| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Editor
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2003 12:57 pm Post subject: B.C. Building Trades |
 |
|
WELCOME!
All about B.C.'s Building Trades:
| Quote: | Note: Technical difficulties have forced us to continue our blog on B.C. Building Trades at
B.C. Building Trades - Part II. Sorry for the inconvenience. |
Ministry of Advanced Education:
So what is the province doing in the way of policing B.C.'s building trades?
Go to the Ministry of Advanced Education homepage, scroll down the links on the right and click on Industry Training, where a press release dated Aug. 12 tactfully asserts that a nine-member Industry Training Authority Board has been carefully selected and appointed "to increase access to training in trades and technical sectors and address skills shortages around the province." Well, that's one way of putting it. A fortieri, more than $73 million a year for the next three years has been "committed" toward these worthy goals.
We're more than a little nervous reading comments from board chair Bev Briscoe, who says in the press release, "Industry is in the best position to know what skills it needs." Is it? While we applaud the proposal for self-governed trades, we'd prefer it served up with an honest explanation of the builders' role in so much leaky construction. How can you solve a problem if you don't first name it?
We also take cold comfort in the responses to FAQs here. Here's a sample:
| Quote: | How will the new model be more responsive to employer needs?
Government will be working with industry to make programs more responsive to industry needs. For example, under the new model, employers will be asked to identify and validate the competence that a trained worker should have in order to be considered fully qualified. |
| Quote: | Why is concern with competence focused entirely on employers' needs and NOT on consumers, who not only have to live in the products of 'BILLY-builder enterprise but who also have to hire builders for costly repairs and substantial reconstruction when the initial construction attempts have failed?
|
| Quote: | The new industry and training model, the Ministry states, "includes" high standards that are recognized across Canada. What does "includes" mean here? What about "recognized"? The words sound authoritative, but what actual assurance of quality do they give consumers?
Alberta, Ontario, Britain, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand are asserted to have standards B.C. might copy or at least reference, however a quick visit to Worldwide Condos reveals serious construction problems in many of these jurisdictions, too. A leaky building crisis is now fully underway in New Zealand, and conclusions from a recent Royal Commission on construction practices in Australia indicate the possibility of criminal prosecutions there, including prosecutions for fraud. Not exactly industry role models.
Alberta and Ontario have also had their share of building failures. Many Alberta numbered companies have been implicated in B.C.'s leaky condo crisis, as we know from the two Barrett Inquiries.
We're not sure about Britain and Ireland yet. Britain has only recently considered what looks to us after a cursory glance like condo legislation, and Ireland is still in the process of examining various development proposals, but we'd be willing to bet that Switzerland, France and Germany all know something about building standards we would probably do well to import. Check out what we've got so far from Switzerland at Worldwide Condos.
The Ministry's site boasts a new Industry Training Centre at Metrotown to provide province-wide services to all industry players. You can even have a look at exam and certification application forms by clicking on the appropriate boxes but, again, it's difficult to analyze either without sufficient basis for comparison.
|
In general:
| Quote: | We'd feel better about this site if there was even one reference to the leaky condo crisis and the role of the building trades in that debacle. A lack of candor this early in the program and the absence of any consumer focus disturbs us, to say the least. Are these initiatives, including proposals for legislative change, merely an effort to placate rather than challenge B.C. builders for the 30-year legacy of substandard housing construction they've left this province? Also, in view of all the building information resources currently available online, we're boggled by what looks to us like the Ministry's stubborn refusal to look outside the toxic wet box.
We'll have to take a wait and see approach to Minister Shirley Bond's initiatives, but we'd love to hear how the building trades themselves feel about them currently. Please let us know by writing to editor@bccondos.ca. We continue to monitor this site for changes and updates. Please check back soon. |
| Quote: | | Note 1.: Our confidence in B.C.'s building trades was further shaken by Minister Bond's recent firing of a program manager who had inflated exam scores of students in the new apprenticeship program. It gets worse, though. Apprenticeship trainers are alleged to have been replaced with a 1-800 number. See the Feb. 5/04 CBC report, Exam scandal prompts calls for inquiry here. We'll be following this investigation. Please check back for updates. |
| Quote: | | Note 2.: The Minister had changed when we revisited this site Feb. 20/06 but that's about it. There is still woefully little in the way of reliable quality control of the building trades, making the search for good contractors far more difficult than it should be this late in the leaky condo crisis. |
Link to this entry
http://bccondos.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=300#300 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2003 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Better Business Bureau of the Lower Mainland (BBB):
For tips on hiring contractors, we liked the Better Business Bureau of the Lower Mainland's online review (Note: This link was no longer in operation when we checked Feb. 20/06), although we doubt that many of us would find much enlightenment on builders' liens and how they operate by reading the Builders Lien Act. Why do so many websites tell us to read statutes? Much more useful to conduct a keyword search at the B.C. Superior Courts website and read a few of the cases. Or scope various law firm sites for articles on the issue. We found a good one yesterday. The URL is now listed at Condo Law FAQs.
