Trees
I think that I shall never see
A poem lovely as a tree.
A tree whose hungry mouth is prest
Against the earth’s sweet flowing breast;
A tree that looks at God all day,
And lifts her leafy arms to pray;
A tree that may in Summer wear
A nest of robins in her hair;
Upon whose bosom snow has lain;
Who intimately lives with rain.
Poems are made by fools like me,
But only God can make a tree.
A study completed by Laval University in 2000, found that landscaped patios added 12.4 percent to property value. This is what we had. ALL destroyed since 2002.
And this is SOME of what Al MacLeod took for his own exclusive use and enjoyment.
Homes with poor landscape appeal had approximately 10 percent lower property value.
No wonder.
Mirrors in our living room, dining room, and hall reflected the trees outside our windows
creating magical park-like surroundings that sheltered our property and filled my heart with joy
ALL DESTROYED.
A history of serious sinking and restrictive covenants that run with the land for protective landscaping requirements were deliberately and persistently ignored by individuals on the strata management team who were on a campaign to create panoramic views that Al Macleod could sell like a bandit.
ruining Unit 409's views
followed by our building sinking
replacing cool shade with more noise, dirt, stifling heat, and fruitless expense than we ever had before
crushing my enjoyment
privacy
property value
peace of mind and sense of security
We would like the trees around Unit 409 reinstated - believe it or not.
Cost to replace a single tree - over half a million dollars
The roots of trees and shrubs provided strength to sensitive slopes supposedly protected by binding restrictive covenants and our building sunk after they were removed - and that was just the beginning of the damage when the roots decomposed over the next 5 years and pavement and underground pipes started breaking prematurely and repeatedly all over the complex.
Vegetation absorbs water and minimizes erosion, sink holes, and landslides. In fact, it is my understanding that geotechnical concerns are the very reason why those restrictive covenants were signed and run with the land as contracts that are just as binding now as the day they were signed.
The developers' landscape architects set out specifications and provided low maintenance high quality landscaping, almost all destroyed by deliberate human acts, including approximately 300 mature trees and thousands of plants, causing loss of privacy, security, and equity that impoverished and stigmatized this strata complex.
We have done everything in our power to mitigate the damage, but it's costly, unfair, and a heartbreaking loss of property of enormous importance to me. It is also ineffective. It is crowding Unit 409's narrow strata plan patio and taking away its railing space so there is no room left for our patio furniture or outdoor dining.
Phase One Landscape Development Plan (Stamped Received May 14, 1987)
Phase Two Landscape Concept Plan (Stamped Received Jan 20, 1989)
The original landscape design provided for a privacy screen of foliage between the windows of all the buildings. People have destroyed the landscape architecture in Sunridge Estates for extra decking and unobstructed views with such persistence that it has became normalized, and despite restrictive covenants and tree and slope protection bylaws the city acts like loss of landscaping is not a problem and says sinking buildings can't sink.
Our overall assessed values have fallen from above average to below average, and geotechnical stability, curb appeal, and reliance on the law are seriously compromised, possibly permanently.
STRATA PROPERTY ACT
Section 71 requires a 3/4 vote of owners for any significant change in the use or appearance of common property. Destroying our urban forest and landscape architecture and creating extra decking, unobstructed views, and predictable unfairness and trauma is the most significant and costly change in the use and appearance of common property that I can imagine. In Sunridge Estates this has been done routinely by certain owners and council members for over 25 years, without penalty or proper approval, regardless of complaints and the risk or harm to strata lands, properties, and owners.
BYLAWS OF SUNRIDGE ESTATES
Our strata bylaws prohibit illegal acts and
damage to common property but we cannot rely on them when strata agents and members of our strata council are the wrongdoers, destroying trees and offloading strata responsibilities and costs onto owners.
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
Restrictive covenants Z123808
and Z123809 are registered in the Land Title Office against the title of
each unit. Without regard to either the terms of these covenants or the risk to the slope people, in a prolonged and repeated practice, have deliberately destroyed original landscaping planted pursuant to these covenants.
CITY OF COQUITLAM BYLAW NO. 2169, 1990
This bylaw required a permit to cut trees in the designated area around building 7 to ensure that cutting would not create a danger
from erosion, but it was disregarded, most notably while Mae Reid was a member of Coquitlam city council and one of the first to enjoy the new views to the detriment of others.
