Gazetted?

[Pedro_The_Swift]

When is a road "Gazetted"?

when its on a map?,
or named?

[scrambler]

When it is legally designated as a road. It then appears on cadastral maps, whether or not there is any roadway present. I've seen one that a bulldozer struggled to drive :eek: and nothing less would have been able to push the trees aside :D Many were surveyed but never used. Without a doubt a road on a regular map, or named, will be gazetted. But there are surveyed, gazetted roads which appear on no mapping other than government cadastral.

[Michael2]

So can I drive on a gazetted road that has had its entry modified by a National Parks authority?

What's more, if the road has been in use for more than 20 years, isn't there a right of way that entitles me to drive on it?

Do we have a constitutional lawyer in our midst?;)

And while governments have a right to temporarily close roads for safety reasons, do they have a constitutional right to charge people to drive on them during some parts of the year only? ie: snowfields

Somebody on this forum the other week was saying how their dad challenged the NSW governments tax on passing interstate trucks some years back. I think there are similar issues to be clarified here.


:wasntme::wasntme::wasntme::wasntme:

[scrambler]

So can I drive on a gazetted road that has had its entry modified by a National Parks authority?

What's more, if the road has been in use for more than 20 years, isn't there a right of way that entitles me to drive on it?

Do we have a constitutional lawyer in our midst?;)

And while governments have a right to temporarily close roads for safety reasons, do they have a constitutional right to charge people to drive on them during some parts of the year only? ie: snowfields

Somebody on this forum the other week was saying how their dad challenged the NSW governments tax on passing interstate trucks some years back. I think there are similar issues to be clarified here.


:wasntme::wasntme::wasntme::wasntme:

Will a Bush Lawyer do, Michael2 ;)

AFAIK there is a "right of way" over gazetted roads, provided that hasn't been modified in some way. That might include limits of what sort of vehicles, or even whether any at all my traverse.

You would need to look at your State constitution as to what the rights the Government have regarding roads. But since they can make and unmake them, I have no doubt they have the right to restrict use of them, including imposing or removing tolls, and including varying the amount of toll based on when in the day or year you travel the road.

I imagine your question would be insurance, Pedro? As the Police have jurisdiction over any publicly accessible roadway (including carparks and roads on private property) I would imagine you are OK if PUBLICLY accessible. But if fees are imposed or access limited by the landowner, then it would not be gazetted and insurance may be affected.

As an example of gazetting, the beaches of Fraser Island are gazetted as roadways.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

yea,, its a murphys law thing
trouble will strike when you least expect it,,
and where you can least afford it,,

"everywhere" rather than "gazetted"
might be a better option,,

[duff]

I don't know if this still applies under law. :confused:

In days gone by the RAAF would close the road between Salisbury and Elizabeth once a year. They would try and pick a very quite Sunday,, to not offend too many of the locals.
They done this to maintain rights over the road. even though the road was a public use road on all the maps it could be closed when the RAAF liked (if needed).
I understand that they would loose the legal ability to close at will if the public had free access to the route on a continuous basis over a given period,,, how long I don't know,,, but the RAAF's answer was an annual closure.

Perhaps this had been done by the national parks in this case. :nazilock:

[landrovermick]

I don't know if this still applies under law. :confused:

In days gone by the RAAF would close the road between Salisbury and Elizabeth once a year. They would try and pick a very quite Sunday,, to not offend too many of the locals.
They done this to maintain rights over the road. even though the road was a public use road on all the maps it could be closed when the RAAF liked (if needed).
I understand that they would loose the legal ability to close at will if the public had free access to the route on a continuous basis over a given period,,, how long I don't know,,, but the RAAF's answer was an annual closure.

Perhaps this had been done by the national parks in this case. :nazilock:

The army used to do this at moorebank when i first came to sydney - they dont do it any more.....

[Michael2]

I don't know if this still applies under law. :confused:

In days gone by the RAAF would close the road between Salisbury and Elizabeth once a year. They would try and pick a very quite Sunday,, to not offend too many of the locals.
They done this to maintain rights over the road. even though the road was a public use road on all the maps it could be closed when the RAAF liked (if needed).
I understand that they would loose the legal ability to close at will if the public had free access to the route on a continuous basis over a given period,,, how long I don't know,,, but the RAAF's answer was an annual closure.

Perhaps this had been done by the national parks in this case. :nazilock:

I believe some shopping centres do a similar thing with their car parks to prevent a legal right of way being established.

My question though pertains to tracks that had for more than 20 years been open, but are now closed. Once the right of way has been established, who has what authority.

There was a case locally a few years ago, when a residential home, located next to a council owned park claimed a section of the park under their title. They had used a strip of land to access their back yard for the seven years they lived there, and argued that the previous owner had done the same. Once they demonstrated continual access for more than 20 years the land became theirs. The council quickly set about surveying all it's public land after that.