Our e-mail to BBB:
Aside from the above we were impressed with BBB's review, so we thought we'd milk it for all it was worth:
| Quote: | From: "editor" <editor@bccondos.ca>
To: <president@bbbvan.org>
Cc: <editor@bccondos.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 10:53 AM
Subject: Asking Valerie about leaky condo repairs
Hello Better Business Bureau,
We're a consumer advocacy website devoted to leaky condo issues and we were delighted to come upon your site today. We were particularly impressed with your tips for potential condo suckers -- I mean, buyers --
as well as the how-tos on hiring a contractor.
We're very concerned at the moment with the quality of building envelope renovations. There is a gap, to say the least between the Canadian Standards Association building durability guidelines and the scant temporary warranty protection under the Homeowner Protection Act. The housing industry has somehow managed to prevent this gap from becoming common knowledge, but we're onto it now like a small dog with its jaws on the Finance Minister's pantleg. Have you any tips for condo owners on how to contract up to meet the durability guidelines?
Also, you mention this business of holdback for 55 days and builders' liens and so on. Do you mean to tell our visitors that a contractor hired by the strata council might actually have authority to effect a lien on our property? Could you please explain this type of risk as it pertains to condo owners involved in leaky condo repairs? We should say first that we've been to the Electronic Law Library info on builders' liens and HPO's site, but we're still not clear on the risk factor to owners, who apparently become developer equivalents in this scenario. Is that right?
Thanks very much.
Editor@bccondos.ca |
BBB replies:
Here's the reply we received:
| Quote: | From: Sheila Charneski [mailto:president@bbbvan.org]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:01 AM
To: editor
Subject: Asking Valerie about leaky condo repairs
Thanks for your e-mail. In regard to your inquiries, our report on contractors is intended to be basic, first line of information for consumers. Additional or enhanced information should be accessed through Canadian Home Builders Association, HPO or a legal advisor.
Regards,
Sheila Charneski |
Fair enough, Sheila, but we won't have too much to say about it if your grant is cut.
| Quote: | Note: When we visited the site Feb. 20/06, we found the following under Top 10 Scams:
Home Repair Scams
Scam artists may pose as home repair workers who knock on the door claiming to be doing some work in the neighbourhood. They’ll persuade unsuspecting homeowners into making renovations and all too often leave a mess of shoddy workmanship while they make a quick profit. The homeowner is left to pay again to get the job fixed.
Quick Tips: When hiring a contractor, check out companies first with the Better Business Bureau and the Greater Vancouver Home Builders’ Association (www.gvhba.org). Remember, a 10 day cooling off period may apply to direct sales contracts, i.e. contract entered into in person at a place other than the supplier’s permanent place of business. Don’t be pressured into making a decision you may regret later.
We also found helpful reports on a number of Contractors - Builders.
In general, a much improved site but not as good as it should be for a major port city, home of the notorious Howe Street and its many scam artists. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Editor
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Canadian Home Builders' Association of British Columbia:
Oh, to live on the happy pink cloud that is the B.C. Home Builders' Association. Have a look at the agenda for the big housing conference in Kelowna Sept. 26 advertised online here. (Note: The link had expired when we visited Feb. 20/06 but no great loss).
Not even the vaguest hint of the leaky condo crisis still plaguing this province, but notice the flashing icon for something called the Georgie Awards. Are they serious? After all the now infamous housing award winners that ended up either Under Tarps or in court or both, do they still expect consumers to fall for these meaningless marketing tools? (Search the terms, 'Georgie Awards,' anywhere at our site to find troubled award winners we've discovered).
Now look at the reference to the 2010 Olympics. What can our builders be planning for Vancouver's housing market? The excitement is almost palpable. We await the results with trepidation.
