Shared Driveway implications for new dwelling in back garden

Seriouslycurious

A property in our street has made an application to build a new detached dwellling in their back garden. At the front of the property there is a large shared driveway split 6 ways. Each house owns a part of the drive but the hatch plan denotes the common area for which upkeep must be split 6 ways. The question is - how does the shared driveway impact this proposed development. Does that property by law then only have to split their 1/6 upkeep between the 2 of them (the existing and new house) with the rest of the houses continuing to cover the remaining 5/6th? Deeds would have to be amended for this house to reflect that split? Or does it mean that expectation is that the rest of the houses will all have to update deeds to reflect ongoing a 1/7th share? Anyone able to share expertise. 

getmore4less

More important I would think is will this new property have automatic right of access over the current shared access or does the current owner and/or those with access need to agree that access

canaldumidi

The devil is in the detail. A fuller explanation is needed of

* who owns the driveway or each individual section of the driveway?

* what rights of access do other people (householders/ owners of other parts of the drive/vistors/ the publc etc?) have over the various parts of the drive
* what is meant by 'common area'? Is this part of the drive, or perhaps grassland or similar alongside it? Who owns this common area? Who manages it?

* what is the exact wording on the various property Titles, Conveyances, Deeds etc regarding access, maintenance, and payment?

ProDave

The devil is in the detail.  What does the deeds say about right of access over the shared bit?  If it says access to one dwelling they have a problem.

Seriouslycurious

Thanks. The wording appears to me not to preclude this (layperson though). It reads "the right to pass and repass with or without vehicles over the accessway coloured red hatch black on the plan being comprised in the property subject to the transferee paying one sixth of the expense of maintenance costs of the accessway shown on the plan hatched red and black required to keep the area in good repair and condition". It seems to me that the "property" is given these rights and the property as per the deeds is "all and any part of the land transferred as the context shall permit". There are a whole lot of other restrictive covenants as well which are being looked at but the shared driveway has puzzled us. Common area sorry was my layperson language. It means the hatch area referred to in the deeds. It's basically one big drive way with each property owning a section and the very front house owning the section leading on to the highway. The hatch area runs from the road to each house leaving basically the spaces in front of garages as not shared - if that makes sense. All the deeds appear to say the same thing (as above) so each house has ROW over the hatch area. Thank you for commenting!

canaldumidi

What document is this specified in? I suspect the Land Registry property Title may reference an original document (Deed? Conveyance?) as well as quoting part of it, but what is the original source?

There are 6 properties. I assume that the Titles of each of the 6 have identical clauses? You've checked?

And each of the 6 properties owns a section of the hatched area (checked their LR Plans?) with the other 5 having the access rights across, and the cost obligations.

But on the face of it, it appears the costs are split 6 ways, based on the properties. Any change to that would require an amendedment to whatever document, Deed or Conveyance (see my query above!) set out the rights and obigations, and would require the consent of all parties (and legal costs).

I'm no expert, but my strong suspicion is that without sucah an amendment, the land in question would continue to have the same access rights, and cost obligations, irrespective of whether an extra property were or were not built within the curtilage of that original property's land. So the costs would continue to be split 6 ways.

The builder of the new house could, of course, create a new obligation on that (7th) property on whatever basis they chose. They could split the 1/6th cost 50/50, or could choose to make the new property fully liable for the full 1/6th cost (or create any other arrangement).

Happy to be corrected though.

Whether any of this becomes relevant during the Planning Consent process is another consideration. I'm not sure if the Planners could grant consent conditional on the arrangement being altered. Prhaps a planning guru could answer....

Seriouslycurious

Thank you. I've checked my own title and that of 2 of the other houses plus the house in question (that wants to build). They are all near identical in wording. I believe I was reading the registered title but will triple check when home. I was a little pessimistic that this would be a planning matter and maybe something we'd have to deal with legally. I'd rather the whole proposal be rejected but waiting on that!. 

eddddy

Seriouslycurious said:

I was a little pessimistic that this would be a planning matter and maybe something we'd have to deal with legally. 

Yes - it's definitely not a planning matter.  The planners won't be interested in who has rights to use the drive.

MalMonroe

eddddy said:

Seriouslycurious said:

I was a little pessimistic that this would be a planning matter and maybe something we'd have to deal with legally. 

Yes - it's definitely not a planning matter.  The planners won't be interested in who has rights to use the drive.

The planners won't be interested, you're right. But the council has a responsibility to distribute letters to all the affected neighbours and ask for their comments. Because these neighbours WILL be affected.

MalMonroe

Seriouslycurious said:

A property in our street has made an application to build a new detached dwellling in their back garden. At the front of the property there is a large shared driveway split 6 ways. Each house owns a part of the drive but the hatch plan denotes the common area for which upkeep must be split 6 ways. The question is - how does the shared driveway impact this proposed development. Does that property by law then only have to split their 1/6 upkeep between the 2 of them (the existing and new house) with the rest of the houses continuing to cover the remaining 5/6th? Deeds would have to be amended for this house to reflect that split? Or does it mean that expectation is that the rest of the houses will all have to update deeds to reflect ongoing a 1/7th share? Anyone able to share expertise. 

Hopefully you and your neighbours have been notified in writing of this planning application. You should be able to see details of this planning application on your council's planning applications website, details of which they should have supplied.

There should also be a link for you to see plans and maps of the application and for you and your neighbours to object to the building of the dwelling and to give reasons for your objection. Do this soon.

My neighbours and I have all recently objected for the third time to planning application for a development of 65 dwellings in a piece of land in our small village and we trust that the application will be refused again. 

eddddy

MalMonroe said:

The planners won't be interested, you're right. But the council has a responsibility to distribute letters to all the affected neighbours and ask for their comments. Because these neighbours WILL be affected.

That's not really correct. Councils only normally send letters to properties that immediately adjoin the application site.

There are 6 houses on the drive, so it's unlikely that they all adjoin the proposed building plot. 

(Nobody would be applying for planning consent for the land that the drive is on, so there's no need to send letters to properties adjoining the drive.)

But the council planners can choose to send letters to other properties, if they want to.


And just to be clear, objections based on who has rights to use the drive would be ignored by the council, as that's not a planning consideration.




(Edit to add...

Except perhaps, if there was a highways issue - like the drive's junction with the highway is dangerous, so you don't want an extra house which would result in extra traffic using a dangerous junction.)