BuildPath NZ logo

Design

Concept design

This stage turns the site information and strategy into sketch designs that test yield, layout, access, outdoor areas, outlook, privacy, cost, and market fit. This page shows what a beginner residential developer in Auckland should check, who to ask, what evidence to save, and where to verify before committing money or instructions.

concept designyieldmassinglayoutmarket fit7 rolesLast reviewed 11 August 2026

How to execute this stage

Micro-stage control plan

Work through each applicable step in order. A hold point means pause the dependent decision or work until the stated evidence and authorised review are complete.

9 structured steps
  1. 01Dwelling mixLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Dwelling mix

    Technical context

    Test this point against Concept plans, the current feasibility version and written input from Architect. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on preferred concept.

    Prerequisites

    • Concept plans is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Architect has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Concept plans directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Concept plans
    • Written Architect response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Concept plans
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before preferred concept.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    access

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  2. 02accessLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    access

    Technical context

    Test this point against Massing studies, the current feasibility version and written input from Planner. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on design changes.

    Prerequisites

    • Massing studies is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Planner has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Massing studies directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Massing studies
    • Written Planner response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Massing studies
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before design changes.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    parking where relevant

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  3. 03parking where relevantLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    parking where relevant

    Technical context

    Test this point against Yield sketch, the current feasibility version and written input from Civil engineer. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on whether to proceed to consent design.

    Prerequisites

    • Yield sketch is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Civil engineer has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Yield sketch directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Yield sketch
    • Written Civil engineer response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Yield sketch
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before whether to proceed to consent design.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    privacy

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  4. 04privacyLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    privacy

    Technical context

    Test this point against Civil sketch, the current feasibility version and written input from Structural engineer. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on whether yield or product changes.

    Prerequisites

    • Civil sketch is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Structural engineer has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Civil sketch directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Civil sketch
    • Written Structural engineer response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Civil sketch
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before whether yield or product changes.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    sunlight

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  5. 05sunlightLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    sunlight

    Technical context

    Test this point against Planning comments, the current feasibility version and written input from QS. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on preferred concept.

    Prerequisites

    • Planning comments is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • QS has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Planning comments directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Planning comments
    • Written QS response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Planning comments
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before preferred concept.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    outdoor living

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  6. 06outdoor livingLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    outdoor living

    Technical context

    Test this point against QS cost advice, the current feasibility version and written input from Real estate agent. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on design changes.

    Prerequisites

    • QS cost advice is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Real estate agent has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does QS cost advice directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • QS cost advice
    • Written Real estate agent response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • QS cost advice
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before design changes.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    outlook

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  7. 07outlookLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    outlook

    Technical context

    Test this point against Concept plans, the current feasibility version and written input from Developer. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on whether to proceed to consent design.

    Prerequisites

    • Concept plans is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Developer has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Concept plans directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Concept plans
    • Written Developer response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Concept plans
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before whether to proceed to consent design.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    buildability

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  8. 08buildabilityLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    buildability

    Technical context

    Test this point against Massing studies, the current feasibility version and written input from Architect. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on whether yield or product changes.

    Prerequisites

    • Massing studies is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Architect has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Massing studies directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Massing studies
    • Written Architect response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Massing studies
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before whether yield or product changes.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    budget

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

  9. 09budgetLevel 2 · Design
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    budget

    Technical context

    Test this point against Yield sketch, the current feasibility version and written input from Planner. Separate verified facts, professional opinion and assumptions.

    Why it matters: This check can change yield, consent pathway, acquisition terms, funding, cost, programme or exit strategy. It must be resolved before the developer relies on preferred concept.

    Prerequisites

    • Yield sketch is current and its source/date are recorded.
    • The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
    • Planner has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.

    Checks

    • Does Yield sketch directly support the conclusion?
    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?
    • Has the feasibility, programme, risk register and decision register been updated?

    Evidence to save

    • Yield sketch
    • Written Planner response or a recorded reason it is not required
    • Dated feasibility/risk/decision update

    Hold point

    Do not waive a condition, instruct design/work, commit funding, lodge, purchase, settle or represent the conclusion as confirmed until the authorised decision-maker has the required evidence and advice.

    Stop or escalate when

    • The source is missing, old, inconsistent or outside the reviewer's scope.
    • The check changes yield, approval pathway, funding, legal rights, tax, safety or a material cost/programme assumption.
    • A deadline is approaching and the responsible professional has not confirmed the position.

