5 Burns Cr · Chiswick NSW 2046

Rent evidence — asking vs transacted, Chiswick · postcode 2046

$1000–$1300/wk is what 3-bed houses in 2046 actually transact for (middle half of 34 bonds lodged, Q2 2026 · median $1198/wk — NSW Fair Trading, CC BY).

2019Q1 → 2026Q2: $820 → $1300/wk · +18% over the last 12 months (latest four quarters averaged against the previous four) — quarterly new-tenancy medians for houses in 2046, 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 City of Canada Bay Council treats the work you might do

Refuses 5.37% of the development applications it decides · off-street parking 6.78% (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 — Chiswick, around 3 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.

Planning & zoning — R2 Low Density Residential

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

Zone R2 (Low Density Residential) under the CANADA BAY 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 City of Canada Bay Council has refused this kind of work

Across all application types City of Canada Bay Council refused 5.37% (3.94–7.28%) of the 708 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.

Development applications — at & near this address

Development application data © NSW Department of Planning and Environment, used under CC BY 4.0. Matched at this exact address or within ~150 m of its geocoded point — proximity evidence, not a parcel-level check. Lodged means proposed, not approved or built. Outcome comes from a separate NSW dataset that stops in Nov 2023: applications determined after that, or still undetermined, read “not on record” — which means we don't know, never that it was refused. “Status” is the council's own workflow state and “Determined” on its own does not say which way it went. Verify any application on the NSW Planning Portal.

School catchments

Abbotsford PS (primary) · Concord HS (secondary)

3 primary schools within 2 km · ICSEA ~1124 — 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.

Green space nearby

Protected public recreation land within 100 m

Land zoned RE1 under the local environmental plan — reserved for public recreation, which protects it from being built over. The zoning doesn't say what's on it or how usable it is, and this layer doesn't carry park names.

Privately-zoned recreation land (RE2 — typically golf courses or club grounds) within 2000 m. Private land: green outlook, not public open space.

Straight-line distance, not walking distance. NSW ePlanning planning layers (Land Zoning), CC BY. Distances are ladder buckets measured at the address's geocoded point.