VIC - setbacks when subdividing a corner lot

Discussion in 'Development' started by aelix, 24th Nov, 2016.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
  1. aelix

    aelix Member

    Joined:
    24th Nov, 2016
    Posts:
    19
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Hi all

    First time poster, lots of useful info here. I am currently looking at buying a corner block and subdividing in two to build one 4BR house (occupy) and one 3BR house (rent out). I've been through the planning scheme for my City in detail and in terms of corner lots it says the following:

    Front setback: lesser of 9m or in line with the building on the abutting property.
    Side setback: lesser of 3m or in line with the building on the abutting property.

    If I choose to build both houses so they front the side street, will I be allowed to bring them right up to the 3m side setback measurement or will Council make me move one or both of them back because they are not facing what is technically the front setback?

    If this doesn't make sense see my (terrible) drawing for illustration... the black rectangles are where I would like to put my driveways. Question is whether I'm reading the scheme correctly or whether Council is likely to make me push either or both houses back further from the side street.

    Many thanks!
     

    Attached Files:

  2. JacM

    JacM VIC Buyer's Agent - Melbourne, Geelong, Ballarat Business Member

    Joined:
    12th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    2,219
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
  3. Mike Sargeant

    Mike Sargeant Active Member

    Joined:
    6th Oct, 2016
    Posts:
    37
    Location:
    Melbourne
    The 3 metres in most LGA's is applied for a dwelling "fronting" a side street, so 3 metres is potentially your setback for both ion your sketched arrangement. Not sure of this approach though, site unseen. Is it on a main road? Hence that why you want it to front the side street? Otherwise if your dwelling closest to the corner fronts the 'address street' then you can reduce your side setback, usually to 2 metres for that dwelling. Rear dwellings stays at 3 metres.
     
  4. aelix

    aelix Member

    Joined:
    24th Nov, 2016
    Posts:
    19
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Thanks for your reply Mike. What you have described sounds consistent with how I read the planning scheme - it does explicitly say the 3 metres is for dwellings "fronting" the side street. I just wasn't sure if dividing the block would cause Council to say that House B needed to be setback as if it was no longer a corner block. But I suppose if legally the block remains a 'corner block' until after I've had the development approved then I should get the same 3m setback for both houses.

    The rationale for having both front the side street is that I actually want to subdivide unevenly and give House A a nice big 'side yard' (where the front setback will be) whereas House B will just have the minimum private open space out the back and no other yard. The block is not actually rectangular either which makes fitting the two footprints on a bit weird. But I haven't settled on the approach and have noted your thought about orientation - thanks again!
     
  5. aelix

    aelix Member

    Joined:
    24th Nov, 2016
    Posts:
    19
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Actually the Council just called me back after being unwilling to commit to a position in an earlier discussion and clarified this for me:
    1. If I want both dwellings to front the side street they will make me set them both back in line with the house on the abutting property (which is about 7m).
    2. If I want the benefit of the 3m setback for House B (fronting the side street) then I have to make House A front the 'address street' and it will be subject to an 8-9m setback based on the house next door.
    This means my only viable option is the one you described @Mike Sargeant (because taking the 7m setback for both houses would cost me too much land given the size and orientation of the block). I'll have a further think about it.
     
  6. Mike Sargeant

    Mike Sargeant Active Member

    Joined:
    6th Oct, 2016
    Posts:
    37
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Hmmmmm. Not sure I agree with feedback on point 1 but the simple reality is that in most cases they are going to prefer your development to address both streets.

    Just on the frontage street, the objectives and decision guidelines provide scope to get a bit less depending on your neighbourhood analysis e.g. checking setbacks in the broader area, any other site constraint/opportunity, matter. You don't in every case have to match your neighbours setback.
     
  7. Tufan Chakir

    Tufan Chakir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Aug, 2016
    Posts:
    877
    Location:
    Victoria, Australia
    In theory if you adopt the side street as frontage, you will need to setback in line with adjacent, but can be 3 m to the Main street! I doubt the Council would see that as a preferred solution (default poistion is always negative)
    The comment above is accurate and consistent with what i have found.
    You should still be able to achieve what you want - 3m setback to both houses on the side street, you just need to be clever with where you put your entry to the house on the very corner
    I seem to recall that "fronatge" is defined somewhere, that's why the Council will be saying it's the main street
     

PFI provide our clients with the opportunity to purchase an investment property, together with performing equity investments from a wide range of ASX listed securities some providing monthly income. This is the value of advice.