What Hurts

This bush in front of unit 409 was the most pest infested plant in the complex


Yet this sickliest bush has grown back all by itself. We believe that most of the other bushes would have also - if their roots had not been torn out














This birch tree in front of unit 409 was cut down in 2006
but the stump was not ground down deep enough
to stop root suckers from growing back














Here are the birch root suckers in 2007 after the hydro kiosk was pressure washed.














By 2008 the root suckers had grown back high enough to reach our living room window before they were cut down.














Then the hydro kiosk was painted and the suckers were cut down but the bush wasn't trimmed.














By 2009 the birch root suckers had grown back in front of unit 409 for the 2nd or 3rd time.

If the suckers were properly eliminated and even the smallest replacement birch trees had been planted in 2006 they would be a nice size by now. It is hard not to imagine how it would look now if healthy young trees had been planted in the fall of 2005 to reinstate the landscaping in accordance with the special levy landscaping budget, instead of cutting more of them down and spending the landscaping budget from the special levy on extra decks for an unreasonably privileged 25% minority.

Instead the common property was left looking like a war zone and this hydro kiosk in front of our unit was left filthy black for more than a year after completion of the building envelope - as owners were forced to sell with the common property littered with the derelict ruins of extra decks, bare dirt, and virlent weeds. The kiosk was spray painted 3 years later - by amateurs who sprayed paint on our hardi plank as well - while loads of matching cladding bought for the project with special levy funds remains in storage. Landscaping had to wait more than 4 years; during which time most owners sold with the common property in a shambles.

WHAT ELSE HURTS?

Law Breakers and Bank Breakers

I am not a lawyer, so I can't give legal advice, but I can read provincial legislation, city and strata bylaws, restrictive covenants, contracts, project specifications, minutes of meetings, and the degree of deference the courts give to administrative officials.

I am not a geotechnical scientist or engineer, but I can understand the implications of restrictive covenants, tree cutting permit bylaws, landscape design, a history of a slipping slope and sinking buildings, floors, and retaining walls, breaking pipes, and cracking walls and pavement.

I am not a political scientist, or politician, but I can recognize a conflict of interest, clouding an issue, double-talk, mushroom management, and indecipherable accounting. I understand the difficulties of ordinary owners trying to manage 20-million dollars of real estate without access to the essential factual data and expert reports kept in the strata records. It's like trying to pin the tail on the donkey with the strata manager in charge of the spin.

I am not a sociologist, but I am hoping that other owners can recognize the importance of having an understanding of the history and nature of our problems and the need for solutions.

Check out the history
Check out the slope
Check out the city's tree cutting bylaws
Check out the restrictive covenants
Check out section 71 of the Strata Property Act
Check out the dates
Check out the votes
Check out the costs
Check out the funding
Check out the sinking buildings
Check out the cracking walls
Check out the breaking pipes
Check out the patched pavement
Check out the math
Check out the directors liability insurance
Check out vandalism in the criminal code
and last but not least
Check out your wallet

We are becoming desperate to stop others who buy in here, wreck havoc, and then sell, repeatedly leaving us to inherit the costs of their reckless conduct.

Strata funds were diverted to build extra decks and fencing and if the minutes are to be believed not a dime was included in the budget for responsible maintenance.
Destroying expensive low-maintenance landscaping and replacing it with fencing that is so expensive to maintain that increased expenses are certain for as long as the fence exists, and given the horrific history of the decks, the hydro kiosk in front of unit 409, and the landscaping for the 4 years since 2005, cycles of neglect are foreseeable.














Having owned and maintained houses with unpainted and painted concrete, and with natural landscaping and wooden fencing, I have direct, personal knowledge of the increased costs associated with the second choices. Since all my warnings went unheeded, all we can do now is hope that we never get to see our fence looking as bad as these ones.














Unpainted concrete that required zero maintainance for nearly 20 years has now been painted and is so high maintenance that it creates a risk of cycles of neglect and near certainty of additional expense in perpetuity - yet if the minutes are to be believed - not a dime was included in the budget for responsible maintenance.









PLEASE do not add further expense by allowing the perimeter concrete and stone work and strata plan decks to be painted. If necessary paint the patched decks sitting out in the front of the buildings, but leave the strata plan decks in their natural state to blend in with the landscaping. To do otherwise will burden owners like us with perpetual expense, for which there is no need and no budget, and a foreseeable eyesore in years to come. Once has only to look at the condition of the front stairs of the units along the entrance way for the past 4 years to see the problems that painted decks will create for the owners who don't sell fast enough.

We are afraid that the reputation of this complex will be forever stigmatized unless owners recognize the problems and put a stop to the way things have been going.

The problems are serious and hard to hide














with sinking buildings













suddenly cracking pavement














patched in more than a dozen places














underground pipes breaking - all over the complex














it is costing more than we can afford














Vandalism is not my style; I find Mr Mac's reports of "ignorant" owners vandalizing the area around his unit disturbing. I also find it disturbing to see the whole complex appear vandalized for over 4 years - since 2005. I wish that those who wrote anonymous complaints were not so afraid to step forward and speak. But I do, most definitely, understand their fear.















