Browse Forums Building A New House 1 Feb 08, 2013 1:49 pm update post #16. Only getting 3k credit
Hey. We were just told by builder that the rainwater tank for our new house being built in qld is no longer required by law. It was quite expensive ($6500) and since we have one of those new small narrow lots, it would be great to get rid of it. We'd still have to pay some fees, but hopefully we'd get around $6000 back. We've never owned a house before or used a rainwater tank, so maybe we are missing potential benefits. Just don't seem like we will ever make up the cost for the tank (not to mention the footprint and maintenance of the tank etc).. We are finding it very hard to justify such an expensive purchase. What do you guys think? Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 3Feb 08, 2013 2:36 pm As it was the builder advising us that we now had this option, I assume it will be fine. They said they had to resubmit council approvals, so if the builder got it wrong and it is not allowed, I assume they would simply not approve the changes and we'd continue as we have been without making the changes. We need to let builder know ASAP though (ie preferably today or at the latest by the end of the weekend). Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 4Feb 08, 2013 4:04 pm I would definitely keep the tank. Water costs, especially in QLD are going through the roof - and it would be such a waste to pay for the water for things like flushing the toilet, washing your car, watering the garden etc. Plus, if I was looking at buying a house that didn't have a rainwater tank, I'd have to say I'd be turned off a bit Building our first home - Thread: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=60033 Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 5Feb 08, 2013 4:14 pm reindeer831 I would definitely keep the tank. Water costs, especially in QLD are going through the roof - and it would be such a waste to pay for the water for things like flushing the toilet, washing your car, watering the garden etc. Plus, if I was looking at buying a house that didn't have a rainwater tank, I'd have to say I'd be turned off a bit Would it be terribly difficult to add this afterwards though? I mean, if we sell it and the potential buyers really wants a water tank, can't they just add one? I see your point, but it is a lot of money just for some extra water.. looking at water prices, it is still a long way to go before we'd be able to recover the money spent on the watertank if just looking at money saved by using the recycled water. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 6Feb 08, 2013 6:57 pm $6,500 for a tank??? How big is it? Sounds like you were getting ripped off by a plumber. Don't go ahead with the plumber; if you want one later, install one that is applicable to your needs. This might be drip feeding the garden, topping up a pool or washing cars etc. You will probably need to settle in and then decide what size/type you need and where it is best to locate it. Don't go in blind or you will get ripped. Nothing surer. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 7Feb 08, 2013 7:03 pm Thats close to what we were quoted also, the cost is made up of the plumbing, pump, slab, electrical and the tank, We have decided not to go with it as it is full after every down pour up here anyway. Bit of a waste for us so i'm quite glad i'm saving the cash. But really depends where you are located. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 8Feb 08, 2013 7:21 pm Hi MACCATTACK, What size and type of tank (plus all the extras) were you quoted on? 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 9Feb 08, 2013 8:28 pm Should clarify that it is for everything as macattack points out. Seems expensive, but no idea how badly charged we are getting. Didn't really have much choice. Base price was 5 grand, but we upgraded to a slimline colourbond tank for another 1.5k. This was to fit it on side of house instead of middle of small lawn, so again we didn't have much choice. Waiting for quote on how much credit we'll get. Suspect it will be closer to 5k than 6.5k to be honest as they have to make changes to reticulation and down pipes etc apparently. And they've already poured the slab, but we'll just keep that as it's connected to the house, so shouldn't be too bad. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 10Feb 08, 2013 8:33 pm SaveH2O Hi MACCATTACK, What size and type of tank (plus all the extras) were you quoted on? Quote was based on a slim line water tank 5000L, all fitted for $6000. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 11Feb 08, 2013 9:15 pm Someone is making a quick buck here. You can source a 5000l slimline tank in Qld for $1800. $4200 worth of installation seems a bit steep. I would be looking elsewhere other than the builders quote. See link fr tank http://www.qtank.com.au/water_tanks_slimline.php Settlement 1/2/12 New Shed 23/3/12 Slab poured 27/3/12 Frame complete 4/5/12 Roof complete 1/6/12 LOCKUP 29/6/12 Our new build blog http://kareenhillsownerbuild.blogspot.com/ Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 12Feb 08, 2013 9:58 pm Builders and plumbers put a hefty $$$ premium on water tank installs and unfortunately most installs are also sub standard. A 5,000 L poly slimline will be anywhere from $1,400 to $1,900 with most around $1,500. Metal slimlines are about $1,000 more. Poly slimlines are devilish to clean! If a slimline tank's overflow is fitted at the end opposite the top infeed and the overflow mesh clogs up during a storm (when most debris is washed from the gutter), the overflow pipe has to be removed to scrub the mesh as you cannot reach it from inside. This also needs to be considered when optioning the position of a round tank's top inlet and overflow. You are much better off financially having some small diameter but tall round poly tanks connected with balance lines and fitting the pump to the end tank. The water will be very clean and the tanks can be spaced apart if needed. This is called a settling system. I was going to start a thread in Eco Living about water tank installation rip offs and common plumbing mistakes but decided not to as it would be too long if everything was covered. Most of the houses sold in Victoria that have had the 2,000 L water tank option as the old 5 star and new 6 star requirement have not been compliant with the standards. People get ripped off by the fitting of unnecessary large pumps. People also get ripped off by being told that they have to have automatic mains water switching devices when they connect to a toilet. There are other options but people are rarely told of these. This is often because builders and plumbers do not know the regulations. Numerous pumps are wrongly plumbed, leading to early pump failure. Most tanks are poorly optioned, particularly when the tank's pump draw outlet is fitted very close to the bottom of the tank. This results in the pump drawing sludge from the anaerobic zone. Many tanks are not fitted with an overflow capable of draining the inflow capacity if the tank fills during a storm. This problem is endemic in QLD. I had better stop before I get started! 