How our reports are built

The structure of every report, the questions it asks and the checks it makes were designed by Angus Wallace, a registered architect, drawing on years of practice with planning, heritage and building approvals.

There are two kinds of report, and they are different. The Site Intelligence Report and the Place History Report are self-service: they are designed and curated by a registered architect, but each one is generated automatically. They are not reviewed or signed off by an architect and they are not professional advice. Self-service reports are not reviewed by a person before delivery. If an automated quality check flags an issue, our team reviews the report after delivery and may send you a corrected copy. The Feasibility Study Report is Architect Led: it is prepared and signed off by a registered architect.

For sites in Victoria, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory the report queries the planning authorities' own records directly: zone, overlays, heritage, hazards and the property boundary. Those sources are queried fresh each time a report is generated, not copied from an old database.

Where you supply a planning property report, such as one from Landchecker, it is used alongside the state records, and any difference between the two is reported rather than quietly resolved. Heritage registers, the Australian Heritage Database and Trove newspaper archives are searched for the Place History Report. For Tasmania the report reads the planning scheme zone, overlays and local heritage for the property boundary; for South Australia it reads them at the address point, because there is no open parcel boundary. In every state the report says what it could and could not retrieve.

A report does not present an address-specific figure as confirmed unless it traces to a source record for that address. A height limit, a lot size or a setback is quoted from the state record or the planning scheme and the source is named.

Where a figure cannot be traced, the report says so and lists it as something it could not confirm. Indicative figures, such as a yield range, are labelled as indicative and show their working.

Each report runs a set of automated consistency checks before it is delivered. They look for things such as figures that disagree with each other, conclusions that contradict the data, and sections that are missing or incomplete. If a check flags a problem, our team reviews the report and may correct it and send you an updated copy.

Every Site Intelligence Report and Place History Report closes with a table of anything that could not be verified from source data, why, and what it means for you. It is not an admission of weakness: it is the part of the report that tells you what to check next, and a report without one would be hiding something.

The Site Intelligence Report is generated automatically from your inputs and publicly available planning data. It is not professional advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for the advice of a registered architect or town planner.

The Place History Report is prepared from documents provided, heritage database searches, and digitised archive searches via Trove. It does not constitute a formal heritage assessment, Heritage Impact Statement, or Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan. It must not be used as evidence in heritage permit applications or formal planning processes without independent verification by a qualified heritage practitioner.

The Site Snapshot is an automated summary of publicly available planning data. It is not professional advice and may not be complete or current. Confirm all controls with the relevant planning authority. See also our AI disclosure.