    Documents and records

    • Yield sketch
    • Architect briefing template
    • Development options comparison
    • Current feasibility, risk register and decision register
    Cost effect
    Record changes to land value, consultant/council cost, construction/civil cost, finance, holding cost, contingency and exit value before preferred concept.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Make and record the stage decision: Preferred concept. Then open the next applicable development stage.

    Applicability: Confirm whether this check applies to the actual site, ownership, strategy, consent pathway, infrastructure and delivery model; record a reason when not applicable.

    Use current site-specific documents and appropriately appointed professional advice. BuildPath does not make the development decision for you.

Developer go / no-go control

Decision gates before the next commitment

A gate records whether evidence supports a commercial decision. It does not replace advice or predict an authority, lender, purchaser or market outcome.

Before resource consent lodgement

Decision: Lodge, redesign, seek pre-application input, or pause

Minimum evidence

  • • Application scope and AEE/supporting reports are coordinated by appointed professionals
  • • Design responds to site/title/infrastructure/hazard constraints
  • • Affected-party and notification risk is considered without assuming the council outcome

Update before deciding

  • • Yield and net saleable/rentable area
  • • Consultant/council/notification allowances
  • • Consent programme and holding cost

Stop / escalate when

  • • Drawings and reports materially conflict
  • • A key rule/standard/approval pathway is unverified
  • • The consent strategy no longer supports feasibility
Record this gate in the Workspace →

What this stage means

  • Concept design is the part of the project where the developer turns an idea into a checked decision, not a guess.
  • The stage should connect market demand, planning rules, legal constraints, design, cost, funding, time, risk, and exit strategy.
  • For Auckland residential development, the answer is site-specific. The same idea can be low risk on one site and unworkable on the next because of zoning, overlays, title interests, services, slope, flooding, neighbours, or finance.

Why this stage matters

  • Early mistakes become expensive because land, design, consultants, holding costs, consent fees, and finance costs continue even when the project is paused.
  • The developer needs written evidence for lenders, consultants, lawyers, valuers, builders, purchasers, and future dispute protection.
  • This stage usually needs verification from Auckland Unitary Plan, MBIE Building Code compliance, Relevant professional advice before the developer treats the conclusion as reliable.

Step-by-step guide

  1. 1Define the decision needed at the end of this stage and the date it is needed by.
  2. 2Gather the stage documents: Concept plans, Massing studies, Yield sketch, Civil sketch, and the remaining stage records.
  3. 3Read the documents once for understanding, then again to list unknowns, risks, contradictions, missing evidence, and professional questions.
  4. 4Ask the responsible professionals to confirm the critical points: Architect, Planner, Civil engineer, Structural engineer.
  5. 5Update the feasibility, programme, risk register, and decision register with source references and dates.
  6. 6Decide whether to proceed, pause, redesign, renegotiate, add conditions, seek more advice, or abandon the option.
  7. 7Save the evidence in a dated folder and write a short stage closeout note explaining what was decided and why.

What the developer must do

  • Write down the development objective for concept design in one clear paragraph: build-to-sell, build-to-rent, retain one dwelling, subdivide, renovate, or staged development.
  • Open the current feasibility, programme, decision register, risk register, and due diligence folder before making new commitments.
  • Collect the documents needed for this stage: Concept plans, Massing studies, Yield sketch, Civil sketch, Planning comments, QS cost advice.
  • Send focused questions to the right people: Architect, Planner, Civil engineer, Structural engineer, QS, Real estate agent, Developer.
  • Record assumptions separately from verified facts so the feasibility does not look more certain than it really is.
  • Update cost, time, consent, finance, and sales assumptions immediately after receiving new information.
  • Escalate anything that changes yield, sale price, cost, timing, consent pathway, title, funding, or settlement risk.

Verification

Source / where to check

Use current official information and the controlled documents for the actual project.

Auckland Unitary Plan

Check the operative plan, maps, zones, precincts, overlays, activity status, development controls, subdivision rules, and assessment criteria for the specific site.

MBIE Building Code compliance

Use MBIE Building Performance to find the current Building Code clauses, Acceptable Solutions, Verification Methods, updates, and technical guidance.

Relevant professional advice

Planner, surveyor, architect, engineer, quantity surveyor, lawyer, accountant, lender, valuer, real estate agent, and other project specialists must confirm site-specific decisions.

Project-specific consented documents and professional advice override generic guidance.

Common mistakes

  • Treating an agent comment, generic online rule, or old document as verified site-specific advice.
  • Forgetting to update the feasibility after design, consent, finance, or market information changes.
  • Not allowing enough contingency, professional fees, council fees, finance costs, holding costs, and time risk.
  • Failing to keep written records of who confirmed what and when.
  • Using concept design to push ahead even when the red flags show the project should pause.

