Partners

Working with agents, builders and certifiers

Three relationships that look nothing like a homeowner engagement, and shouldn't be priced like one.

Real estate agents

A listing with a documented development potential sells differently from one without. We run the planning on a property before it goes to market and give you something to put in front of buyers — what the controls permit, which pathway is open, and what the site will carry.

Turnaround is fast because it's desktop work, and for agents we work with regularly it's a standing arrangement rather than a quote each time.

Builders

We work as outsourced documentation for builders who'd rather not carry a drafting team — DA and CDC sets, construction certificate drawings, and the consultant coordination that goes with them.

Repeat work is priced as a rate rather than a proposal per job, and we're used to working to a builder's standard details and specification rather than imposing our own.

Certifiers

As-built and works-as-executed plan sets for building information certificates, amended drawings where a set needs correcting to match what was built, and documentation to close out a job that stalled.

We measure on site and draw to the standard the certificate needs, which is not the same standard as a marketing floor plan.

What makes this work

Volume changes the economics, so it changes the price. A builder sending us six jobs a year is not paying the same rate as a homeowner sending one, and an agent asking for a planning read on a listing is buying something quite different from a feasibility.

It also changes the format. Partners generally want the answer, not the report — a short written position they can act on, with the long version available if a client asks for it.

Tell us what the volume looks like and what you actually need, and we'll structure it accordingly.

Get in touch directly

Link Teale — Design Manager
0403 993 876
link@planland.com.au

A phone call is usually faster than a form for this. If you'd rather write, the contact form works too — just say what the arrangement would look like rather than describing a single site.