30 Kentwell St · Baulkham Hills NSW 2153

Rent evidence — asking vs transacted, Baulkham Hills · postcode 2153

$900–$1100/wk is what 4-bed houses in 2153 actually transact for (middle half of 62 bonds lodged, Q2 2026 · median $978/wk — NSW Fair Trading, CC BY).

2019Q1 → 2026Q2: $585 → $900/wk · +8% over the last 12 months (latest four quarters averaged against the previous four) — quarterly new-tenancy medians for houses in 2153, all bedroom counts pooled.

Asking rents are what agents hope for; bond figures are what tenants actually signed at (NSW Fair Trading bond lodgements, CC BY). No yield % is derived here: each rent above is a different grain from this home's price, and a ratio of two grains reads as precision it doesn't have. New-tenancy rents run hotter than sitting rents. Not financial advice.

Development potential — how The Hills Shire Council treats the work you might do

Refuses 2.06% of the development applications it decides · off-street parking 1.92% (determinations to Nov 2023).

The full outlook — every category with confidence ranges, which plan elements come unstuck, and the heritage effect by category — is under Explore the area.

Published auction results at this address

From Domain's published weekly auction results — individual outcomes as published; withheld prices stay withheld.

Agencies' own published sales nearby — Baulkham Hills, around 4 beds

Prices as published on the selling agency's own website (their sold pages) — includes private-treaty sales the auction results never see. Only sales the agency chose to publish a figure for appear here.

⏭ It passed in — what happens next — the question the listing stops at

Homes in Baulkham Hills that passed in and later sold went for about the same as comparable homes that sold under the hammer.

Half sold within 33 days, 76% within three months.

Like-for-like within bedroom and property-type groups · 142 comparable sales in Baulkham Hills, sales settled in the last two years. Based on passed-in homes that later sold. Homes that never sold aren't in the figure, so read this as what a sale fetches — not what the home is worth. Passing in is a negotiating position, not a verdict — this is evidence about outcomes, never advice on what to offer.

Planning & zoning — R2 Low Density Residential

Houses and dual occupancies. A protected low-rise street — little chance of towers next door.

Height limit 9m (≈ 2 storeys) — the current legal ceiling for new building at this point under the LEP. Any proposal above it needs a variation or a rezoning — the kind of change the fast-track pipeline tracks.

Registered lots in Baulkham Hills run 690–930 m² (middle 80% of 113 registered parcels). This one is 822 m² — inside that range.

Whether a block this size can be subdivided or redeveloped is a separate question: minimum lot size, setbacks and the council's DCP controls decide it, and this page doesn't check them. One point per registered parcel, so a tower's parent lot counts once — not once per unit. Confirm the parcel and its controls with the council before you inspect.

Zone R2 (Low Density Residential) under the THE HILLS SHIRE LEP, as recorded against this property in the NSW Valuer General's valuation record — a guide, not a parcel-level legal check. Confirm the exact lot at the NSW Planning Portal.

Development outlook — how often The Hills Shire Council has refused this kind of work

Across all application types The Hills Shire Council refused 2.06% (1.67–2.53%) of the 4,230 development applications it decided.

Where these applications come unstuck

The refusal rate above says how strict the council is. This says which part of a plan is exposed — measured across all 192,284 NSW development applications, not just this council. Each is an association: plenty of applications carrying these elements are approved, and nothing here is a verdict on a proposal you haven't made yet.

• Alterations & additions — a new vehicle crossing cut into the front boundary (refused 7.27% vs 2.59% for this kind of work generally — 2.8×, on 220 applications); excavation or a new lower level (refused 6.71% vs 2.54% for this kind of work generally — 2.64×, on 611 applications)
• Off-street parking — a new vehicle crossing cut into the front boundary (refused 8.45% vs 2.42% for this kind of work generally — 3.49×, on 284 applications)
• Pool, deck or fence — excavation or a new lower level (refused 6.22% vs 1.61% for this kind of work generally — 3.88×, on 659 applications); full demolition and rebuild (refused 4.97% vs 1.6% for this kind of work generally — 3.12×, on 965 applications)
• Knock down & rebuild — excavation or a new lower level (refused 25.78% vs 9.36% for this kind of work generally — 2.75×, on 256 applications); full demolition and rebuild (refused 19.91% vs 10.46% for this kind of work generally — 1.9×, on 221 applications)

Determinations lodged on the NSW Planning Portal up to Nov 2023 — the published dataset stops there, so this is a record of how the council has behaved, not a forecast and not a statement about any particular application. Rates cover development applications only; modifications and reviews of an earlier decision are excluded. A rate is shown only where at least 30 applications were decided — below that the counts are given instead, because a percentage from a handful of decisions is not a fact about a council. "Approved with conditions" is a consent, not a refusal, and is never counted as one.

School catchments

Jasper Rd PS (primary) · Model Farms HS (secondary)

6 primary schools within 2 km · ICSEA ~1125 — the socio-educational advantage of the school community (My School, national average ~1000): a demographic measure, never a results or quality score.

NSW DoE intake zones at this address's geocoded point — tighter than a suburb-level guess, but geocodes carry a few metres of error and boundaries change with reviews. Verify the exact address at School Finder. Intake zones cover government schools only.