Here we go again with the 36th Annual Canadian Housing and Renewal Association Congress March 31-April 3/04. Renewal of what, we wonder? More of the usual hubris to draw attention from the multi-unit housing failures littering B.C.'s landscape? After the Crown Corporation Committee's review of Homeowner Protection Office building failure stats in November, we won't even dignify this one with an URL. (For the full committee report, go to our review of HPO under Condo Link Reviews).
| Quote: | Note: We noted with disinterest when we revisited the site Feb. 20/06 what is now the 38th Annual Canadian Housing and Renewal Association Congress scheduled in Ottawa in April/06. Here's the riff under Building a National Housing Policy: What's Ahead?
Canada has a new minority Conservative government. How will this affect federal housing policies and programs? Representatives from CHRA and the housing and social policy communities worked very hard over the past two years to assist the federal government to build a new National Housing Framework. The need for affordable housing for low and modest income households continues to be very high. During the election, the Conservatives promised an Affordable Housing program. How will it meet the interests and needs of Canadians?
The new government will be faced with different communities of interests – regional needs, the needs of cities, the challenges for immigrants, the complex issues for aboriginals, both on and off reserve. This plenary will feature speakers representing some of these communities of interests who will map out what they would like to see from the new federal government in terms of national housing policy. What are the key messages for the new government to assist it to develop federal policies and programs that will be effective for Canadians and Canadian communities? |
Ho-hum, same old uncritical rhetoric.
This one sounds more like it:
| Quote: | Building an Applied Research Network: A Forum for Researchers
The state of applied housing policy research in Canada is weak, with few remaining active academics and thus no one mentoring youth to study housing and to consider this profession. At the same time, perusal of papers at the 2004 international Housing Research Conference at the University of Toronto identified over 30 Canadian research authors. In 2005, SSRHC grants to research related to housing exceeded 40 grants, and many of those were to graduate students. It appears that the situation may not be as bleak as perceived. But who are these researchers? How do we create connections and networks to enable providers and government agencies to draw on this ongoing research? How do we create the incentive for researchers to continue examining housing issues? This research forum will seek to attract and engage interested researchers to discuss the creation of a housing policy research network in Canada and to link researchers with clients. The forum will feature a cross-section of recent and ongoing research as well as sharing CHRA's research priorities. Facilitated by Steve Pomeroy, Focus Consulting Inc. |
We agree whole-heartedly that the lack of proper tracking almost guarantees proliferation of the kind of leaky, substandard, inaccessible, unaffordable housing at issue in B.C.'s ongoing leaky condo crisis. We will therefore try to provide links to any helpful materials we're able to access from this workshop. Please check back for updates.
In general:
Nothing much but the dates have changed since we last visited this site, although we would now caution visitors against the ad for Hardie products used most notably in building envelope repair. Our queries regarding the effectiveness of the warranty for products installed in B.C. remain unanswered. Please check our Watchdog Forum here for the full story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Further criticism of B.C.'s building trades:
We found this April, 2003 condemnation by Vancouver Condominium Services of local tradesmen and of the Homeowner Protection Office's licensing scheme here. Scroll down to The Leaky Condo Saga Gets Worse.
We'll explore this and report back.
Our e-mail to HPO:
From: editor [mailto:editor@bccondos.ca]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 4:11 PM
To: 'hpo@hpo.bc.ca'
Cc: 'editor@bccondos.ca'
Subject: Vancouver Condominium Services condemnation of April, 2003
Hello Homeowner Protection Office,
We came upon this item in Bulletin #39 from April, 2003 by Vancouver Condominium Services. Any response?
Editor@bccondos.ca |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BC Building Newletter - Fall, 2003
Here's something we found at HPO's site that acknowledges at least part of the problem: click here. Scroll down to Update on Liability Insurance. We'd like to hear a lot more.
Ed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GREATER VANCOUVER HOME BUILDERS' ASSOCIATION
Here is the website of the local chapter of this Canada-wide construction network: click here.
We don't quite know what to make of this site, frankly. There is no shortage of listings so members must garner significant benefits from signing on. All the information we found was decidedly focused on commerce, not on consumer protection.