CITY OF COQUITLAM TREE MANAGEMENT BYLAW NO. 3855, 2007
On November 19, 2007, Coquitlam city council repealed bylaw 2169 and adopted Tree Management Bylaw 3855 which is no more protective than 2169 as far as any trees that infringe on Ms. Reid's view or a prospective deck site. In her strata President's Report for 2013-2014 Lynda Baker, who also works for the City of Coquitlam and thanks Al MacLeod for his role in getting us to this point in our strata history, calls the mature, healthy maple which the landscape architect provided for our peace and security a "problem" tree and boasts that cutting it down was an accomplishment.
2004
Building Envelope Project Specifications: Trees, shrubs, ground cover,
and landscape elements protected and preserved during the building
envelope project
.22 At commencement of work protect all fences, trees, shrubs, and landscape elements from incidental damage. Identify in advance any fencing and landscaping element that will prevent the timely undertaking of the work. The Owner will make arrangements for removal and reinstatement...(a budget of $50,000 was included to provide for reinstatement of what lost, NOT MORE.)
.1 Every attempt shall be made to preserve the existing mature trees.
Identify the trees that will interfere with the timely undertaking of the work. The Owners will make arrangements to trim and/or strap these trees whenever possible.
These terms were set out in the scope of work when the owners voted to approve the special levy, but instead of complying with the terms of the agreement
Al MacLeod
and his like-minded collaborator, and future strata president, Georgia Title
actually DESTROYED the existing mature
trees and have CONTINUED to do so - causing damage in the MILLIONS, contrary to the law as it is written.
Hundreds of trees were cut down far beyond the area of scaffolding and long after the building envelope repairs were
complete. Instead of spending the more than adequate $50,000 special levy fund budget to reinstate the landscaping and the 30 or 40 trees that were unavoidably lost or damaged, the entire half million dollar balance of the special levy funds were diverted to extra decking, destruction of trees, and downgraded replacement of high quality landscaping with unobstructed panoramic views for those like Al MacLeod and his clients. The delays and extra expenses are staggering, and the strata corporation and those harmed may not recover for decades, if ever. It was a costly and traumatic shock, to say the least.
Situated on a high profile corner the landscape architect's beautiful "street of dreams" landscaping which was displayed proudly to passing traffic and enjoyed by people from within and without, year after year - WAS GONE. The sight that remained for years after was scandalous.
Millions of dollars of
landscaping was destroyed by a minority to provide extra decks and unobstructed views for their own exclusive benefit at great expense contrary to the best interests of the strata and other owners.
Hundreds of mature healthy trees had been growing in groves, stabilizing the slope, cleaning the air, quieting the noise, cooling the heat, beautifying views, and preserving property values.
The trees and common assets of Sunridge Estates that were paid for by the original owners like 409 were so ruthlessly destroyed that it is hard to
believe that the importance of geotechnical stability, high quality professional landscape design, and legal authority had ever been recognized and valued.
As Kenneth Cloke says in his book The Crossroads of Conflict there is a choice between fighting and problem solving and a choice between merely settling conflicts and learning from them. Seeking to learn from them, correcting behaviours, and moving toward reconciliation rather than adversarial approaches is one of my primary goals in blogging about conflict.
Photos from Unit 409
of our low maintenance evergreen ground cover and crack-free pavement.
Although I have never to this day stepped down as a member of the landscaping "committee" I have been quietly excluded from all but one "meeting" which to my knowledge is the only one ever to take place. From what I can tell the so-called "committee" was in reality just one person, be it Georgia Title or Trevor Neuman, with Al MacLeod pulling the strings from behind the scenes to keep others out.
We remember enjoying beautiful leafy green windows, easy care landscaping, and years of solid grounds and buildings, and we object to Georgia Title, Al Macleod, and others who refuse to reinstate the trees and ground cover so needlessly and wantonly destroyed without 75% approval. We object to not having our landscaping maintained and our patio reinstated and waiting nearly 10 years for our front entrance to be restored and even longer for our strata lot to be repaired while the strata fees we paid to cover these things have been diverted to destroy our trees and common assets and give a minority extra decking and panoramic views at the expense of everyone else.
It is unfair to cater to special interests and trim this hedge, maintain this ground cover, shovel this driveway, and build this fireplace all for the exclusive benefit of Al MacLeod, while we go without.
Replacing low maintenance greenery with lawns not only increased landscape maintenance by about 25%, but then the strata fails to keep the new lawns watered.
Paying one owner patronage to water, but not others, and vilifying owners for damage that would not exist but for the strata acting in secret, making bad decisions, and trying to avoid its maintenance obligations is not good management.
From what we have seen over the years, the landscaping at Sunridge Estates has historically been damaged far more by strata management, than by owners, with very few exceptions.
