42A Toronto Av · Cromer NSW 2099

Rent evidence — asking vs transacted, Cromer · postcode 2099

$820–$990/wk is what 2-bed houses in 2099 actually transact for (middle half of 21 bonds lodged, Q2 2026 · median $880/wk — NSW Fair Trading, CC BY).

2019Q1 → 2026Q2: $850 → $1150/wk · -1% over the last 12 months (latest four quarters averaged against the previous four) — quarterly new-tenancy medians for houses in 2099, 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 Northern Beaches Council treats the work you might do

Refuses 2.88% of the development applications it decides · off-street parking 2.59% (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.

Planning & zoning — R2 Low Density Residential

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

Height limit 8.5m (≈ 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.

Zone R2 (Low Density Residential) under the NORTHERN BEACHES LEP, from the NSW ePlanning layers at this address's geocoded point — a guide, not a parcel-level legal check. Confirm the exact lot at the NSW Planning Portal.

Development outlook — how often Northern Beaches Council has refused this kind of work

Across all application types Northern Beaches Council refused 2.88% (2.42–3.44%) of the 4,195 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

Cromer PS (primary) · NBSC Cromer (secondary)

2 primary schools within 2 km · ICSEA ~1074 — 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.