Acquisition
Site selection
This stage compares shortlisted sites and selects which one is worth deeper due diligence or an offer. 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.
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.
01Planning pathwayLevel 1 · Acquisition
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Planning pathway
Technical context
Test this point against Site comparison table, 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 preferred site.
Prerequisites
- Site comparison table 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 comparison table 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- Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?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 comparison table
- 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 comparison table
- Development options comparison
- Site assessment checklist
- 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 site.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Likely dwelling count
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.
02Likely dwelling countLevel 1 · Acquisition
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Likely dwelling count
Technical context
Test this point against Quick feasibility, 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 backup site.
Prerequisites
- Quick feasibility 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 Quick feasibility 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
- Quick feasibility
- 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
- Quick feasibility
- Development options comparison
- Site assessment checklist
- 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 backup site.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Infrastructure 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.
03Infrastructure accessLevel 1 · Acquisition
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Infrastructure access
Technical context
Test this point against Planning screen, 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 maximum offer price.
Prerequisites
- Planning screen 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 Planning screen 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 screen
- 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
- Planning screen
- Development options comparison
- Site assessment checklist
- 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 maximum offer price.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Demolition risk
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.
04Demolition riskLevel 1 · Acquisition
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Demolition risk
Technical context
Test this point against Risk notes, 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 due diligence conditions needed.
Prerequisites
- Risk notes 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 Risk 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
- Risk notes
- 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
- Risk notes
- Development options comparison
- Site assessment checklist
- 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 due diligence conditions needed.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Build complexity
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.
05Build complexityLevel 1 · Acquisition
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Build complexity
Technical context
Test this point against Comparable sales evidence, 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 preferred site.
Prerequisites
- Comparable sales evidence 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 Comparable sales evidence 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
- Comparable sales evidence
- 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
- Comparable sales evidence
- Development options comparison
- Site assessment checklist
- 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 site.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Margin sensitivity
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.
06Margin sensitivityLevel 1 · Acquisition
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Margin sensitivity
Technical context
Test this point against Site comparison table, the current feasibility version and written input from Lender. 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 backup site.
Prerequisites
- Site comparison table is current and its source/date are recorded.
- The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
- Lender has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.
Checks
- Does Site comparison table 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 comparison table
- Written Lender 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 comparison table
- Development options comparison
- Site assessment checklist
- 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 backup site.
- 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: Backup site. 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
What this stage means
- Site selection 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, Auckland Council GeoMaps, Relevant professional advice before the developer treats the conclusion as reliable.
Step-by-step guide
- 1Define the decision needed at the end of this stage and the date it is needed by.
- 2Gather the stage documents: Site comparison table, Quick feasibility, Planning screen, Risk notes, and the remaining stage records.
- 3Read the documents once for understanding, then again to list unknowns, risks, contradictions, missing evidence, and professional questions.
- 4Ask the responsible professionals to confirm the critical points: Developer, Planner, Architect, Civil engineer.
- 5Update the feasibility, programme, risk register, and decision register with source references and dates.
- 6Decide whether to proceed, pause, redesign, renegotiate, add conditions, seek more advice, or abandon the option.
- 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 selection 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 comparison table, Quick feasibility, Planning screen, Risk notes, Comparable sales evidence.
- Send focused questions to the right people: Developer, Planner, Architect, Civil engineer, Valuer, Lender.
- 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.
Check the operative plan, maps, zones, precincts, overlays, activity status, development controls, subdivision rules, and assessment criteria for the specific site.
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.
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 selection 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, Planner, Architect, Civil engineer, Valuer, Lender.
- 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 selection, 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 site
- Backup site
- Maximum offer price
- Due diligence conditions needed
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
Two sites have similar price, but the selected site has better stormwater options and fewer title restrictions, so the risk-adjusted margin is stronger.
Use this in my project
Turn site selection 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.