Question 4

What was proposed

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) identified options to achieve the objective of reducing regulatory barriers to building granny flats, with related benefits, costs and risks. These included regulatory and non-regulatory options, including options that would not require a building consent and fast-tracked building consents. Full detail can be found on pages 8 to 12 of the discussion document.

The proposal outlined a new Schedule in the Building Act that would provide an exemption for simple, standalone dwellings of up to 60 square metres in size. Compared to the existing exemptions under Schedule 1, the new schedule would have additional criteria to recognise the increased health and safety risks associated with granny flats. To mitigate these risks, it would use existing occupational regulation of qualified professionals and would also require using certain Building Code Acceptable Solutions (structure, weathertightness and plumbing related) unless MultiProof or BuiltReady schemes are used. Property owners would also have to notify councils of the work.

Summary of feedback

Overall, 1,450 submitters answered this question. A breakdown of their responses is shown in the graph below. 

Submitters were also given the opportunity to explain their views on this question. 672 submitters provided a further explanation of their view. 

Homeowners

Homeowners were generally supportive of the proposal, with a significant majority either agreeing or agreeing in part with the proposed option. Many homeowners supported the proposal for the social benefit that it will facilitate for intergenerational living. 

Many homeowners submitted that the 60 square metre limit for these dwellings should be increased. There was variety in the suggested size increase, ranging from 65 square metres to no limit at all. There was also a variety of justifications for this increase; some submitters stated that it was needed to ensure comfortable living, while others said it would enable a more flexible range of designs.

Some homeowners submitted that the scope of the policy should be broadened to apply to more than a simple, standalone dwelling. These submitters requested that both tiny homes and the alteration of existing buildings were included as part of the proposal. 

Iwi, hapū and Māori

Iwi, hapū and Māori submitters generally supported the proposed option and considered it a positive step towards removing barriers and creating a more equitable housing system for Māori. However, several submitters recommended alterations to proposed exemption conditions to enable specific considerations for Māori communities. These recommendations were that the dwellings should be explicitly permitted as standalone structures on whenua Māori (Māori land), without requiring a primary dwelling. Additionally, the policy should allow for multiple small dwellings to be erected on the same site, to enable papakāinga development (housing development for Māori on their ancestral land). 

Councils (including Building Consent Authorities)

A key theme in council submissions is a preference for alternative options to address the stated problem. Various approaches under the Building Act were suggested. The most common suggestion was to retain a building consent but reduce the mandatory turnaround time to 10 working days (i.e. a fast-track consent).

Another common concern raised was that the proposal's benefit was marginal and only represented a small percentage of the cost of building. Councils submitted that the costs and risks associated with removing council quality assurance mechanisms may outweigh this benefit.  

Most councils raised the issue of a potential increase in non-compliant building work. These councils stated that the competency of tradespeople, such as Licensed Building Practitioners and the occupational schemes that regulate them, are insufficient to take on assurance responsibilities. Councils often cited current high inspection failure rates as evidence for this position.

The Building Officials Institute of New Zealand submission included a recent analysis of Requests for Information (RFI) and failed inspections from 18 building consent authorities (BCAs) across the country, ranging from small to large, over a period of 11 months (May 2023 – March 2024).

Requests for Information (RFI) and failed inspection rates from across 18 BCAs

Source: Objective Corporation Limited (Data tables contained in the BOINZ submission on the Making it easier to build granny flats discussion document)

Auckland Council’s failed inspection rates for the last 12 months

One council agreed that creating a new schedule to the Building Act was preferable to amending the existing Schedule 1. However, if that was the case, they considered a review of Schedule 1 would need to be undertaken to ensure consistency between both Schedules.

Industry

Most architects and designers were supportive of the proposal, citing that, for dwellings such as granny flats, the building consent process was not necessary, and that this exemption would enable a greater number of minor dwellings to be built across the country.

However, some key concerns were raised regarding the proposal's potential to lead to compliance issues and poor-quality housing. Submitters queried how the quality of building work would be monitored, noting their concerns with placing assurance responsibilities on Licensed Building Practitioners.

Builders were also largely supportive of the proposal, viewing it as an opportunity to reduce the cost and time associated with building a simple dwelling. However, feedback indicated that it is important to ensure relevant safeguards are in place to mitigate the risk of removing council oversight.

< Part 2: Proposal under the Building Act 2004 | Question 5 >