Cheaper Burlington condo fix is ‘minimum repair’:
engineer
The Hamilton Spectator
07 April 2016
BURLINGTON— The engineer who recommended multimillion-dollar repairs to
prevent the collapse of a crumbling condo that's the focus of lawsuits
now agrees there's a cheaper fix.
But it's far from ideal, suggests Stephen Blaney, who was hired by the
2411 New St. condo corporation in 2009 to assess structural problems in
the building.
"This is what you call the minimum repair."
That involves reinforcing bowing concrete floor slabs in at least 15 of
the worst units with carbon fibre straps for an estimated $670,000 to
$770,000.
The city publicized the cheaper option this week after a newly formed
association of condo residents launched a website, 2411newstreet.ca,
drawing attention to their troubles.
Residents say they didn't know about the structural problems when they
moved in. Since then, they say, property values have plummeted and
their units aren't marketable.
I can't sell my place
"I can't sell my place," said Colin Brown, who bought in 2001 for
$108,000.
The residents want the city to buy them out at fair market value,
circumventing legal battles that have named the municipality, an
east-Hamilton real estate firm, property manager and a litany of other
defendants.
None of the allegations have been tested in court. Defendants have
formally denied the claims and, in turn, are suing each other.
The city disputes Blaney's earlier opinion that the building required
millions in structural work.
City manager James Ridge says mediation involving the defendants and
the condo corporation led to the "agreed-upon remedial work."
"The City remains in litigation with the Condo Corporation. Mediation
was undertaken last year and we are cautiously optimistic that a
settlement is possible," Ridge said in an email Wednesday.
It's not clear which parties have agreed. Guelph-based lawyer Robert
Downhan, who represents the condo corporation, declined to comment on
the mediation.
Laura Hillyer, whose Burlington firm represents 26 units in a lawsuit
that also implicates the condo corporation, wouldn't say whether
clients have agreed to the cheaper solution.
But she noted they have made claims for "diminished property value."
"These losses will continue in spite of any repairs undertaken — they
really are separate issues."
In 2009, Blaney reported concrete slabs weren't thick enough to support
a six-storey apartment block that wasn't constructed to code in 1965,
nor was the building up to snuff when Megna Real Estate converted it to
condos in 1998.
"In order to try to settle, I agreed we'd better try to do some minimum
repairs because the building's not safe, in accordance with the
building code. Let's get going," Blaney said Wednesday.
That will make the building safe, "but there are still other structural
deficiencies."
In a news release, the city maintained the building was built to code
and hasn't shown "any sign of structural failure" for 50 years. Also,
the building is "structurally sound now."
That doesn't wash with Blaney, who questioned why the city would
advocate a $770,000 fix if the building had an "adequate factor of
safety."
The city has expressed sympathy for the residents' plight but also said
the "decision to defer necessary, preventive maintenance was made by
the condo corporation."
Blaney says no "preventive maintenance" could have addressed the
structural problems. "No, it was a latent defect in the building, from
the day it was constructed."
Ted Griffith, a Burlington resident who's helping the residents in
their pitch for a fair market value buyout, says the city is "victim
blaming."
"It's not a preventive maintenance issue. It's structural."
COMMENTS
By Warren April 08, 2016
Its interesting Griffith is not even officially representing the condo
owners as per the letter from the City. The value of the condo is zero.
The land value is negligible as the building is positioned on its side
facing new street severely limiting its potential to be developed. The
notion owners receive a "fair" value payout from the City is a time
waster. "Fair value of what? Zero ? This has been in litigation since
2009. The condo board should do the right thing and secure its own sale
of the property, sell it and disperse whatever money is left to the
owners. They own the property not the people of Burlington.
By mike April 07, 2016
these people are in dreamland, blame everyone except themselves for the
problems with the building, 50 year old structures will need repairs
and it looks like the condo corporation just ignored repairing
anything,are all the tenants just ignorant of repairs staring them in
their face. I've noticed a bunch of rental bldgs. the same age on the
mountain being repaired with similar issues.
By mush April 07, 2016
This building is the responsibility of the owners. It is the same as
someone buying a house, letting it deteriorate for 20, 30 or 40 years
then blaming the builder. Nonsense.
By mush April 07, 2016
As has been stated in previous comments regarding this story... this is
a condo. There has always been a 'corporation' to manage the condo and
any repairs. This corporation collects fees and designs a maintenance
schedule. The damage visible in the photos did not happen overnight and
it is the result of neglect. These people only have themselves to blame
for the positions they find themselves in.
top contents chapter previous next