[solmanic]

What's more, if the road has been in use for more than 20 years, isn't there a right of way that entitles me to drive on it?

Not automatically - no. We had a situation like this recently where the access road to our rural retreat was gated-off by a f*#%wit neighbour since it meandered onto his land and outside the surveyed road alignment. We had been using it for just on 20 years (since 1987). The legal expenses and surveying costs to have the road re-aligned were less than the cost of bulldozing a new road.

[Bushie]

When is a road "Gazetted"?

when its on a map?,
or named?

Can't really answer that, except I don't believe roads are gazetted any more (at least in NSW) and the laws/rules will vary significantly between the states.


Bushie

[p38arover]

There was a case locally a few years ago, when a residential home, located next to a council owned park claimed a section of the park under their title. They had used a strip of land to access their back yard for the seven years they lived there, and argued that the previous owner had done the same. Once they demonstrated continual access for more than 20 years the land became theirs. The council quickly set about surveying all it's public land after that.


I heard of a similar cxase where a bloke allowed his neighbour to graze his cattle on his land. After x years the neighbour claimed the land as his - and won!

Ron

[CraigE]

Not sure of the road closure you are talking about. But if main roads close a road for safety reasons (flood, rain, natural disaster, damage etc) and you bypass the road closed signs you can be fined $10,000, this is fact talk to a MR surveyor. However just restricting public access without a valid reason may be a constitutional issue.

[tombraider]

Not automatically - no. We had a situation like this recently where the access road to our rural retreat was gated-off by a f*#%wit neighbour since it meandered onto his land and outside the surveyed road alignment. We had been using it for just on 20 years (since 1987). The legal expenses and surveying costs to have the road re-aligned were less than the cost of bulldozing a new road.

Wouldnt it have been more fun to Bulldoze the Neighbour :wasntme:

[solmanic]

I did think about letting some of the local mice loose inside his caravan...

[Jamo]

In WA only a government authority can restrict access to a gazetted road, such as Main Roads WA.

'Gazetted' means it has been formally surveyed as a public road and has been listed in the Government Gazette.

A private landowner who fences or otherwise restricts access to a gazetted road is committing an offence.

[Liv]

I have been reading your posts as I've a situation of my own that is very frustrating. I own land at the end of a public road which has been maintained by council to a certain point and due to 3 other gates the council is not wanting to take responsibility for the rest of the road. Now council and the lands department has informed me that yes it is indeed a public road and is council owned however by law the council is not obligated to upgrade the road which is now only accessable by a 4 wheel drive in all weather conditions.
The first part of the road has been upgraded and those people living on that part of the road did not pay council, however if I want the road upgraded I have to upgrade the road to council standards which is in the range of $200 000.

It has recently been brought to my attention that the best way of achieving anything is to attend the council meetings and continually campain for the road upgrade. Due to the fact that the our society has a thing with whoever makes the most noice gets action.

It has also been told to myself that if you live on a public road your privacy is irrelevant as this is one of the reasons for not wanting to take the gates down. A public road is open to everyone regardless if it travels through private land as the land holder has no rights over a public road.
Now the gates are another issue. According to our local law the gates should be constructed to council standards (which they definately are not) and a permit is to be held, and also public liability insurance of $5 million is need by the land holder and council is not deemed responsible for any liability that way. However, it has been told to me that if the law came into effect after the gates constructed the permits do not have to be inforced.

To me this is double standards as the road is a council road which I have no right according to their law to tamper with without a permit and paying huge amounts of money to do the road without any one else required to pay because i'm the one wonting the road upgraded to build my house(Others want the road done and would benifit but isn't their bill, fair enough not mine also).

I don't understand, the council should have a duty of care to provide a safe road which was officially named only 2 years ago. If someone died on this road or serverley handicapped that it would cost thousands every year of the persons life to maintain their life, who is responsible? My husband works as a panel beater in Brisbane and if a car they're working on is damaged by a pot hole they send the bill to the Brisbane city council.
So would the land holder be responsible for an accident that happens on a road that isn't rightfully theirs or the coucil as it is a public road but they don't want to take responibility for it now. I am glad my property doesn't have the road run through it because I reckon the council would ensure the poor landholder would take all the blame.

Anyway I guess the council will continually see my face cos i'm not giving them one single cent. I pay my rates and rego just like people in town who don't pay for the road outside their houses.

[digger]

I don't know if this still applies under law. :confused:

In days gone by the RAAF would close the road between Salisbury and Elizabeth once a year. They would try and pick a very quite Sunday,, to not offend too many of the locals.
They done this to maintain rights over the road. even though the road was a public use road on all the maps it could be closed when the RAAF liked (if needed).
I understand that they would loose the legal ability to close at will if the public had free access to the route on a continuous basis over a given period,,, how long I don't know,,, but the RAAF's answer was an annual closure.