These rocks came as a surprise to us.
We didn't vote for them.
Did 75% of you?














Tree roots provided geotechnical benefits. These rocks have no roots - and no explanation. We wish we knew what was going on. It is pretty hard to tell much by the minutes.














We are sinking, we know that much at least.
The threshhold of our new door is scarred
The new door is difficult to open and close
Adding more underpinning fixed it for only a couple of months
At an unknown cost - owners should know.














When I put the cat's toy flat on the floor
with my camera beside it
and shone the laser beam light across the room
the red dot in the center of this photo
showed how much our floor has sunk.














The landscape architect said he was not asked to consider any geotechnical issues with this site. We were shocked. We think that the whole of the circumstances surrounding the landscaping has been an unconscionable scandal and devastating cost.

In 2008 supporting beams were added
underneath the northeast corner of Unit 409
to shore up the building and try to stop it from sinking
- but it didn't stop - it is still sinking.


WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO NOW?

After being comparatively stable for more than 15 years our building started sinking rapidly after the trees were cut down - and adding more underpinning did little if anything to stop it.





We think the only thing that will stabilize the land again over the long term - is the same thing as before - large trees.

Our soul crushing view
polluted with roof tops, heat, grime, noise, and expense













The trees left sitting in these 3 pots for so many years cannot restore the view from the windows of unit 409 - nor can they effectively replace twice as many birch and pine that grew so much taller than the lilacs in these pots ever will. We want evergreen bushes planted to hide that extra deck from the view of the street. Even if the trees in these pots are still viable, we object to them being planted as substitution for, or in obstruction of, replacement birch trees.








Most of the trees around our unit were cut down illegally, and accordingly, we have asked for replacement trees similar in numbers and species as the originals.

The landscape architect quit, the same as various strata management companies quit, and more than half the owners quit - all since since My Pal Al got involved - a pattern too telling to ignore.

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

It seems like the honest answer in this complex must be, "Maybe; Someday; It could depend on who you are; or Where you live."

From 2004 to 2010 the painfully embarassing condition of the bare dirt and high weeds around our strata lot made it plain for all to see that there was virtually no landscaping or gardening done around us. Budgets seemed to be systematically designed to rob Peter to pay Paul. Funds were allocated for management fees and special interest projects for an unduly privileged minority, while correspondingly neglecting the landscaping around all but the most high profile people and areas.

As any landscape matures it requires pruning and pest control. We think that the scope of damage arising from these budgets was entirely foreseeable by management and that they failed in their fiduciary duty to warn council when presenting budgets for approval in an obvious conflict of interest.

SLOPE PROTECTION

The land, buildings, and fixtures on this slope have a history of slipping and sinking. Our building sunk about 6 inches in 1988. Retaining walls in Phase 2 are cement, but in Phase 1 they are wood. It is not enough without the trees. Just look at the mountain behind us and the history surrounding us.

Since the trees were cut down our building sunk, was reinforced, and sunk again. Other owners complained that new decks sunk, walls cracked, underground pipes and water mains broke. Our building had to be reinforced under the foundation, retaining walls had to be replaced, pipes had to be replaced, again and again. We didn't see any of this in the budget even though all of this was a foreseeable result of cutting down the trees; so much so as to have been predictable. These expenses would have been added into annual budgets, but for Mr Mac and strata management being willfully blind to the causal links and keenly aware that they could be sued for the damage.

In 2003, a landscaping committee was formed, which I promptly 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 reinstatement.) I asked that we vote on decisions, record minutes, and submit written reports. My voice fell on deaf ears.

In fact, it was worse than that; there was nver any real committee; the whole thing was a sham. The chair, Ben Abbott, told me that quotes were received, but he "didn't like them" and "threw them away", that the nephew of a strata council member and president, Peter Slack, was "qualified" and we "don't need" votes, minutes, reports, or resumes; he called my ability to "think clearly" into question. After that, he snubbed me, and I was excluded. To the best of my knowledge that was the end of the "landscaping committee" and, in actual fact, no landscaping committee has been in existence since this place was built in 1987.

Although I have never resigned, the committee never met again, in spite of my requests for a meeting. References in the minutes to the landscaping committee are misrepresentations. Basically, there was no committee - there was no 2nd meeting, no minutes, and no report from any landscaping committee to owners.

I estimate that approximately $50,000 of strata funds were spent to cut down and grind the stumps of approximately half of the trees on the landscape design, however, it is a blind-fold estimate. The published financial statements do not tell us the cost or where the money came from. For years strata trees were not pruned; pests were not controlled. With more than half the trees cut down, those that were spared were left standing in isolation. They had been planted in groves and had relied on their neighbours for support for nearly 20 years. They could not stand alone and quickly fell to the ground, uprooted by the wind. It's lucky they didn't fall on a building or kill anybody.

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.
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.

Decisions were made on this issue 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.

