Skip to main content
Clean Best logo
Menu
Call 02 5839 30120485 000 860

Frenchs Forest NSW 2086

Two Frenchs Forest schemes sharing services through one committee

Some developments contain more than one strata scheme, with shared driveways, plant and entries governed by an arrangement sitting above both of them. Deciding who cleans a shared entry then involves a committee that neither scheme's owners think of as theirs, and that most of them have never heard of.

Request a fixed quote Call 02 5839 3012

In short

Where a Frenchs Forest development contains more than one strata scheme, shared areas such as driveways, entries and plant may be managed under a building management arrangement rather than by either scheme individually. Decisions about cleaning those areas sit with that body, not with either committee alone.

Clean Best asks how a development is structured before quoting, because it determines who the client is and who can approve a change. The scope then names the responsible body for each area so nobody is issuing instructions they are not entitled to give. That way an instruction always comes from a party entitled to give it.

A third decision-maker most owners have never met

Owners in a multi-scheme development generally understand their own committee. Far fewer are aware that a separate body governs the areas both schemes rely on, or that its decisions bind them through their scheme's participation rather than through their own vote. That distance produces genuine surprise when somebody discovers the entry they use every day is not their committee's to decide about. It is a structure that works perfectly well and that almost nobody has explained to them.

For a cleaning arrangement it matters because instructions from the wrong body cannot be acted on. A committee member asking for a change to a shared driveway is asking about an area their scheme does not control alone. Establishing at the outset which body holds which area, and who is authorised to speak for it, avoids a cycle of requests that go nowhere and frustrate everybody involved.

Splitting a scope along governance lines rather than geography

The natural way to write a cleaning scope is by walking the site and grouping areas that sit near each other. In a multi-scheme development that produces a document nobody can approve, because a single section covers areas belonging to three different decision-makers. The scope has to follow the governance structure even where that means splitting spaces that a cleaner treats as one job. Convenience for the crew is the wrong organising principle for a document that has to be approved.

Done properly it is straightforward. Each body receives the parts it controls, priced separately and reported separately, while the work itself is still delivered in one efficient visit. That way each committee sees only what it funds, can approve or vary its own portion, and is never asked to consider a figure that includes areas outside its control. Each body also gets a figure it can compare year to year without other parties' costs moving inside it.

Business park and healthcare occupiers add their own expectations

Developments of this kind often mix corporate offices, healthcare and hospitality within the same site. Those occupiers arrive with different views about presentation, access and hours, and they direct those views at whoever they can reach, which is usually their own building's committee rather than the body that actually controls the shared areas. The request then sits with a body that is sympathetic and powerless, which satisfies nobody.

The remedy is a stated route rather than better cleaning. Occupiers who know that a request about the shared driveway goes to a particular body, in writing, will use it. Occupiers who do not will raise it repeatedly with a committee that cannot act, and both parties will conclude the arrangement is not working when the real problem is that the request never reached anybody with authority.

Multi-scheme points for a Frenchs Forest development

  • The structure of the development confirmed before quoting
  • Each area allocated to the body that controls it
  • Separate pricing and reporting for each responsible body
  • The authorised contact named for each portion of the scope
  • A stated route for occupier requests about shared areas
  • One delivery visit despite the split documentation
Clean Best supervisor reviewing office and strata cleaning quality in Parramatta NSW

Working in Frenchs Forest and the Northern Beaches

Frenchs Forest on the Northern Beaches holds healthcare, business parks, schools and local retail, including developments where several buildings share driveways, parking and entries under arrangements that sit above the individual schemes. Occupiers in those developments range from corporate offices to clinical practices, each with its own view of presentation and none with a direct vote on the shared areas. Working out who decides is the first step in any cleaning arrangement there. Clean Best services Frenchs Forest from Seven Hills and confirms the structure before pricing anything.

Questions about Frenchs Forest

Who decides on cleaning of a driveway shared between two schemes?

Usually the body that governs the shared areas under whatever arrangement the development was set up with, rather than either scheme's committee acting alone. The strata managing agent for either scheme can normally explain the structure. Establishing it early avoids requests being sent to a committee that has no authority to act on them. A short note in the building explaining the structure often prevents the problem entirely.

Why is the scope split when one crew does all of it?

Because each portion has to be approved and funded by a different body. A document combining them cannot be approved by anyone, since no single committee controls all the areas in it. Splitting the paperwork while delivering the work in one visit keeps the governance clean without adding cost or duplicating attendance. It also keeps each body's figure comparable from one year to the next.

Can our committee ask for more attention to the shared entry?

It can raise the request, but the decision belongs to the body that controls that area. A written request through the proper channel, ideally with a quoted option attached, is much more likely to result in a decision than raising it at your own committee meeting where nobody present has the authority to act. Requests routed correctly the first time are resolved in weeks rather than months.

Do occupiers need to know the structure?

They need to know where to send a request, which is a simpler thing. A short note stating which contact handles shared areas and which handles their own building resolves most of the frustration. Occupiers rarely care about governance structures; they care that a request they made reaches somebody who can do something about it.

Does this arrangement cost more to service?

Not usually. The work is delivered in one visit regardless of how the paperwork is divided, so the efficiency is unchanged. What differs is the administration, since separate pricing and reporting is required for each body. That is a small overhead compared with the cost of an arrangement that nobody can approve or vary. It is considerably cheaper than the alternative of an arrangement nobody can vary.

Related pages

Get a fixed written quote for Frenchs Forest

Free walkthrough, scope in writing, price back within 24 hours.

Request a quote
Call nowEmail us