PCYC issues

July 30th, 2010

The headlines in The Chronicle while highlighting an issue, could be somewhat misleading. Council has been working closely with PCYC management and the Fire Services to ensure that any necessary fire safety related issues are dealt with in an efficient and timely manner. As the building owner Council must ensure that legislation is adhered to and it goes without saying that everyone has the safety of PCYC users as their first priority.

For background – Council owns the land and the building and PCYC leases the facility from Council. Fire safety issues relate to the differing uses of, and types of, buildings. Sport related uses are classified differently to non sport related uses by fire safety related legislation.

Council together with the PCYC does want to extend the building for a much deserved third court so Council is keen to ensure that the building is safe and that it complies with requirements now and into the future.

I look forward to the third court being built.  The resolution copied below from the Council website outlines the requirements needed to ensure that ALL functions in the centre can continue. Sport and non sport activities. The main point that I personally want to make is that as building owner, I believe Council does have a moral as well as a legal responsibility to ensure the safety of all users of the building.

Could I also draw attention to the fact that while this matter was discussed in the confidential section of the Council meeting the outcome of this matter is voted on and clearly outlined publicly and openly. Minutes also show how all the Councillors voted.

http://www.frasercoast.qld.gov.au/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=f1006dfe-5a00-4df4-a3b7-b608a2389099&groupId=12430

(Any formatting errors below are mine as copying sometimes muddles text)

ORD 15 CONFIDENTIALORD 15.1 Council Property Matter

RESOLUTION

( Dalgleish / MucKan )

That, until such time as a satisfactory resolution is reached to the fire compliance issues within the PCYC building, a number of actions be implemented immediately in order to address Council’s risk as building owner as follows:-

1. Require PCYC to immediately address the following items which have previously been requested in correspondence dated 6 May, 2010:

 

 

 

Remove locks to the gates on the awning side of the PCYC building and replace with single release action hardware;

Demolish the illegal pergola structure located at the northern aspect of the building; and Remove the roller door from the first floor stairwell;

2. Council investigate and attend to the remaining rectification works, as a matter of urgency, in accordance with instructions from Council’s building certifiers;

3. Council advises the PCYC that to enable the continuation of non-sports related activities the PCYC is required to implement the following:

 

 

 

 

Evaluate the adequacy of emergency fire exit doors (including installation of appropriate emergency/fire compliant door hardware) to allow for increase in “allowable” maximum occupant numbers at any given time; 

 

 

Install a temporary auditory warning system that could be used in the event of an emergency to instruct occupants to evacuate the building;

 

 

 

Ensure an appropriate number of trained fire wardens are onsite during times of peak occupancy and special events;

 

 

 

Undertake pressure testing on existing hydrant system to ensure that adequate levels of water pressure are available in the event of an emergency;

 

 

 

Engage QFRS for 1-off events, emergency evacuation and fire fighting;

 

 

 

Ensure good housekeeping of the venue;

4. Finalise investigations, suitable fire safety management options and costing as a matter of urgency;

5. Upon finalisation of point 4. above, forward a report to Council recommending a suitable solution.

Carried Unanimously

Ord 11/226/07/10

 

2 Responses to “PCYC issues”

  1. # Sadmanon 02 Aug 2010 at 7:49 am

    Sue,
    As owners of the PCYC buildings and land, how was it allowed that a “roller door” and “pergola” were installed?

    Based on news reports and your comments above, our police as managers of the club have little understanding of safety issues!!! A bit of a worry really, isn’t it?

    Saman

  2. # Sue Brookson 03 Aug 2010 at 7:56 pm

    Sadman it seems that there is a general lack of understanding sometimes about what applications need to be obtained before even simple structures are constructed. To build a 7m X 2.2m patio on to an existing house for example, requires a Council Building Application it seems. This from my own recent experience. Council, as building owners and as lessor of other buildings, is intent on ensuring leases adequately cover such things.
    The PCYC building has been undergoing regular fire safety checks as do all buildings but as times change so does legislation and often it is when one wants to extensively renovate or extend an existing building that triggers the need to upgrade and become present day compliant I believe. As everyone realises Council has been attempting to extend the PCYC to facilitate a 3rd court.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply