Are councils necessary?

I never cease to be amazed by the incompetence of our local elected bodies and their all too apparent greed.

Recently put in an application to subdivide a block. We did what we thought was enough research on a couple of matters and were given answers- by phone- to several questions. The most important of these being: What is the required distance from the boundary to the house for an easement? (For a sewerage line)
Answer: 4.8metres.
OK. Application submitted on the basis of the information supplied.
Submission approved, provided easements were a minimum of 3.00 metres.
This changed things completely so we asked for the sewerage connection to be relocated. Cost for a rubber stamp $1250.!!!!!!Council calls it fee, I call it legalized robbery.

Second problem; The storm water drainage outlet was approved for location at a point almost 1.5 metres ABOVE the actual downpipe outlet!!!. When i questioned the engineer who had approved this he was a bit miffed and couldn't see the problem. I asked if he had read the contour lines or if someone had actually been out to see the block. NO, but that's what council had approved. Like talking to a brickwall.

Third problem: New driveway for the block to be located where it would have a power pole smack in the middle of it!! Again the submitted map and info had been completely neglected.

Problem four: Simple question "What are the minimum and maximum heights for a step?" ( I asked this of the girl at the information desk.) Didn't know. "Any chance it's in that 3foot thick bundle of folders with all the other info?" No.
So the girl rang the engineering dept. "We can't tell you that. You will have to pay a fee to a Certified Building inspector and get the measurements from him."
Needless to say I was flabbergasted so I got onto a mate. This information as it happens is all in "The Australian Standards ".

There are more installments to follow.:((:((:((

One reason I built something off the house and neglected to involve the local council :innocent: - too much red tape and too much trying to jump into my back pocket for everything. So I and everyone else I'm sure can fully understand your agro.

That said it's all to spec. :2tsup:

At least they dont sound like they're being obstructionist. We've had some developers take them to court here after they have been given a development approval with crazy conditions.
Did you hire a good engineer?

Because of all the development happening in suburbs (2 units on one block) the stormwater pipes in the street can't cope withe the sudden rush of water so the council have asked for a retention/detention tank where the first rush of stormwater goes into the tank and then slowly bleeds thru a small overflow pipe into the street.

All this is fair enough and I have no problem with it but when I asked the council for the size of the tank I was told they couldn't tell me.

Why not?

Because it has to be calculated using a formula.

So what is the formula?

We can't tell you. You have to pay an engineer to work it out for you then submit it and pay a approval fee

And they wonder why people get frustrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artme

I never cease to be amazed by the incompetence of our local elected bodies and their all too apparent greed.

Third problem: New driveway for the block to be located where it would have a power pole smack in the middle of it!! Again the submitted map and info had been completely neglected.

---

We just did an extension/renovation were our existing double garage was converted into a study and a toy/tv room for the kids, and a new much bigger double garage with small workshop was built beside it. Council gave us approval for the building but would not move on the wider than normal but necessary driveway. As we had to remove our garden and they wanted all details on the plants types/numbers/sizes/ages/etc. The git behind the desk couldn't understand that it is my garden and I'll do as I please, and that if I had of decided to do a makeover and say change to natives or cacti that I would have just done it and not talked to the council "Oh but that is different", he says. "How?" , I say. And so on. They just couldn't see the logic of you have given me approval to build this extension, but I can't use it!!

With much frustration and anger they finally gave in, only took about two weeks, but the catcher/kicker was that we had to completely remove the existing perfectly good driveway, and fix the curb and channel, before we could start on the new one. Another $2500 that we hadn't budgetted for!!

They invented the words obstructionist and obfuscation,down where I spend summers three of the four councils have been sacked,and the fourth one is under investigation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rat52

So what is the formula?

We can't tell you. You have to pay an engineer to work it out for you then submit it and pay a approval fee.

---

Stormwater routing isn't a simple formula calculation. It's an iterative thing best left to the very expensive software that has been developed to do it.

Yes rat52, there is a smidgen of sense in that but my position is totally different.

The engineer could not, or would not, see that I would be required to run water uphill. When I asked him if I was expected to put in a sump and pump he still couldn't see my point.

