Highview Condominium II
Board of Directors - Meeting Minutes
September 27, 2011 7:30 p.m.
The fifth meeting of the
2010-2011 Highview Condominium II, Inc. Board of Directors was called to order
at approximately 7:30 p.m. by Stacey Cohen, President.
Board members in attendance: Robert
Boynton,
1)
Minutes: Minutes of
the May 23, 2011 meeting were approved prior to this meeting by an email vote.
2)
Water infiltration: Following
the May 23, 2011 meeting with SMS Engineering, it was agreed that Joe Cann and Joe Skonieczny would
meet with Linda Romolo and Becht Engineering.
Although Becht came to the building, Joe Cann and Joe Skonieczny were
neither advised of the meeting nor its outcome.
On account of the urgency expressed by affected unit owners, Cohen
recommended that Board approve the bid from SMS without further delay.
Since SMS had estimated cost of work in excess of $300,000 for 30
individual leaks in thirty units (replacing all brickwork and AC sleeves between
two vertical windows), Boynton suggested that considering the potential cost of
this extensive work the board should not rely on the opinion of a single
engineer and a minimum of three engineering should review the situation and
offer bids. D’Angelo concurred.
Romolo will get additional engineering bids and discuss their strategies.
It was also questioned whether completion of the Local Law 11 – Cycle 7
Inspection would add any additional exterior repairs that might need to be
performed at the same time. In
addition to the outcome of the Local 11 inspection, several residents have
reported new wall cracks in their units following the summer’s earthquake and
Brighina’s Fall 2011 inspection may discover additional window leaks to be
added to the inventory of repairs to be contracted.
As noted at the May meeting, the estimated cost of masonry work will be
unknown until contractor bids received, but with the first engineer’s review
suggesting $7,000-$10,000 per leak, the cost might be expect to be in the range of $200,000 - $300,000 for the 30 leaks
confirmed in the spring. There was a
brief discussion of the Special Assessment required to fund the work, but
discussion was tabled until engineer is contracted to determine scope of work
and masonry contractor bids are reviewed for selection.
Maintenance
update from super: Chris
Brighina joined the meeting to report on building maintenance and concerns.
3)
Building Repair & Maintenance Report:
a)
Emergency Lighting: Brighina
reported that he has completed inspection of the emergency lighting and made a
number of unit replacements. However
he noted that during the recent hurricane numerous emergency lights still failed
after a short period of time. He
will be re-inspecting in the weeks ahead. Noted
that the emergency lights are for immediate evacuation and not for extended
electrical outages. Also noted that
without emergency lighting, hallways and stairwells are totally dark.
b) Carpet cleaning:
Romolo reported that the carpets were cleaned after the May meeting and
will be cleaned again before Thanksgiving.
c) Garage Stairwell
Door: No update.
At the May meeting, Romolo was asked to get estimates for replacement of
the garage stairwell door and an email vote would be conducted to approve the
work. It was noted that the door
rusted out at the bottom and a kick-plate was installed several years ago to
hide the deterioration. At this
point, the door is shifting and garage residents have repeatedly reported being
unable to open the door for access to their cars.
On account of the urgency of this matter and four month delay, the Board
approved single estimate from Minkel Locksmiths per super’s conversation with
the locksmith.
d) Sprinkler System
Inspections: At the 02/02/11
meeting, Brighina reported that a flow test of the garage sprinkler system had
been performed by the Fire Department and questions were then raised by the
board about inspection of the compactor and laundry room sprinkler systems.
No update from Romolo at the 02/22/11 or at the 04/26/11 meeting when
Romolo indicated that she continues to investigate.
At the May 23, 2011 meeting, Romolo indicated that the inspections would
be completed in June. As of this
September meeting, the inspections had not been performed.
e) Stairwell painting
estimates: It was noted that at
previous meeting Romolo was to get estimates for stairwell painting.
No estimates at this meeting. Since
the work requires ventilation it will be held until spring.
