[Moorf]

Is there any benefit (financially or whatever) in merging a few sections together? I ask because our property is on 3 separate titles/sections so we get three lots of rates.

Has anyone merged titles or knows a reason why we shouldn't?

Moorf

[KerryS]

We did this with two sections - one residential and one designated as agricultural use. (It was just a large paddock really.)
If you merge the titles, you will be liable for only one set of rates. But, you may get an adjustment to take into account the new value of the combined section. If only one of your current sections has a property on it, then I am presuming that the rates for that section are much higher than an empty section (was for us when we bought in the Waikato). We merged, purely for simplicity - I don't know if there was any financial advantage to doing this, it was just more simple to only get one lot of paperwork for the place as we don't actually live there ourselves.

[Moorf]

Thanks Kerry,

Yes, you're right - the plot on which the house stands - 1859sqm - is just over $1000 a year. The other two plots are lots cheaper as no buildings on them (treed paddock 2023sqm $307/yr - vineyard/orchard 1765sqm $101/yr). Strange when the rateable land value of both "empty" plots has just $2k difference yet one set of rates is 3x the other!! :confused:

Were you able to get a land / capital valuation on the merged plot before going ahead?

[ENZ]

Just thinking aloud, but it costs $xx,xxx if you have one section and want to split it up into separate titles. Since this has already been done for you, it might be best to keep it that way. At some point in the future it could be to your advantage.

[Moorf]

Wow, I had no idea that those sort of costs were involved. Thanks for that info :nice1

[ENZ]

It's not something I have first hand knowledge of - I've just heard people complaining about the costs of subdividing.

Here's what chch council has to say about it. (http://www.ccc.govt.nz/Subdivisions/SubdivisionFees.pdf) (pdf document.) The costs quoted here look lower than the costs I've heard people complaining about and which I mentioned above.

[Moorf]

:eek: Again, thanks, I'll put that idea on the backburner for now :D

[sizzlingbadger]

I would leave them as it is. As ENZ has said it may work to your advantage in the future if you wanted to sell off some land to subdivide. Also if you come to sell up then it would be a selling point to any potential developers :)

[Moorf]

Thanks Sizz. :nice1

Not sure we can subdivide here as there's a min size for sections due to us all being on septic tanks... I'll enquire anyhoo and see what's involved.

[sizzlingbadger]

No problems. My in laws are nearly completing on a piece of land that's been subdivided.

The owner of the land has had to put in drainage, sewerage and electrics, as well as a fence to get it approved by the council. Not sure of the cost involved but it varys enormously between different councils.

Not sure about rural planning as it's something we've not had to look into :)

[KerryS]

Subdivision in an urban area is very different to the merging of titles in a rural area. Our sections were just paddocks, with no facilities ie no drains or water supply. It was cheaper to merge the sections into one title, which reduced the rateable value of the land as separate sections.
There would be no opportunity for our land to be subdivided for residential sections, which is where you generally get the large cost implications from the council.
If your land package is too small for subdividing then it may be worth making enquiries?