The sudden collapse of the 12-story condominium has prompted lots of talk about the problem of our older buildings and the combined effects of age, deferred maintenance, water intrusion, climate change, and so on.
Here are a few more links.
An old friend, Chuck Smith, summarized a lot of the concerns in a blog post a few days ago on his “Of Two Minds” blog (“A Few Things About Reinforced Concrete High-Rise Condos“).
The second most remarkable thing about the sudden collapse of the Florida condo building was the rush to assure everyone that this was a one-off catastrophe: all the factors fingered as causes were unique to this building, the implication being all other high-rise reinforced concrete condos without the exact same mix of causal factors were not in danger.
Before we accept this conveniently feel-good conclusion, there are a few things we should consider about reinforced concrete high-rise condos.
He then goes on to make a number of excellent points, discussing the problems of reinforced concrete, the specialized business of analyzing and repairing such problems, questions of liability, and what happens in more affordable buildings when the costs of repair exceed the sometimes modest original apartment prices.
This one seems to state the bottom line:
Reinforced concrete high-rises built decades ago to the building codes of that time may not be up to snuff should ground settlement exceed modest limits or structural weaknesses develop. Age and water are enemies of all structures, but multi-story buildings are especially at risk.
Then, thanks to Jay Hartwell, here’s a link to the first in a Hawaii Business Magazine series published last year (“A Condominium Can Last Hundreds of Years, But Not Its Components“).
Here’s the beginning of the excellent series by Noelle Fujii-Oride. Links to the next two articles in the “Condo Owners Beware” series are found at the end of the first story.
A 40-year-old Honolulu condominium can show its age in many ways: brittle, leaking pipes; cracks in its concrete walls and decks; rusted rebar; and corroded railings and window frames.
Dana Bergeman is the CEO of Bergeman Group, a local construction management company. He says many of Hawai‘i’s condominiums were built in the 1960s and ’70s and are reaching the point where they will need major infrastructure, cosmetic and architectural improvements to keep their value and remain liveable.
“As these buildings become older and older, they’re going to need more and more care,” he says. “Buildings are a lot like people in that sense. As people age, they have greater needs and greater health care needs and need additional attention. Buildings are no different.”
Hawaii Business Magazine spoke with plumbers, exterior renovators, homeowner association managers, real estate experts and reserve planning specialists to learn more about these capital improvement projects. They say that keeping an aging condo functional and safe can cost millions of dollars, take months or even years to complete and requires that condo boards plan well in advance.
What follows is a report on some of the larger capital improvement projects, typical for aging condos, and how much they will cost on a per unit basis.
Highly recommended!
And today an article in the New York Times explored similar issues confronting Chicago. Yes, the city of Chicago, a city, it reminds us, was built on a swamp. Read on.
See “The climate crisis haunts Chicago’s future. A Battle Between a Great City and a Great Lake.”
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
One item in an apartment that an owner of it should focus on is the circuit breaker board. When we first moved into our place after buying it in Feb. 2020, we brought in an electrician to determine why certain appliances were not working properly. Turns out the circuit breaker board was coming to the end of its useful life. We got it to live another year before power outages took out some of the circuits due to power surges. In replacing the box, we were told that we needed to let our owner committee know and show them the “core” of the box, as there was notable arcing that had happened, that could have caused a fire.
Literally put, we have prevented a fire by biting the bullet and changing out the circuit breaker box, which in turn has brought back to life all of our appliances and plugs in the apartment better than new. This type of work is typically in the hands of the owner. And depending on the investigation of the core could lead to them being able to file for insurance reimbursement.
Just another item to keep in mind.
When a multi-unit structure reaches the end of its life, what happens to the owners’ investments? Each unit has real property value. But when the structure goes away, do those multiple investments literally go up in smoke?
There isn’t a really effective process for winding down and liquidating condo projects that have reached the end of their lives.
The law (HRS 514B-47(a)(1)) permits removal of a project from the condominium code where **80%** of the common interest ownership agrees to do so, but that’s a pretty high bar to meet. In aging projects the owners may be of limited income and have limited ability to obtain new domiciles, so there’s likely to be high resistance to this.
Of more relevance to Ian’s post, alternatively, where “The common elements suffer substantial damage or destruction and the damage or destruction has not been rebuilt, repaired, or restored within a reasonable time after the occurrence thereof, or the unit owners have earlier determined as provided in the declaration that the damage or destruction shall not be rebuilt, repaired, or restored” (HRS 514B-47(a)(2)) a project can also be taken out of the condo code. I don’t know that this has ever been done, and it seems to me that the law is not settled as to what constitutes “substantial damage or destruction” and what a “reasonable time” is or even what the “occurrence thereof” is (is it when the damage occurred? I would think so. But maybe it’s when the damage is noticed and brought to the Board’s attention?).
In either the situation the solution is the same: the Project is subject to an action for partition, and any unit owner or lienor can bring the action. The property would be sold at the order of the court and the proceeds divvied up amongst the common interest owners as tenants in common in accordance with their respective common interests.
Perhaps, our City Department of Planning and Permitting could enforce the existing building code. That would be a revolutionary concept.
In question of Owner value loss, all properties are at full risk. And value, should be reflected, disclosed and monitored by responsible government agencies.
Best of luck with DPP insuring your safety.
There was an apartment building across from makiki park that had the walkway in front of a few apts that cracked and left a gaping hole. People had to vacate their homes during the reconstruction of it. The sad thing is that there many apartments similar age and conditions. I think we’ll be seeing more of this happening.
Thank you, Ian, for referencing my post and assembling a comprehensive list of other well-researched articles. Increasing our knowledge is the first step to making a realistic assessment.