Recently the residents at 21 Coast Ave Cronulla (a unit complex comprising 20 apartments on 7 levels) received an order from a Sutherland Shire Council officer on behalf of J W Rayner, General Manager.

The order in part requires the owners to:

“9. Remove all obstructions in the path of travel to an exit on all levels including scales, floor mats, shoes, artificial plants, pots and bins…

Reason:- to assist in keeping the paths of travel to the exit clear at all times”.

and

“3. Remove screen doors from sole occupancy units that have had them installed.

Reason: – To ensure the fire rating of the internal bounding walls between a unit and common area are maintained at the required fire rating 90/90/90, to stop the spread of fire into a SOU and to ensure the path of travel is not restricted from the sole occupancy unit”.

Is this red tape gone overboard? How are floor mats or shoes fire hazards or obstacles in paths? Is it also an offence to have shoes on the inside of the apartment door? How is having shoes or a mat inside the apartment door any different than having shoes or a mat outside the apartment door?

Secondly, in relation to the security/screen doors, there are 2 elderly ladies who live alone in the building, and both have a security/screen door on their units (the only security/screen doors in the building). However, during a recent fire inspection the Sutherland Shire Council says that all security/screen doors have to be removed. This is despite the doors having been professionally installed and previously passing fire inspections. Also, there is a certified fire door already in place at these 2 units in addition to the security/screen door. However, despite this, Council has ordered that the security/screen door be removed.

This basically means that any unit, in the Sutherland Shire or elsewhere for that matter, can not have a security/screen door. I would have thought that this would impact ten of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people, and it would just not be restricted to residential premises.

Perhaps this is old news, but it is new to me and to the residents of 21 Coast Ave, Cronulla. In particular I feel sorry for the poor old ladies who had the screens installed because they no longer can have that feeling of added security, let alone pay the cost of removing the screens.

As a candidate for Ward A, can you please advise:

1. Why is Council wasting ratepayers money to ensure shoes are not left at doors, and that welcome mats be removed?

2. Are all buildings in the entire shire receiving the same micro attention? If so, how is Council funding all this administrative cost and where will the staff come from to resource this? If not, why are only certain buildings being victimised and why isn’t there consistency across the shire?

3. A quick sample of other unit buildings in Coast Ave by me have identified that over 90% of the buildings would fail a similar council order. Is a similar order being made on all these other buildings?

4. How can the 2 elderly ladies gain a feeling of security?

A copy of the relevant parts of the order are attached.

I look forward to your response.

Regards