Perhaps this had been done by the national parks in this case. :nazilock:


the RAAF still do this, but have an agreement now with SAPOL so that speed enforcement etc can be conducted along this road rest of the year!

digger

[digger]

AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 11
"11—" " Australian Road Rules apply to vehicles and road users on roads and road-related areas


(1) The Australian Road Rules apply to vehicles and road users on roads and road-related areas.


Note—


"Road" is defined in rule 12, "road-related area" is defined in rule 13, "road user" is defined in rule 14, and "vehicle" is defined in rule 15.


(2) Each reference in the Australian Road Rules (except in this Division) to a "road" includes a reference to a "road-related area", unless otherwise expressly stated in the Rules.


Examples for subrule (2)—


1 A reference in rule 146 (which deals with driving within a single marked lane or line of traffic) to the road includes a reference to the road-related area of the road.


2 A reference in rule 200 (1) (which deals with certain heavy or long vehicles stopping on roads) to a length of road includes a reference to the road-related area of the length of road.


3 A reference in rule 31 (which deals with starting a right turn from a road, except a multi-lane road) to a road does not include a reference to a road-related area, because of the definition in subrule (5) of that rule.

AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 12
12—What is a road


(1) A "road" is an area that is open to or used by the public and is developed for, or has as one of its main uses, the driving or riding of motor vehicles.

Note—
"Motor vehicle" is defined in the dictionary.


(2) However, unless the contrary intention appears, a reference in the Australian Road Rules (except in this Division) to a "road" does not include a reference to:

(a) an area so far as the area is declared, under another law of this jurisdiction, not to be a road for the Australian Road Rules ; or

(b) any shoulder of the road.

(3) The "shoulder" of the road includes any part of the road that is not designed to be used by motor vehicles in travelling along the road, and includes:

(a) for a kerbed road—any part of the kerb; and

(b) for a sealed road—any unsealed part of the road, and any sealed part of the road outside an edge line on the road,


but does not include a bicycle path, footpath or shared path.


Note—


"Bicycle path" is defined in rule 239, "edge line" and "footpath" are defined in the dictionary, and "shared path" is defined in rule 242.








AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 13
13—What is a road-related area

(1) A "road-related area is any of the following:

(a) an area that divides a road;

(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road;

(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public and designated for use by cyclists or animals;

(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to or used by the public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.


Note—


"Vehicle" is defined in rule 15.


(2) However, unless the contrary intention appears, a reference in the Australian Road Rules (except in this Division) to a "road-related area" includes a reference to:


(a) an area so far as the area is declared, under another law of this jurisdiction, to be a road-related area for the Australian Road Rules ; or

(b) any shoulder of a road; or

(c) any other area that is a footpath or nature strip as defined in the dictionary,

but does not include a reference to an area so far as the area is declared, under another law of this jurisdiction, not to be a road-related area for the Australian Road Rules .


Note—


"Shoulder" is defined in rule 12.


one pointed out to me by a kid at a school talk was this one...also done by a student...


Road Rules – It’s time to take some lessons, Australia
By John Cadogan | February 28th, 2010


Most people are road-rule idiots. I know I was, up until about 18 months ago when I read the almost-400-page online version of the Australian Road Rules for an assignment I was boning up on. It’s a seriously long-winded, hard-to-read document. If you printed it out, you could use it for self-defence.

The magnitude of stuff I just didn’t know gobsmacked me.

An example: How many people do you know who claim if they’re driving on private property – say, the local Woolies carpark – then the road rules don’t apply. If you know anyone like this, you can tell them from me that they’re full of it.



The Australian Road Rules apply to roads – and a road has a specific definition that has nothing whatsoever to do with whether the road is on privately-owned or public land.
Here’s the official definition: “A road is an area that is open to or used by the public, and is developed for, or has as one of its main uses, the driving or riding of motor vehicles.” Best read it a couple of times, because the implications are huge.

Here’s one: Let’s say you’ve had a few beers at the pub and, like a responsible driver you elect to cop a ride home from a (sober) mate or in a cab. But first, because you don’t like where your car is parked in the pub’s car park, you elect to drive it further down the back, where some drunk idiot is less likely to sideswipe it in the wee small hours. I mean, it’s not as if you’re rolling blotto here – there’s just a chance you might be over the limit.

So you move your car, the cops swing into the car park, they stop you and breath-test you. You fail the breath test, they arrest you, you get breathalysed and then charged with low-range PCA … and yet the offence occurred on private property. This is because the pub car park is a) open to the public and b) is developed for the riding or driving … blah, blah, blah. It’s a road.



