VIC Where to take advantage of FHB Stamp Duty benefit and new zoning laws

As the title suggests, given the recent changes to the stamp duty laws for FHB's in Victoria and the recent zoning changes potentially opening up neighbourhood zoning properties to development, i'm curious to see what types of properties and where people think the opportunities are?

Personally, depending on what the FHB stamp duty discounts look like on purchases from $600 - $750k, i'm tipping that purchasing around the $500k mark is where the opportunity lies. Ideally, development sites where the end product would usually yield around $500k per property. Sell as OTP, no stamp duty for the first home buyer and they will get their $10k grant as well.

Surely there is money to be made somewhere with these changes. What does everyone else think?

 

I just saw your post and you are right - there are opportunities to be made

WINNERS
Neighbourhood zone (high end areas like KEW, BALYWN etc) which were previously restricted to no development
Residential Growth Zone - no Change (more in demand) since it has no garden req restrictions.
LOSERS
General Residential zones (650-750sqm) since the 35% garden req kicks in and you're paying for more the block as you're not really 800-1000sqm requires a lot of creativity from the town planner- as now less dwellings and more build cost if you going 3 storeys.

More demand for blocks 650sqm below as it garden req of 35% does not kick in

Just look at this couple of blokes who bought a place in Kew (neighbourhood zone - which they could not develop) and want to sell it double the price. since the minimum dwelling is now removed.

Developer demolishes Kew mansion, selling block for almost double the price

 

@melbournian , would subdividing a General Residential zones that is slightly larger than 650sqm be a work around the new 35% garden rule?Obviously would depend on the block shape and frontage...

 

my reasoning was just that 600sqm block would cost less to purchase and would only have 30% garden req compared to say 655 sqm block . Obviously having larger blocks 800-1000sqm would be more beneficial as the more dwellings goes on the profitable it would be to the developer. I just feel the 650sqm at the very end when the reqs come in is just disadvantageous as the vendors who are selling these blocks would want more $$ for 650-700sqm block as opposed to 600sqm so you're paying more for it and subjects to higher garden req.

 

No. Would still require 35% for each block after subdivision.

 

How is that? if you subdivide, your land size is halved and hence the 35% shouldn't apply.

 

Just so I think what you are trying to say. you want to subdivide twice to remove the garden requirement as it only kicks in at 400sqm. Once like empty land torrens title and then do another subdivision based on something less than 400sqm. for example 700sqm to be subdivided as 350sqm and 350sqm. interesting concept and creative too.

I think you would face resistance from council who want to see plans etc and then you would have to double up on costs (planning, architect, lodgement and contributions). I get what you mean as once you below 400sqm the minimum garden req don't apply (I foresee lots of places in those cottages in Melbourne suburbs like south Melbourne, port melbourne, Williamstown, footscray, seddon below that 400sqm).

 

So when you're looking at a site the land size is usually given as "approx". How do you know for sure say e.g. if it is advertised as "650sqm approx" whether you'll need to meet the 30% or 35%?
The subdivision plan will have the block dimensions (usually in feet on older titles) so is it safe enough to go off that or is there a definitive source?!?

 

Gone over this a little and thinking as long as council allows you to go 3 story on block sizes such as 650-750 range, with some creative designs you can actually get more dwellings than previously allowed which previously limited to say only 3 double story townhouses.

Using the pic as an example, showing 6 triple story's townhouses on a block 695sq. If you chopped off 1 or 2 of those townhouses you should be able to make the 35% required, but gain 1-2 extra townhouses. It might cost a little more, depends on sizes, but this could be a gain?

 

Thought the same possibility. No the 35% still applies to each of the new lots based on advice from a lawyer who specialises in town planning. I'm sure someone will test it out & challenge it though.

My guess (only) is it may have something also to do with the zone applied as new & inner city blocks may have different zoning? Not sure on that however.
Might be almost treat it similar to a covenant over the entire block both before & after sub.

 

3 storeys cost more than single and double storey to built eating into ur margins and also without the garden req in the past u would be able to build decent 2 storey without sharing walls. Don't forget each dwelling needs to have that garden space incorporated into their unit having side by side stacked against each other could be tricky. The state gov is just painfully making life hard. The real gains are the ones in neighbourhood zone like those guys in kew would bought it 9 mil and want to sell it 17 mil as more density and subdivision compared to none before.

But For 695sqm would be expecting minimum 4 townhouses either way. 600sqm in grz can get u 3.