Retaliation is not unusual; ADDING to the damage to provide a cover-up is.
The process is costly.
When the strata is guilty of avoiding its duty to take care of common property, please don't impute blame on the innocent strata lot owner or vilify them in the minutes. Doing so, if not downright defamatory, could be seen as a bad reflection on the owners of the unit.
Disregarding any apprehensions about Al MacLeod taking punitive retaliation for what he may perceive as a failure of the strata lot owner to water grass playing a role in this unusual sight, we think it goes to show that if the strata is not prepared to take reasonable care of the new lawns it should reinstate the original low maintenance trees and bushes and ground cover AND CHARGE BACK THE COSTS not to the victimized owner of the targeted strata lot, but to Al MacLeod or individual members of council instrumental in destroying the property, directly or indirectly.
Otherwise, the cheapest most practical fix for the lawns might be clover. It's natural, low maintenance, good for bees, and better looking than unwatered moss filled grass.
I suggest taking a look at strata fees and special levies, see where they were spent. Consider who has benefited and who has been harmed.
I could be wrong, but Al MacLeod might have felt justified in calling others "ignorant" "whack jobs" when he was able to divert strata funds to his own personal interests and use the strata as his own special bank for what I consider to be money laundering, pay less strata fees than others and take twice as much, and get away with it for years despite the strongest possible professional warnings.
To a person in the business of selling real estate it was probably particularly helpful to have
"bonus" extra decks and unobstructed panoramic views to promote, especially if it wouldn't be his problem if it cost the strata millions, as long as he could just pretend that all is well and make jokes about doing "autopsies" on suddenly dead trees and transfer the strata's expenses onto individuals to hide them from the records. Of course artificially low strata fees are always helpful in sales, especially when you can brag about how they actually cover new fireplaces and extra decks and patios and views and replacement cost repairs for all the extras, and a
supply of equipment to clean up property and run an office couldn't
hurt either, and snow removal equipment on site 24/7 when time is of the
essence in a possible sale would be wonderful, so long as all of it was at the expense of others. For a realtor to maximize profit its so much easier to photograph a building for market without trees getting in the way, and as far as parking goes, well the property would display better if people didn't park cars in their driveways, and if you could exempt yourself from restrictions of any kind because rules are for others, that would work out well for you, and it would be good to pass a bylaw for no soliciting to keep the competition away, and if
you could hide evidence of corruption in minutes that are too ambiguous and redundant to bother with, and no records or records disappearing without a trace and financial statements that are superficial and ambiguous, all of that would
be important, and if you could break the law and vilify those who complain, and advertise unfairness and oppression as good management and the trauma of it all provoked people to sell, that would be just perfect, the more sales the better! What's not to like?
Over a 10-year period Al MacLeod was instrumental in foisting significant changes in the use and appearance of common property on owners for the primary benefit of a minority, particularly himself, to the detriment of the majority, particularly 409. During the MacLeod era a perverse culture of power without responsibility, strata fees without service, and strata records without meaning was cultivated, leaving the strata with a costly legacy of corruption and confusion. Unfairness and violating the Strata Property Act was so normalized that the last act in Mr. MacLeod's administration was to further cover up the costly legacy wrecked on the strata in another move to create divisions for maintenance and strata fees and shift strata responsibilities onto individual owners in a bogus annual painting bylaw to avoid reasonable user fees or shared use of common property and fair strata fees in accordance with unit entitlement.
The strata and its agents (including members of council, strata managers, strata lawyers, engineers, architects, agents, contractors, and their employees) act and make unreported decisions with impunity contrary to law and protective enactments, but with staggering costs to the strata, and systemic devastation to certain individuals.
Call me crazy if you like, but I have considerable evidence supporting my accusations of misconduct, retaliation, sabotage, and vandalism.
When I wrote letters complaining about strata funds being diverted from the landscaping budget and neglect of the gardening years of bad things suddenly started happening around 409.
- the
rhododendron at the front entrance to 409 suddenly became chewed up with root
weevils, and extreme infestations isolated to this one bush in the middle of the complex persisted
- my flowers on 409's patio very suddenly played host to 10 times more slugs, and large numbers of new ones kept showing up in fresh
bunches on a regular basis
- the bushes around 409's patio were no longer trimmed and weeds grew out of control
- the ground cover around 409's patio was smothered with bags of decayed leaves
- all of the ground cover in front of 409 very suddenly turned brown and died
The more I challenged Al MacLeod the more bad things happened in a very destructive pattern
- he cut down the trees in front of 409 when we went away on vacation
- he sent us email saying he had the right to act against others
- trees suddenly began dying throughout the whole complex
- the minutes claimed the gardeners were doing a "good job" and joked about doing autopsies
- defamatory accusations were made against me in the minutes and elsewhere
- life in our own home was a living hell.
