# A property listing is more useful when it arrives with a feasibility study.

*Landform Research field note · Matt Strawbridge · 30 August 2026*
*HTML version: https://www.landformlab.com/research/blog/paparangi-method-study.html*

This Paparangi study shows what an agent, developer and architect can establish before their first project meeting.

**The opportunity is a property market where a listing arrives with an informed first view of what the site could support.** An agent contributes market evidence, a developer applies the commercial knowledge of the business, and an architect tests the site against past models and design experience. When those inputs are structured and reusable, each firm's accumulated knowledge becomes available while the opportunity is still live, giving all three a shared proposition for the first conversation.

The example starts with 10 Hillview Crescent, a 4,671-square-metre Paparangi site marketed in March 2026 with consent for thirty townhouses. The study combines the public listing, consent decision, LINZ parcel and LiDAR data, cost assumptions and market evidence available at the time.

The result is an early conversation pack: indicative site constraints, a scheme that can be reviewed, a feasibility scenario and a clear list of information still required. It does not establish the property's current ownership or availability.

## One shared brief gives the agent, developer and architect a useful first view

Jim is a fictional townhouse developer who also runs a building company. His brief records the projects he wants, the rates he trusts, his margin hurdle and the evidence required before a site progresses.

| Illustrative developer brief | Setting |
| --- | --- |
| Project type | Consented or advanced townhouse sites |
| Delivery | Two-storey timber homes built by the company |
| Preferred scale | 20 to 35 dwellings |
| Geography | Wellington region |
| Margin hurdle | 18% on cost |

An agent can apply that brief before calling him. An architect can test the indicative terrain against the firm's previous housing models and design knowledge. Jim then receives one pack showing the opportunity, the assumptions and the next investigations.

The HTML page includes an unbranded feasibility workspace populated with the Paparangi example. It contains no agency, developer or client data.

### The agent prepares market evidence

The agent contributes the listing context, settled sales and a reasonable pricing range for the homes that may result.

### The developer applies business criteria

The developer contributes delivery costs, margin requirements and the project types that fit the company's capability.

### The architect tests a scheme

The architect contributes site interpretation, relevant past models and early design options that can be tested against the brief.

## 01 · The first check tests the listing description against open terrain data

The process combines the LINZ parcel with a one-metre LiDAR surface. At Paparangi, this changed the reading of the site. The listing described near-flat contours; the terrain model records 16.1 metres of fall across the study area at a mean slope of 12.5 degrees, with 29% of the ground steeper than 15 degrees.

This desk study positions the terrain window from a street-level geocode rather than surveyed title coordinates. The figures describe the immediate ground and remain indicative until they are checked against a topographical survey and the title boundary.

The modelled fall changes the scheme direction. Four benches run along the contour, each balancing its own cut and fill. The first direction ran across the fall and required a seven-metre cut per bench, so it was discarded.

## 02 · The developer brief gives the architect a scheme worth testing

The study retains the consented mix of thirty dwellings: thirteen three-bedroom, fifteen two-bedroom and two one-bedroom. Eight short clusters sit on four benches, with the gaps aligned to form a planted route through the centre of the site. The design model provides 2,951 m² net saleable area at a 98 m² average.

The upper floor projects 600 millimetres over a recessed entry. Ridge heights and setbacks vary along each cluster, while the two single-storey one-bedroom homes step the scheme down beside neighbouring houses. These are early choices for the architect and developer to review together.

## 03 · The feasibility tests a land value under stated assumptions

The base case carries $480,570 per dwelling before land, finance and margin, an 18% margin hurdle and a 7.5% facility rate. The commercial model retains 2,814 m² of net saleable area, 4.9% below the 2,951 m² design model. This preserves the more conservative area allowance used in the original feasibility.

The two-bedroom sale-price test is $779,000, taken from [advertised pre-sale pricing for a Paparangi cohousing scheme](https://www.circleliving.nz/wellington-paparangi-cohousing), accessed 31 August 2026. It is not a settled sale. The source also reports that a conditional tender was accepted on a Paparangi site in April 2026, without identifying the address. The figure is therefore treated only as local advertised pricing; it does not establish the status of 10 Hillview Crescent.

The one- and three-bedroom values remain inferred. Under this advertised-price case, the model produces an illustrative land residual of **$1.17 million**. The result changes quickly: at a $740,000 two-bedroom assumption the residual falls to $456,000, and at $701,000 it becomes negative.

The development-contribution allowance of $20,000 per dwelling is also unverified. Settled sales, an updated cost plan and the current contribution schedule are required before relying on the result.

## 04 · Design references give the architect a practical starting point

[Fair Acres Townhouses](https://firstlightstudio.co.nz/projects/fairacres) by First Light Studio informs the projecting wrap, cascading elevation and transition to single-storey homes at the edges. [Catalina Bay](https://architectus.co.nz/work/catalina-bay/) by Architectus informs the use of stepped pieces across the slope. [Modal](https://www.ockham.co.nz/modal/) by Ockham Residential informs the texture and rhythm of the repeated facade.

These references guide massing and material decisions; they do not validate the feasibility assumptions.

## 05 · Model-linked images make early design choices easier to review

The working model establishes massing, dwelling mix and ground. Generated images add materials, planting and light while retaining the model camera and overall geometry. Publishing each image beside its model view keeps the differences visible.

## 06 · A decision requires a clear line between established evidence, scenario inputs and outstanding checks

### 01 · Established evidence

- **Parcel and terrain data:** the LINZ parcel records 4,671 m². The LiDAR model records 16.1 metres of fall across the geocoded study area; a survey is required to confirm the ground within the title boundary.
- **Consent decision:** the September 2022 decision records thirty homes and the stated bedroom mix.
- **Tender date:** the marketing process closed on 15 April 2026. Current ownership and availability are not established.

### 02 · Scenario inputs

- **Proposed scheme and images:** layouts, facades, planting and generated frames are design proposals, not records of the consented drawings.
- **Sale prices:** the $779,000 two-bedroom input is advertised pre-sale pricing. The one- and three-bedroom values are inferred.
- **Costs and residual:** the $20,000 contribution allowance is unverified. The $1.17 million land residual depends on the stated cost, price, margin and finance assumptions.

### 03 · Checks and owners

- **Agent or valuer:** confirm current property status and replace advertised pricing with settled comparable sales and valuation advice.
- **Architect:** review the consented drawings, s127 variation and geotechnical report against the proposed scheme.
- **Developer or cost adviser:** confirm construction rates, development contributions, finance terms and the required margin.

This is an early desk study prepared from public data without the vendor's involvement. It is not a valuation or advice to buy or sell.

## 07 · The pack gives three parties the same starting point

The finished pack brings the site evidence, proposed scheme, commercial scenario and open investigations into one reviewable document. It gives the parties a common basis for deciding whether the opportunity should progress to professional due diligence.

A company version would hold the firm's project criteria, previous models, cost rates and evidence requirements in a repeatable process, then produce the same first view for each suitable listing.

**Source register:** [original Trade Me listing](https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/property/residential/sections-for-sale/wellington/wellington/paparangi/listing/5829808997) · [consent and property files](https://www.propertyfiles.co.nz/property/10hillviewcrescent) · [LINZ one-metre elevation collection](https://nz-elevation.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/wellington/wellington-city_2025/dem_1m/2193/collection.json) · [advertised Paparangi pricing](https://www.circleliving.nz/wellington-paparangi-cohousing). Design references are linked in Section 04.