Question 5
On this page
What was asked
Question 5: What other options should the government consider to achieve the same outcomes?
What was proposed
Further to the proposed option (option 2), the discussion document outlined four alternative options involving potential changes to the Building Act that could achieve the same outcome. These options are outlined on page 8 of the discussion document.
Overall, 662 submitters responded to this question, and some of these submitters commented on alternative options for the Government to consider.
Summary of feedback
New Schedule 1 exemption (option 1)
There was little preference for option 1 across all submitter groups.
Several homeowners responded that the government should consider option 1; however, these submitters did not elaborate further on their preference. One industry submitter stated that option 1 was too risky with little mitigation to address the risks identified.
Self-certification regime (option 3)
Some homeowners submitted their preference for option 3; one homeowner commented that professionals are currently obligated to follow rules and regulations and that a self-certification scheme would be an extension of that obligation.
Some responses from the industry showed a general support for option 3. Whilst some responses did not provide further explanation for their support; a few of these submitters expressed that this was a great idea for the sector. On the contrary, a few industry submitters stated that option 3 would add too much complexity to the system.
Fast-tracked building consent (options 4 and 5)
Most councils were in favour of the fast-track consenting process provided by Options 4 and 5, expressing that these options would create fewer risks than other identified options. They acknowledged that Options 4 and 5 would still require a building consent but considered the benefits would outweigh the processing time and cost. They considered that under this fast-tracked approach, consumers could be better assured that their granny flat is of good quality and meets the Building Code, as well as better protected in the case of building failure or defect. Further comments made stated that these options would better enable councils to collect development contributions for these buildings.
Some homeowners supported the fast-tracked consenting options, options 4 and 5. They expressed that options 4 and 5 would provide for a faster consenting process as well as council oversight to ensure that the building work complies with the Building Code. These homeowners also considered that these options would provide consumers with more flexibility in terms of design.