Councils say PIM changes unlikely to transform project timelines 

While councils say they can meet the Government’s proposed, shorter statutory timeframe for Project Information Memorandums, several building consent authorities have questioned whether the change alone will significantly accelerate construction projects 

In June, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk announced that the Government will reduce the processing timeframe for all Project Information Memorandum (PIM) applications from 20 working days to 10 working days 

“PIMs are an important part of the building process,” he said. “They give homeowners and builders greater certainty about site-specific requirements, like natural hazards and infrastructure constraints, before a building consent is requested and construction begins. 

“Currently, councils can take 20 working days to process a PIM application, but we know time is money when building a home, and long wait times can quickly drive up costs, delay projects, and frustrate homeowners who are simply trying to get building underway.” 

Penk said the change would “help homeowners and businesses to get on with their projects sooner” and make building easier and more affordable. 

PIM processing not the only factor 

However, councils that spoke to Under Construction said that while a 10-day statutory timeframe is achievable, the overall timeline for a building project is influenced by many factors beyond PIM processing. 

Auckland Council Building Consents General Manager Ian McCormick said PIMs are generally applied for by private building consent authorities or for small, non-consented standalone dwellings, rather than for standard council building consent applications. 

“On current volumes, we would meet the reduced statutory timeframe; however, if we were to see an increase in application numbers, we would need to review how we manage this,” he said. 

McCormick said consenting was only one part of a much wider process. 

“In our experience, timeframes for projects starting are influenced by a range of factors and consenting is only one of them. There are a significant number of building consents already approved but where work has not started for other reasons.” 

Christchurch City Council Head of Building Consenting Steffan Thomas said the change would have limited practical impact in Christchurch because most PIMs are already processed within the reduced statutory timeframe. 

“For the 2026 financial year, Christchurch City Council’s average time for processing PIMs was seven days, with all PIMs processed within 14 days,” he said. 

“Reducing the statutory timeframe to 10 working days is achievable but may require some minor changes to the way we currently work.” 

Thomas said reducing the timeframe could provide some benefit but would not necessarily result in construction beginning earlier. 

“The overall timeline for a building project is influenced by a number of factors, many outside the Council’s controls,” he said. 

“A reduced PIM timeframe may not result in every project starting construction earlier; however, improvements within any stage of the building and consenting process are beneficial.” 

Can’t comment 

Carterton District Council Building Services Team Leader John Tait said the council was not in a position to comment on the Government’s rationale for the changes. 

“We can’t comment on the Government’s views, as we don’t have access to the factual data that ministers relied on when they make their various claims.” 

He said reducing statutory timeframes could be more challenging operationally than it appears. 

“Often, the issue for council building control teams is that many hands from many parts of councils need to assess a PIM, which naturally slows down the process. This includes the planning team, infrastructure/drainage teams, roading teams and the like. 

“The building teams will need to ensure all other parts of council work are completed promptly to ensure a PIM is processed within a timely manner.” 

Tait said issuing faster PIMs would not necessarily translate into earlier construction starts. 

“It’s not common for people to be standing waiting, shovels in hand, for the approval,” he said. 

“When the work starts is largely up to the parties concerned. Most people are organised, arrange all the applications ahead of time. Once they have the relevant permission to start, they get organised and do it.” 

Focus turns to granny flats 

The reduced timeframe comes as PIMs take on greater importance under the Government’s new granny flat exemption. 

Anyone intending to build a qualifying small standalone dwelling must obtain a PIM before construction. 

Councils say demand for PIMs is already changing. 

Auckland Council said PIM application numbers had increased because of both the growth of private BCAs and the new granny flat exemption, and that it had invested in system upgrades to support the increase. 

Christchurch City Council said it had also seen an increase in granny flat-related PIM applications and that higher application volumes would require careful management to ensure statutory timeframes continued to be met. 

CCC Head of Building Consenting Steffan Thomas also encouraged applicants to submit complete, high-quality applications to minimise requests for further information and help councils consistently achieve the new 10-working-day timeframe. 

Carterton District Council said it had not yet experienced an increase in PIM applications for small standalone dwellings, although Building Services Team Leader John Tait was aware that other councils had. 

Tait also urged homeowners considering a granny flat project to seek professional advice before proceeding. 

“Although on face value it appears that the process for small standalone dwellings is quick and easy, there are some very complex matters owners need to consider before deciding to follow the PIM/small standalone dwelling route. 

“We strongly suggest that owners get professional advice before heading down this track. They should not expect Council to provide technical or design advice,” said Tait.