Question: Our car parks have a retention pit on the far side with a drop of up to 500mm. Residents are reluctant to park in these spaces due to the precipice. Is there a legislative requirement for a safety barrier?
I own a unit in a 12 unit single level complex. Each unit has a car park adjacent to its unit. My car park has a retention pit on the far side with a vertical, sloping drop off of 300mm to 500mm. My neighbour in unit 2 has a level drop off of 200mm. Residents are reluctant to park in these spaces, especially at night, due to the precipice.
I would like to know what the legislation is regarding this area as I feel that a safety barrier is required.
Answer: No, but the greater risk to the body corporate is the duty of care that everybody corporate has over the common property.
This is a great question to raise and one that we receive quite regularly from Strata Communities. As we advise on safety reporting and compliance across the entire Australasian region, we come across many scenarios like this one.
To answer the question of ‘is there a legislative requirement for a safety barrier’… the simple answer is no. The building code and the national construction code only reference the need to have a barrier or system to prevent a fall when the possible fall is 1 metre or greater. As you have described the precipice only reaches a maximum of 500mm.
Now that covers the requirements under relevant building and construction codes. BUT the greater risk to the body corporate is the duty of care that everybody corporate has over the common property.
As you have identified and most would notice even at a glance, this scenario is still a hazard. Whilst it does not breach any specific codes, you have a trafficable area of vehicles and people, with a sharp drop into a retention pit.
A pedestrian walking could easily slip, particularly at night without lighting and a vehicle reversing could misjudge the edge and cause significant damage to the mechanisms of the car.
In strata, whilst it is always important to observe and be aware of the relevant codes and standards of compliance, it’s even more important to remember the term ‘reasonably practicable’ because these would be the words you would hear in court when an owner or visitor sues you.
The courts would ask, what did you do that was “reasonably practicable” to mitigate this hazard and prevent injury or damage?
It is quite reasonable to believe that this scenario could be a hazard and therefore the strata scheme has a duty of care to mitigate or at least minimise the risk. Simply failing to act would not be an excuse in court.
In my opinion, it would be worth contacting the builder and asking about the necessity of this retention pit. Does it need to be this deep given there are two stormwater drains in the pit? If so, then we would strongly be recommending that a barrier of some sort be installed and ensure that this barrier is a contrasting colour to ensure drivers of vehicles will see it when trafficking the area.
We would also recommend lighting be installed to assist visitors walking up and down the common property at night.
This post appears in the February 2022 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Dakota Panetta
Solutions in Engineering
E: dakotap@solutionsinengineering.com
P: 1300 136 036
Leave a Reply