That means all those other rules apply as well – seatbelts, giving way rules, having a registered car, mobile phones, indicators, having a driver’s license, etc. And guess what? It’s not just car parks – it’s beaches like Fraser Island or Sydney’s Stockton beach, bush tracks generally. Anywhere open to the public (or even closed to the public but used for driving anyway) is basically a road.

Now let’s take pedestrians. You have an obligation to avoid hitting one. Pedestrians have an obligation not to cause unnecessary obstructions. Pedestrians aren’t allowed to walk on the road if there’s a serviceable footpath or nature strip, and they’re not allowed to cross the road within 20 metres of a pedestrian crossing – but they are everywhere else. Drivers have to give way to pedestrians on crossings, obviously (give way means slow down, stop or remain stationary, if required, to avoid a collision). But if you are turning at an intersection and a pedestrian is crossing the road you’re turning into – you have to give way. Strangely this doesn’t apply at roundabouts.



And here’s some stuff most people don’t know about parking. Before you leave the vehicle – even if you’re just getting out briefly for whatever reason – it’s a legal requirement that you apply the parking brake. If you then move more than three metres away (the official distance to qualify as legally ‘leaving the vehicle’), you must also switch off the engine. If you leave the vehicle and there are no passengers (or only passengers under 16) you must remove the ignition key (the Road Rules haven’t adapted up to the existence of proximity keys yet).

If you leave the vehicle and there are no passengers, you must roll up the windows (at least within 2cm of shut) and also lock the doors.

If you knew all that stuff already, you’ve a better appreciation for the Road Rules than I had several months back. And if you didn’t, maybe it’s time you downloaded the PDF version of the Australian Road Rules and started curing your insomnia with it.


anyway...it doesnt fix your problems but - have fun!

digger

[V8Ian]

The Australian Road Rules apply to roads – and a road has a specific definition that has nothing whatsoever to do with whether the road is on privately-owned or public land.
Here’s the official definition: “A road is an area that is open to or used by the public, and is developed for, or has as one of its main uses, the driving or riding of motor vehicles.” Best read it a couple of times, because the implications are huge.

Here’s one: Let’s say you’ve had a few beers at the pub and, like a responsible driver you elect to cop a ride home from a (sober) mate or in a cab. But first, because you don’t like where your car is parked in the pub’s car park, you elect to drive it further down the back, where some drunk idiot is less likely to sideswipe it in the wee small hours. I mean, it’s not as if you’re rolling blotto here – there’s just a chance you might be over the limit.

So you move your car, the cops swing into the car park, they stop you and breath-test you. You fail the breath test, they arrest you, you get breathalysed and then charged with low-range PCA … and yet the offence occurred on private property. This is because the pub car park is a) open to the public and b) is developed for the riding or driving … blah, blah, blah. It’s a road.



That means all those other rules apply as well – seatbelts, giving way rules, having a registered car, mobile phones, indicators, having a driver’s license, etc. And guess what? It’s not just car parks – it’s beaches like Fraser Island or Sydney’s Stockton beach, bush tracks generally. Anywhere open to the public (or even closed to the public but used for driving anyway) is basically a road.

Now let’s take pedestrians. You have an obligation to avoid hitting one. Pedestrians have an obligation not to cause unnecessary obstructions. Pedestrians aren’t allowed to walk on the road if there’s a serviceable footpath or nature strip, and they’re not allowed to cross the road within 20 metres of a pedestrian crossing – but they are everywhere else. Drivers have to give way to pedestrians on crossings, obviously (give way means slow down, stop or remain stationary, if required, to avoid a collision). But if you are turning at an intersection and a pedestrian is crossing the road you’re turning into – you have to give way. *Strangely this doesn’t apply at roundabouts.



And here’s some stuff most people don’t know about parking. Before you leave the vehicle – even if you’re just getting out briefly for whatever reason – it’s a legal requirement that you apply the parking brake. If you then move more than three metres away (the official distance to qualify as legally ‘leaving the vehicle’), you must also switch off the engine. If you leave the vehicle and there are no passengers (or only passengers under 16) you must remove the ignition key (the Road Rules haven’t adapted up to the existence of proximity keys yet).

If you leave the vehicle and there are no passengers, you must roll up the windows (at least within 2cm of shut) and also lock the doors.

If you knew all that stuff already, you’ve a better appreciation for the Road Rules than I had several months back. And if you didn’t, maybe it’s time you downloaded the PDF version of the Australian Road Rules and started curing your insomnia with it.

*In Queensland you have to give way to pedestrians at a roundabout. The defination of give way being 'all traffic and pedestrians', most roundabout entries are roadmarked and/or signed Give Way, but by legislative default, you must give way when entering a roundabout.

Again, in Queensland, you can be done for drink driving in an unservicable vehicle in your own garage. The charge is 'Being in charge of a motor vehicle.........etc', it has been used often.