developing and fences

[MTR]

Does anyone here hit their neighbours for costs of fencing 50% when developing.
My costs will be $12,000 this includes removal of asbestos, retaining.... I was not going to bother until I read this on Council's website. Standard fencing in Perth should be 1.8, however my fencing is much lower, therefore perhaps the neighbours have no choice but to cough up.

On the flip side is it worth worrying about, having disputes with neighbours when I am trying to sell, who knows what could happen to empty villas??? Perhaps not worth taking a risk on this.

Thoughts??

Redevelopment of properties
If your adjoining owner redevelops their land by demolishing
existing buildings or erecting new ones, they may ask for a
contribution for a new fence.
This may occur if the existing fence is:
? of a lower standard than a sufficient fence;
? is erected other than on the boundary line; or
? is in need of repair or replacement.
It may also occur because the adjoining owner wants a new
fence.

 

[Perp]

Which state is the development in? Edit: Duh, WA, got it!

I would have thought not, but will reserve judgement until I've seen the legislation.

 

[MTR]

Really... but
why ignore what Council has outlined as legitimate reason ??

 

[Perp]

Does Council have a local law saying that dividing fences have to be 1.8m?

If not, it appears that if the existing fence was agreed upon between the owners at the time it was erected, then it is by definition a sufficient fence.

http://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/building-commission/dividing-fences-0

Also, laws usually aren't retrospective, so any requirement that the fences have to be 1.8m would have to have been in force at the time that the existing fence was constructed, unless the local law specifically has a retrospective effect.

 

[westminster]

Does anyone here hit their neighbours for costs of fencing 50% when developing.
My costs will be $12,000 this includes removal of asbestos, retaining.... I was not going to bother until I read this on Council's website. Standard fencing in Perth should be 1.8, however my fencing is much lower, therefore perhaps the neighbours have no choice but to cough up.

On the flip side is it worth worrying about, having disputes with neighbours when I am trying to sell, who knows what could happen to empty villas??? Perhaps not worth taking a risk on this.

Thoughts??

Redevelopment of properties
If your adjoining owner redevelops their land by demolishing
existing buildings or erecting new ones, they may ask for a
contribution for a new fence.
This may occur if the existing fence is:
? of a lower standard than a sufficient fence;
? is erected other than on the boundary line; or
? is in need of repair or replacement.
It may also occur because the adjoining owner wants a new
fence.

So the existing fencing before replacing was lower than 1.8m?

I don't ask neighbours to cough up because I'm the one that wanted the fence changed. If I need to change the levels of the fence due to retaining on my development then it's all part of my costs.

I consider it all part of developing. Where the fence is in the right spot I keep it. On the Gwelup project I only needed to do 25 lineal metres of fencing

 

[Jamie_]

Standard fencing in Perth should be 1.8, however my fencing is much lower, therefore perhaps the neighbours have no choice but to cough up.

If the standard for fencing should be 1.8m, then shouldn't you be building to this? 1.8m is quite low for a standard anyway, i wouldn't have any less than 2.1m at my house..

Redevelopment of properties
If your adjoining owner redevelops their land by demolishing
existing buildings or erecting new ones, they may ask for a
contribution for a new fence.
This may occur if the existing fence is:
? of a lower standard than a sufficient fence;

This isn't referring to the height of the fence but quality i.e. replacing super6 with Colorbond, however if the super6 is of correct height and structurally sound I doubt they will have to contribute.

 

[Perp]

If the standard for fencing should be 1.8m, then shouldn't you be building to this? 1.8m is quite low for a standard anyway, i wouldn't have any less than 2.1m at my house..

I think as well you've underlined "of a lower standard than a sufficient fence;"
This isn't referring to the height of the fence but quality i.e. replacing super6 with Colorbond, however if the super6 is of correct height and structurally sound I doubt they will have to contribute.

I think I misread it the same way you did at first. I think MTR means that the existing fence is lower in height than 1.8m and therefore is suggesting it's not a "sufficient fence". I believe MTR plans to build a 1.8m fence.

i.e. when MTR says "my fence", she's referring to the existing fence, not the proposed new fence.

 

[Jamie_]

Ah yeah, i see that too now

Carry on

 

[Scott No Mates]

In NSW it is often a condition of the DA that the developer is required to replace the fences at no cost to the neighbours. It's fine if they want to chip in but otherwise have to suck it up.

 

[MTR]

Yes, the proposed new fence is standard now and will need to be 1.8 m.

Retaining is required as the asbestos fences can take the heavy sand backed up on neighbours side, colour bond will not support this.

I tend to agree with WM on this issue, just cough up and move on.

I met one of the neighbours who looks like an ex bikie, gave me his business card, tattoo artist, I don't think I want to mess with him.

 

[Blacky]

I asked all of my neighbors if they would like to replace the fence at 50/50 cost. All 3 agreed.

The place next door to me started developing at the same time as me, though finished slightly before I did. He offered to do the fence and I agreed, as there was retaining to be done. It then took me about 6 weeks of arguing with him to have it corrected as he had done a horrible job of it. Got there in the end.

Blacky

 

[Jaggannath]

'Should' means there's no obligation. I'd ask, and if they say no then so be it.

 

[HD_ACE]

I have not bothered as of yet. I add it to the feasability and consider it another cost. Unless the fence is in disrepair and not fit for use you will have a hard time getting someone to cough up.

But in saying that I did pay half the cost of one boundary fence to another property where the neighbour was developing. But made sure he paid 100% of removal and disposal as it was asbestos.. But i didn`t have to, i am just a nice guy

 

[MTR]

I have not bothered as of yet. I add it to the feasability and consider it another cost. Unless the fence is in disrepair and not fit for use you will have a hard time getting someone to cough up.

But in saying that I did pay half the cost of one boundary fence to another property where the neighbour was developing. But made sure he paid 100% of removal and disposal as it was asbestos.. But i didn`t have to, i am just a nice guy

What can I say HD, wish you were my neighbour, damn it

 

[MTR]

I asked all of my neighbors if they would like to replace the fence at 50/50 cost. All 3 agreed.

The place next door to me started developing at the same time as me, though finished slightly before I did. He offered to do the fence and I agreed, as there was retaining to be done. It then took me about 6 weeks of arguing with him to have it corrected as he had done a horrible job of it. Got there in the end.

Blacky

Blacky
you did good, my guess is most will not cough up if they don't have to

 

[LeoT]

In NSW it is often a condition of the DA that the developer is required to replace the fences at no cost to the neighbours. It's fine if they want to chip in but otherwise have to suck it up.

Yup thats been my experience.

Leo

 

[alicudi]

I met one of the neighbours who looks like an ex bikie, gave me his business card, tattoo artist, I don't think I want to mess with him.

Hi

If this is the case I would not be asking for any financial input from the neighbour. I would probably be asking them what color fence they prefer!

Regards,

alicudi