bad rep for those problems remains. Did you know that many of the structures in antarctica have uPVC windows....the UV there is higher than NZ and they are still performing well. The same applies to many buildings built across the world at high altitude, where the UV is also very high.

Have you got a source for this? I've been trying to get hold of definitive info about PVC windows in NZ for a while now, so I'd appreciate any links you could provide.

The only research paper* I have been able to find isn't NZ specific, but it says that PVC windows have an optimum life of 25 years compared to 40 years for aluminium, wood, and that aluminium-clad timber is expected to last for more than 40 years (it's too new to have data behind it yet). That paper also says that "PVC is very sensitive towards high temperature and ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which can break its molecular bonds, resulting in embrittlement and discolouration."

* Source: Chartered Institute of Building Engineers: Life Cycle of Window Materials, Asif et al, 2002 (http://www.cibse.org/pdfs/Masif.pdf)

[Familyofmonkeys]

Have you got a source for this? I've been trying to get hold of definitive info about PVC windows in NZ for a while now, so I'd appreciate any links you could provide.

The only research paper* I have been able to find isn't NZ specific, but it says that PVC windows have an optimum life of 25 years compared to 40 years for aluminium, wood, and that aluminium-clad timber is expected to last for more than 40 years (it's too new to have data behind it yet). That paper also says that "PVC is very sensitive towards high temperature and ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which can break its molecular bonds, resulting in embrittlement and discolouration."

* Source: Chartered Institute of Building Engineers: Life Cycle of Window Materials, Asif et al, 2002 (http://www.cibse.org/pdfs/Masif.pdf)


I know OH has some stuff about this bookmarked on his laptop, but's he working away this week. I'll see if I can get him to send me some links to post :)

As far as I can remember, the 'optimal lifetime' as you call it for uPVC was slightly less, but the maintenance costs over the lifetime were also lower and the payback time in terms of energy saving etc worked out the lowest of all the options, apart from (i think) some hardwood windows. The risk of argon/krypton gas from the seals units depended much more upon the manufacturing quality than the window type.

I have still got this from a previous post (sorry, not sure where I sourced it from)....


The polymer industry world wide has been developed to an extremely sophisticated level. Plastics are now widely used in such applications as the NASA Space Crafts. The science of the industry has advanced to the point where the plastics available to the building industry are of incredible strength and durability. Like all products in all industries, the quality may vary with the integrity of the manufacturer when it comes to quality allowing absolute confidence in the stability of the PVCu composition and colour. With titanium dioxide added to the PVCu polymer as a uV inhibitor, PVCu windows are currently installed in locations where the uV is much higher than the New Zealand - levels of 100-130Kcal/cm2/yr e.g. Arizona Desert, West Indies. Little degradation has occurred over 30 years and accelerated weather testing confirms longevity.

Only a new glazing law introduced countrywide in 2008 prompted a wide sweeping change resulting in all window suppliers incorporating double glazing. However the magic of double glazing lies not in the two panes of glass, but rather in the sealed space between the two panes. A 16mm gap between the panes is the ideal space for energy efficiency. Most aluminium windows will offer 10-12mm spaces which decreases the performance of the double glazed unit by allowing heat to transfer much easier (not to mention the inefficiency of the metal frame).

[Jo Jo]

I know OH has some stuff about this bookmarked on his laptop, but's he working away this week. I'll see if I can get him to send me some links to post :)



Thank you! That would be fab. It's going to be about a hundred years before we can afford to build our own house, so no hurry. :D

[John Z]

For window frames I have never liked plastics. Everywhere I've been over the world the material looked deteriorated, and simply unpleasant. And with that it has a bad reputation for weathering, although I read above that there have been improvements.

The coating I read on the specifications for aluminium "architectural frames" again is PVC, without a thermal break specification...

I considered natural aluminium because I do not have a specific problem with (the look of) weathered aluminium.

The most pleasing material for window frames (especially in our design, that has to be of all ages) is wood. Wood is a natural insulator (!) and it helps my design to give illusion of timelesness. But, it needs maintenance, which to me is only a minor drawback. I still have to figure out which wood is best for the NZ conditions, also related to cost.

There is also a combination of wood + aluminium, where the outside is aluminium and the inside is wood. Interesting but also some kind of weired. I have to take a bit more time to come to grips with that concept.

The way mold builds on wet frames is something I've never seen before as in NZ, and certainly is also something to keep in mind, I think.

