- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Parking is a perennial issue in many OCs and nothing inflames quite like some one parking in your allocated car park.
Car park bollards are an easy fix and they can come with remotes to raise and lower them. So not so inconvenient any more.
Some OCs oppose car park bollards whilst others are accepting of them. There is a particular OC that is opposed to bollards in my mind. I did search here but only found a discussion on painting a car park floor that seemed relevant. So I am raising directly.
Installing a bollard would be a modification within a lot. Sect 132 has something to say about attaching fixtures or chattels to walls/floors if the boundaries are denoted as interior face of the building.
However external appearance 138B does give an OC some powers to make rules. A yellow bollard is intended to stand out. External appearance is somewhat fuzzy in concept. In the case at hand the OC has not yet made rules so perhaps it cannot or should not make rules retrospectively.
Sect 140 restricts the ability to make rules that are oppressive or prejudicial or unfairly discriminating against a lot owner. Rules that prevent a car park owner to ensure their car park is available for their use when needed might be oppressive or prejudicial to a lot owner.
Interpreting sect 140 is above my pay grade. Can anyone suggest how it should be taken or know of any VCAT decisions that are relevant to car park bollards where an owner and an OC is in dispute?
-
Replies
-
Installation of bollards is more likely to be about a trip hazard, than visual.
It is also possible if the committee hasn’t turned its mind to bollards, they say “no” until they have had time to consider.
I would suggest that you do the research for them and submit permission for a product that is recessed into the floor, could be telescopic and when upright is the sufficient height that a car can see it when reversing. There may need to be consultation with a structural engineer to determine the depth of recess without compromising the structural integrity (if it is not a slab on the ground). It may also need to be lit, if there is insufficient ambient lighting.
The product needs to address the risk for the owners corporation whilst balancing the needs of owners. If you propose a surface mounted solution, then add that you will provide signage and continuously have “public liability” for your private property and that you will indemnify the owners corporation for any injury caused from your installation and provide a certificate of currency every 12 months.
Do the research, provide alternatives and submit to the committee for consideration. The committee needs to act reasonably. This doesn’t mean they have to say Yes to your proposal, but it does mean they need to weigh the pro’s and con’s and give reasons as to why you can or can’t have the bollard.
If you still feel aggrieved, then you can then contest the committees decision at VCAT.