Bypassing local councils min frontage requirements (WA)

[Tano]

Hi All
I have seen the below statement in a few town planning schemes and i am not sure what it really means

"It has become common practice for the minimum frontage requirement of dual coded areas to be circumvented by undertaking the subdivision process before the development application process."

eg For a dual coded R20/40 20m wide site that needs a 25m frontage then i understand you subdivide first then go to council with the DA plans (survey strata) instead of proposing a new development on a unsubdivided lot. What i dont get is how the developer would get the higher zoning automatically by subdividing first. Can anyone explain?

 

[Aaron Sice]

which council?

WAPC have a reasonably aggressive stance on urban infill at present.

making the case, especially WRT Canning, can make a big difference at State level.

you don't need to go to council for subdivision approval - that's done at state level.

 

[Tano]

which council?

WAPC have a reasonably aggressive stance on urban infill at present.

making the case, especially WRT Canning, can make a big difference at State level.

you don't need to go to council for subdivision approval - that's done at state level.

Yes Canning.

Here is their response
"Should you apply to the WAPC for the three lots the City will not support the application as the lot does not fully comply with Clause 5.4.1.5. of Town Planning Scheme No.40. However as the WAPC is the determining body for any subdivision application they may approve the application. Note, each application is based on its on merit so it may be in your best interest to contact WAPC and discuss your proposal with them."

I think what my first post means is that WAPC will approve the 3 lots even though frontage is not met but they will all be the lower zoning.

 

[Aaron Sice]

I think you've got a good case, on the face of what you've mentioned just there - especially if it's at the lower zoning.

bring up as many points as you can under R Codes Clause 5.1.1 (P1.2) and highlight how the proposal isn't a detriment to the existing streetscape.

i'd look at point 2 (existing streetscape), point 4 (site limitations), point 5 (especially if you're using the lower zoning) and point 6 (with a bit of research).

assuming of course, it's a longer, narrower lot.

 

[Tano]

Thanks, this site sold along time ago (i think) but i just want to know the fact/figures so i can move fast if anything comes up in this area. Every development site in WA is overpriced and if i do find something valuable (because agent is lazy or dosnt know the zoning) then its snapped up within hours before i can finish my DD.

Hopefully i am prepared enough now just to jump at it.

 

[Aaron Sice]

what are you looking for?

i've seen some interesting sites for duplexes that only require a little out-of-the-square thinking to capitalise on them.

just a bit out of my price range.

 

[Tano]

Triplex sites under 700k with a 20 to 25% margin. I am concentrating on r40 wth 750sqm to 800sqm with no easements and a fairly flat block. I check RE.com a few times a day so i am playing the waiting game now

 

[paulie]

I thought I'd take the Tano shopping challenge, how about this one, at 131 Centre Street Queens Park

http://reiwa.com.au/property/for-sale/Queens-Park-3580192/

Although it is a touch more than your $700k limit, and is a probable 4 unit site assuming the higher coding of R40 is attainable.

I might add it's possibly a 5 unit site with a two stage sub division.

Cheers

 

[Tano]

Thanks Paul,
Site looks great, nice 4 unit site that will fit single storey 3x2's. No sewer problems. BUT... there is a large transmission line about 2m from the boundary lot along the length of the property. From my understanding WP will create a 8m wide easement either side of that line during subdivision. Does anyone know more about this?

Does anyone know how to bring up the contours on the canning mapping system? I can see ''Relief Contours" but it does not seem what i am looking for.

Dual Density Bonus
5.4.1.5 Where a site has a dual coding the lower code shall prevail as the maximum bpermissible residential density for any land within the Residential zones unless ?
(a) reticulated sewerage is or becomes available to any land within the zone or subject to the provisions of the Government Sewerage Policy;and
(b) for development of more than two dwellings the minimum development site frontage is 25 metres unless otherwise indicated on the Scheme Map of a gazetted Town Planning Development Scheme.
Clause 5.4.2 ? Residential Design Guidelines provides a further consideration for dualdensity coded land:
Where a site has dual coding Council may approve residential development at a density exceeding that applicable at the R17.5 Code if it is generally consistent with the design criteria in the Residential Design Guidelines in Appendix 7.

 

[paulie]

Hi Tano,

Nice pick up on the high powered overhead lines.

Although given nearby developments at 20 and 24 Prince Street, there doesn't seem to be massive additional setbacks affecting those newish developments.

 

[Tano]

There would be a 8m easement (as i spoke to them last week) but you are allowed to build on part of the easement but only using certain materials (eg no tin/colorbond roof). I heard its atleast 6k for the WP Assessment and then the problems with building restrictions.

Either way it seems like a good buy. Do you know how much end of the end values will be affected by the sight of those transmission lines?

I didnt have queens park in my alerts but now i do. Another one has popped up. Waiting on the council to call back regarding the QP structure plan
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-wa-queens+park-119521323

------Here is their response:-------
If you are wanting to develop any kind of structure within an existing Western Power Easement it has to be assessed by us.

The process is that you would need to provide full building plans of what you are proposing and then we would advise what studies or surveys are required to enable the assessment to be completed. All costs associated with the studies and assessments are to be paid by the developer in advance and are charged on a cost recovery basis.