Reference: Owners Forum; December 28, 2007. Meeting Notes by Pat Lihou
Dear owners:
As a member of the Structural Deflection Committee (SDC), I am compelled to correct a statement made by Mr. Rufa in response to questions by Mr. Periera regarding the 5th floor terrace roof experiment. Mr. Rufa is quoted as saying: "The CBH Deflection Committee had looked at the problem and resolved that 'you can do anything you want up there'.
Unfortunately Mr. Rufa is mistaken. That is not at all what Tacoma Engineering advised the SDC and Coral Beach.
Please find below the key paragraphs from the Tacoma Engineering Report. As you will note, Tacoma's opinion strongly cautions Coral Beach and is not as stated by Mr. Rufa. Mr. Rufa's and Mr. Galiano's misunderstanding is potentially dangerous as well as costly.
EXCERPTS COPIED DIRECTLY FROM THE TACOMA REPORT
Our calculations indicate that the net safety factor required by A23.3 has not been achieved. In fact the design strength is in the order of 92% of that required by the code.
Reserve Strength:
Based on the following dead loads:
- slab weight 55 psf
- topping weight (3”) 37 psf
- floor, ceiling and partition allowance 15 psf
Our calculated net total reserve allowance for live load is 85 psf. This means that the slabs can be expected to collapse if the live load exceeds 85 psf (200 people in a studio apartment or 300 people in a one-bedroom).
FLOOR TILES:
In our opinion, ceramic floor tiles may be used to replace carpet and underlay. However, the maximum tile thickness allowed should 1 centimeter (3/8”) and no leveling grout can be allowed.
I would be pleased to send the entire Tacoma Engineering Report by e-mail to any owner upon request. May I also draw your attention to commentary on this subject of the experimental roofing system by Mr. Untch and myself? Please view it on Coralbeachhotelnews.blogspot.com/.
I wish all friends and neighbours at Coral Beach a very happy and peaceful New Year.
Ted Mulvihill
ejmulvi@sympatico.ca
416 243 9277
Apt 3603
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
C. Haddad asked about the Pool Bar at the Owners Forum.
BR said that the judge who had signed the injunction was a temporary judge. A number of Owners asked why a settlement could not be arranged. BR said “I’m not willing to pay her anything”. BR said that the case had cost about $2,000 in legal fees so far.
I guess BR "forgot" to mention the loss of the monthly rental, $1,500 every month it is shut. At the beginning she was ready to settle for $40,000. How long will the Pool Bar remain closed?
There is no way we can win this case with a deported President and a bankrupt Treasurer. They are burned out in the Business Community, so how can they protect the interests of Coral Beach Hotel?
I guess Mr. Rufa also decided not to mention that they retained Mr. Moss - a retainer of $10,000 was required. They felt Mr. Moss would be better suited to handle the pool bar situation then Ms. Dennison.
How much of that did we get back if any?
CLARIFICATION
My intention was to have Pat send out my message by e-mail as I was having difficulty with incorrect addresses. My personal preferrence would have been to not make this information public. That said, I appreciate Pat's effort. I do not see it(publication) as any kind of faux pas. Importantly, all owners of integrity ought to feel morally oblicated to divulge the state of our building and their apartment. In the USA and Canada revealing this condition would also be a legal requirement.
The key point to remember is that even though the builders pushed the design envelope and got the "deflection" incorrect they did apparently get the "strength" correct. The three nasty ladies, Frances, Jeanne and Wilma provided some proof of that.
Have a great 2008!
Ted Mulvihill
3608
Dr. Haddad makes some excellent points, thank you Charles.
Even if Mr. Rufa and Mr. Galiano are re-elected I would hope that their supporters would insist on a new team to negotiate and eventually settle. Although the beach bar is of little importance to me personally, I know from the owners questionnaire (opinion survey) that it is of paramount importance to the majority of owners.
This is not rocket science. Let's get it done!
Ted Mulvihill
I agree that it would be a travesty to not seize the opportunity to settle this problem that has been a thorne in the side of the majority of owners. In fact, it would just be good business to settle in order to re-open the Pool Bar: it would save future legal fees, and return the Pool Bar to a profit center
(which a previous Board proved could be done),contributing much needed money to the Coral Beach bottom line. Any person with a sharp business mind can see the wisdom in this course of action. Therefore, there must be another reason for not settling this issue --perhaps we should all ponder upon what that reason could possibly be.
"Keepin 'Em Honest"
At the Owners' Forums
An attempt to pierce the stonewalling, verbal persiflage and deliberate misinformation.
Keepin Em Honest, Part 1-
RE Pool Bar discussion: On www.coral-beach-hotel.com, please read the Kenilworth Bar Lease signed with Charmaine Thompson. This can be found under Misc. Docs. In clause 3 it states the tenant ( Ms. Thompson) is required to provide her own permits to operate the pool bar concession. Very interesting information, in light of all the inflammatory rhetoric that has been spread around by the Board about how Ms. Thompson "fraudulently" obtained the bar license for the pool bar. It is important to note that Bruno's signature is clearly visible on this agreement.
Keepin Em Honest, Part 2-
Bruno stated at the Owners Forum that they (the Board) consulted with "3 engineers and 5 roofers" regarding the recent method being used to repair the roofs/terraces. The Board should be required to make public to all owners the reports they received from those 3 engineers and 5 roofers in order to demonstrate to us that they are spending our money wisely on these new repairs. If they refuse to make those reports public, it is the same as admitting they are not telling the truth about the aforementioned consultations, and that is a potentially dangerous situation for Coral Beach to be placed in.
Keepin Em Honest, Part 3-
In response to a question asked about Kenilworth Ltd. documents, Bruno said at the Owners Forum that the Board has been unable to obtain important information from Callenders & Co (the office of registry) about Kenilworth documents. The truth is that we owe Callenders & Co approximately $12,000 and that is why they will not release the information.
Post a Comment