Houses built so close in Logan, their roofs and gutters touch

Houses built so close in Logan, their roofs and gutters touch

Seems a big failing to not have any recourse against certifiers :/

 

I was really confused by the article initially. Mainly because if they had moved the garage onto the boundary all they needed is for both to have a zero lot design where the gutter goes straight up so that two houses can butt up against each other. I don't get why the other house also doesn't have zero lot guttering too as it's garage is supposed to be where it is which is presumably on the boundary.

So I'm trying to work out if it really is an issue or not?

 

Perhaps when they flipped the garage they didn't adjust the design to suit.

Like all the houses had garages on the left, with 900mm separation on the right so it wasn't going to look this bad etc

 

The article was pretty lacking in information. I gather it's not a zero boundary, the garage is simply too far over. But there's no information about how the rest of the house is situated. As to why there is no recourse against the certifiers

 

but these are terraces

 

But why was the neighbours house also built that way? They are surely zero lot/on boundary too? I don't get it. Hate articles like that which don't actually explain the issue

Maybe it's a QLD thing and they don't do zero lot gutters??

 

Am glad I am not the one trying to lay the bricks from inside the garage, it'd be a PITA
Don't see the problem either, it's just a garage wall

 

Agreed overhand lay - real PITA!

 

I think in this estate there is a building envelope on each block so that only one side of the block can be built to boundary. Eg, all of the houses in the street can be build to the left hand side boundary so no houses are touching. But the builder in the article mirror imaged the house (for some other reason?) and so it sat on the wrong boundary. So then the neighbour has correctly build their house on that same boundary.
But to answer your exactly question, built to boundary is ok in Qld, but the gutters are not meant to stick out. So if both builders planned for this And did the right type of guttering it would have been fine.
But honestly I don’t see the big deal. The garages are next to each other, not habitable rooms.
The original problem stems from the council approving the house being built outside of the building envelope.

 

Most likely next door was approved and not built before they mirror reversed the design. The certifier probably approved the mirror reversed design as to them there was no dwelling next door and unaware of the zero lot design approved. The only real person to fault is the owners themselves for wanting a zero lot design, should have left a side setback. The neighbours on the other hand might be able to get a recourse again these owners but this article doesn't seem to talk about it