Two routes exist for getting approval to build in New South Wales, and the difference between them is the single largest thing affecting how long a project waits. One is a judgement call. The other is a checklist.
| Complying Development Certificate | Development Application | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A check that the proposal meets fixed, published standards | A merit assessment of whether the proposal is acceptable |
| Who can issue it | A council or a registered private certifier | The council, a planning panel, or the elected council |
| Neighbour submissions | No — there is nothing to weigh them against | Yes, and they can change the outcome |
| Discretion | None. It meets the standards or it does not | Substantial. Judgement applies throughout |
| Median time in NSW | 4 days | 56 days |
| Determined in 12 months | 37,164 | 40,828 |
Source: NSW Planning Portal, applications determined in the last twelve months, measured by Lodgd.
The gap is enormous
Complying development is roughly two in five of everything determined in New South Wales — and about 48% of the choice between the two pathways. It is not a niche path; for a large share of ordinary residential work it is the normal one.
Why complying development is so much faster
Because nobody is being asked to form a view. A development application asks an assessment officer whether a proposal is acceptable — a question that admits argument, invites submissions, and can go to a panel. Complying development asks whether the proposal meets the standards, which is a question with a yes or no answer and no one to persuade.
That is also why it is unforgiving. There is no partial credit. A proposal that misses one standard by a small margin is not a nearly-complying development — it is a development application.
What tends to push a project out of complying development
The standards are detailed and they vary by the kind of work, but proposals commonly fall out over:
- The land itself. Heritage listing, heritage conservation areas, and various environmentally sensitive designations generally rule the pathway out regardless of what is proposed.
- Site constraints. Lot size, width and shape have to meet minimums. Older subdivisions frequently do not.
- Setbacks and height. These are fixed numbers, not guidelines. Missing one by a little is missing it.
- Hazard-affected land. Flooding, bushfire and contamination all have thresholds beyond which the pathway closes.
- Wanting something specific. The architectural choice that makes the project worth doing is often exactly what the standards do not allow.
Choosing between them
The trade is speed and certainty against freedom.
- Complying development gives a fast, predictable outcome with no neighbour objections — as long as you build precisely what the standards permit.
- A development application lets you propose what you actually want, and argue for it, at the cost of a much longer wait and a genuinely uncertain outcome.
For a straightforward house or a standard alteration on a conforming lot, complying development is usually the obvious answer. Anything unusual — an awkward site, a heritage context, a design that needs to breach something — is a development application whether you like it or not.
Watch out for the mixed statistic. Councils and commentators often publish an "average approval time" that combines both pathways. Because complying development is so fast and so common, that blend flatters everyone and tells you nothing. A council with a lot of complying development posts an excellent combined figure while its DAs take just as long as anyone else's. Always check which pathway a published figure covers.
How long each takes near you
The NSW medians above are the state picture. Individual councils vary widely on the development application side — in the slowest council a DA takes 118 days — while complying development is fast almost everywhere, because there is much less for a council to do.