Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Our Strata Management Review site now has 90+ reviews. As Jimmy says we believe recommendations from other owners are one of the best ways to find out which company would likely be a good fit for your building.
It’s simple – Write a Review – Read the ReviewsMy take on the DBP and the sleeper issue Fire Compliance!
- For existing strata buildings — particularly older, smaller schemes — the consequences of DBP are significant and likely largely unintended, however that does not ease the pain!
- The Act operates alongside the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
The threshold question is whether works require development consent. If they do, DBP obligations may follow.
Owners corporations have rarely had to interact with planning law or planners — this is unfamiliar territory for both volunteer committees and strata managers.
In practice, confusion is rife. Roofers are advising that routine roof repair works are automatically subject to DBP requirements, when in many cases the first and critical question is whether planning consent is required at all. The result is paralysis and delayed maintenance. - Many 1960s–1980s buildings must have major structural elements renewed if they are to last another 40–50 years — balconies, concrete, roofing, waterproofing and services. This is essential renewal to preserve housing stock.
- If renewal is delayed due to compliance cost and uncertainty, buildings risk sliding into “fire sale” territory — and we are already seeing this dynamic emerge in the context of fire compliance on well-located sites, where financial distress creates acquisition opportunities.
- Most strata schemes were never funded for today’s construction pricing let alone the added costs of DBP compliance and implementing new fire standards in older buildings once major works trigger planning and DA approvals.
Capital works funds are insufficient. Special levies are now common — and often substantial & I cannot see this changing. - For many residents in older walk-ups, typically the affordable end of the market, the financial burden is overwhelming. Compliance intended to make buildings safer is, in practice, forcing owners to sell. Usually the more vulnerable & elderly – the irony is inescapable.
- The objective was stronger buildings. But a one-size-fits-all regulatory approach is not working. Without a proportionate, risk-based framework for existing strata schemes, compliance costs risk destabilising the very communities the legislation seeks to protect.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thankyou, Jimmy & Sue, for the interview with Linton.
I hear you say “….we get the usual nonsense, as we’ve had from SCA in the recent past …”
And look what the reaction from SCA has been …..
We might have hoped for something along the lines “ We will take measures to restore Integrity in the profession”, but
No it’s…. “We will take measures to restore Faith in the profession”
The spin doctors have made sure that it is us strata owners who are being asked to change ( change our view of SMs) ! rather than than any admission that the SM profession itself has to change its standards.
John Hutchinson
Strata AnswersAt the outset it is important to consider what most owners would want for EV charging both now & into the future & aim to set up accordingly. The committees responsible for navigating this future planning must consider alternatives that are fair & in the best interests for their building situation.
A thoughtful approach up front will hopefully prevent pain further down the road.
Setting up agreements like those suggested requires ongoing management. Who will do this and at what cost?
Certainly would recommend any agreements made have timeframes written in.Hi TM_15,
Waste disposal is an ongoing issue in strata that is for sure – all part of the joys of community living.
Sounds like I am in the same local government area & am planning on embarking on a bit of an education program within the scheme I have moved into around garbage. I wonder if a bit of collaboration maybe useful for us both.
I have contacted the council waste team and they are extremely supportive of any champions within strata buildings.
Send us an email if you think it would of value to compare notes.Tonja.gibson@strataanswers.com.au
Hi Bonnie,
Front doors to apartments need to be fire rated doors. If you have a security building access can be a problem – you can contact your local brigade and enquire if they will hold a key, however sometimes it is a different brigade that attends.Strongly recommend the OCN seminar on Fire Safety in apartment buildings on March 14
Sign up here – https://www.ocn.org.au/civicrm/event/info%3Fid%3D91%26reset%3D1
Ah Melanie
The joys of a 2 lot strata scheme.
This is the strata version of “Married at First Sight”
They are a nightmare for strata managers and one wonders if they should even be allowed. Perhaps a prerequisite for anyone wanting to purchase into a 2 lot scheme is that they undergo couples counselling with the other party before they sign on the dotted line!
However, given that you have indeed signed up for cohabiting with your neighbour it is in your interest to find a way to make it work so that you and your neighbour can live together peacefully.
From what you have said it does appear that your neighbour would perhaps like to think of the pool as her own personal property rather than a shared facility.
Coming to a harmonious arrangement for pool usage for you both as soon as possible will potentially save much angst and drama into the future. And solutions are most likely found in psychology books rather than strata law.
Perhaps a way to view it is as an opportunity for you to get in ahead of the game and learn how to be your own mediator.
Mediation has a number of steps that you could think about
- Exploration – Listen & get to know the other party. Allow time for talking. Listen for what are underlying interests.
- Reframing – try to find a way to reframe any issues into Neutral, Mutual & Future Focussed language.
- Work on a mutually beneficial solution – come to an agreement
Not easy stuff, & no magic bullet but better to get in early and address any issues before they become entrenched.
As an owner you are able to inspect all the books & records of your strata scheme. This will include the strata roll. Often the strata roll may not have phone numbers or email addresses, however it is likely that the strata manager does have a list of these. These should also be made available to you as they form part of the books & records in our view.
As you are a committee member I would think it would be expedient for the strata manager to just supply you with this list.
The following is as explained by a lawyer on a panel Q & A at Griffith Strata Conference in Sept 2019
The privacy act does not prevent the release of personal information if you are required to by statute. Every state has a regime where people are required to allow inspection, including inspection of personal information as defined under the Privacy Act. You need to have a privacy policy which explains that to people & that’s often where the failure is, the managers who would be subject to the act not having an adequate privacy policy that explains that.
Perhaps you can ask your strata manager to see a copy of his privacy policy?
I would say the word residents is important here. Building managers need to know who is actually living in the building for lots of reasons. Emergency situations being the most pertinent. It really is in your interests that the BM has a current contact list of both email & mobile numbers.
Increasingly I find people prefer their information via text message rather than email. Our building management portal allows for bulk messages to be sent out – this is used for important messages only. As a committee, our expectation is that the BM would keep the contacts list relevant. It helps us better manage the building and communicate with the residents in a timely manner.
It is unlikely that the strata manager will have an up to date list of tenants.
Have a look at the SP number
1 – 8539 = Pre 1974
8540 + 1974 on