Our favorite feature used to be the Monday Morning Briefing by Chief Operating Officer Peter E. Simpson. It used to come up in a sidebar on the left when you clicked on News. It usually had one or two items to stimulate discussion, to say the least. When we clicked on the week of Oct. 6, 2003, for instance, we were somewhat taken aback at the special heads-up given to the association by the North Vancouver city clerk regarding a proposed building bylaw seeking to gut the public inspection process. Did the B.C. Trial Lawyers Association, whose members often represent plaintiff leaky condo owners, get a similar warning, we wonder? Please go to Condo Law FAQs for more information.
Sadly, the briefings are only available now to members as is the great push of this site, something called the S&M (Sales and Marketing) articles, which no doubt provide members with sufficient puff to cloud the real housing picture in B.C., one littered with tarps, drills and the endless pumping of water from between thin, moldy walls.
Oh, look at the happy family romping on the homepage! Ask residents of the Delano and Trafalgar Mews how full of family fun it is to live under the hum of major envelope repairs month after month.
It's puzzling and disturbing to find no discussion here of building challenges, shall we say, that continue to litter the provincial landscape. Here are some figures recorded in Hansard May 14/03 (emphasis ours):
| Quote: | ASSISTANCE FOR LEAKY-CONDO OWNERS
T. Bhullar: My question is to the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. It's regarding those awful leaky condos. Can the minister please tell the House the status of the leaky condos that the government has undertaken and if the minister has reached any conclusions?
Hon. G. Abbott: The issue of leaky condos certainly remains a major and difficult issue. We estimate at this point that some 65,000 homes and families are affected in some measure by leaky-condo syndrome. The cost of that is certainly at least $1.5 billion and possibly up to $1.6 billion, so it's a huge issue for a lot of families.
To date, through the homeowner protection office, the province has invested $293 million in no-interest loans. We have also put out $7.7 million in interest rebates, PST rebates, to families that have been affected by that. As well, HPO has invested a lot of resources in research and education to ensure that we can remediate those homes properly and ensure that the problem doesn't continue in the future.
We are continuing to work, as well, with the federal government to try to strengthen their partnership. I'm working in particular with the new secretary of state for housing, Steve Mahoney, to see if we can get a GST equivalent to the PST rebate, to get more action on leaky co-ops and to move ahead and try to resolve this situation, which unfortunately affects many British Columbians. |
And what of the new building trade training and certification requirements supposedly obtained by licencees after courses given over the phone? (See more at our review of the Ministry of Advanced Education above).
Not even a word about the current liability insurance crisis, in which most insurance companies suddenly pulled out and now refuse to touch B.C. housing construction. How come? (For more information, go to our review of the Homeowner Protection Office at Condo Link Reviews .
We'll keep asking about all that's missing here and so should you. Please check back for updates.
In the meantime, here's a presentation by GVHBA president Peter Simpson Oct. 3/03 before the Select Standing Committee on Finances and Government Services, a bid to raise property transfer taxes (emphasis ours). Huh?
| Quote: | Members, our next presentation will be from Mr. Peter Simpson, Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association.
Welcome, Peter. When you're ready, you can begin.
P. Simpson: Thank you very much for this opportunity. I applaud your efforts to find out what the province is thinking by your road show, I guess, going around the province. I'm sure that after a while all you hear from some people is just blah, blah, blah, so I'm not going to add to that. I'm just going to zero in on a couple of things that I think are important for the home-building industry.
First of all, our organization is composed of…. We just hit the 400 level of member companies with the Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association. We represent builders, developers, suppliers, subcontractors — anybody associated with the home-building and development industries. We are the third-largest in Canada, the largest in B.C. and, in fact, the largest home-builder and development organization for residential in B.C. as well.
We have a lot at stake with a lot of things. One of the items we're constantly concerned about and monitoring is the rising cost of transaction costs: fees, levies — things like this. Back in 1995 I did a study here in Surrey which examined the level of fees attached to a home. Then, of course, they're taxed as well. We found that at that time it was approaching 20 percent of the cost of a new home. Currently, that is up closer to 25 percent of the cost of a new home — a fee levied by one level of government or another, whether it's federal, provincial, regional or municipal.
[0930]
At the municipal end of it we're concerned that with the Community Charter, it has the potential of putting more power into the hands of the municipalities to find more ways to fill the coffers and look for industries like ours to get that from. Of course, it's all passed down the line. We're a manufacturer of a good, not unlike any other manufacturer, and all of these costs that are levied on our industry are passed down the line to the consumer.