Two months after the insurance coverage for Directors, Officers & Property Managers was increased to 2 million Mr Mac began his tree-cutting carnage in what we have reason to believe was malicious vandalism. Knowing how important to me the trees around unit 409 were, which had been specifically preserved during the building envelope project and were in an area that required a special permit to cut them down, he cut them down without any authorization. Other than the trees along the meridian, we believe Mr Mac cut down the rest of the trees, about a million dollars worth, primarily as a cover-up. The visual shock was worse than all the subsequently breaking pipes and patched pavement. The local newspaper paper published a picture of what the complex had looked like from the street before the trees were cut down; a picture with pretty green tree tops climbing over the roofs of all of the buildings.

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 Okanogan 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. It might be enough to give a person a heart attack.

Then Mae Reid got involved, and Council diverted the special levy funds from landscaping reinstatement to building extra decks for a unreasonably privileged 25% minority, to which she belonged. That money, which she never paid a single dime of, had been collected for landscaping reinstatement, as voted by the owners who paid the special levy, and council was to remove the extra decks of owners unwilling to pay the added costs associated with their existence, as the owners had directed council at the AGM. Mae got involved and had them set in concrete.

Instead of amending the bylaws to provide for user fees, owners are asked to amend the bylaws for nonsense issues like removing decorative chattels or measuring dogs.

The most serious and long-standing problems are ignored.
Like the enormous cost to the restore the landscaping that was destroyed in violation of the bylaws and every other known law














Past, Present, and Future Costs














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

• Restrictive covenants that run with the land


• Coquitlam tree cutting permit protection bylaws


• Natural laws of sinking and sliding slopes

• Mr Mac did not request a site visit by an arborist until
  April 2006


• Long after he had cut the trees around Unit 409 down

Section 71 of the Strata Property Act was seriously violated

• Mature trees removed - without need or authority


• Invading our home with this soul crushing view


• Leaving noise, building grime, air pollution


• Heartbreak, Embarassment, and Loss

Special levy funds were diverted from the landscape budget to demolish and reconstruct at excessive expense extra decks that were added illegally by a 25% minority of owners. It took strata 5 years of saving and doing without landscaping to reinstate anything, during which time underground pipes broke and buildings sunk as tree roots decomposed, and the land in front of our strata lot and others was left with bare dirt and derelict weeds for 4 years.

WHAT IS WRONG HERE?



















2008
After the surrounding trees were cut down the new door to our deck started scraping the threshold and jamming so bad that it could barely open - as our building sank - and then sank 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














Mr Mac left this large deep hole open at the northeast corner of unit 409 from May 2008 to November 2008. It seemed like an evil thing to do.














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 those 6 months. 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 being mentioned in nearly every issue of the minutes - alleging that "settling cracks are owner responsibility." Although the minutes do not name said owner, I think the only ones responsible for these "settling cracks" are Mr Mac and Mr Slack, the two who had the trees cut down.

I think it is highly unlikely that buildings would suddenly start "settling" 20 years after being built the way they did - if half the trees were not cut down the way they were. Underground pipes and pavement, which were fine before, suddenly started cracking as well. Allowing Mr Mac to transfer the responsibility off of himself onto other, innocent, owners is disgusting.

Cracking walls and sinking land and buildings are not the only damage. After surrounding trees were cut down at least 3 mature pine trees which had grown in groves for nearly 20 years were left standing alone and very quickly blew down to the ground in the wind. It was lucky they didn't fall on a building or kill someone. Trees grown in groves rely on the support of those surrounding them and cannot often stand in isolation; this was so clearly foreseeable that I wonder if it was intended.














If it is true that one birch tree can absorb 10 bathtubs of water that would otherwise run off into the drains - it makes sense that when a hundred or more are cut down the water table may drop as a result. I think at least a dozen dying trees were cut down in the first few years after the original groves were destroyed, and I don't know how many more are doomed. The death rate of these trees wasn't natural. It was due to abuse and neglect and deliberate acts of men.

I wrote letters to council warning about loss of ground cover, lack of pest control, and needing a reasonable landscaping budget. My warnings were rejected by someone who didn't record the decision in the minutes; I blamed it 0n council, but I suspect that council may have never even seen my letters.

When trees suddenly started dying Mr Mac ridiculed the problem by suggesting "autopsies" in the Minutes.

I wish I could retire from work; but it's unlikely that I'll be able to continue paying for the consequences of so much costly corruption, unless I work to death, or take my shattered nerves and injured lungs and move from a home I've owned for more than 20 years. That's what hurts the most.

I can't afford to build extra decks for a privileged minority, on top of paying for the leaky condo damage caused by the architects and politicians, and still keep paying to repair the broken water mains and other damage flowing from someone else's destruction of trees and landscaping worth millions of dollars. I just can't do it. I need help from others to stop the bleeding.

RELATED LINKS:
http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/S/98043_05.htm#section71
http://www.choa.bc.ca/members/pdf/200/200-049%20Tree%20Removal.pdf
http://www.climatecrisis.net/