19
constraints, two fields each
every constraint carries a rating AND a separate data status, so a gap in public data is disclosed as pending, never dressed up as clean
Two things we do not have, said plainly
Yield and precinct economics. Lot yield is a design and market
exercise, and PSP or contributions economics (ICP / DCP levies, servicing costs,
staging) are financial modelling. The screen tells you which enabling instruments
and constraints apply to the land; it does not model your feasibility.
Servicing capacity agreements. The screen measures distance to
mapped water, sewer and power infrastructure. Whether the authority will serve your
lots, when, and at what headworks cost is an authority conversation no spatial
layer answers.
What the screen does close out early, from public data:
- Zoning and growth-area status: UGZ schedule, deferred land or rural holding, and what that means for sequencing
- Easements crossing the parcel: corridors that cut straight through lot yield
- Ecology and EPBC: native grassland and threatened-community triggers that reshape layouts and add seasons (the sample site carries both, and a conservation reserve sits 1.6 km away)
- Heritage sensitivity, flood, bushfire, soils, contamination: read as the future residents' exposure, each with its own data status
- The urban interface: what already surrounds the land, because the noise and hazard questions run inward for a residential use
Coverage varies by state and the report says so per constraint: Victorian screens
run with full layer coverage; in NSW the Aboriginal heritage register is access
restricted and council flood mapping is partial, so those constraints are reported
pending there, not assumed clear. This is a preliminary desktop screen to support
early site selection; it is not planning advice, and it does not replace the
specialist assessments a development application requires.
