WA - multi-dwelling planning policy changes

Hd. OK all good thanks. Now i know why my builder hasn't informed me of the changes. Im building three 4x2s. Two doubles, one single

 

@ARC - at what stage are you at? Perhaps if would like to share your journey on this dev on a new thread I and others would like to read more about this.

 

The changes won't affect this type of development. Hey, that sounds like a great project! I'm designing a townhouse to build in Cloverdale ATM too.

 

Yes you can do Class 2/7 because Belmont don't have a "seriously entertained planning proposal" in the works to disallow it, in line with the Gazette.

But if you're doing single dwellings (Class 1), then you are safe anyway.

 

Just finalising finance and about to submit plans to council.
I will post more regarding the development once things start moving along.

I'm still bit hesitate with perth market.....!

 

@Perthguy How many you planning on building?

 

One now, one later and another down the track.

 

Make sure you get Belmont to agree to the staged development by labeling each unit as "Unit 1 / Stage 1" etc and have the approval done upfront for all three.

That way, intent is ensured and one dwelling complete is 'substantially commenced' maintaining the approval for the remaining two infinitum.

 

Hmm wow. I had not thought of that. I haven't even started thinking about the design of unit 1 (street front). I didn't actually think they would let us have a perpetual approval.

 

It's not perpetual approval - it's simply that the approval must be substantially commenced within a 2 year period - there's no end to how long it could take.

It could be deemed that they are separate applications if you wait a decade between stages - but if you're building/selling/building/selling/building/selling then the works are ongoing and staged.

 

Oh, ok. I am building, holding. Does that make a difference? Also, it will be 10 years between Unit 3 and Unit 1 (unit 3 is being built first). I thought that might be stretching the friendship with the council

 

Selling/Holding - whatever.

But in that case, yes - it would be pushing it. If it's not a linear progression it's clearly not demonstrated to be all part of the one development.

 

Thanks Aaron. The way it is planned is really three separate developments. We're not even 100% sure what we will be doing with Unit 2 and Unit 1 (the front house) could be anything at this point. It is even an option to carve off a freehold lot at the front and develop it separately. There are advatages to this approach, but also additional costs of course.

 

Old thread I know, but it's now relevant again I think.

I flicked an email to council asking them what was going on with the proposal, they are now saying that they are agreeing to it and my block will be re zoned to R-AC3. Can anyone give me a rough idea as to what I could put on it now ?

Thanks in advance

 

You'll need to read the specific planning controls for meltham precinct but generally you're looking at mixed use 6 storey max with plot ratio of 3.0 not including the ground floor commercial which is likely to be mandatory

Congrats btw, without looking at specific sales data I suspect you should be seeing ladb value of 1750-2000/m2 at a minimum for that zojing in the area

 

Thanks Sanj, the council came back to me and said minimum four storeys, if I can collaborate with neighbours anything above 1500m2 is 6 storeys. The area does need re developing, so it's good news .

 

Nice, I've got a 1850sqm corner site just outside the new areathat I'll be discussing with council but helped a family member acquire a r-ac3 site in Vincent which is why I'm familiar with the zoning, will post on that when the time is right

 

By the way for an example of what's possible with a similar size and zoning have a look at 247 Stirling St Perth, 399 or 369 sqm from memory, odd shaped and no ROW (does yours have ROW?) , 5 stories, 12 apartments and commercial

 

No ROW but there is decent street frontage and city views so could be worse, I will check the site you mentioned.