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 13Feb 08, 2013 10:17 pm You have to remember that these are a charged system on new builds. All downpipes lead to the watertank and then it fills the tank and once full then routes to the street. So a few more costs than buying a tank and just hooking it up to a downpipe you put it near. 2 Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 14Feb 09, 2013 12:08 am Our house is already enclosed so the plumbing for the tank has already been completed, but our builder contacted us last week and asked if we still wanted the tank. We said no. It's not so much the money factor (I think we'll only get around $1000 back - the cost of the tank and the pump - as the plumbing has already been completed), but more that we don't really have the space on our block for a round tank. Since the plumbing is already done, I don't think it would be an issue for someone to put one in later, but it's not something we really want. Last week having spent a few days without a flushing toilet because of no power, if I can avoid that again, I will! 1st build: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=59376 *New*-2nd build: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=70324&p=1154282#p1154282 Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 15Feb 09, 2013 12:40 am stellabella Last week having spent a few days without a flushing toilet because of no power, if I can avoid that again, I will! All you have to do is remove the cister cover (at the top) and manually fill the cistern. You need the full flow to activate the syphon pipe, pouring buckets down the bowl doesn't do it. If you had a tank supplying gravity fed water to the cistern as I do, you would still have water. Supplying a large pressure tank from the pump also gives a (limited) water supply during power failures. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 16Feb 11, 2013 5:15 pm Well, we got quote back, which made it harder. We thought as long as we get 5k back, it's a no brainer.. We did not. According to contract, the tank (which includes surrounding work) is $6550. What we will get back is $3230 minus 200 if we want a tap where tank used to be. We asked for clarification what all these charges where, as all they've done is the tank slab + they told us of a 300 council fee for approving new plan without tank. We were told that "the items that you have been charged for is the drainage, amendment fee’s & the redirection of the drainage lines etc". Not that we can do anything about it, but do these charges seem reasonable? We are in the frame stage, but no down pipes or anything else do to with tank has been done except slab. We are not too happy. Should we just keep tank? Feels dirty throwing away 3.5k for nothing, but 3k credit is better than nothing.. was looking forward to more space and less maintenance. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 17Feb 11, 2013 5:36 pm Quite frankly a silly decision by the QLD government - sure we've got plenty of water now, but in a few years time we'll end in the same situation we were 5 years ago with a water crisis. Our last house had a 5000l tank connected to the toilets, laundry and an outside tap. Found it did reduce our water bill quite significantly when it was full (more often than not it was empty) - but definitely not enough to justify what you're being charged. $6500 - what a rip off! Also make sure the system switches over to the mains, rather than have the mains top up the tank - otherwise you can't use it to water your garden or wash your car (doesn't comply with restrictions) We've ended up with two tanks - one to service the house and garden, the other will be to top up the swimming pool Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 18Feb 11, 2013 8:39 pm Rainwater tank installation costs are a rip off on new homes. Your charges are padded and they are keping $3,020 for work already done. What have they done? Laid some pipes and made a small tank base while the concreters were there anyway!!! Your costs were bundled as $6,550. Your refund is $3,530 less $300 council fee. You posted that you upgraded the contract to a slimline colourbond tank for another $1,500. How much was then allowed in total for this tank? How much was allowed for the pump and what make & model was it? You would have been required to have either a manual or automatic mains water switching device. Did they discuss your options with you and what make, type and price was in the contract? I suspect (from the experience of others) that you have been charged top dollar for these items and you could be looking at about $2,500 just for the tank. If they have loaded the install with an overpriced and unsuitable pump and an unnecessary and expensive automatic mains water switching device, that could easily account for another $1,000. That makes $3,500 just there. How close am I? And then there are the other plumbing charges for work that now will not be done. There will also be other items that would be included in the $6,550, for example, rainheads, flap valves, pump connections and hoses/pipes that you should also be getting refunds for. Unfortunately, you are at their mercy. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Rainwater tank not required - new legislation - remove i 19Feb 12, 2013 4:33 pm You were being overcharged on the original installation cost and your refund seems very light on. You are getting ripped either way. When it comes down to it, you are now being offered the install for $3,230. The rest of the money is gone regardless of what you do. This is a good price for a colourbond slimline, accessories, slab and plumbing. Maybe you should have it installed. A word of warning. Most tanks installed to QLD homes have issues, the main one being that the overflow capacity is usually insufficient to drain the inflow during a storm when the tank is full. There are a number of other things that are also done poorly. You can always post your install to ask for advice. It would be exceptional if the builder provided a good system. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. DIY, Home Maintenance & Repair But if it is a ground level open pit, then it is not a charged system. No surprises there. The pipes have obviously been altered and there would be a reason for this.… 3 25115 Hi all. Anyone know when the $11,000 limit was set in legislation for renovations in QLD? Ive been renovating for 5 years now and this was the limit back then. As we know,… 0 2056 18 74677 |