Thread: Recommissioning.....................a house

Originally Posted by abaddonxi

I'd imagine it's fine to put a fence up between the two driveways, just put a gate in. Do the two padlock on a chain thing, one for you, one for him.


Then in six months time....

Mr Happy was adamant that nothing could be put there. The gate option had crossed my mind when the problem first arose & I was planning on discussing it with him in a civilised manner but he didn't hang around long enough .

I've also read that he has no obligation to re-lock or even close the gate which is a worry too.

I'll be talking to my solicitor again this week to get the all clear just to be on the safe side.

So both parties have easements in their titles for access on either side of the boundary?

Is access necessary or just a weird arrangement?

I guess you could spend a lot of time driving up and down his side and then suggest you both remove the easements. Wonder how much that'd cost.

Originally Posted by Scouse

Hmm, there's now a problem with this 'split' driveway.

...
Does anyone here have experience with this sort of problem, the fence I mean, not fruit loop neighbours? I don't know why the driveway situation would even be the way it is - 10m each is plenty enough.
Can this be changed somehow or does it need both parties to agree to the change?

One option is to run the fence to each side of the garages but this is not how I would like to solve the problem as it leaves the garage doors vulnerable.

You have what is called reciprical rights of access. He has an easement for access on his property that benefits you and you have an easement for access on your property that beneits him. This situation is usually in the form of say 2*2m wide strips that gave a total 4m wide driveway access to two properties, battle-axe style. A 20m wide access is VERY wide, I could not give you a reason why it may have been done that way without seeing a DP (survey plan) etc.

You cannot extinguish the easement on your property without the beneficiaries agreement (ie your neighbour) and he cannot do likewise.

Why do the properties have common driveways? Is is too steep for each property to get access directly onto the street? Was it a lot with two houses on it (say owned by members of the same family and therefore the common driveway was acceptable) that was subdivided and one lot sold? (Have come across a few situations like this over the years where a family breakup saw a property subdivided and when one party sold, the other party made life difficult for the new property owner as the properties were never really set up to operate as separate dwellings.)

Property law can get very ugly. Hope it works out.
Cheers,
Chris

Originally Posted by abaddonxi

Is access necessary or just a weird arrangement?

Just a weird arrangement.

Both driveways from the road (his on the left):

Part the way down my driveway:

And the house end of my driveway:

Up & down his driveway. As you can see, his is a lot easier to drive along:



I'd always wondered why someone would make a grand entrance at the end of a driveway. Now I know.

Originally Posted by cjc_td5

Why do the properties have common driveways? Is is too steep for each property to get access directly onto the street? Was it a lot with two houses on it (say owned by members of the same family and therefore the common driveway was acceptable) that was subdivided and one lot sold? (Have come across a few situations like this over the years where a family breakup saw a property subdivided and when one party sold, the other party made life difficult for the new property owner as the properties were never really set up to operate as separate dwellings.)

As you can see, access is quite easy & virtually level for the first 100m or so. It then goes to a gradual slope down to the main part of his block.
Both lots were subdivided off the original lot that faces the main road (originally had approx 75 acres) at the same time in 1987.
Mr Happy told me that he's lived there for 20 years but a search shows that he only bought his land in 1999. My house was there long before that.

There is a dividing mound/garden between the driveways down to my house so I can only assume this was there before he bought his land.

From the photos, it looks like 2 seperate driveways divided buy a row of trees. Why can you not put a fence up between the two rows?

I once avoided buying a property because of a "shared" drive way, The property I was looking at was off private drive way and was owned by the dairy farm a bit further along. I could see potential problems down the track if and when the dairy was sold off .

Originally Posted by crash

From the photos, it looks like 2 seperate driveways divided buy a row of trees. Why can you not put a fence up between the two rows?

I'm hoping that I can but I'll need to give him access via a gate between the two driveways.

I can really see no reason why on earth he would need access to both driveways but I'll see what the solicitor says about the fence with a gate idea.

Hi there Scouse,
It certainly looks an unusual arrangement.
It might be worth going and seeing your local Council to see if they can give a reason why the recipical rights of access leg is so wide. They may also be able to give you some advice of managing access etc.
Are we talking the Sydney basin or up in the Blue Mountians?
A thought is that they created a wide access leg to leave room for a potential future road. Is there developable land at the rear? Another reason could be some sort of Bushfire requirement (APZ etc) thought is looks like it was never physically created.

Cheers,
Chris

Originally Posted by cjc_td5

Hi there Scouse,
It certainly looks an unusual arrangement.
It might be worth going and seeing your local Council to see if they can give a reason why the recipical rights of access leg is so wide. They may also be able to give you some advice of managing access etc.
Are we talking the Sydney basin or up in the Blue Mountians?
A thought is that they created a wide access leg to leave room for a potential future road. Is there developable land at the rear? Another reason could be some sort of Bushfire requirement (APZ etc) thought is looks like it was never physically created.

The local council seems to be worse than useless. On every map I've seen, there's a Lanhams Rd running off 'mine'. It doesn't actually exist so I thought I'd ask council what was planned.
Council knew nothing about this road. There is a clearing for it on the affected property so it's been planned by someone.

[ame="http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Wedderburn,+N ew+South+Wales&sll=-25.274398,133.775136&sspn=99.673192,155.917969&ie= UTF8&hq=&hnear=Wedderburn+New+South+Wales&ll=-34.127517,150.814519&spn=0.006279,0.013604&z=17"]Wedderburn, New South Wales - Google Maps[/ame]

Eventually they said it wasn't in their council area & I'd have to speak to the adjoining council. WTF - the whole residential area of the suburb is part of Campbelltown Council !!

There's no real developable land behind the properties due to the creeks & associated terrain.
I doubt it's an APZ. The lot that Lanhams Rd is on is actually just a paddock with a few small fruit trees so I doubt an APZ would be needed there.