Architects and other building designers can produce pretty pictures of their projects for clients but do they know how to fill in consent applications properly?

It looks like an external investigator is needed to investigate the activities of the Council. I don't mean IANZ either.

The documentation required by the council is huge and always changing and getting bigger. If there is any element the council doesn't understand or think is missing, they hold up the consent and send a letter to the applicant. In my 20 years working as an Architect I have never had an application approved first go (I can see some jokes coming my way)

I read this as Auckland Council mostly doing a good job given how constraining the Building Act 2004 is.

I hope that the pre-meeting referred to in the article is free (or at least one meeting is) and would call that a definite customer-friendly service.

Although it doesn't say it I also hope that the council does a basic screen of an application before it formally receives it and charges any money. Just to see that all the fields are filled in etc.

Most people don't understand what a sea-change the 2004 amendments to the Act were. Made at the time the government was speedily shovelling all the blame for its own cock-ups with respect to leaky buildings onto councils the Act sought to professionalise the industry at the same time it deprofessionalised the building inspection role. Under the new Act buildings must be built as per the approved plan. Previously inspectors could approve changes as construction proceeded as long as the variations still complied with the Building Code. Now the plan has to be perfect first go and all statutory requirements met before the consent is issued.

Hence all the reasons given above for "seeking further information".

I wonder how many applications get held up multiple times because they find new reasons after each new submission. I think this happens because the consent application passes through multiple hands, but once it is held up it stops with that council employee. Once the reason for it being held up it gets passed on internally to someone else that holds it up for a different reason. Happened to me years back, and the administration requirements are much more onerous now.

Design and administration are opposite ends of the same stick. If you keep pushing Architects into mindless admin, the designs will suffer.

Having done a big reno, I have had my consent held up in these separate instances
*Additional information that the council building desk said was not needed (my architect called to check), but then the officer reviewing the consent decided he needed it.
*An engineer's hand writing that the officer didn't like, even though it is readable.

My architect has been in the industry for 30+ years, and he said the consent pre-meeting is not worth the time, because whatever was agreed to is non-binding, and the person assessing your consent take no notice of what went in the pre consent meeting.

Just more public servant inertia, micro management and misdirection. The brief is simple, always make the problem belong to some body else over designing a suitable system. Always their reports are sufficiently vague as to obscure the real downfall of archaically inefficient systems and processes, internal incompetence and simple indifference. Never will their fellow public servants find them at fault. Hospitals, MSD offices, council offices along with many others need security guards to protect their staff from disgruntled service users primarily because their service is unsatisfactory. In my experience, satisfied customers do not shoot you. NZ used to be better than this. But hey, what are you gonna do?

Hugely complex convoluted slow process full of barriers.
Simplifying the system would help housing supply.

Many times have a sat cussing at my desk in disbelief of the councils pointless requests

Strengthens my case for single-storey, light-roof, residential construction to be slung straight under the 'exemption from consent requirements' sections of the BA 2004.

Because going through all the hoops - like, who decides that "Designers trying work outside their competency" and what are the appeal provisions - is just an economic dead-weight.

We don't subject cars, caravans, boats or planes to this sort of Byzantine process. Or even walk-in freezer rooms. In every case, it's unload 'er off of the truck, plug 'er in or put gas in the tank, hey presto, she runneth.

Best plan: more use of national multiple-use approvals (Secs 30A-H BA 2004) to end-run the craziness of Council BCA's. The uptake is minimal.

Oh, and SIP, panelised and similar construction designs, made in factories, with proper QC. My familiar refrain.

Because, with the current system, even when ya gets through the bureaucratic mire, pockets many thousands lighter for close to zero practical design benefit, the sad reality is this:

yer Dream Home is going to be clonked together by occasionally drug-tested hammer hands, with sparse/rotational attendance by everyone from aforesaid hammer-wielder to tradies, left out in the weather for weeks at a time, will take 6-12 months total elapsed time, and if you are really lucky, will have only over-run budget by 10-15%.

Generic process for councils wishing to serve burgers:
After waiting in queue, Customer presents at counter to place order.
No menu is displayed, If customer requires to view a menu, counter staff advise that menu is available to be viewed online only and asks for relevant documents for the order, also available to be downloaded online.
They do however have a copy for you, you may take it and fill it in and rejoin the queue.
On completion and return to counter, staff peruse the document and, while it is not specifically requested, note that you have not specified how you would like your burger patty cooked. They refer you to the guideline section of the document and suggest you adjust your form and rejoin the queue to resubmit it when done. The guide will inform you that regardless of the selection you made regarding the condition of your patty, the council and its agents cannot be held responsible if your request cannot be met due to circumstances outside their control.
On completion and return to counter, staff peruse the document and if satisfied that the form is correctly completed the staff will ask if you would like fries with that.
When you reply "yes", they will present you with a supplementary form which must also be completed for this addition to your order. Note that the original order cannot be processed until this supplementary has been received. Time to delivery cannot be advised.