[Tony]

Hi Again 

Can someone please tell me if this advice is accurate from a recent EC meeting as I am leaving for overseas on Wednesday and need to respond urgently thanks in advance :-

From recent EC meeting :- 

It was also noted that based on advice received from The Strata Managers that the EC does not have authority to approve the use of the seal and that a motion for approval to execute the DA application will be included with the AGM agenda.

EC noted the new procedure issued by the Community Association in relation to application for owners wishing to undertake works which require CA approval. The EC noted that the process is lengthy, cumbersome and inefficient and which will result in owners having to request two (2) general meetings of the Owners Corporation to process an application (one for the DA consent and another for the strata by-law).

Regards Tony 

[Tony]

Thanks OverIT I actually did call planning and they indeed do have an exemption for screen enclosures but only for single or 2 level residential dwellings NOT multi storey apartments which is our situation.

Neeedless to say matters have reached an all time low of late !

Last Saturday whilst standing on our balcony ‘clapping away’ some pesky indian minors buzzing our cat we were confronted by our neighbour who started screaming and threatening at me from his balcony telling me that the temporary blind I erected was a provocation and that i should remove it immediately and that i should get rid of my cat etc etc etc and after a 20 min rant concluded by saying repeatedly that ” i should be careful provoking people as I would get what i asked for  ” – my response was that i didn’t have time to listen to his nonsense and walked away not wishing to engage in a verbal stoush across balconies.

Tonight the same fellow followed me and stopped his car beside me as i walked to my front door then reversed and drove into the basement car park .

I am now on edge even walking to my letterbox not knowing what might await me .

Is this a matter for the police or the OC ?

 

[Tony]

Hi Whale 

You’re a quite right it is up to Council however in our case for reasons that no one can understand the CME made representations to Council basically requesting them to support their position which would require a DA for minor impact works such as screen enclosures.What will be interesting is how Council and the CME deal with the hundreds of lots who have pre existing shutters/blinds without Council approval.

Thanks for the well wishes Whale have very much appreciated your input 

Kind Regards 

Tony 

[Tony]

Thanks Whale and Austman much appreciated the input … am still waiting on OC to respond to my DA request –

Austman – it’s interesting that a DA was accepted by the Council without the OC Seal ….It is the case in NSW as well that you have a distinction between a DA and a building permit however on approaching the duty Town Planner at this Council they indicated that a Seal was required before accepting submission of the DA I might revisit this based on your experience.

Whale to answer your question our individual OC has an overarching Community Management Executive (CME) and Plan that it must adhere to ..after ten years approx the CME have decided to change the procedures with respect to screen enclosures ( why no one knows ) and now require a DA to Council. 

In regards to the Architectural and Landscape Standards they are an annexure of the Community Management Plan as administered by the CME.The issue is they are not consistently applied throughout the estate – eg pot plants !

In frustration i have removed our bright coloured umbrella and replaced it with a white blind which is held up to our pergola by string ..as a temporary measure again I was emailed by the strata manager telling me I must remove this immediately as it requires permission from the OC.

My own research notes that Section 5 – Damage to Common Property that you cannot deface, mark, screw nail etc onto common property but this does not preclude an owner installing a screen to protect children from harm — it is my understanding that as the temporary shade fits with the colour scheme of the A & L standards, is not damaging common property and is required for UV protection then it is OK while i await further advice re our Shutters.

And yes Whale this is the type of nonsense that scares people away from Strata Schemes – for me our OC has lot all credibility and given the circumstances am under no allusion that this matter will have to be resolved by an adjudicator at some point , pity is that there actions has damaged irretrievably my previous strong sense of community.

 

[Tony]

Hi 

We recently found a product available in US ( Silent Blue ) which provided a 72 IIC rating and exceeded all AUST Standards re sound insulation.

Hope this helps

Cheers Tony  

[Tony]

Nonsense continues :-

1. Mediation at Fair Trading on 4/03/14 provided insights into the obvious mal administration of all parties noting that the delay of 12 months was primarily due to the OC not following due process and we also now needed a DA to Council for any screen enclosure . Shame it took 12 months and formal mediation to inform me of that piece of brilliance.

2. And if that wasn’t frustrating enough one day after mediation we were sent a breach notice asking us to remove our pot plants from the balcony and the stand alone umbrella we had offering some sun protection , both were in breach apparently of the architectural and landscape standards of the estate.

3. We have submitted a completed DA to the OC requesting their common seal allowing us to submit it and are awaiting their response after their next meeting.

Question – must we have OC sign off to submit a DA to Council ?

             – If approved from Council do we still need to get approval from >=                  75% of lot owners ?

             – should we just forget due process and simply force mediation and                    NCAT under section 144 2(b) ?

 

[Tony]

Hi ,

The latest update :

1. Discussions with Department of Planning & Council Planner concluded that a DA application may be an avenue to assist provide weight to our case notwithstanding the additional costs and bother. Council advised that loss of a view would not be in itself sufficient objection if impact was approx less than 50%. Further a view corridor analysis would be conducted if above 50% determining the final outcome.

2. On initiating the process I realised approval was required by the owners corporation and Community Association before submission on writing to owners corp ( also informing them that i had taken action against the CA)they told me that they could not provide approval given the current situation with the CA. Interestingly , I received a letter from the CA the same day the first after 5 months noting that they had suspended all shutter instals due to inconsistencies with their own architects advice ( what these are were not explained ) and a new procedure was being written .. and thanked me for my cooperation REALLY !!!   

3. I am disgusted with the politics being played here and look forward to my opportunity to ask them to explain there actions in a formal setting such as the NCAT.

As noted in our letter – we believe that our right to the full use of our balcony, reduction in energy costs , privacy and most significantly protection from the western sun far outweighs any argument to loss of a very partial view .

