Should we get rid of an outdoor laundry drying area?

While I am unfamiliar with Victorian strata law, I am sure it would contain provisions for the class of resolution required for an owners corporation to change the use of an area of common property. It could be reasonable to informally poll owners to find out whether most owners value the provision of outdoor clothes drying and would like that reinstated after doing roof repairs or not. That could then inform what motion is put to a general meeting. The owners corporation certainly has to get on with fixing the roof. Whether the drying facilities are then reinstated or the area is put to some other purpose or nothing further is done is then a matter for the owners to decide.

Setting aside concerns for soaring energy costs and global warming, sadly typical of Victorian strata law, this is not as simple as it should be. You will need a special resolution to change common property which requires a vote in favour of 75% of all owners (not just those voting at the meeting) or 75% of unit entitlements (ditto), if a poll vote is taken.

However, if the vote at the meeting is more than 50% of all owners in the block in favour, and fewer than 25% vote against, it is considered an interim special resolution, in which case owners must be informed withing 14 days and then objectors have 29 days to raise a 25% vote against, otherwise it becomes a special resolution.

No wonder Victorian strata is such a mess.  How does anything significant ever get decided?

In this specific case, the following may be significant:

An owners corporation must not make a significant alteration to the use or appearance of the common property unless … there are reasonable grounds to believe that an immediate alteration is necessary to ensure safety or to prevent significant loss or damage.

Otherwise, here (below) are the requirements for changing common property under non-emergency circumstances.

OWNERS CORPORATIONS ACT 2006 – SECT 52

Significant alteration to common property requires special resolution

An owners corporation must not make a significant alteration to the use or appearance of the common property unless—

(a)     the alteration is

S. 52(a)(i) amended by No. 2/2008 s. 12(2).

(i)     first approved by a special resolution of the owners corporation; or

(ii)     permitted by the maintenance plan; or

(iii)     agreed to under section 53; or

(b)     there are reasonable grounds to believe that an immediate alteration is necessary to ensure safety or to prevent significant loss or damage.

OWNERS CORPORATIONS ACT 2006 – SECT 53

Upgrading of common property

(1)     An owners corporation may by special resolution approve the carrying out of upgrading works for the common property and the levying of fees on lot owners for that purpose.

S. 53(1A) inserted by No. 78/2013 s. 7.

(1A)     Subject to subsection (1B), the fees must be based on lot liability.

S. 53(1B) inserted by No. 78/2013 s. 7.

(1B)     Fees for upgrading works carried out wholly or substantially for the benefit of some or one, but not all, of the lots affected by the owners corporation must be levied on the basis that the lot owner of the lot that benefits more pays more.

(2)     In this section “upgrading works” means building works for the upgrading, renovation or improvement of the common property where—

(a)     the total cost of the works is estimated to be more than twice the total amount of the current annual fees; or

(b)     the works require a planning permit or a building permit before they can be carried out—

but does not include works that are provided for in an approved maintenance plan or works referred to in section 4(b).

OPERAKAT wrote:

I’m not sure what your problem with Victoria is …

Lack of transparency (owners have no right to attend strata committee meetings), complete breakdown of underfunded CAV and clogging of  VCAT with a two-year waiting list for hearings. Meanwhile rogue strata committees neglect their responsibilities  and openly flout the law with no redress (such as one refusing to hold an AGM on the grounds that they were likely to be voted off, and CAV, VCAT and ministers not even responding to complaints). And then you have the flammable cladding shambles. And the Aurora scandal.

Everywhere has problems in strata but at least other states have avenues for resolving them.  Victoria has a hidden crisis because politicians and the mainstream media just don’t want to know.  It’s just like NSW – only 20 years ago.

OPERAKAT wrote:

… going by the act you have quoted it’s straightforward and achievable.

Achievable, for sure, but straightforward? I don’t know how many people usually turn up at general meetings in Victoria – or hand in proxies or postal votes – but 75 per cent of all owners or unit entitlements is a massive threshold.

Even 50% of all owners (not just those present or voting at the meeting) is hard to achieve.  Then there’s the whole 29 days “cooling off” period while you wait to see if the opposition can garner 25% of the votes against.

Compare that to NSW where it takes 75 % of votes in favour by the unit entitlements of lots represented at the meeting. If it passes, it passes; if it fails, it fails. Now that is straightforward.  It’s not perfect but it’s easy to understand.