Laws of the Land

Property Disclosure Statement - Strata Title Properties:
What is the monthly maintenance fee per month?
Does this include: Gardening?

In 2003, a landscaping committee was formed, and I joined. I asked that we obtain quotes, avoid destructive practices, hire qualified professionals to advise us (i.e. an arborist for preservation and a landscape architect for remediation), vote on decisions, record minutes, and submit written reports. My voice fell on deaf ears. In fact, it was worse than that.

The chair told me that quotes were received, but he didn't like them and threw them away, that Mr. PS's nephew was qualified, that we did not need votes, minutes, and reports, and that my ability to think clearly was in question. After that, he snubbed me, and to the best of my knowledge, that was the end of the landscaping committee.

Mr. Mac had the trees in front of our windows cut down in February 2006, while we were out of town on vacation - while they were in a designated tree cutting permit area - without any kind of vote - without authorization - without need - and despite the strata property legislation and restrictive coventants and all warnings - before Coquitlam, or anyone else, had a chance to stop him. We believe that he acted alone, although he implicated that Mr. PS's nephew was also involved. The trees were mature, viable birch that were specifically preserved during the building envelope project, which were not interfering with pipes or pavement, and with their well established roots there was no evidence that they would ever be likely to do so. Afterward Mr. Mac emailed me saying that he had the right to take actions against his foes. Our view and property value was predicatably damaged, our building sunk as the roots decomposed, and the devastating effect on us was, and is, foreseeable and obvious - if not criminal. http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080308/NEWS04/803080377/1004/NEWS03&template=printart

In addition, I estimate that approximately $50,000 of strata funds was spent to cut down approximately half of the trees on the landscape design, however, the published financial statements do not tell us the cost or where the money came from. Strata trees were not pruned, pests were not controlled, and with more than half the trees cut down trees planted in groves trees were left standing in isolation and fell to the ground uprooted by the wind.

My request for tree replacement was met at a meeting of council with an estimated price to replace a single mature tree of $15,000. Decisions were made on this issue by council and recorded in history - but not in the minutes - not to file a police report, not to investigate the funding and misconduct of the responsible parties, not to make an insurance claim on behalf of the owners to recover from hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars worth of damages, and not to replace the trees.

Multiplying a $15,000 replacement cost by 150 trees = $2,250,000 (2 million, 250 thousand dollars) in damages. At the Annual General Meeting on December 15, 2005, our liability insurance coverage for Directors, Officers & Property Managers was increased to 2 million dollars. Council did not report the loss or make any claim for compensation.

The City of Coquitlam says the value of the individual trees on the Riverview grounds is estimated at more than $50 million; however, the age, variety and condition of the collection as a whole make it worth much more. http://www.coquitlam.ca/Residents/About+Coquitlam/Riverview+Hospital+Lands.htm

The November 17, 2008, Province newspaper reporting on a $100,000 investment loss from the contingency fund says in part:

"Owners of two BC condo complexes have lost substantial amounts from their reserve funds after making risky investments... In the Okanagan case, the owners lost nearly $100,000... Tony Gioventu of the Condominium Homeowners Association warns that condo owners hurt by bad investments can sue their strata council or they may have to absorb the loss... Gioventu said strata councils may try to recoup some of the money by making an insurance claim under the "errors and admissions (sic) insurance of the strata corporations."

Our strata corporation lost over 2 million dollars in landscaping after reckless destruction of trees, plants, and soil - and it was just swept under the rug. I don't understand why we should absorb such an enormous loss. It is not just the immediate costs, but future damages as well. Buildings are already sinking for the second time. The full extent of such loss may not be known for years to come.

Council nevertheless voted to spend the special levy funds that were budgeted for remedial landscaping to build extra decks for a certain minority. These funds were spent after the owners directed council at the AGM to remove the extra decks of owners unwilling to pay to added costs from their existence.

Extra Decks built illegally on common property



















Tree cut down - trellis planter placed on our deck














Pine trees - removed from meridian - stumps ground
Mr. Mac get a panoramic view!














Only about 6 trees were marked as significant risk.
Geotechnical issues ignored:

• Restrictive covenants that run with the land
• Coquitlam tree cutting permit protection bylaws
• Sinking land and buildings

• No site visit by city arborist until April 2006
• After the trees around Unit 409 were cut down

Section 71 of the Strata Property Act ignored

• Mature trees removed - without need
• Invading our home with this soul crushing view
• Leaving noise, air pollution and grime
• Where we saw green leaves in summer and
• Twinkling lights in winter

Loss of use and enjoyment of deck:

• Remedial proposals ignored since 2001
• Twice demolished and reconstructed without requested extension
• Special levy funds diverted from landscape reinstatement to extra decks
  
• User fees not levied for exclusive use and benefit - owners to expect a "Special Privilege" document - drafted by the strata corporation lawyer - specific to these "improvements"
  
• Does anyone else see anything wrong here?

• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  2008
  After the surrounding trees were cut down and not replaced the new door started scraping the threshold and jamming so bad that it could barely open as our building sank, once again.

• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

The ground has been sinking as well - not just the buildings
Our retaining wall had to be rebuilt











More supporting beams had to be added underneath our building














This large deep hole was left open at the northeast corner of unit 409 from May 2008 to November 2008. We do not know why.














There was no investigation that we know of to determine the degree of erosion that may have travelled beneath our building while this hole was left open for such an extended period of time. We worry about the long-terem consequences of the caves that developed.

After 20 years of minutes - with little or no mention of cracking walls - cracks suddenly began to be mentioned in nearly every issue of the minutes - alleging that "settling cracks are owner responsibility." The only owners who I can see that are responsible for these "settling cracks" are Mr. Mac and Mr. PS.

Allowing responsibility to be transferred onto innocent victims - rather than remaining with those whose actions are the most likely cause of the cracking - doesn't make sense to me - I doubt that buildings would start "settling" 20 years after being built - if half the trees were not cut down and not replaced while the landscaping budget was spent on reconstructing illegally built extra decks for the privileged few.

Cracking walls and sinking land and buildings after half the trees were cut down are not all. After surrounding trees were cut down at least 3 pine trees that had grown in groves for nearly 20 years were left standing alone and quickly blew down in the wind.

I am told that one birch tree can absorb 10 bathtubs of water - and when more than half of a grove are cut down the water table may drop as a result. In any event, I think that there have been at least a dozen dying trees have been cut down since the groves were destroyed - I don't know how many more are doomed, but the death rate of these trees is primarily due to the wrongful acts of people, not nature.

More trees had to be cut down in 2008 because they were dying of abuse and neglect.

My warnings about loss of ground cover, lack of pest control, and a reasonable landscaping budget were disputed and rejected.

When trees suddenly started dying council ridiculed concerns by suggesting autopsies in the Minutes.




Falling Rains - Rushing Drains
(volume must be turned up for this video, click triangle pointer to play)
This is what is sounds like - after removal of about 150 trees - when rainfall runs off (with soil) into the ditches, instead of soaking into the earth to replenish water tables that appear to have dropped after the land was scalped.



When I attended a meeting of council on December 4, 2008, it sounded like the estimated cost to connect a pipe to the sewer might be about $25,000 - presumably because trees that no longer exist can no longer absorb the rainwater and the land is destabilizing.