In Melbourne.
The same goes for other states and territories.
And it's not all close to the CBD, we are looking at 1:100m2 density in the outer suburbs as well.
It's about the site and its context.

We are seeing a lot of small lot proposals of late, and it seems to be an emerging niche. Densities are being reconsidered and suburban properties are being looked at quite differently to say five years ago. In positioning ourselves as Small Lot Specialists we have given some thought to what in fact constitutes a small lot. And the answer varies according to context.

Right now we have several proposals of three or four dwellings on 400m2 or thereabouts in front of council, and generally speaking these are being positively received and higher densities encouraged.

The smallest lot we are working on is a proposal for 15 dwellings on 120m2 in the CBD.
We are also working on a two lot subdivision on 240m2 in the inner suburbs.

Success in smaller lot proposals seems to be at least partially driven by typologies. What we are seeing is an emerging type – the "apartment house" – that is a hybrid dwelling with larger than usual balcony spaces, but not necessarily any private open space at ground level. This is a very flexible approach that requires a sound understanding of the planning scheme and the stress points for this type of application.

As Jim points out, the costs of providing services (civil engineering) to larger lots is expensive, and unless the land is valuable enough the costs don't always add up. You have probably already considered it Jim, but is it possible to get each lot directly accessing the existing road?

Mustafa,

Firstly, it's often difficult to "resurrect" a town planning application that has lapsed. Get in touch with council and seeks their views on this application in the context of any changes to the planning scheme which may have occurred.

If you are looking to subdivide down the middle – as you put it – it may be possible to subdivide the land before you build and sell on part of this land to someone else, perhaps even a builder, before the project starts.

It is possible to enter into a contract for the sale of the land along with a contract to build. That is to say, you can agree to a contract amount for the building of both dwellings then sell part of the land to a second party. You and the second party then effectively "split" the building contract into two parts.

Best of luck with the dream!

My advice would be to investigate the options carefully, and measure those options without emotion.

Notwithstanding the very important issue of planning advice; and I would recommend getting advice from a private planner, one can determine some basic parameters by mathematics.

Take the dimensions of the land (let's say 15m x 40m) = 600m2
Take away the front set back (say 9m x 15m) = 465m2
Take away side set backs (50m2) = 415m2
Take away parking for 4 cars (75m2) = 340m2
Take away private open space (90m2) = 250m2

250m2/2 = 125m2 :. footprint = 125m2 per dwelling
Assume 50% upper floor level :.

125m2 + 75m2 = 200m2 maximum floor area.

With articulation and design issues 80% of this area is more likely, so

200m2 x 80% = 160m2 of quality floor space.
More than adequate for 3 or 4 bedrooms.

Gio,

Firstly, the numbers look a bit iffy.

I would be concerned about spending $450,000 building on a $250,000 parcel of land.

As for an equitable structure, you could consider 50/50 in/out, whereby you share costs and profits equally.
Or, buy the land in partnership and agree to buy the subdivided land from the partnership for say cost + 30%.

Good luck with the initiative.

Your contract is likely to be in two parts:

1. The planning, design, documentation, project management and subdivision.
2. The building contract.

There are both legal and practical reasons for this.

A building company may be able to offer an end to end service, however, there will be no competitive tension around pricing as the end product will not be determined until a town planning permit (TPP) is granted for the project. As it would be impractical to engage say three builders to each provide end to end services for an unknown quantity it would be prudent to seek building quotes when the TPP is at hand.

Looking at it the other way around, it is quite possible to seek several quotes for the planning, design, documentation, project management and subdivision of the project, and then several quotes for the built form.

Good architects and designers have in-house building and planning expertise and can help ensure the budget is reasonably accurate and that the process is clearly defined. Find yourself a practice that is able to manage the whole process with/for you and you will be well on the way.

Thanks Terry.

I reckon there's a strategy there.
The greatest depreciation benefits are also over the first five years.
So, for a developer, it may make sense to hold for 5 years, in some cases.

Any project you take on will take longer than you thought and cost more than you budgeted for, but will probably still turn a profit as long as the fundamentals are sound and the project funding is robust.

As for the council fees, front the planning desk, run through your scenario and they'll happily give you some imaginary figures.

And good luck with your endeavours.

I do a bit of work with Breece Gevaux at Hub Town Planning – hubplan.com.au – and can recommend his services.
The fees, of course, will depend on what you're trying to achieve.
So, no matter who you approach, first try to have a good understanding of what it is you want to do.