I've looked at a property which is in need of a reno and is within our target price range. The house is on a corner lot in the eastern burbs of Melbourne and is perfectly positioned to fit 2 extra homes with street frontage. the plan is reno sub divide and sell 1 or 2 lots with plans and permits….However the lot has a covenant (35 yo) on the section 32 stating the lot is for one dwelling house with out-building. A friend tells me the word "one" makes this complicated and all the beneficiaries need to be notified and agree to aprove an alternative sub division.
My question is does anyone have experience arranging the removal of a covenant and how difficult is it?
Ta.If any of the beneficiaries object you're stuffed, unless you want to go to the Supreme Court.
I would look around the area of this property and see if any other properties have been developed with more than one building per lot.
Ring the local council planning department and talk to them about the chances of your proposal.
I know of an area in the northern suburbs of Melbourne that has covenants on the titles for one dwelling only, however there are quite a few units going up around there now.Good luck
Ok I was looking through old posts and saw this one again.
A while back I spoke to a guy I know through the Results 2 program and mentioned this particular deal which I decided not to go any further with on the advice of a town planner friend. He informed me his mate had bought it and was in the process of building 2 units on the back.
Apparently if I had done some research with the council I would have found there had been other subdivisions in the same area on lots with a one dwelling covenant.
My advice is to get a second opinion and do some more research if a deal looks this good so you don't miss out on the profits locked away in a property.We had a Rural PPOR which had the same covenant on it which we were released from. Also in the covenants the previous owner (who did the original subdivision) had the power to remove or alter any covenant so we approached him and he agreed to remove it from our block. This was much easier than trying to gain an agreement from all the other owners.
Hi Winzer.
This sounds like just the sort of property to get. I have found similar situations myself in SA, where covenants had been put in place by the original developer to protect the 'new' development. I did as a previous respondent suggested and looked for other properties that HAD been developed. Then I knocked on the door of the developed property and asked them about how they'd gone about it. They gave me the name of their conveyancer/landbroker, who told me that the original developer no longer existed and another entity had authority over the original covenants. Apparently they were now looking favorably on subivisions, and she was able to handle the process for us. You could try that approach and I wish you good luck.
G
Seeing other multiple dwelling developments in the area is no indication because
A. they may not have the covenant
B. it used to be the case that a council was not required to check if there were any covenants on the land before issuing a permit, therefore they could issue something that was in breach of a covenant and it could then be built.GeraldineM wrote:Hi Winzer.They gave me the name of their conveyancer/landbroker, who told me that the original developer no longer existed and another entity had authority over the original covenants. Apparently they were now looking favorably on subivisions, and she was able to handle the process for us.
I was not aware of any such thing, you may need legal advice. My understanding was that covenants went with the land and other than when they were to do with getting approval from some sort of developer committee or the like, had nothing to do with the developer after they are registered. However, myexperience is from handling planning applications for covenant variations, so I am only aware of applying through the local council or the supreme court.
Cheers,
Melanie
Town Planner
http://www.achangeofplan.com.auHi Melanie.
For your interest, I was talking about Flagstaff Hill, Adelaide, and land originally developed by Hooker Town Developments (I think!) Some land had been released by Barrett & Barrett without the covenants. As the original developer no longer exists the local landbroker had successfully applied to have the restrictions overturned. However, I think the Onkaparinga Council may assess each case individually, based on steepness of land etc. but it is definately happening.
Regards,
G
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
