Due diligence
Water supply checks
This stage checks the existing supply, proposed connections, metering, pressure or capacity concerns, fire-related design inputs where relevant, disconnection needs, easements, approvals, and delivery lead times. 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.
01Existing meter and connectionLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Existing meter and connection
Technical context
Test this point against Watercare records and correspondence, 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 connection and metering strategy.
Prerequisites
- Watercare records and correspondence 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 Watercare records and correspondence 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- Which information is verified, assumed, missing, superseded or contradictory?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
- Watercare records and correspondence
- 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
- Watercare records and correspondence
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 connection and metering strategy.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Proposed number of connections
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.
02Proposed number of connectionsLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Proposed number of connections
Technical context
Test this point against Property file, the current feasibility version and written input from Watercare. 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 applications to start.
Prerequisites
- Property file is current and its source/date are recorded.
- The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
- Watercare has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.
Checks
- Does Property file 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
- Property file
- Written Watercare 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
- Property file
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 applications to start.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Likely route
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.
03Likely routeLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Likely route
Technical context
Test this point against Existing services plan, the current feasibility version and written input from Plumber. 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 cost and lead-time allowance.
Prerequisites
- Existing services plan is current and its source/date are recorded.
- The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
- Plumber has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.
Checks
- Does Existing services plan 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
- Existing services plan
- Written Plumber 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
- Existing services plan
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 cost and lead-time allowance.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Capacity or pressure advice where required
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.
04Capacity or pressure advice where requiredLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Capacity or pressure advice where required
Technical context
Test this point against Concept plan, the current feasibility version and written input from Hydraulic designer where relevant. 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 specialist design is needed.
Prerequisites
- Concept plan is current and its source/date are recorded.
- The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
- Hydraulic designer where relevant has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.
Checks
- Does Concept plan 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 plan
- Written Hydraulic designer where relevant 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 plan
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 specialist design is needed.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Backflow or fire-related project needs
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.
05Backflow or fire-related project needsLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Backflow or fire-related project needs
Technical context
Test this point against Civil or hydraulic notes, 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 connection and metering strategy.
Prerequisites
- Civil or hydraulic notes 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 Civil or hydraulic 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
- Civil or hydraulic notes
- 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
- Civil or hydraulic notes
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 connection and metering strategy.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Disconnections
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.
06DisconnectionsLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Disconnections
Technical context
Test this point against Provider application requirements, the current feasibility version and written input from Quantity 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 applications to start.
Prerequisites
- Provider application requirements is current and its source/date are recorded.
- The project objective, feasibility version and decision deadline are clear.
- Quantity surveyor has a focused brief where professional confirmation is required.
Checks
- Does Provider application requirements 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
- Provider application requirements
- Written Quantity 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
- Provider application requirements
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 applications to start.
- Programme effect
- Record the decision deadline, dependencies, information lead time and effect on acquisition, consent, procurement, construction, sales or settlement milestones.
Next action
Approval, inspection, and as-built requirements
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.
07Approval, inspection, and as-built requirementsLevel 2 · Due diligence
TaskCheckHold pointEvidenceRecordNext actionSimple explanation
Approval, inspection, and as-built requirements
Technical context
Test this point against Watercare records and correspondence, 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 cost and lead-time allowance.
Prerequisites
- Watercare records and correspondence 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 Watercare records and correspondence 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
- Watercare records and correspondence
- 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
- Watercare records and correspondence
- Infrastructure/services checklist
- Utility application tracker
- 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 cost and lead-time allowance.
- 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: Cost and lead-time allowance. 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 building consent lodgement
Decision: Lodge coordinated documents, resolve gaps, or defer
Minimum evidence
- • Architectural, structural, civil, services and specifications are coordinated
- • Design producer statements/calculations and approval dependencies are identified
- • Consent deliverables reflect the intended procurement and construction scope
Update before deciding
- • Developed-design quantities and trade scope
- • Authority, testing and observation requirements
- • Long-lead procurement and consent response allowance
Stop / escalate when
- • Unresolved interface changes could invalidate another discipline
- • Required approval/ownership information is absent
- • Budget or programme has not been updated for the developed design
What this stage means
- Water supply checks 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 Watercare builders and developers, Auckland Council property file, 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: Watercare records and correspondence, Property file, Existing services plan, Concept plan, 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: Civil engineer, Watercare, Plumber, Hydraulic designer where relevant.
- 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 water supply checks 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: Watercare records and correspondence, Property file, Existing services plan, Concept plan, Civil or hydraulic notes, Provider application requirements.
- Send focused questions to the right people: Civil engineer, Watercare, Plumber, Hydraulic designer where relevant, Surveyor, Quantity surveyor.
- 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.
Use Watercare and civil engineering advice to verify water and wastewater connection requirements, network capacity, approvals, fees, and construction standards.
Review historic building consents, drainage plans, previous approvals, CCC records where available, and historic plans. Compare records with what physically exists on site.
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 water supply checks 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: Civil engineer, Watercare, Plumber, Hydraulic designer where relevant, Surveyor, Quantity surveyor.
- 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 Water supply checks, 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
- Connection and metering strategy
- Applications to start
- Cost and lead-time allowance
- Whether specialist design is 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
The developer records the water assumptions as unverified until Watercare and the project civil or hydraulic designer confirm the project-specific requirements.
Use this in my project
Turn water supply checks 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.