Hey Guys,
I'm just wondering peoples thoughts on the following.
Would you be deterred from purchasing a particular property because of aspect / position?
Understandable that properties with northerly aspects are the most attractive given the amount of natural light, but if a particular property crossed all the boxes but had say a southerly aspect (ie. Balconies, Living Areas, etc. facing South) would this be enough to reconsider the property?
In a hot area a south-facing balcony etc is better than one facing west IMHO.
Where the main living area (lounge) is at the front of the house but the backyard is at the rear then a lounge facing south could be OK if you built a deck or patio at the rear.
Then there are other considerations like view - eg I went to an auction of a house yesterday that had a north-facing lounge with sea views. That was good but the penalty was that the backyard would have been shaded for much of the time (good in a hot area but on balance not so good in Melbourne). Overall I'd say that the ocean views trump other considerations, but the house didn't sell (the lack of even a carport probably put people off it - though people tolerate that in an inner suburb like Albert Park or Carlton).
I agree that position is more important for units than houses. You're sacrificing space and you can't knock it down, so you're stuck with what you buy with a unit.
For rows of units the very front or very rear tend to be better than the middle, especially if these come with more land. Some people like a front unit for its street frontage and front lawn, while others prefer a rear unit for privacy (no one walks past it, assuming it's a single storey block or with no stairwell at that end).
My observations are that the higher the density the greater the chance of at least one unit having a really bad position. Eg you might have one on the bottom floor that has little natural light as there's a stairwell or storeroom blocking the window.
Although such units may have yuck factors, they still seem to sell at good prices. Eg a 1br unit in a dodgy part of Frankston Central that had been seriously trashed by tenants and needed extensive work to be habitable was quoted at $100k+ but sold for over $130k. The bedroom was very dark even at midday - its window looked right at a brick wall 1 metre away (a small alcove for the storeroom). Hence even if done up there were severe orientation problems that could not be fixed.
Conversely my PPOR occupies either the best or second best position in the block (depending on taste) and in my view it did not attract a significant price premium. And the rent being paid (before purchase) was if anything below market, largely due to an agent who hadn't raised it and improvements to take advantage of its position not being done.
I regard orientation as being somewhat important but position in the block (if a unit) as being even more important. And if the two coincide then that's even better. Driveway steepness: Level is best but agree that high side is better than low side - if only to quell ones imagination about floods and out of control cars careering through your roof!
Such an advantage would deserve a price premium, but I'm not convinced it would attract a signifcant rent premium (unless effort was made to really take advantage of the orientation).
And even if this was done, I'm not convinced that there would be any long-term capital growth gains after the one-off of any value-adding. Eg let's suppose a bad position property was priced at 95% of one with a better position. Assuming good orientation is something that has constant, timeless appeal, the well positioned one should always be dearer than the first and have the 'wow factor' the other doesn't. But I don't see why they should not appreciate at the same rate, with the inferior property remaining at 5% less (a rising tide lifts all boats and there will always be people for whom affordability is key).