75 Cottenham Avenue · Kingsford NSW 2032

Last seen listed — $3,300,000 · not confirmed in 54 days

3 bed · 2 bath · 2 car · House · 453 m² land

⏳ We haven't been able to re-confirm this listing since 4 July 2026 — it may have sold or been withdrawn since; the price shown is the last one advertised.

View the original listing →

⏱ Days on market — this campaign

105 days since our daily sweep first saw this listing.

The portal's own campaign may have started slightly earlier than our first sighting. Longer campaigns tend to mean more negotiating room — the board's "Longest listed" sort exists for exactly that reason.

Rent evidence — asking vs transacted, Kingsford · postcode 2032

$1200–$1402/wk is what 3-bed houses in 2032 actually transact for (middle half of 16 bonds lodged, Q2 2026 · median $1300/wk — NSW Fair Trading, CC BY).

2019Q1 → 2026Q2: $850 → $1150/wk · +7% over the last 12 months (latest four quarters averaged against the previous four) — quarterly new-tenancy medians for houses in 2032, 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.

Land — for a house, the land is the asset

453 m²

A house's size is its land. An apartment's advertised "size" can include car space and balcony — the two are never comparable and this site never pools them. Lot details and planning controls sit under Explore the area.

Development potential — how Randwick City Council treats the work you might do

Refuses 3.23% of the development applications it decides · off-street parking 5.36% (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.

Similar properties — on the market now

The 6 listings above are on the market now: same house category, within 1 bedroom of 3, asking within 20% of this one, in Kingsford or a suburb whose centre is within 3 km — ordered by how close the asking price is. That is the whole rule: a filter, not a recommendation, and nothing here judges which home is better.

Planning & zoning — R2 Low Density Residential

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

Registered lots in Kingsford run 230–600 m² (middle 80% of 42 registered parcels). This one is 446 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 RANDWICK 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 Randwick City Council has refused this kind of work

Across all application types Randwick City Council refused 3.23% (2.08–4.99%) of the 588 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.

What's changing in Kingsford — recent local signals

2026-08-08 — South Coogee to Kingsford walking & cycling corridor (stage-zero.json (date = register entry, not decision — check stageNote for the real dates))

2026-08-08 — Kingsford–Coogee greenway concept (Warren and Mahoney) (stage-zero.json (date = register entry, not decision — check stageNote for the real dates))

2026-07-03 — DA-approved site — listing's own words: "DA approved" (24 Araluen Street, Kingsford, NSW 2032) (listing rea-151520672 (rea), first seen 2026-07-03)

Dated public signals compiled for this suburb — openings, closures, site sales and institutional moves. Facts with sources, not forecasts.

School catchments

Daceyville PS (primary) · Randwick HS (secondary)

7 primary schools within 2 km · ICSEA ~1084 — 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 250 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 500 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.