The key challenges in building consenting right now

Plus, the stats around RFIs and inspections

We have been listening to central government and government agencies talk about the building consent system reform and proposals to improve consistency, efficiency and reduce costs over the last year, with quotes identifying inefficiencies in the consenting process as a major drain on productivity.

The reality, as you know, lies mostly in the high level of Requests For Information (RFI) process.

From an Objective point of view, we see only praise falling on councils for providing the regulatory rigour they are obliged to do under the Building Act. BCAs are ensuring that New Zealand building owners and users are protected, and that our built environment is a safe place to live, work and play by certifying code compliant designs.

The RFI challenge

Our statistics show that across the Objective Build platform, there have been at least 218,512 requests for information questions raised between 2022 – 2024, a staggering amount indicating some significant issues with applications and the industry as a whole.   

This means information in the building consent application is either missing, incorrect, or not clear when demonstrating compliance with the New Zealand Building Code. 

The top 10 RFIs are dominated by the B (structure) and E (moisture) code clauses, which are critical to the structural integrity and weathertightness of a building.

73% of all consents are requiring RFIs for sub standard applications. This number of incomplete or substandard applications submitted is not ideal, and BCAs are doing a great job in identifying the issues and working with the applicants and agents to ensure code compliant designs.

Our data shows that the average number of days that the application is suspended during this process is 29 days (median 27 days), adding approximately 1 month to the overall statutory timeframe. This indicates that better quality applications would resolve a great deal of the time issues, rather than any lethargy from council. 

This volume, paired with building consent authorities' ability to constantly meet the 20 day obligations is admirable, and so much is obviously dependent on how quickly the applicant responds to the RFIs.

Added to this, our data also shows a 48% failure rate for inspections. The top 3 failed inspections being Final, Framing and Pre-line, all requiring re-inspections to ensure compliance with the approved consent.

Quality through collaboration

We appreciate the amount of rework that the BCAs are doing to ensure quality outcomes for building owners and users. We feel that it is important to share these stats with you, so that you have information that empowers you to advise your community on the work you undertake accurately.

Unfortunately, due to the high failure rates at assessment and inspection stages, it is the building owner who carries the cost burden on time. And often, they are unaware of how lapses in quality drive BCA decisions.

It makes sense that improving the application inputs and readiness for inspections will assist the BCAs and building owners to achieve a more efficient, streamlined process with reduced cost, whilst maintaining the quality that all building owners and users deserve.

Objective are constantly looking at how Build can help to make the application process clearer and easier for the applicant. All stakeholders have to play their part in the process, and we want to assist you however we can to communicate this.

If you have any questions or want to have a chat, please get in touch with your Account Manager - we are always here to help.