Rearranging 3 lots on 2 titles

Hi everyone,

I have spent a lot of time reading on this forum but I unfortunately haven't had the pleasure of contributing much so far so go easy on me.

I have come across an interesting opportunity in Brisbane. There are 2 properties next to each other. No.1 is 809m2 on 2 lots and No.2 is 607m2 on 1 lot. Each property has a pre-1946 house on it. The properties are in the Demolition Control Precinct which means they have to be preserved.

Now here is my question. Is it possible to move house No.2 off the 607m2 and put it behind house No.1 on 809m2. Has anyone ever seen this done?

Here is a theoretical possibility that might get you round the preservation requirement on a technicality:

1. Amalgamate both properties into 1.
2. Shift house No.2 behind house No.1.
3. Re-subdivide the properties.
4. Result is a vacant unencumbered 600m2 block.

I have attached an image which the current situation and my desired outcome.

See what you think! All thoughts are welcome and appreciated!

Regards,

Rhys
 

Attachments

  • can it be moved.jpg
    can it be moved.jpg
    89.4 KB · Views: 114
I have come across an interesting opportunity in Brisbane. There are 2 properties next to each other. No.1 is 809m2 on 2 lots and No.2 is 607m2 on 1 lot. Each property has a pre-1946 house on it. The properties are in the Demolition Control Precinct which means they have to be preserved.

Now here is my question. Is it possible to move house No.2 off the 607m2 and put it behind house No.1 on 809m2. Has anyone ever seen this done?

Here is a theoretical possibility that might get you round the preservation requirement on a technicality:

1. Amalgamate both properties into 1.
2. Shift house No.2 behind house No.1.
3. Re-subdivide the properties.
4. Result is a vacant unencumbered 600m2 block.

As the building is within a Demolition Control Precinct the preservation requirement is likely to apply to the setting and streetscape not just the physical building therefore it is highly unlikely that you will be given approval to do any of the above.

If on the other hand it is not a precinct but rather the property itself then there may be an opportunity to move the building. This is especially true if the listing is only at the Local Government level. If it is considered to have State or National significance then you have no chance of proceeding.

I deal with this type of thing in my day-to-day dealings and when it comes to Heritage issues it is a hard sell. I think we have only had one win with Council and that was only after alot of expense and detailed Heritage investigations, reporting and cataloging. Again in my job, I have put in offers on properties based on DA Approval (no approval - no purchase) however you will need the owner to sign the DA form in order to lodge the DA.

Personally, if the options you are putting forward are the only way the deal makes sense then I would walk away.

Regards

Andrew
 
What advantage does your option of moving the house achieve, given the associated costs and hoops you will need to jump through.

If it is preservation of streetscape why not simply put a common driveway to the rear of the lots and build behind each existing house?
 
Thanks for the replies.

BH, I have spoken to Council regarding that demo issue and they advised me that moving the house would constitute demolition and therefore it is not something they would approve. So that rules that idea out.

After speaking with a few people and Council a more a pertinent proposal has arisen. It is similar in nature to what Joe has described. The proposal is to subdivide the back of both 15 & 17 into 1 new block. This new block would be 600-650sqm of vacant LMR. This means no demolition control constraints. A 3.5m wide easement is required to access the rear block.

I need to look further into the possibility of multi-unit dwellings if there is no frontage. I have a niggling feeling it is not permissible. This would mean that the new lot would be limited to a single unit dwelling which would throttle its value.

However the feasibility of it is still shaky. Cutting the rear of both blocks with diminish their value. However the creation of a new block at rear creates value. Exactly how much value is lost and gained is the key.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
 
My knowledge of Queensland planning law is not great, I have only done one sub-division in the state, but how about this approach:

Consolidate the two backyards into one allotment of say 620m2 (as suggested) and use this allotment to construct two dwellings on the one title.

The benefits of this approach are financially motivated. The two original dwellings could be sold, and the dwellings on the rear allotment developed and held. This would provide the best depreciation benefits (on the new dwellings) and a fantastic equity position once the original dwellings were sold.
 
Boundary realignment to create a seperate lot at the rear would be the best option for resale. If however you can not go down that road due to the planning scheme.

Would it be another option to desolve the lots and submit an application to council as a unit development making the front houses units 1 + 2 and the rear built dwellings unit 3 + 4.

Just a thought, will depend on the zoning may be a question best asked of a town planner in the area.

Cheers,

Fourex.
 
Thanks for the replies.

BH, I have spoken to Council regarding that demo issue and they advised me that moving the house would constitute demolition and therefore it is not something they would approve. So that rules that idea out.

After speaking with a few people and Council a more a pertinent proposal has arisen. It is similar in nature to what Joe has described. The proposal is to subdivide the back of both 15 & 17 into 1 new block. This new block would be 600-650sqm of vacant LMR. This means no demolition control constraints. A 3.5m wide easement is required to access the rear block.

I need to look further into the possibility of multi-unit dwellings if there is no frontage. I have a niggling feeling it is not permissible. This would mean that the new lot would be limited to a single unit dwelling which would throttle its value.

However the feasibility of it is still shaky. Cutting the rear of both blocks with diminish their value. However the creation of a new block at rear creates value. Exactly how much value is lost and gained is the key.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Maybe first look at the costs to split the blocks,but what Fourex is talking about may work,you move both houses foward to a few mts of the fence line with only a partial demolition of the buildings,and retain all existing
and retain all the original building that are not being demolised,but i would look into the numbers first,and depending on the location and price,then build 2 in the back sections,be very carefull with something like this, i have several like this on the table all with DA in place,and 2 of them the vendors have invested over 1.5 million plus holding costs for over 2 years,and they can,t get any offers over 900k:rolleyes:,and both of those only have less then 9 months till the DA runs out on these multi unit developments,also look into what monetary contribution you will have to pay too the BCC,towards sewerage,and the rates specified in the Infrastruture Contributions Planning Scheme Policies,very hard to work the numbers on thios one unless we have a rough idea of the area..
Don't listen to what the r-e is telling you,just work out the numbers..
..good luck willair..
 
Top