[Super_BQ]

The most pleasing material for window frames (especially in our design, that has to be of all ages) is wood. Wood is a natural insulator (!) and it helps my design to give illusion of timelesness. But, it needs maintenance, which to me is only a minor drawback. I still have to figure out which wood is best for the NZ conditions, also related to cost.

Would it be foolish to think of using wood on a 2 story level home knowing that in 10 years time, costly scaffolding will be required just to paint them? I know this is normal maintenance for 2 story houses built in the past for NZ however, I would of thought people would of caught on how doing so is a major job.

Perhaps not so an issue for NZ as the average home gets flipped every 6 years and almost all houses are single story. There is good reason why 350M people living in N. America have gone PVC.

As I have mentioned before, you get twice the house in home comfort in America than one in NZ for the same price. Because of this, I would be foolish to pay 30% more to build a new house in NZ using those features like PVC widows, 140mm wood framing, HRV, etc. when they are all standard features in a house in Canada.

[John Z]

Would it be foolish to think of using wood on a 2 story level home knowing that in 10 years time, costly scaffolding will be required just to paint them? I know this is normal maintenance for 2 story houses built in the past for NZ however, I would of thought people would of caught on how doing so is a major job.


The house I've designed has only small windows (1X1 meter, bedrooms) on the second floor. In Europe new houses (can) have windows that open inward, so for maintanance you need no ladder or scaffolding.

When we had our mansion in the Netherlands, it had about 3 meter high windows on the second floor, and to keep maintenance costs down we bought "rolling scaffold" so I could do it myself every few years, which again was not a major issue.

For our new house I'm hoping to get the inward opening windows (the architectural firm I'm working with didn't know them...), but anyway, maintenance will only take one weekend, or let's say a bad case scenario, 2 weekends. Still no big deal, or is it? :)

(Please let me know if I'm missing your point)

[Super_BQ]

When we had our mansion in the Netherlands, it had about 3 meter high windows on the second floor, and to keep maintenance costs down we bought "rolling scaffold" so I could do it myself every few years, which again was not a major issue.

Your rolling scaffold must be well over 5 meters in height? Ground level may be 2.6m + the 3m height of the 1st floor window. If this is the case, then you will find in NZ has the following strict requirements taken from page 6 of here (http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CBIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acc.co.nz%2FPRD_EXT_CSMP%2Fid cplg%3FIdcService%3DGET_FILE%26dID%3D29189%26dDocN ame%3DPRD_CTRB074522%26allowInterrupt%3D1&rct=j&q=scaffolding+testing+ACC&ei=icb0Su6lK5GuNvXwiekF&usg=AFQjCNEtXwg_5Skw1pOZPtemsXv7errNqg).

You can thank NZ's ACC system and OSH (dept. of labour) for these guidelines when working at elevated levels.

Scaffolding
Building scaffolding is a complicated job and it must
be done in accordance with the Approved Code of
Practice for Safe Erection and Use of Scaffolding. Any
scaffolding over 5 metres must be built and maintained
by a certified scaffolder or registered engineer and
notified to the Department of Labour (DOL).
The scaffolding:
• must be fitted with toe board, mid rails and hand rails
• must built on a firm and level foundation
• must be secured to a permanent structure (building) where possible
• must have all platforms and ladders secured
• can only be modified or removed by a qualified person.


So if you're considering 2 story construction, the key is to keep all your maintenance workings under 5 meters. 1 meter square windows is rather small IMO, especially on the north facing side of the house.

[VileTraveller]

You can thank NZ's ACC system and OSH (dept. of labour) for these guidelines when working at elevated levels.
Presumably this only applies if you hire workers or get someone other than yourself to use the scaffolding? Unless you plan to sue yourself when it collapses underneath you ... :uhoh

[Kanga]

1 meter square windows is rather small IMO, especially on the north facing side of the house.

I was thinking just that- don't you want to let the sunshine in as much as possible?

Also, personally, I wouldn't want inward opening windows (unless they were a clever design that opened out and in) as that dictates furniture and window dressings too much, imo. Plus, depending on how high the windows are, when open they could become something you perpetually bash yourself against.

[John Z]

Your rolling scaffold must be well over 5 meters in height?

So if you're considering 2 story construction, the key is to keep all your maintenance workings under 5 meters. 1 meter square windows is rather small IMO, especially on the north facing side of the house.

It was 8 meters high, professional quality. Something like this:

http://www.msteigers.nl/MSTEIGERS%20INTERNET%202.JPG



1 meter square windows for the bedrooms only. I don't understand why you need glassed walls for your bedroom, unless for some strange fashion.