- This topic has 8 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 months ago by .
27/06/2020 at 3:45 pm #50728azaghulFlatchatter
We are in a complex of 15 lots, with only 1 allocated parking space/lot (the garage), 4 visitors spaces and nothing to spare. As most are now multicar housholds, parking is at a premium.
There are 3 spaces on common property that have been used informally as residents parking for over 15 years, on a first-in, first-out basis. But this seems to run foul of the parking on common property by-law. We’d like to legally convert them to residents parking. We’ve got an egnigmatic answer from our SM, but every email to them seems now to incur a sundry charge, so a bit reluctant to ask again.
Our advice is we need to send out letters to all residents. Or is it best to get the SC to have a formal vote so its properly documented, then send out letters (or a letterbox drop)?
30/06/2020 at 6:51 pm #50773Laney101Flatchatter
Agreed Jimmy with the oldies making up their own rules sigh. Contributing to this thread, our complex of 9 in WA has 7 visitor’s bays that are used for just that and also for any 2nd cars that we have granted written approval for parking. Currently our resident vehicle numbers allow for it. Only 3 units with 2 cars. We have an extreme amount of common gardens that we wish to convert into 4 more bays. Allowing for 11 in total.
Each unit gets a second permanent designated bay for their own use ( in addition to their carports ) or their visitors/tradies etc plus 2 spare. Win, win right ? Parking issues sorted, adds to our property value and allowing for the possibility of increase in vehicles in the complex. No more dramas yay.
Nope, we got road blocked by our local shire/council in the initial planning and surveying stages. They have stipulated they will not and will never give approval for us to develop the landscaped areas.29/06/2020 at 4:29 pm #50769Jimmy-TKeymaster
… convene a meeting, get the 3 spaces made legal, and move forward to the tribunal for the parking infringement.
See Kaindub’s comments below. Your development approval would have come with certain conditions and that includes the number of parking spaces for your block. Now, your local council may be OK with this change of use (because that’s what it is) but there’s every chance that they won’t be. And you can pass all the by-laws that you like, but they can’t contravene superior laws … like Planning laws, for instance.29/06/2020 at 4:24 pm #50757azaghulFlatchatterChat-starter
I know, it can get rather convoluted…
I’d say like a lot of strata complexes, people on the SC are always willing to complain, but not actually take thier responsibility seriously and do anything…lets leave that for somebody else. And I don’t want to become to sole parking police for the complex.
I think our best bet is to get the SM to convene a meeting, get the 3 spaces made legal, and move forward to the tribunal for the parking infringement.29/06/2020 at 3:38 pm #50759kaindubFlatchatter
The first problem you have changing the visitors parking into “other “ parking.
The building approval by the council was based on the premis of a certain number of visitor parking spaces. In order to reduce the number of visitor parking spaces will require a DA approved by the council . Good luck getting that approved as council requirements are more stringent today. Without council approval every other step is academic.
Check what type of resolution is required for what you propose. Most changes to use of common property require a unanimous resolution. Your elderly resident could vote against your proposal and you’re back to square one.
The “sharing” of these visitor parking spaces is just going to cause more future trouble. People, rightly or wrongly, will claim others have unfair access or use of the spaces. Someone is going to sort this out, and neither the police nor NCAT are going to help you because no law has been broken.
If you can get the visitor parking spaces reclassified, then consider auctioning off the spaces . Maybe make a yearly lease for each space and rent the spaces to the highest bidder.
You may suddenly find that owners are not prepared to rent the parking and find somewhere else to park.
Finally your SM is correct. You have to present in court with clean hands. Until the current mess is cleaned up, your elderly owner will quite rightly claim he is being victimised, and until a clean pair of hands is presented in court, the courts won’t enforce a judgement against him.
Finally remember the police have no jurisdiction in terms of parking on common property. They will quite rightly say it’s a strata issue.