 

[Tony]

Thanks Whale – agree however given approx 30 per cent of our complex already had the same shutters we naively assumed that we would not have an issue getting approval and we paid 50per cent upfront for the shutters which are complete and waiting to be installed. At that time we were also having timber floors put in and our focus was meeting the by laws for this as it was contentious never imagining given the precedents that we would get no opposition to the floors and absolute whitewash on the shutter.

Nevertheless mediation is on its way , have commenced the DA process but now need to get the body corp to co sign the Da before the Council can accept its submission . It is a ridiculous situation and it doesn’t seem that the new draft laws will address similar situations in the future.

Thanks again for your input champ … best wishes Tony 

[Tony]

Hi 

Spoke to Council today and it seems like I will need a DA for shutters given as I am on the third floor and it needs to comply with all the criteria in subdivision 35 of the State Environmental Planning Policy. I also commenced a request for mediation at Fair Trading as no action can commence at NCAT without undergoing mediation first. Further research on the Community Management Plan governing this estate also notes that any application is deemed to be rejected after three months and to date there has been no communication from them in over 4 months thanks guys , you really are conducting your roles for the greater good !

Tony 

 

[Tony]

Thanks again for the heads up JimmyT you’re the ‘Stephen Hawkins’ of Strata Management – will give our next steps some further thought as our patience has been sorely tested. Meanwhile I’ll get onto Council immediately and initiate a clause in respect to a special by-law as suggested .

Interestingly ,I’ve also been advised recently by our own Body Corporate that they are hamstrung until further advice regarding our application is forwarded by the Community Association. Needless to say , they have strongly urged me not to action its installation without approvals , as they will have no option but to get orders to have it removed and they are confident given their legal advice that they will win at a considerable financial cost to us !

Our decision to sell our family home for an apartment and more community based lifestyle has been shattered !

Kind Regards – Tony & Melinda  

[Tony]

Hi ,

As promised here is the latest update :

The Community Association met last week and a fly on the wall has informed me that all ongoing shutter applications including mine continue to be deferred. It is some of the executives belief that they will be held liable if say a shutter happens to fall off a balcony and hit a car for example (funny how there is no history of a single issue over the past ten years to instigate this concern ), needless to say a new procedure is supposedly being drafted that includes the requirement for owners to submit a Development Application to Council from now on. Apparently we ( current applicants ) are to be informed of this sudden piece of genius in writing at some stage.

Question is —

Will I have to comply with this new procedure and hence have to wait till I am informed in writing by the Community Association or should i simply act on my previous letter and commence action at CTTT ?

Can these bodies simply change the rules whenever it suits without resident input or actual evidence underpinning it ?

Thanks to everyone for their continued interest and advice to date .

Regards Tony 

 

 

[Tony]

These are all great suggestions and excellent advice thank you all so so much it really has given us some encouragement to keep persevering … We have over the weekend put up a free standing “bright orange” umbrella temporarily as we thought it would make an excellent contrast to the more architecturally appropriate white shutters we actually have requested .

We now await advice from the Community Association Executive before actioning next steps. If they approve it in principle we still have to get it through the next hurdle at our own Owners Corporation.

Needless to say I will follow the Jimmy T’s advice to the letter writing both to all lot owners and taking it to CTTT if necessary – as mentioned by KP there is no general by law in relation to shutters at this complex but interestingly there is in other Owner Corps across the Estate.

There seems to be no consistency in relation to this issue ,however i agree with KP that existing owners in this complex who have previously installed shutters without a by law will be put on notice if we take the issue to the CTTT and fail. 

Will keep you posted  

 

[Tony]

I have been informed by our owners corp that proxies I received from lot owners in anticipation of a special resolution are not valid – only after a letter and agenda is sent by the owners corp will proxies be accepted. further I am told that only 25 per cent need to vote no and experience of general meetings is that only 20 or so owners turn up and it is easy to get 4 or 5 voting against in this instance my neighbour is more aligned with a number of owners and has I am told already secured a voting block regardless of whether I am successful at the community estate level. I have also been informed by the owners corp that they will seek orders to make me remove the shutters if I go ahead without permissions and that I am unlikely to win the case if I try to get adjudicators orders as there is now a very detailed document trail explaining due process .

Heaven help us if this is what is supposed to be community living !

[Tony]

Sorry about that – CMS is the community association executive for the estate !

 

[Tony]

Thanks again KP and Jimmy – here is a copy of my email to the CMS today :-

 

Dear Sir, 

 

Further to our previous email correspondence of the 5th December, 2013 wherein we still await a response , we understand that the CMS has now again deferred our application pending discussions with the local council on so called procedural matters notwithstanding our approval  … suggesting at any time that this was a requirement pre installation  .

 

We also understand that since our application in September 2013 , not all Shutter Applications within the Community have been deferred, noting approval for shutters at lot Y for the install of two shutters 28/10/13 ; lot Z fixed shutters north and south with 100 per cent coverage 25/11/13 seemingly indicating a glaring inconsistency in the application of due process.  

 

Given that our application will provide much needed sun screening to the western side of the balcony only and will remain open for the majority of the year… not to mention other similar and more pervasive instals at the same complex we cannot comprehend the reasoning for selectively discriminating against this approval.

 

… it is our intention to use the shutters in a fully extended position to screen the western sun during the hotter months/days . 

 

Accordingly we ask that the CMS reconsider our application and approve its installation on or before its next meeting. Otherwise we will have no option but to seek adjudicators orders at the CTTT .

 

It is our fervent hope that common sense prevails and that the CMS time is given to the many more competing and difficult priorities within the estate .

 

[Author]

Replies