Romolo was asked to get written estimates by the next meeting for
incorporation in FY2012 budgeting, noting that the prices will not go up by
spring as painting contractors are hungry for the work.
f) Parking lot
crack repairs: Building super
Chris Brighina will repair cracks before winter.
g) Entrance area tile
crack and grout repairs: Building
super Chris Brighina will make repairs before winter.
h) Sewer line
cleaning: Romolo provided bids
for quarterly sewer line cleaning contract.
Board compared bids and noted differences in the proposed scope and
method of cleaning – questions raised about pressurized cleaning, whether
cleaning was to street, and how many feet back from front wall clean-out.
Romolo will get answers to all questions by next meeting.
Romolo will also ask Rapid Sewer to amend their proposed contract to
include sewer line to laundry room.
i) Water supply
filtering for unit L-H: It was
noted that the building has repeatedly assumed costs of emergency plumbing
repairs and replacement of bathroom and kitchen water supply fixtures damaged by
sediment in water lines. Similar
blockages have been reported in units L-H, L-C, and L-D in recent years;
requiring replacement of water supply lines to unblock the lines after other
remedies used by plumber failed. Skonieczny
volunteered to meet with plumbers and propose a filtering remedy for unit L-H at
next Board meeting.
j) Tree pit
hazard: Romolo was asked to
write a letter to the management of
k) Weekend super:
It was noted that the weekend super’s hours are 8:00 a.m. – 12:00
p.m. Although the weekend super
shows up eventually, sometimes as late as the afternoon, his 8:00 a.m. start
time is set to the needs of the building; assuring that residents will start
their Saturday and Sunday morning with a clean building.
It was also noted that management stipulates an interior/exterior inspection of the common pathways and a quick cleanup of litter and overnight debris around the building as the day’s first maintenance priority – in advance of processing compactor garbage. It was noted that often the building’s debris and spills are ignored until after the weekend super has spent hours in the compactor room. Management was asked to review the priority list with weekend super and provide a written copy of the schedule/priority list with the Board to assure that there is no disagreement.
4)
Financial Report:
a) FY2010 audit:
The completed FY2010 audit by Wilken & Guttenplan was approved by an
email vote and the annual meeting has been set for October 26, 2011.
5)
Legal Report:
a) Local Law 11 façade inspection (cycle 6) and Local
Law 11 façade inspection (cycle 7): Romolo
indicated that although Cycle-6 preliminary report has been submitted to the
City, there is no update from the City of filing.
At the May board meeting, Romolo reported that Becht Engineering would be
performing the Cycle-7 pre-inspection engineering work next week.
At this meeting, status of Cycle-7 submission and final inspection by NYC
Building Department unknown. Another
engineering firm indicated to Romolo that the Cycle-7 has not been filed.
Noted by Board that Romolo indicated she had not spoken with Becht
Engineering since March 2011, but she believed that follow-up was complete
responsibility of Becht, not Wentworth. Board
members disagreed. Current status of
Cycle-7 unclear.
Romolo provided new engineering bid for Cycle-7 inspection.
Boynton questioned why getting additional bid now for a Cycle-7 and asked
for confirmation as to whether Becht Engineering had already been paid to
perform the work. Romolo confirmed
that Becht had been paid. Since
Romolo was now recommending a new contract for same work, Boynton questioned if
vendor was at fault why Romolo was not proposing legal action to recoup the
several thousand dollars already paid. Situation
unclear.
Clarification requested by Board member concerning why management
continues to refer to Fall 2010 filing of Cycle-6, while NYC Commissioner’s
Order received by Wentworth in August 2010 indicated that Highview II was
requested by the NYC Buildings Department to file an acceptable Cycle-7 report
within 30 days (letter dated August 27, 2010) and once the Cycle-7 report was
accepted, the building would be credited for both Cycles 6 and 7.
No indication from Romolo why action to comply with the Commissioner’s
Order was not taken by Wentworth.
b) Lease rule violations:
Romolo indicated that all leases are up-to-date.
c) Insurance rule violations:
Romolo indicated that all units are up-to-date.
The meeting was adjourned at
approximately 9:30 p.m.
Minutes
submitted by Robert Boynton, Secretary.