The other disturbing thing to come from this is the position elected councillors have in relation to salaried administrators, engineers and the like.
My understanding is that elected people are there to represent their constituents and look after their interests. It appears from what some developers and planners have told me that the engineers and administraors are virtually a law unto themselves. Any inquiries, or pushing the point by developers, surveyors and can cause the powers that be to become obstructive. Not only is this a problem but I was told councillors are reluctant to help constituents because they are wary of the CMC.

What has the country come to!!

Quote:

---

The engineer could not, or would not, see that I would be required to run water uphill. When I asked him if I was expected to put in a sump and pump he still couldn't see my point.

---

That's not unheard of. A friend of mine was adding an extension to his house on a sloping block and was told that the storm water would have to be pumped up to street level. I think he got around it in the end by building a rubble pit which discharges onto the reserve below him.

From my limited dealings with council, elected councillors rarely get involved in these types of planning issues. They might if a development has been rejected but they have no power to have a decision changed. That's what the Land & Environment court is for. All planning and approval is done by the salaried staff - we don't get to elect them.

Also you will find it more and more difficult to find anyone in council who knows anything about the relevant building codes etc. It is not seen as their job to tell people how to build. Their focus is on local area planning and making sure that the relevant environmental, bushfire and other regulations are observed.

I have a small "cattle" farm at the foot of The Barringtons,accessed by a gazetted council road, dirt of course, that hasn't been maintained for over 16 years.
We CANNOT get a truck along the last 2km, so have a beautiful block that is completely unproductive, but I, and two neighbours, am expected to dutifully cough up our rates on time every time!!
When I complained to the council, I was informed "that not enough people lived along the road to make maintenance worthwhile.
When I offered to with hold the rates I was threatened with court action and, in time, forfeiture of the land!!
Guy Fawkes had the right idea!!!:~:~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artme

The engineer could not, or would not, see that I would be required to run water uphill. When I asked him if I was expected to put in a sump and pump he still couldn't see my point.

---

That must have been a planner, doesn't sound like an engineer.

The business I'm in has just moved our warehouse into a brand new building which our landlords have built on there property. When they were building the council told them they had to put garden beds in to seperate the car parks and driveway to which they complied. Two weeks after the building was completed and landscaping finished they were told the council rules have changed and they had to be taken out and concreted in (to allow semi trailer access) at a cost of $30 000.:no:

If they had a development permit, that should be that, councils can't come back and have a second go at things if they change their minds. (Not saying they dont, just they shouldn't)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enigma

The business I'm in has just moved our warehouse into a brand new building which our landlords have built on there property. When they were building the council told them they had to put garden beds in to seperate the car parks and driveway to which they complied. Two weeks after the building was completed and landscaping finished they were told the council rules have changed and they had to be taken out and concreted in (to allow semi trailer access) at a cost of $30 000.:no:

---

that's a try-on
the requirements as of the date of the original DA are the ones that apply
any subsequent modifications (submitted by the developer/owner) only apply to the items modified

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lignin

I have a small "cattle" farm at the foot of The Barringtons,accessed by a gazetted council road, dirt of course, that hasn't been maintained for over 16 years.
We CANNOT get a truck along the last 2km, so have a beautiful block that is completely unproductive, but I, and two neighbours, am expected to dutifully cough up our rates on time every time!!
When I complained to the council, I was informed "that not enough people lived along the road to make maintenance worthwhile.
When I offered to with hold the rates I was threatened with court action and, in time, forfeiture of the land!!
Guy Fawkes had the right idea!!!:~:~

---

you might like to mention the words
malfeasance
misfeasance
to council
about 7 years ago the High Court held that Councils could not do nothing in that sort of situation, either council has to formally close the raod and then pay compensation for you becoming "land locked" or you can recover your costs of using the road from Council

Council should readily see that sending a grader and/or small dozer along the road will be cheaper than hiring a chopper to get you in and out

Just back from the council. Would you believe that the girls at the front desk were able to actually help me with the planning/building permit application? I was more than happy!:):):) I was over the moon!:U:U:U

Went to see one of the neighbours. She is not particularly happy but realizes things have changed and that there is probably little she can do, if anything to stop the building going ahead. I can see her point to some extent, but since everything is within the regulations I don't think it's any of her business as to what I do on my land.