We have a couple of studies that we can leave with you today. One is a very extensive research report that we did with our national office and Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which was kind of a follow-up to what we started back in 1995 on the level of fees, charges and taxes on new housing. I also have a prebudget submission here, which has a lot of provincial content, that will be presented to the federal government in a week's time. So there are two items here. Unfortunately, I've asked for copies of this; they haven't arrived yet. I told the aide that I'd be pleased to get
[ Page 1665 ]
them at a future date, but I certainly have two right here to speak from.
One of the things that is going on right now is that finally there is an increase in activity here in the lower mainland, particularly, in housing. I know that if you go to downtown Vancouver right now, you'll see 21 cranes at work. Those 21 cranes are responsible for nearly 2,800 housing units. Of those 2,800 housing units, fewer than 200 are currently for sale. The rest are sold. Out here in the valley — through Surrey, Langley — you're seeing a lot of homes springing up that are geared to first-time homebuyers, and of course the move-up. We're seeing a lot of innovative housing being produced. We're seeing a lot of good land use measures being implemented.
One other thing we would like you to take a look at — and this is what I'm going to zero in on today — is the property transfer tax, which was implemented in 1987. In 1987 the average price of a home, all types — apartment, condo, townhouse, single-family home — was $97,500. The current average price of those same housing units, right up till the end of September, was $255,550. Land costs are rising; materials costs are rising. You've all seen the stories about the cost of plywood and OSB, which is called oriented strand board. Those costs are hiked up considerably. The Americans need the same lumber that we do, so the price is going up every time we turn around. Just in the last couple of months, the price of a basic framing package — these are the 2-by-4s, the sheet goods, the dimensional lumber to build the bones of a home, basically — have gone up about $6,000 per house.
Costs are rising. Of course, the person who pays for these costs is the end user, and where you could have a role in this is to take a look at the property transfer tax, look at where it was and what the ceiling is. Currently, it's 1 percent on the first $200,000 and 2 percent on the balance. We'd like you to look at that and make some adjustments, or consider some adjustments, to raising that ceiling, taking into account inflation and the increased cost of housing over those years. (emphasis ours). We know you've come up with some good measures, such as exemptions to first-time homebuyers and other types of exemptions, but we'd like for the rest of the folks to take a look at that ceiling and increase it. Currently, it's $200,000. We'd like to see you raise that higher. So far, since its inception, your net revenue — meaning, this is outside of your exemptions — gained through the property transfer tax has just hit, and this is a figure right up until last week: $4,178,504,644. This is what this provincial government has taken in, in property transfer taxes since the inception of that tax. Of course, many of these properties have been sold over and over again, so you're getting that tax pyramid onto that as these homes are sold.
[0935]
There are a lot of other things that we could talk about, but this is the one thing that we really would like you to look at. Rather than go on and on about other things and blur everything into one, this is the solid thing that I think you should be looking at right now. This would help an awful lot of British Columbians — certainly a lot in the lower mainland, where my jurisdiction is here — to get into a home.
Of course, these taxes come at the worst possible time — at the very start of their home ownership journey. They have to pay these things up front as a closing cost. So we'd like you to look at that level and perhaps raise it. I'd like you to take a look at these submissions when you have a chance. This sort of spells out all the other taxes, fees and levies which contribute to a high cost of home ownership.
In my position I have a lot of friends throughout the United States who have visited me from time to time. I show them home sections, and I show them real estate magazines and newspapers, and they just about fall off their chair. You know, we have high land costs here. Of course we live in a very special area, but along with a special area come constraints like the mountains, the oceans, the agricultural land reserve and these types of things.
I know you have a busy agenda. I don't want to, as I say, blah-blah on and on. So that's it. I'd be pleased to take any questions from you.
B. Locke (Chair): Thank you, Peter. Can you tell me when the property transfer tax was initiated?
P. Simpson: In 1987.
B. Locke (Chair): Okay. I'll now ask the members if they have any questions.
D. Hayer: Peter, thank you very much for making your presentation. I've just got a question: if you want to raise the ceiling, any idea what amount it should go up to from $200,000 the first 1 percent…?
P. Simpson: I'd like to leave that to the experts. You have to look at all the factors regarding inflation, with how the cost has risen. I could tell you $500,000, but you're not going to believe me, and that's out of line. So the experts need to look at that and make some suggestions to that, in consultation with our industry.
