Keep your inspection notes together. Saved on this browser only; no account needed.
Your buyer evidence guide
Understand the home before the offer.
The useful records, what they mean, and the questions they leave open. Start here, then explore the evidence below.
How much price evidence fits
170 sales in the wider suburb/type pool
The wider pool is not a set of identical homes. Bedroom count, condition and location within the suburb affect comparability.
Published auction evidence · model trained through 2026-09-03
Planning activity nearby
1 recorded application at or near this address
An application is not an approval or a promise that building work will happen. Location and stage matter.
NSW Planning Portal · individual records in Explore the area
What deserves a closer look
No dated campaign events are available here. That does not establish that the asking price or agent has never changed.
What we still cannot tell you
We do not have a current listing in this page's evidence. An address record is not proof that a home is for sale.
No settled-sale history is available in this page's records. This does not mean the home has never sold.
Direct price support is limited. Read the comparable sales and the estimate's uncertainty together.
Public records and an automated estimate cannot establish whether the home is defect-free, what the contract contains, or why the owner is selling.
Questions to take to the inspection
Use these with the agent and your independent advisers. An answer is something to verify, not a fact we have recorded.
Which nearby applications affect this home, and what stage has each actually reached?
Which recent sales are most comparable to this home, and how do their size, condition and position differ?
What repairs, alterations or water issues are documented, and what can an independent inspection verify?
Do the planning and heritage records match this exact lot, and what approvals exist for alterations?
The estimate is a model output. The records are evidence. Your inspection and document checks fill the gaps.
Is the asking price plausible?
This is a comparison with the evidence we hold, not a valuation or a recommended offer.
CONSERVATIVE
$1.41M
the calibrated floor
LIKELY FAIR RANGE
$1.41M–$1.76M
around $1.57M mid
STRETCH CAP
$1.76M
$2.03M on the wider 80% band
Confidence: Low — based on 170 comparable auction sales (14 of this exact configuration) · model runs ±11% for this configuration · confidence held at Low — under 20 same-configuration sales · priced from this property's own records: block size, land value · the model's typical miss is ~10% against published results — every hit and miss
How this estimate was made
Method: AI PropertyEye tree model · trained through 2026-09-03
Inputs used for this home: priced from this property's own records: block size, land value
Comparable support: 170 sales in the wider suburb/type pool; 14 of this exact configuration
When to be more cautious: Condition, aspect, renovation and the contract are not model inputs and can move the eventual sale price.
Comparable auction sales
Address
Config
Sold
When
47 Martin St
3 bd · 1 ba
$1.35M
July 2025
72 Rogers St
3 bd · 2 ba
$1.62M
June 2025
3 Leigh Av
3 bd · 2 ba
$1.49M
June 2025
3 Ridgewell St
3 bd · 1 ba
$1.8M
May 2025
Suburb risk flags
crime index: 47 — around sydney average · trains ~every 15 min at peak
Where every number comes from
Fair value: AI PropertyEye tree model 2026-09-02-v7-price-model-v6-full-grid, trained through 2026-09-03 — trained on 169,356 published auction sales; priced per address where this home's own records reach the model (see "How this estimate was made"), otherwise at configuration level (suburb × type × beds), not an appraisal of this exact home
Comps: published Domain auction results for Roselands — suburb × configuration matches, not hyper-matched to this address
Risk flags: suburb-level overlays (BOCSAR crime, flood/bushfire intel, aircraft bands, GTFS transit) — NOT a per-parcel assessment
What to inspect before you offer
Condition, aspect, renovation and the contract — these can materially change price, and the estimate cannot see them.
1 development application is recorded at or near this address — check the source records and current status.
Planning controls and heritage status — confirm the exact lot, not just the address-level guide, before relying on development potential.
These are due-diligence prompts, not a verdict on this property.
Rent evidence — asking vs transacted, Roselands · postcode 2196
$750–$892/wk is what 3-bed houses in 2196 actually transact for (middle half of 34 bonds lodged, Q2 2026 · median $828/wk — NSW Fair Trading, CC BY).
2019Q1 → 2026Q2: $540 → $800/wk · +4% over the last 12 months (latest four quarters averaged against the previous four) — quarterly new-tenancy medians for houses in 2196, 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 Canterbury-Bankstown Council treats the work you might do
Refuses 11.6% of the development applications it decides · off-street parking 11.19%(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
Auction week
Result
Price
Agency
28 Feb 2026
Sold
$1,770,000
—
From Domain's published weekly auction results — individual outcomes as published; withheld prices stay withheld.
Agencies' own published sales nearby — Roselands, around 3 beds
Address
Sold
Price
Beds
Agency
11a Dunlop Street
31 May 2025
$1,260,000
3
Harris Partners
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 — R3 Medium Density Residential
Townhouses, villas and low-rise units permitted — expect gradual medium-density infill.
Registered lots in Roselands run 330–620 m²(middle 80% of 33 registered parcels). This one is 468 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 R3 (Medium Density Residential) under the CANTERBURY-BANKSTOWN 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 Canterbury-Bankstown Council has refused this kind of work
If you wanted to…
Refused
vs NSW
Applications decided
Alterations & additions
8.76%(6.52–11.67%)
3.3× (NSW 2.63%)
41 refused of 468 · 6 approved with conditions
Off-street parking
11.19%(7.01–17.4%)
4.3× (NSW 2.58%)
16 refused of 143 · 3 approved with conditions
Pool, deck or fence
9.42%(7.04–12.48%)
5.4× (NSW 1.73%)
42 refused of 446 · 4 approved with conditions
Granny flat
10.76%(7.94–14.43%)
2.4× (NSW 4.45%)
38 refused of 353 · 13 approved with conditions
Knock down & rebuild
9.86%(4.86–18.98%)
0.9× (NSW 11.55%)
7 refused of 71 · 2 approved with conditions
Across all application types Canterbury-Bankstown Council refused 11.6% (10.37–12.95%) of the 2,380 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
Where
Proposal
Status
Outcome
Est. cost
Lodged
~127 m · 24 Albion Street Roselands 2196
Home Business, Change Of Use Of Land Or A Building Or The Classification Of A Building Under The Building Code Of Australia
Dated public signals compiled for this suburb — openings, closures, site sales and institutional moves. Facts with sources, not forecasts.
School catchments
McCallums Hill PS (primary) · Kingsgrove NHS (secondary)
7 primary schools within 2 km · ICSEA ~987 — 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 500 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 1000 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.
Want the numbers agents don't volunteer?
Check any Sydney suburb free — Market Mint market-conditions readout, live median, clearance trend and the price model — at aipropertyeye.com. No sign-up for the suburb check; the full board is 7 days free.
Data from published auction results (Domain) and live portal listings. Estimates are never valuations or financial advice. Own this home and want a result corrected? hello@aipropertyeye.com.