All Topics / General Property / Res Zone 3 – Site Coverage?

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Profile photo of cadancadan
    Participant
    @cadan
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 25

    In Melbourne as far as I know, the Residential Zone 3 states that site coverage restriction is 50% (on zone 1, it is silent).
    Does this mean that the buildings on the site cannot be greater than 50% of the block? Are only buildings included in this 50% restriction?

    Profile photo of cadancadan
    Participant
    @cadan
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 25

    any info would be appreciated.

    Profile photo of Jon ChownJon Chown
    Member
    @jon-chown
    Join Date: 2007
    Post Count: 254

    Cadan,
    While I am not totally familia with Melbourne Council requirements, there are usually two issues with respect to cover.   One part referrs to site cover (which is as you mention, the amount of land that can be built upon – in residential, it is usually 35%.   The other half of the equation is GFA (gross floor area), this can be anywhere from 50% to Plot ratio1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3 and so on.   Usually on Res blocks this is restricted to 50% and on High Density blocks it goes up from there.

    Hope that helps
    Jon

    Profile photo of cadancadan
    Participant
    @cadan
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 25

    Thans Jon, but I am getting confused between site coverage and gross floor area, won't this be the same ie. if site coverage is 35% as an example, how can gross floor area by greater than 35%, ie. the building takes up more than 35% of the block?

    Profile photo of Jon ChownJon Chown
    Member
    @jon-chown
    Join Date: 2007
    Post Count: 254

    Caden,   Think of it this way.   Let's say the block of land is 1000m2 and GFA is 50% then that means that you can allow 500m2for living space.  On the other hand if the site cover is 35% then you can only fit those 5002m of building on 350 m2 of land which would mean that you will have to build two stories of 250meters each, or 1 at 350 meters and the second at 150meters.

    Does that clarify the question?

    Jon

    Profile photo of cadancadan
    Participant
    @cadan
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 25

    Thanks Jon, excellent, you have answered my question, much appreciated.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.