D. Hayer: Basically, your recommendations are just to increase the…
P. Simpson: …ceiling on the first…. Yeah.
D. Hayer: The first part.
P. Simpson: That should capture a lot more people in there as well.
D. Hayer: Thank you very much.
B. Locke (Chair): Peter, the report that you're leaving for us — is it just specific to federal…? I wasn't sure.
P. Simpson: No. There's a mix in there. I guess you'd have to glean out…. It calls for greater coopera-
[ Page 1666 ]
tion between the federal government and the provincial government in taking a good hard look at all of these taxes, levies, fees, etc., and that's what some of the other provinces are doing. I know that we've already had some consultations with the transition team in Ottawa right now. They're very busy placing their people right now, of course, in line for February. They're wide-open to this thing as well.
B. Locke (Chair): As well as municipal. It's in there?
P. Simpson: Yes, it is. Certainly, municipal governments are all in here as well.
The other thought I had earlier, too, about the Community Charter…. Again in my jurisdiction, we have 19 municipalities we're dealing with. You can imagine. I feel like that guy on The Ed Sullivan Show years ago, who runs up and down the stage trying to keep all the plates spinning on top of the stick. I don't want one of those plates to fall down. We have 19 municipalities all doing their own thing, all having their own rules and regulations. It's an onerous task at best, so we would like you to look at that and what that charter does, putting more power into it to sort of open up the potential for additional charges as well.
B. Locke (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation. We appreciate it.
P. Simpson: Thank you very much[/i] |
We'd love to know what you think of this proposal. Write to us here at the forum or to editor@bccondos.ca.
| Quote: | Note: Clearly, this group is influential. A news item June 28/04 at the Continuing Legal Education homepage is headlined, BC proposes tax changes for pre-sold homes. Click on the Ministry of Finance Factsheet included in the summary - not for the truth of the information contained there but for the list of players supplying the gov't with stats and presumably on which important housing decisions are made.
Wouldn't it be interesting to look at housing starts and costs and so on from several years ago and chart the percentage of them that ended up or will end up under tarps? We dare any of Mr. Simpson's membership to submit those figures before the committee. |
Link to this entry
http://bccondos.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=334#334 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATION OF B.C.
For more information on the liability insurance crisis currently stalling repair work on B.C.'s wasteland of failed housing construction, go to the B.C. Construction Association's website and click here.
The focus of these articles is largely on what builders consider to be unfair apportionment of liability for their substandard workmanship when angry leaky condo owners take them to court. One commentator is still suggesting that the B.C. Building Code is itself at failt, although the two Barrett Inquiries concluded with a finding that condos meeting those standards do not leak. Click on Chapter Two of the 1998 report here, which states as follows:
| Quote: | The Commission was unable to find evidence that the building code, per se, has caused the problems. It agrees that the B.C. Building Code outlines appropriate performance standards for large buildings, as well as prescriptive standards for smaller buildings and houses. Where the building code may have failed is in the definitions of large and small buildings. This has resulted in a number of large complex, wood-frame condominiums being built under guidelines meant for smaller buildings. However, even under the prescriptive approach, the buildings should have been well constructed.
There appears to be confusion among building officials and professionals in understanding and interpreting what the building codes have outlined. It is the Architect's responsibility to ensure that the project's design and construction substantially conform to the relevant building codes. It is the municipal inspector's responsibility to ensure the code has not been violated. However, municipal officials approve plans for permit purposes and undertake minimal on-site inspections. Inspections do not cover building envelope design, but deal with foundations, sheathing, framing, insulation, and a final inspection for occupancy. Field review activity of architects are at their discretion and, as has been suggested by various presenters vary in their calibre. |
We're trying to find out from insurance companies and their regulatory bodies what B.C. architects, engineers and builders will have to do now to obtain liability insurance. Please look under Architects and Engineers at this forum for more information and be sure to come back for frequent updates.
Ed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:05 am Post subject: Out in the rain - Is this a CMHC best practice? |
|
|
Sasamat Gardens at W. 9th Ave. and Sasamat in Vancouver
Out in the rain - Is this listed in any of CMHC's Best Practice Guides?
We were very disturbed to find the construction site of this new housing development in Vancouver, Sasamat Gardens at W. 9th Ave. and Sasamat, bare and unattended during a three-day downpour in August, 2004. Are owners of the 75 per cent sold according to the sign, aware of the way Vancouver home builders are are managing their investment, we wonder? Visit Condos Only! to see the listing price for one of these homes.
