Post by Brent George on Jul 10, 2017 20:10:44 GMT
This article (Stuff (Dominion Post) 11-July-2017) seems to describe a misunderstanding of the purpose of a road, and the purpose of the portion of land between the kerb-line and the private property boundary or "berm".
The former is to provide legal frontage and allow for physical access to property.
The latter is to provide legal frontage and allow for physical access to a property.
The misunderstanding results from the way many people treat their berms - and also sometimes their neighbouring berms and even the berms across the road from them (as in this case). As soon as someone takes care of their berm - mowing it; weeding it; doing edges; even planting on it - they assume additional rights and responsibilities - but these rights are only moral at best, and certainly lack any legal rigour.
It would appear that this case escalated due to a simple (and unfortunately common) factor - lack of communication. If the Council had advised residents early on that their planting on the berm (= legal road) was at their own risk; if the developer or landowner had advised the neighbours of their intentions and explained the need to construct an access; if the developer had offered to re-plant after the works; etc.
This situation is probably not the best way to start "neighbourly relations" with a newcomer to the neighbourhood Support Group.... 