Parking on common property is covered by a by law and so it’s a civil and not a criminal matter29/06/2020 at 11:23 am #50755Sir HumphreyStrataguru
I am not sure I followed all the detail. However, I don’t quite understand how things are improved by giving away a shared common property resource (the 3 parking spaces) to just a few owners.
I can see where your manager is coming from in that you need to be able to show that you are being even-handed. Perhaps you do that by cracking down consistently and simultaneously on all instances of parking that is not in designated parking spaces.
If there is anyone parking on common property while not using their allocated garage space for parking, then crack down on that. At the Tribunal, your argument is that they are diminishing the use and enjoyment of the common property by using for routine parking because they are not using their own garage.
If some common property parking is not causing an obstruction to other but you want to go to the Tribunal over the instance that is causing an obstruction, then that is your point of difference. Make it not about parking on common property in general but about obstruction of others’ access to their allocated parking.29/06/2020 at 9:43 am #50749Jimmy-TKeymaster
This sounds very like this question from WA. Coincidence? An epidemic of grumpy old neighbours parking where they like? Or something more sinister? Is one of the Oldies newsletters telling their readers to ignore by-laws becasue they are untouchable?29/06/2020 at 9:35 am #50736azaghulFlatchatterChat-starter
Thanks Sir H…Generally the SC would be happy to just let things stay as they are. This then opens the can-o-worms of other parking issues. I was trying to keep the parking issues seperate.
We have an eldery resident that has parked in front of thier garage for years (common property), has raised a motion at the last AGM wanting permission to formalize that arrangement (failed), we’ve had the vehicle towed, and a notice to comply issued (ignored). The resident had a fall over christmas and is claiming mobility issues. While we are not unsympathetic to thier plight, due to the layout of the complex, allowing the car (a large 4WD) to remain where it is, or in a nearby common property location, obstructs/blocks access for 3 other residents to use thier garages. One of these residents is blind and thier carer needs garage access. The reason given for parking where they do is “i have mobility issues, and need easy access to my car”. To add to things, the car is usually not moved for days, twice a week if we’re lucky.
The SC wants to take this to the tribunal as our next step for non-compliance, mediation was initiated by the resident, but they did not like who our representatives were. The SM suggests that we need to go in with “clean hands” ourselves and formalize the above 3 spaces for residents before doing so…this is so that the offending resident can’t then say “others are parking on common property without penalty, why am i being singled out”…
- They could park thier car in one of the 3 newly allocated “residents spaces”, but due to the size of the 4WD and small size of the space, they tend to scrape thier car.
- We could allocate a space in the visitors parking, but thats 150m away and would be too far for thier mobility issues.
- They could park in thier garage, but they claim they cannot reverse (which i thought was a prerequisite to drive)…but can do a 5-7 point turn to get out.
Yes, the SC should not have let this go on for so long…hindsight 🙂
Lets just say we are a little frustrated, to the extent where police were called due to people being parked in.
Unfortunately there are other issues with this resident, so nobody is really on speaking terms with them. Even the SM has thier own set of issues.
We are all just looking for a way forward and would rather no have to go to the tribunal.27/06/2020 at 3:53 pm #50732Sir HumphreyStrataguru
I think the simplest thing would be for the 15 owners to decide to continue with the current practice and turn a blind eye to the bylaw if all are of the opinion that nobody would benefit from enforcing it.
If the parking spaces on common property are not those designated as visitor parking (so can’t be reallocated to another purpose) and were built as parking spaces from the start, then clearly their purpose was for parking by residents. If they were unallocated, then it seems to me that your current practice is consistent with their common property purpose. It sounds like all lot owners get a chance to use them since people come and go; everyone has a chance they will find a vacant space on returning home. I would say you only have a by-law problem if one lot owner uses a space all the time (perhaps by leaving a car than never moves) preventing other owners from deriving ‘use and enjoyment’ from that common property.
- This reply was modified 5 months ago by .
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.