DraftlyFree property checks › Free site feasibility
Free site feasibility

Free Property Site Feasibility Report — Any Australian Address

Zone, overlays, verified lot boundary, easements, design wind region and nearby DA activity — the whole feasibility picture in one free pass, as a downloadable PDF.

Free, no account, not metered. Runs the full site brief — zone, overlays, verified lot boundary, easements and design wind — and gives you the PDF.

What you get back

Every free brief returns the whole picture — not just the one line you came for. (Your check lands in the brief's The whole brief section.)

Free here, billed per report elsewhere

Typical per-address pricing elsewhere in the Australian property-data market, against what the Draftly site brief includes.
CheckProperty-data platformsDraftly site brief
Flood report $39–$69 Free
Bushfire pre-screen $39–$69 Free
Planning PDF around $9 Free
Geotechnical desktop study around $119 Free
State heritage certificate $63.04 Free

Source: Draftly's public comparison audit, last updated 2026-08-12 — the same figures shown at /compare/. Figures are point-in-time and describe the property-data category generally, not any one named vendor; verify current pricing with the vendor. A state heritage certificate fee is set by the state heritage body.

Site feasibility for a backyard structure is a small number of questions with expensive wrong answers. What zone is it. What overlays apply. Where is the boundary really. Is there an easement in the way. What wind region governs the structure.

None of that is secret. All of it is public government data. The market that exists around it sells aggregation — pulling scattered portals into one report — and it prices per address, which is entirely rational when the report is the product.

Why Draftly gives it away

For Draftly the report is not the product. The paid work is what happens after the answer: siting the structure inside the verified constraints, sizing members against AS/NZS 1170.2, producing DXF and PDF drawing sets, and assembling a lodgement package. Charging for the research would put a toll booth in front of our own funnel.

So the brief is free, needs no account, and is not metered.

Where the paid platforms are genuinely better

Breadth. A dedicated property-data platform carries well over a hundred layers per address — noise, acid sulfate soils, school catchment, soil hazards — and Draftly does not aggregate those nationally. If you are acquiring sites or qualifying leads at volume, that breadth is the product and it is worth paying for.

Draftly's bet is depth on one workflow: address to permit to built, for Australian residential work. The comparison table below is maintained as an audit rather than a brochure, including the parts that do not flatter us.

How Draftly compares

DimensionDraftlyCanibuildBuildertrend / CoConstructArchistarProperty-data platformsClearCalcsCouncil & state portals
Address-to-answer speedType an address → a useful answer, with nothing in between.45144.51.51
Planning data reliabilityHow much of the planning answer is real government data vs inference.4414.5415
Visual UXMap, drag-and-drop, live feedback — how it feels to use.453.5433.51
Drafting & exportDrawings, DXF/PDF sets, documents a council or certifier accepts.4.521.5112.51
Engineering defensibilityStructural calculations, member schedules, AS/NZS-referenced outputs.421114.51
Commercial readinessPricing clarity, payments, onboarding, market maturity.3.53.54.543.53.5
Partner / trade ecosystemPartner programs, integrations, API access, white-label.4.533.52.5221
Running the buildSchedule of works, trade dispatch, purchase orders, and what the homeowner can see.31.54.5111
What you get before payingHow much of a usable answer arrives without a subscription, a per-report fee, or a sales call.511.51.52.523

Scores are calibrated for ONE job: the address-to-permit-to-built workflow for Australian backyard structures and small residential builds (pergolas, decks, sheds, carports, granny flats) — for trades, builders and homeowners. They are not a verdict on general construction software. A tool can score low here and be excellent at what it is actually built for.

Scored 1–5. “—” means the dimension does not apply to that product. Last updated 2026-08-12. See the full comparison · Report an error.

Where Draftly is weak

This table is an audit, not a brochure. These are our own limitations, published because a comparison that only flatters us is worth nothing.

  • Planning zones come live from government APIs in 5 states/territories (VIC, NSW, QLD metro councils, TAS, ACT). SA is answered from a shipped snapshot of the PlanSA zones layer (~3 m simplified), not a live call, because SA has no public point-query service — the brief says so on the result rather than showing a fetch time that would imply otherwise. WA/NT and full per-state overlay completeness are still gaps; uncovered lookups fall back to guided manual entry, never a fabricated answer
  • Hazard depth is thinner than the dedicated property-data platforms. Heritage is queried in all six wired jurisdictions and acid sulfate soils across the NSW councils that publish them; bushfire and flood are wired where a government service exposes them. Noise, school catchment and soil hazards outside NSW are not aggregated nationally
  • AI is used only for extracting details from documents you upload and for the help assistant — never for planning data (address research is a pure government-API lookup)
  • Draftly Works is new. The schedule, gates, orders and claims are built and tested, but no build has yet been run end to end on it by a customer
  • Purchase orders and progress claims exist as tested engines with database rules behind them, and neither has a screen in the app yet. Xero sync is not connected either — so a purchase order will be a record in Draftly until both land
  • A stage completion asks for a photo and a readiness checklist. The gate is enforced; the photo file itself is not stored yet, so the evidence is a prompt rather than a record
  • The dependency cascade — recalculating downstream dates when a stage runs late, and naming which trades are affected — is built and tested, but the schedule screen still shows the baseline plan. It does not yet move dates on you
  • Billing handles the happy path: new subscriptions, upgrades and cancellations. A failed card or a refund is not yet reflected automatically in the product — those are handled by hand in Stripe today
  • Commercial maturity lower than the volume-builder platforms — live payments and a subscriptions interface shipped 2026-08-04, but still pre-public-launch
  • Mobile UX still being polished (Section-3 site-design rework in progress)

Questions

What does the free site brief actually include?
Zone, lot geometry, easements, the overlays your council publishes (including flood, bushfire and heritage where a government service exposes them), AS/NZS 1170.2 design wind, and live DA counts — downloadable as a PDF. No account, no per-report fee, no lookup cap.
Is it really free, or is it a teaser?
The research step is not metered at all. Draftly earns downstream — the engineered design, the drawing set and the lodgement package — which is why the brief itself can be given away rather than sampled. The honest limit is coverage, not paywalling: some states and some overlay layers are still gaps, and the brief says so when a lookup is not covered.
How does this compare to a paid property-data report?
Paid property-data platforms are broader — well over a hundred data layers per address, including things Draftly does not aggregate nationally, such as noise, acid sulfate soils and school catchment. They are built for site acquisition and lead qualification. Draftly is narrower and goes further down: the same brief carries into siting, engineering and a lodgement package. Different jobs.
What are the honest limitations?
Planning zones are live via government APIs in six states and territories — WA and NT, and full per-state overlay completeness, are gaps. Hazard depth is thinner than the dedicated property-data platforms. Uncovered lookups fall back to guided manual entry rather than a fabricated answer, and every rule carries a data version and human-reviewed date stamp.
Is AI used to generate the planning data?
No. Address research is a pure government-API lookup. AI is used only for extracting details from documents you upload and for the help assistant — never for planning data.
What happens after the brief?
You can stop there — the PDF is yours. If you continue, the same verified boundary and controls carry into siting the structure, then into AS/NZS-referenced structural calculations, DXF and PDF drawing sets, and a council submission package. That downstream work is what Draftly charges for.

Check something else on the same address

Run it now

Free, no account, not metered. Runs the full site brief — zone, overlays, verified lot boundary, easements and design wind — and gives you the PDF.