As you have probably noticed speed bumps were installed over the summer on both YCC 367 and YCC 256 roadways. Then in the first week of November two of these speed bumps (outside 17 Woburn
Let me make my position clear - I am opposed to the installation of these impediments. I am even more concerned about the manner in which these additions to the Common Element were approved by your Board of Directors.
The Issue: Safety concerns particularly related to some vehicles occasionally exceeding the posted speed limit and the risk to residents, particularly small children.
Background: A discussion of safety issues within the Corporation has been considered by your Board of Directors both past and present. For example, improved lighting and the extension of fencing to prevent non-residents easy access to backyard areas were effective projects in addressing security concerns. Alteration to our roadways has been an issue that has been considered by previous Boards. An evaluation of the merits of installing speed impediments always attempted to estimate the real risk and whether the solution adequately reduced that risk as well as the costs both monetarily and to personal freedoms. Our roadways are primarily used by owners and their guests and are not a thorough fare subject to excessive traffic. The daily inconvenience to our residents and the potential for damage and increased maintenance to their vehicles as a consequence of traversing roadway impediments, the impact of these impediments to snow removal, emergency vehicles and other service traffic were all factors that were balanced with the perceived risk. Previously, it was the opinion of the standing Board that the installation of speed bumps was not warranted.
Decision 2008: Over the past summer, during a joint Board meeting and discussion with the Board of YCC 256, we were informed that as part of their roadway repaving they were installing speed bumps on their roadways. This information led to a renewed discussion on the installation of speed bumps within YCC 367. During this discussion the Board was not in possession of any specific information regarding the specifications for these speed bumps, except that if we had them installed while YCC 256 was performing their repaving, the cost would be $500 per speed bump and five speed bumps were being recommended. An exchange of information by email ensued and ultimately a decision was made by email consensus to approve the installation of five speed bumps. I was not included in this Board decision as I do not agree to transact Board decisions by any means other that a meeting at which a quorum is present to discuss and vote on the issue.
My Concerns: This was an improper decision.
1) I had made it clear to the Board that while email, fax or phone was an agreeable method to exchange information, all Board decisions can only be voted on after discussion at a meeting of the Board. No such meeting was held. The rationale was that this was an emergency decision. That is simply not true. There was no emergency, just a deadline by the contractor to have the work done at the $500 price. That is not an emergency. This stipulation of holding a Board meeting is a requirement of The Condominium Act, not just me being difficult.
2) It was also argued that if YCC 367 did not install the speed bumps, while YCC 256 had speed bumps, that more traffic would be diverted to our roadways as cars avoided the speed bumps on Dunkeld. All I have to say about that is nonsense. Look at the layout of our developments. Most of YCC 256 is situated along Dunkeld and Romfield. While it is possible that some of the residents in the SW aspect of the complex may have elected to go along Kindale through YCC 367 roadways, the more probable route would be to continue using Dunkeld.
3) The estimation of risk and evaluation of the acceptance by our community of the inconvenience and their willingness to accept the installation of speed deterrents was not properly investigated. This was an emotional decision not a rationale one.
4) This alteration to the Common Element is on the threshold of being considered a substantial alteration and as such not only did this decision require a vote by the Board of Directors, a vote of the Owners would also have been appropriate if not mandatory. An alteration is considered substantial if the cost in any single month exceeds $1000 plus 1% of the annual budget. This threshold figure works out to $2584. The five speed bumps cost $500 each, so their cost was $2500.
5) The speed bumps as they were initially installed were bad enough. The two more aggressive speed bumps that have recently been installed are excessive. The reason for this change is unclear as there was no discussion regarding this alteration either at a regular Board meeting that was held the week prior to this work being done or by any other form of Board communication.
6) This winter will be a test of whether these “improvements” pose a problem or risk on snowy/icy days when getting up the grade on both Kindale and Woburn
I have had my say, now it is your opportunity to have your say. Please post your comments or communicate with your Board by any means that you choose. Contact information can be found in the last newsletter (March 2008). If you have lost yours, a PDF copy can be viewed/printed from this blog (under the “Everything you wanted to know about Condo Living” section).
{Dec.6, 2008}
P.S. Subsequent to the publication of this post I received emails from my fellow Board members voicing their displeasure with this post. One of these was from our President Zoran Gadganski, demanding that I remove this post and change the name of my blog. I will do neither. If I have misrepresented or made an error in any of the information presented, I will gladly correct or modify the information appropriately. I will not be censored because any of my fellow Board members disapproves.
