When frontage falls short: subdivision case study

Every now and then in property development, you come across a block that looks perfect, until you read between the lines of council requirements. That was the case with this site, where our client wanted to turn one block into two. On the surface, it looked like a straightforward small-lot subdivision. In reality, the land was just a fraction too narrow, and a big old street tree threatened to throw the whole project off course. We're sharing this case study with you to show you not just what happened, but also the lessons we’d give anyone curious about how to become a property developer in South Australia.

At the time, council rules were clear: a minimum 10-metre frontage was required for new allotments. Our site had 9.24m and 9.25m about a 6–7.5% shortfall. Technically under, and technically, non-compliant. Add to that a well established street tree sitting right in front of the block. Council weren’t impressed with our plan to create a new driveway crossover nearby. Their comment? “The indicative crossover proposed appears too close to the street tree. Vehicle access may not be achievable without impacting the tree.” We were facing two barriers: frontage deficit less than the required 10m and street tree conflict a potential deal-breaker for vehicle access.

For many, this is the point where a project gets shelved, but understanding the property development process means bringing the right team together who know that most problems have a solution.

Step one: we brought in a private town planner. Their job was to justify why the frontage shortfall shouldn’t impact the project. They prepared a planning statement to explain that slightly narrower lots would still support functional, attractive housing, and wouldn’t negatively impact the neighbourhood.

Step two: we worked with an architect to design two dwellings tailored to the narrower frontages. By submitting actual design concepts, we gave council confidence that the end result would still meet their standards.

Step three: solve the tree problem. Council’s concern was valid, driveway crossovers too close to street trees can damage roots and tree health. Our planner referenced the planning guidelines driveways need a minimum 2m setback from street trees, and we adjusted the design to show our commitment to protect the tree.

In the end, the combination of expert advice and thoughtful design paid off. Council approved the 1 into 2 subdivisions. The client achieved the outcome they wanted, despite the minimum frontage challenge. Moreover, it was a huge win in terms of learning. It showed how Adelaide zoning regulations for development aren’t always black and white, there’s room for flexibility if you can prove your case.

What could have gone wrong?

If we’d skipped the professional advice from the private town planner, council may have refused the application. Additionally, if we hadn’t adjusted the plans for the 2m tree clearance, one of the blocks could have ended up with no legal driveway access. That’s a nightmare scenario in a subdivision; you can’t actually build. In other words: no experts, no approval, no new lot.

For anyone looking at how to subdivide land in Adelaide (small lot subdivision), this project is a classic reminder that the tree matters, a half metre here and there, those little details can decide whether a project sails through or gets stuck. The good news? With the right approach and due diligence, even tricky sites can become success stories. If you’re exploring how to invest in property development, these are exactly the types of challenges and solutions you’ll want to understand.

“A difference of just 0.75 metres nearly stopped this subdivision until the right planning advice and design got it through.”