Common risks

  • Yield reduces after proper planning, engineering, title, or infrastructure review.
  • Costs increase after QS, builder, civil, geotechnical, demolition, asbestos, or consent information is received.
  • Programme moves out because consultant inputs, council RFIs, neighbour issues, finance, title, or construction sequencing take longer than assumed.
  • Funding or sales assumptions change before the project reaches settlement.
  • The developer relies on unverified information and loses negotiating power or misses a due diligence deadline.

Common costs

  • Professional fees for planner, architect/designer, surveyor, engineer, QS, lawyer, accountant, valuer, and lender reports.
  • Council fees, consent fees, development contribution estimates, engineering approvals, infrastructure checks, and inspection/monitoring costs where relevant.
  • Design revisions, reports, investigations, demolition/asbestos work, service location, geotechnical testing, and valuation updates.
  • Holding costs such as interest, rates, insurance, utilities, temporary maintenance, and security.
  • Contingency for unverified conditions until the relevant professional confirms them.

Quotes and fee proposals to obtain

  • Obtain written fee proposals or quotations from the relevant stage professionals: Architect, Planner, Civil engineer, Structural engineer, QS, Real estate agent, Developer.
  • Issue the same current documents and a clear scope to each party so prices, exclusions, assumptions, deliverables, lead times, and programme can be compared.
  • Identify council, authority, investigation, testing, design, construction, monitoring, and close-out charges that may sit outside a consultant or contractor quote.
  • Record every provisional sum, estimate, exclusion, expiry date, dependency, and unverified allowance in the Quote Register and feasibility.
  • Do not approve an appointment or purchase order until scope ownership, evidence required, payment terms, variation process, insurance or competency checks, and completion deliverables are understood.

Common delays

  • Waiting for property file, LIM, title instruments, survey information, consultant reports, or council responses.
  • Design changes caused by planning controls, infrastructure constraints, engineering findings, budget pressure, or market feedback.
  • Lender, valuer, lawyer, or purchaser conditions not being satisfied on time.
  • Council RFI responses needing more consultant work than expected.
  • Construction or subdivision closeout documents not matching settlement or sales deadlines.

Common consultant questions

  • For Concept design, what are the three highest risks that could change cost, time, yield, or approval pathway?
  • Which parts of your advice are confirmed, which are assumptions, and which require another professional to confirm?
  • What documents did you rely on, and are any documents missing, outdated, superseded, or inconsistent?
  • What decision does the developer need to make now, and what should wait until more information is available?
  • What wording should go into the decision register, consultant meeting minutes, or lender/client update?

Red flags

  • A professional says the issue is outside their scope and no one else has been asked to confirm it.
  • The feasibility only works if optimistic sale prices, low construction costs, fast consent, low interest, and no delays all happen together.
  • A title, planning, flooding, geotechnical, access, service, or covenant issue may prevent the intended yield.
  • A seller, agent, builder, or consultant pressures the developer to waive due diligence before core checks are complete.
  • The project file has no written evidence for a major decision.

When to stop and get professional advice

  • Stop and get professional advice when title, easements, covenants, unit title, cross lease, or subdivision matters affect the proposal.
  • Stop and get professional advice when zoning, overlays, activity status, notification, infrastructure capacity, flooding, geotechnical, contamination, or heritage could affect yield.
  • Stop and get professional advice when GST, income tax, entity structure, lending, guarantees, or sale contract terms affect the decision.
  • Stop and get professional advice when the developer is about to sign, waive a condition, lodge consent, start work, approve a variation, accept practical completion, or settle.

Decisions that must be made

  • Preferred concept
  • Design changes
  • Whether to proceed to consent design
  • Whether yield or product changes

Evidence to save

  • Dated source documents and consultant advice.
  • Feasibility version showing the assumptions used at the time of decision.
  • Risk register and decision register entries.
  • Meeting notes, emails, marked-up plans, calculations, photos, and council/lender/consultant responses.
  • Clear note of who approved the next step and any conditions attached to that approval.

Beginner-friendly example

The preferred concept is not the highest dwelling count; it is the option with the best mix of approval risk, build cost, sales value, and programme certainty.

Use this in my project

Turn concept design into controlled action

Open the relevant workspace register, create the project-specific record, link the controlling documents and preserve evidence. The guide does not automatically approve or verify the action.

Open workspace
Create a task →Record a document →Update feasibility →Record a decision →Record a constraint →Compare quotes →
All development stagesDevelopment problem solverDevelopment formsQuote register