Here's the sign with a drawing of the finished product - assuming the wood hasn't rotted by the time construction is complete:
Here are some photos of the moist construction site, including piles of lumber soaking up the rain:
What do the textbooks say?
Here is an excerpt from Protection and Care of Materials On the Building Site at para. 4, p. 52 of Canadian Wood-Frame House Construction, published by CMHC, revised in 1998, reprinted in 2001 and available at Vancouver Public Library's central branch here:
| Quote: | | Lumber stored in close piles however, may soak up and retain water, causing very slow drying out. This condition should be avoided because it may lead to staining and decay. Piles of lumber should be placed on skids raised off the ground and covered with sheets of waterproof material to shed water. Sheets of polyethylene may also be placed on the ground, under the skids to prevent ground moisture from wetting the lumber. |
More photos:
Here, too, are more photos taken during the rains, this time from W. 8th Ave. and Sasamat:
Let's ask the experts. Our e-mail to CMHC:
We decided to ask the experts for their views on these photos:
| Quote: | From: editor@bccondos.ca
To: editor@bccondos.ca
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 10:51 AM
Subject: Best construction practices
Hello CMHC,
Our question today concerns the best practice guideline for protecting a wood-frame residential structure during construction. For example, does one of your guidelines here recommend covering the wood frame to protect it from the elements? If so, could you set out the provision for us and tell us which guide it's in?
Thanks very much.
Editor@bccondos.ca
http://www.bccondos.ca
Consumer guide to B.C.'s leaky condo crisis. |
Check back soon to read our reply from CMHC.
Link to this entry
http://www.bccondos.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=531#531 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CMHC replies:
| Quote: | From: <CHIC@cmhc-schl.gc.ca>
To: <editor@bccondos.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 9:01 AM
Subject: Information request to CMHC / Demande d'information adressée à la SCHL <Ref:031142>
This message is to acknowledge receipt of your request for information sent to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. A response will be sent to you as soon as possible.
Thank you for your information request.
Canadian Housing Information Centre
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Our reply:
| Quote: | From: editor@bccondos.ca
To: Louis, Tim
Cc: editor@bccondos.ca
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: Inspect the work site at Sasamat and W. 8th Ave.
Hello Tim Louis,
Thanks for your comments, which we will consider through a glass darkly in the next few days.
In the meantime, while consumers are now quite familiar with municipalities' assertions that they will not be underwriters for residential properties, etc., etc., we draw your attention to the following comments of Grist, J. in Strata Plan NW 3341 v. Canlan Ice Sports, which remains a leading case in leaky condos:
| Quote: | | [71] The express purpose of Part 5.4 is to provide standards dealing with rain protection, an elementary feature to be expected of residential construction. In my view Delta should have anticipated the obvious. The public would reasonably expect that a municipality would put some effort into its responsibility to administer and enforce these Provincial Code provisions. I think it would surprise most Delta residents, for example, to find that no attention was to be paid to whether s. 5.4.3 was met: the very basic requirement that a roof shed or drain water.... |
and
| Quote: | | [82] The evidence was that the Delta Director had previously been part of the Burnaby Building Department and a wide ranging practice is difficult to establish on this evidence alone. Mr. Gies' evidence was that at the relevant time Municipal Building Departments had inquired in respect of Part 5 issues on projects he was responsible for. He viewed the pursuit of these issues as being individual to the checker or Municipality. In the ultimate, however, whether or not it was common for municipalities to take steps to enforce Part 5, there was a clear obligation to enforce all parts of the code, and it will not do for a regulating authority to say that it, like others, did not deal with the responsibility. (emphasis ours). |
It might not be a bad idea for inspectors to clarify at this point just what, if any, standards on a multi-unit housing complex they are required to enforce. In other words, are the judge's comments irrelevant today in most municipalities?
Ed. |
More on municipal liability in our e-mail from the former executive director of the Municipal Insurance Association at Condo Law FAQs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Deputy Chief Building Official on Sasamat Gardens in the rain:
| Quote: | From: Jackson, Dave
To: 'Editor@bccondos.ca'
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 4:19 PM
Subject: New Construction at Sasamat and 8th
Dear Editor, BCCONDOS,
As noted in your e-mail, construction at 8th and Sasamat is proceeding in the rain with piles of lumber stored on the grounds (albeit on skids) also getting wet.