In talking things over with her she told me that the original subdivision had covenantsthat were put in place by the owner who developed the land. Now I would like to know by what right does any person, other than a government body, gain the ability to tell you what your house should be built form! I know it has happened for years and has been accepted practice, but does that make it sensible or right?

As a result of this the neighbour is intending to grill council. Sorry, but those restrictions that applied 20 years ago have gone and in my opinion she should keep her nose out of it!!!

I have been polite and congenial in my dealings with her but I can do without the stress.

Ah, covenants!

When we bougt our 25 acre block, there was a covenant on it, amongst other things you had to have Colorbond sheds and could not build with weatherboard or mud brick.

When I asked the owner who was selling the land (the sub-divider, farmer) what he had against mud brick (not that I wanted to use it) his reply was:

"Have you ever seen a mud brick house that is finished?"

Hadn't really thought about that or noticed, when I started taking notice of this, he was right, hardly any mud brick houses get finished!

Covenants are really there to protect every one, just down the road there is an estate with 10 acre blocks, no covenants, lots of weatherboard houses, mud brick houses (unfinished!) etc. The whole overall look of that area is decidedly downmarket. There are some very nice big places in between but their market is reduced by the surrounding lower quality homes.

Having said all that, quite a few people in our estate have ignored the Colorbond only clause! So who enforces them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artme

In talking things over with her she told me that the original subdivision had covenants that were put in place by the owner who developed the land.

---

If they are proper covenants they would be recorded on your certificate of title and disclosed by way of a title search before you bought the property.

They are binding on all future owners of the land unless removed through an application to Court.

If you break the covenants your neighbour, being an owner in the subdivison also covered by that covenant, has redress against you in the courts. The court has the power to either allow your breaking of the covenant or force you to comply with the covenant by ordering you to return the property to its original condition.

In Vic the court is the Supreme Court and if it gets to court you both will make lawyers richer so negotiate with her to get her of your back in a happy state before you go to far.

Councils are not involved in this so you won't get help there.

The time to consider as to whether covenants are a nuisance is before buying the land and your solicitor should have informed you of them.


Peter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artme

snip
Went to see one of the neighbours. She is not particularly happy but realizes things have changed and that there is probably little she can do, if anything to stop the building going ahead. I can see her point to some extent, but since everything is within the regulations I don't think it's any of her business as to what I do on my land.

In talking things over with her she told me that the original subdivision had covenants that were put in place by the owner who developed the land. Now I would like to know by what right does any person, other than a government body, gain the ability to tell you what your house should be built form! I know it has happened for years and has been accepted practice, but does that make it sensible or right?

As a result of this the neighbour is intending to grill council. Sorry, but those restrictions that applied 20 years ago have gone and in my opinion she should keep her nose out of it!!!

---

Normally a covenant attaches to the land title — when you buy the land you also buy the restrictions (covenants, easements, etc) attached to the title.

It's easy for the original owner (seller) to attach a covenant to a title.

These sorts of covenants usually become difficult to enforce once a property has passed through a number of hands and the original developer has sold all the lots in the subdivision. A clever 3rd or 4th buyer would negotiate a price that included removing any restrictive covenant. However, if the covenant still exists, anyone adversly affected can take court action if they wish. So work with you neighbour and try not to upset her too much.


BTW, I understand that it's also possible for a third party to attach a covenant (or similar) to a title. The situation I'm thinking off is the "wronged" wife encombering the title to the family home to stop "hubby" selling the house without giving her some (or all) of the proceeds

Thanks for all the info and advice.Yes, I have been courteous and kind with the neighbour and have endeavored to establish a good rapport with her. I think this has gone well enough.
She is a little inclined to want things her own way. For instance there was constant nagging to the previous owner about the vegetation on the property and the leaves that blew onto her garden. Everything except a Golden cane Palm and a clump of Bamboo has been removed. When this was being done her mother basically demanded that the bamboo be removed by the operator of the excavator. He said that wasn't up to him. I have told the lady in question that that may well go when I get back from overseas.

I left the "comments"paper with her so she and the husband can add whatever comments they wish. I gave them a couple of days to chew it over. I also told the lady that they were definitely entitled to their say and it was not for me to oppose that right.

I can only wait for the result.