Securing a building permit from the city can test one’s patience. The process, which includes an increasing amount of regulatory hoop-jumping, sometimes prompts attention to unforeseen details — and additional hoops. And the wait time, while Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) staff size up an application, can be excruciating for applicants who see a permit as a catalyst to a money-making venture.

The city has a history of gentle handling of questionable activity by property owners and builders who violate the application process — whether due to sheer impatience or unscrupulous practices. DPP focuses on finding ways to make a violator come into compliance with zoning and building laws with fines and after-the-fact inspections, among other carrot-stick tactics.

While that strategy may have worked in the past, it’s increasingly ineffective in the face of a concerning build-now-apologize-later contingent. Among the latest cases in point: A three-story residential complex now standing on a prime corner lot in the Kapahulu neighborhood that went up with no city building permits and despite stop-work orders.

As of last week, parties linked to the nearly completed property at Date Street and Makaleka Avenue had been slapped with some $16,000 in fines. Frustrated critics of DPP practices are correct in their assertion that such blatant disregard for city rules and regulations spotlight a lack of sufficient enforcement authority, staffing and no-excuses mindset needed to combat illegal construction projects.

In this case, a building permit application was submitted in November 2016. But DPP is still waiting for the applicant to jump through at least a few regulatory hoops before it can wrap up processing. DPP Acting Director Kathy Sokugawa said last week: “We need to see some progress. … Hopefully, they’ll get a building permit soon.” If not, the matter will be forwarded to city attorneys.

Seventeen months is a long time to wrestle with an application process. The wait time is exacerbated, in part, by an increase in government agencies — federal, state and city — asking to review for compliance with their rules. Regardless, allowing this sort of illegal gambit to continue is flatly unfair to anyone who plays by the rules.

Generally, while a construction project is in the works it undergoes various inspections, ranging from structural and electrical to plumbing and fire safety, when applicable. Construction is typically stopped until each inspection is completed. Among the flaws in DPP’s dealings with scofflaws is reliance on those very scofflaws to serve as stand-in inspectors.

City inspectors can ask for portions of structures to be torn out to check for code compliance. But in some cases, such as a concrete pour or steel reinforcement, the task can take an entire day — and DPP inspectors cannot remain on-site for lengthy stretches due to limited staffing. Then, the contractor is liable for self-certifying that the job was done correctly. For the sake of a public safety double-check, all certification should be handled by inspectors with no direct link to the property owner or builder.

At the 6,000-square-foot site in Kapahulu, the city’s overly easygoing take is evident in a recent remark by ProWork Pacific Inc. President Jimmy Wu, whose firm submitted the building permit application. Noting that he fully expects the project to receive a building permit, Wu said: “The only violation is they built without a permit, probably.” Probably?

The City Council Budget Committee is now asking all agencies to trim their budgets. An exception should be made for DPP, which sorely needs funding to help put in place strategies to speed up the application process and strengthen enforcement efforts. Also, heftier fines and other penalties — including teardown of structures of those willfully and repeatedly ignoring the process — must be established. City officials need not offer an ounce of sympathy for anyone launching construction without first obtaining a vetted permit.