Notwithstanding CMHC's "Best Practice Guide", The National Building Code of Canada (and accordingly the BC Building Code and Vancouver Building Code) does not prescribe specifics on how to carry out construction of a building. What the code does require, though, is that all the framing lumber be dried out to 19% or less moisture content before covering in. Accordingly, on this project, like all others, the construction schedule must allow for the proper drying of the lumber and the time to dry will be governed by how wet it is when it is installed.
The responsibility for ensuring that the building envelope is constructed in accordance with the code including moisture content rests with the architect of record and the building envelope professional. Your e-mail is being forwarded to those responsible for this project as a reminder that greater care will be necessary to ensure that the lumber is properly dried out before covering in, especially, given the extended timing of this project.
Dave Jackson
Deputy Chief Building Official |
More on B.C. Architects.
More on Letters of Assurance (scroll down). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Our reply:
| Quote: | From: editor@bccondos.ca
To: Jackson, Dave
Cc: editor@bccondos.ca
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: New Construction at Sasamat and 8th
Always a pleasure to hear from the City. It's important for our visitors to know who exactly is accountable in this type of scenario. Thanks for your prompt attention.
Ed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
editor
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Posts: 878
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2005 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Update on Sasamat Gardens during the Pineapple rains:
(Photos taken Jan. 20/05 at the height of two weeks of torrential downpours that caused mudslides in North Vancouver).
Will this wood dry out according to CMHC best practice guidelines set out above, we wonder?
How about these?
Look how wet that wood is...
The developer is asking how much for this?
Link to this entry
http://bccondos.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=649#649
Last edited by editor on Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:31 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
editor
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Posts: 878
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
B.C. workers just plain not interested in providing quality:
BC Business
Magazine Subscription
What's wrong with B.C.?
(Maybe it's you)
By Paul Willcocks
June, 2004
| Quote: | If British Columbians were smart, we'd be lobbying for economic excuse-making as an Olympic sport in 2010. We're gold-medal calibre there, with a hundred explanations for our lacklustre economic performance - the unions, the NDP, the Liberals, the tax structure, the dollar, Asian markets, First Nations, Ottawa, Americans, red tape. There may be lots of legit reasons B.C. has been economic weakling for most of the last two decades. But there's one big problem that stands out if you look closely: As the Beatles sand four decades ago, 'Baby, it's you.'
We are a people who have decided that other things are more important than being the very best at our jobs. That's not to say we're bad people - maybe we're better human beings - or even that we're slackers. But we aren't driven to be the best in our chosen fields. (emphasis added) If we were, we almost certainly wouldn't be here. (Excerpt from p. 45) |
Link to this entry
http://bccondos.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=769#769
Last edited by editor on Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:03 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
editor
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Posts: 878
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How can I assess the quality of construction at Sasamat Gardens?
| Quote: | From: Pierce Hughes
To: editor@bccondos.ca
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 1:29 PM
Subject: Sasamat Gardens
I've read the info on your website regarding the construction practices of Sasamat Gardens. Do you have anymore recent info on this development? How can I (as a potential buyer) assess the quality of the construction? |
Our reply:
| Quote: | From: editor
To: Pierce Hughes
Cc: editor@bccondos.ca
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 4:34 PM
Subject: Sasamat Gardens
Hello Pierce,
All we've got on Sasamat Gardens are the photos on the homepage plus the inside photos and two e-mails (see above) - one from CMHC and one from Dave Jackson, Vancouver's deputy chief building official - which describe best practice guidelines and the importance of drying out wood during construction.
Assessing the quality of construction will require an independent opinion by an expert - either an architect or a civil engineer - who is qualified to inspect the building and compare those findings with the technical building audit and/or letters of assurance. Quaere whether the wood used in that construction was dried sufficiently and, if not, what is the predicted outcome/service life? If there is any reluctance on the part of the developer to fully disclose those documents - can't see why they'd want to - you may wish to mention the e-mails from CMHC and the City.
As you can see from the posts, we've done our best to record our efforts to notify the appropriate officials, which may be of value to buyers especially if there are problems later on, but we have no way of knowing what effect, if any, our inquiries had on the finished product.
Interestingly, we learned recently of a lawsuit proceeding now in Victoria, B.C. against a public inspection official who ignored repeated warnings of questionable practices at a construction site recently. No resolution yet.
Hope that helps. If not, let us know and we'll keep going. We'd be very interested to know how those units at such a plum location turned out. Like much of B.C., they look quite nice from the outside.
Regards,
Ed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
