Question 3

What was asked

Question 3: Do you agree with the risks identified? Are there other risks that need to be considered?

Summary of feedback

Overall, 1,450 submitters answered this question, with a further 533 submitters providing further information in the open-ended section.

Figure 4: Graph detailing the response to question 3
A graph showing the percentages of answers to question 3 of the discussion document: 'Do you agree with the risks identified?'

Homeowners

Most homeowners agreed with the identified risks, but some submitted that the risk of building work not meeting minimum standards was overstated. These submitters commented that granny flats were low-risk, and that the consent exemption could allow for more than is currently proposed, such as larger buildings. Other homeowners were concerned that there was a risk of councils attempting to prevent homeowners from accessing the exemption if any approval-process was involved.

Iwi, hapū and Māori

Iwi, hapū and Māori submitters agreed with the identified risks but submitted there were also additional risks missing from the discussion document, such as those relating to flood-prone land as well as other environmental concerns.

Councils

Councils generally did not consider all the relevant risks had been identified, noting that there had been a particular failure to recognise the protection and assurance that the current processes provide to homeowners. Councils submitted that there will likely be a failure to notify councils of new granny flats, leading to an incomplete record of information about the building work and potentially causing complications at time of re-sale or if alterations are being made to the dwelling. Councils stated that any increase in costs to monitor these dwellings or rectify building work will fall on the ratepayer. Other additional risks were also identified, such as flooding and natural hazard-related issues and biodiversity risks.

Industry

Most builders agreed with the identified risks, stating that building safety and performance was the key risk to mitigate. Some builders noted that this risk already exists within the building system but without the oversight of councils, it may be exacerbated. The same submitters were concerned with “cowboy builders” who may use the exemption and the associated reduction in monitoring to carry out non-compliant building work. 

Architects and designers also agreed with the identified risks, however commented that some risks, such as building safety, were more consequential than others and that they had not been weighted appropriately in the discussion document. Some submitters noted that the risk of liability in case of building failure or defect had not been fully identified.