› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Common Property › Balcony Timber Decking › Current Page
aw, that depends upon what you mean by “appropriate consideration”. Owners need to put an opposing view if they consider such a bylaw unfair. I would agree that the bylaw is aimed at imposing more responsibility on owners but is that necessarially a bad thing?
Our OC recently passed a bylaw making many things, that according to the memorandum put out by the Land and Property Office (AG520000 titled Defining who is responsible for items and areas in a Strata Scheme), an owner’s responsibility. We have done this for items that we consider are in the control of owners eg flyscreens and trees in courtyards.
I have no idea of the physical layout of your strata but if access to the balaconies is only available to owners of particular units, shouldn’t each owner bear responsibilty for the upkeep of ‘their’ balacony? That way each owner is encouraged to look after their ‘exclusive access’ balacony. For example, one owner may use the balacony often while another hardly at all. If I was an owner who hardly ever used my balacony I would feel a bit hardly done by an owner was using a disproportionate amount of OC funds to maintain their balacony just because they used it all the time.
One way or another all owners pay it is just, do we do it through levys?