BuildPath NZ logo

Acquisition

Site finding

This stage creates a disciplined search process for sites that might support the target residential development strategy. 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.

site findingland acquisitionagentshortlist6 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. 01Site areaLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Site area

    Technical context

    Test this point against Site search criteria, 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 which sites deserve quick feasibility.

    Prerequisites

    • Site search criteria 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 Site search criteria 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    • Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?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

    • Site search criteria
    • 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

    • Site search criteria
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 which sites deserve quick feasibility.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Frontage

    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. 02FrontageLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Frontage

    Technical context

    Test this point against Agent emails, 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 which sites are rejected immediately.

    Prerequisites

    • Agent emails 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 Agent emails 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

    • Agent emails
    • 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

    • Agent emails
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 which sites are rejected immediately.
    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.

  3. 03AccessLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Access

    Technical context

    Test this point against Listing notes, 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 what information to ask the agent for.

    Prerequisites

    • Listing notes 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 Listing notes 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

    • Listing notes
    • 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

    • Listing notes
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 what information to ask the agent for.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Slope

    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. 04SlopeLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Slope

    Technical context

    Test this point against GeoMaps screenshots, 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 which sites deserve quick feasibility.

    Prerequisites

    • GeoMaps screenshots 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 GeoMaps screenshots 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

    • GeoMaps screenshots
    • 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

    • GeoMaps screenshots
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 which sites deserve quick feasibility.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Zone

    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. 05ZoneLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Zone

    Technical context

    Test this point against Initial site shortlist, the current feasibility version and written input from Surveyor. 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 which sites are rejected immediately.

    Prerequisites

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

    Checks

    • Does Initial site shortlist 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

    • Initial site shortlist
    • Written Surveyor 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

    • Initial site shortlist
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 which sites are rejected immediately.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Overlays

    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. 06OverlaysLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Overlays

    Technical context

    Test this point against Site search criteria, the current feasibility version and written input from Valuer. 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 what information to ask the agent for.

    Prerequisites

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

    Checks

    • Does Site search criteria 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

    • Site search criteria
    • Written Valuer 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

    • Site search criteria
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 what information to ask the agent for.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Existing dwelling position

    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. 07Existing dwelling positionLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Existing dwelling position

    Technical context

    Test this point against Agent emails, 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 which sites deserve quick feasibility.

    Prerequisites

    • Agent emails 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 Agent emails 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

    • Agent emails
    • 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

    • Agent emails
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 which sites deserve quick feasibility.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Services context

    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. 08Services contextLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Services context

    Technical context

    Test this point against Listing notes, 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 which sites are rejected immediately.

    Prerequisites

    • Listing notes 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 Listing notes 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

    • Listing notes
    • 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

    • Listing notes
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 which sites are rejected immediately.
    Programme effect
    Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.

    Next action

    Asking price

    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. 09Asking priceLevel 1 · Acquisition
    TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext action

    Simple explanation

    Asking price

    Technical context

    Test this point against GeoMaps screenshots, 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 what information to ask the agent for.

    Prerequisites

    • GeoMaps screenshots 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 GeoMaps screenshots 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

    • GeoMaps screenshots
    • 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

    • GeoMaps screenshots
    • Site assessment checklist
    • Initial feasibility template
    • 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 what information to ask the agent for.
    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: What information to ask the agent for. 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 making an offer

Decision: Offer, negotiate conditions, or stop

Minimum evidence

  • • Title/interests and property-file review routed to the right advisers
  • • Planning, hazards, access and service constraints screened
  • • Versioned feasibility with land, works, finance, tax/GST advice triggers and contingency

Update before deciding

  • • Maximum land price and deposit
  • • Due-diligence/finance conditions and dates
  • • Downside yield/cost/programme scenario

Stop / escalate when

  • • A material constraint has no owner or allowance
  • • The offer conditions cannot protect the unresolved checks
  • • Required legal, planning, finance or tax advice is missing
Record this gate in the Workspace →

What this stage means

  • Site finding 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 Council GeoMaps, Auckland Unitary Plan maps, 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: Site search criteria, Agent emails, Listing notes, GeoMaps screenshots, 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: Developer, Real estate agent, Planner, Architect.
  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 site finding 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: Site search criteria, Agent emails, Listing notes, GeoMaps screenshots, Initial site shortlist.
  • Send focused questions to the right people: Developer, Real estate agent, Planner, Architect, Surveyor, Valuer.
  • 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 Council GeoMaps

Use GeoMaps as an early desktop check for property layers, contours, flooding/overland flow information, services context, and council spatial information. Confirm critical matters with professionals and council.

Auckland Unitary Plan maps

Use the plan maps to confirm site-specific zoning, overlays, precincts, controls, designations, natural hazards, and planning layers before relying on generic 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 site finding 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: Developer, Real estate agent, Planner, Architect, Surveyor, Valuer.
  • 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 Site finding, 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

  • Which sites deserve quick feasibility
  • Which sites are rejected immediately
  • What information to ask the agent for

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

A site with a wide street frontage, gentle contour, clear access, and fewer overlays may move to quick feasibility before a steep rear site with uncertain services.

Use this in my project

Turn site finding 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