You’ve probably seen the headline by now. “Build up to 70 square metres without consent.”
It sounds like a big win.Faster builds. Less red tape. Lower costs.
And for a moment, it feels like building just got a whole lot easier.
But once you get into the detail, it becomes pretty clear this isn’t quite the shortcut people think it is.
A good headline… but not a huge shift
To be blunt, this feels like one of those policies designed to sound great at a glance.
Yes, there’s now a pathway to build without consent under 70m². But it’s a narrow one.
It’s really aimed at very simple, standard construction. The kind of build that fits neatly inside a predefined box.
The moment your project steps outside that, which a lot of real builds do, you’re often back into the normal consent process anyway.
Most of the work hasn’t gone anywhere
This is the part people don’t realise until they’re in it.
Even if you qualify for the exemption, you’re still dealing with all the things that actually drive cost and time:
- Site works.
- Foundations.
- Plumbing and wastewater.
- Electrical.
- Council rules around zoning and land use.
And in many cases, you still need things like geotechnical reports.
If your ground conditions aren’t straightforward, or your foundation needs engineering input, that doesn’t disappear just because consent does.
So while “no consent” sounds like a shortcut, most of the heavy lifting is still there.
The cost doesn’t disappear, it just moves
There’s also a bit of a misconception around savings.
Yes, you might avoid some consent fees.
But you’re still likely dealing with:
- development contributions for infrastructure
- planning costs if the site isn’t simple
- engineering and design work
Those costs are tied to the fact you’re building a dwelling, not whether you needed consent.
So in many cases, the overall project cost doesn’t shift as much as people expect.
Where the confusion is starting
There’s already a bit of noise out there.
Some people think this means they can just build a small home without involving council at all.
Others assume it applies to any type of build.
In reality, there are still plenty of situations where consent is required, and a lot of grey areas where people think they’re fine when they’re not.
That’s where things can start to get risky.
Where SIP and modular builds sit
For higher-performance homes, like SIP builds, this exemption often doesn’t really apply anyway.
Not because they’re worse, but because they’re engineered differently and don’t fit neatly into the “simple construction” category the rule is based on.
But that’s not necessarily a disadvantage.
In many cases, consent is actually a good thing
This is the part that often gets overlooked.
Avoiding consent doesn’t just remove paperwork.
It also removes one of the key layers of protection.
With a consented build, you get:
- reviewed plans
- inspections during construction
- a Code Compliance Certificate at the end
That creates a clear record that the home meets the Building Code.
And if something does go wrong later, there are more parties involved, not just the builder. That can matter more than people expect.
Without consent, you’re relying much more heavily on the builder and your own due diligence.
It also matters when you sell
This is one of those things people don’t think about upfront.
But it comes up later.
When you sell a home, buyers, banks, and lawyers will look for documentation.
A fully consented build with a CCC gives confidence.
It reduces questions.
It makes the process smoother.
A home without that can still be perfectly fine, but it often raises more questions than people expect.
So are you actually missing out?
For most SIP or higher-performance builds, not really.
You’re not losing some major shortcut.
Because the real success of a project doesn’t come from avoiding consent.
It comes from:
- getting the design right
- making the site work
- building something warm, efficient, and durable
That’s what holds value over time.
A better way to think about it
Instead of asking, “Can I avoid consent?”
A better question is, “What’s actually going to give me the best result, now and in the future?”
Because the easiest-looking path upfront isn’t always the one that delivers the best outcome long term.