A culture of corruption and unfairness was normalized. The staggering cost is beyond belief.
Without a vote or need Al Macleod cut down these trees in
front of unit 409 while we were away on vacation and then sold Unit 510 above
us to fellow realtor and politician Mae Reid with unobstructed views, causing phenomenal cost to the strata and profound
upset to 409. It was the only sale Mr. MacLeod got for about a year while owners sold in droves.
Unit 409's comparative property assessment notice fell immediately afterward by $10,000.
After paying nearly $100,000 in special assessments 409 didn't have enough money left for a trial. Neither did the other owners, and the strata did not have enough money to reinstate the trees. As the roots decomposed things sank and people fled. Mae Reid listed Unit 510 for sale also, coincidentally on or about the same day that more trees were cut down outside of Unit 409.
The strata corporation was so dysfunctional in the Al MacLeod era that owners sold with the property in a horrific condition, and even though they boycotted Mr. MacLeod directly, the strata manager reported to an AGM that Mr. MacLeod had nevertheless managed to involve himself in about 50% of the sales.
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
A decade of reckless destruction left owners deprived and the strata corporation too impoverished to maintain common assets.
Owners must rely on council to enforce the bylaws and act fairly and in good faith. We want the trees that were surrounding 409 and removed without authority reinstated, not just for ourselves, but to make it right in law and ethics, as well as geotechnic and economic stability. We can't afford to keep paying the price of the alternative.
A satellite view of the former urban forest at Sunridge Estates.
http://earth.google.com/ - satellite photo
It was perverse, but even though the sellers boycotted Al MacLeod he was still able to capitalize on sales through the buyers instead of the sellers; the
result being that it is possible that a number of the disbelieving new
owners were basically hand picked by Al MacLeod.
The trees were beautiful.
"Keep your faith in all beautiful things; in the sun when it is hidden, in the spring when it is gone." - Roy R. Gilson
It was not just 409's windows that were surrounded in spring, summer, and fall by beautiful leaves of trees that cleaned the air, screened the windows for privacy, cooled the summer heat, reduced noise, and then dropped off in winter to a sparkling panoramic view of night lights like a magical fantasy land. 
It was a joy to behold.
In summer
in spring
autumn
winter
It was like an urban forest and looking out our window was like looking into a park.
With trees and professional landscape design
it was beautiful, quiet, clean, cool, private, and secure.
A few rogues cut down hundreds of trees and destroyed these environmental benefits contrary to the strata bylaws prohibiting owners from damaging common property and assets and the Strata Property Act requiring significant changes in the use and appearance of common property to be approved by 75%.
Ruthlessly cutting them down
in full knowledge of their importance
particularly to my enjoyment and the value of Unit 409.
without trees
everything pretty in the view from Unit 409 has been destroyed
by members of council acting contrary to the bylaws and law of the land
leaving me traumatized
and my view stark and barren and no longer private.
In mid December 2013, the vine maple tree was growing beautifully on the east side of Unit 409's living room window and screening the view into 409 from Unit 508 when it was suddenly cut down. . When asked why Georgia Title advised the April 2014 AGM that it was "too big" according to Morris the Aborist. If the arborist said it should be cut down he has some explaining to do in court about the loss of privacy
and environmental benefits
If the arborist didn't say the tree should be cut down, then Georgia Title acted in conflict and violated the bylaws and council's duty to maintain the common property.
Either way, Councillor Title acted deliberately knowing that destruction of the tree would have a foreseeably damaging effect on me, just as she knew threatening me with fines for mitigating the loss with architectural glass, and calling my complaints "bullshit" and me an "asshole" and giving false information to the police would have foreseeably damaging effects on me.
This was obviously an important tree that provided privacy and security and much needed shade. It cooled the homes and screened Unit 409's patio from sight and sheltered it from wind driven rain.
We miss our trees!
This was a healthy mature well established tree with no evidence of devastating disease or damage to buildings, pipes, or pavement. It could never be too big to maintain because it was a vine maple, and they can be pruned down all the way to a Bonsai.
The only thing making it "too big" was the "view" that Mae Reid advertised as she listed Unit 510 above us for sale, and Georgia Title's hostility and knowledge of the extreme importance of trees to me. There is no more reasonable explanation that I am aware of.
It would take me a lifetime of delivering my paper route to pay for this destruction.
It is another significant change in the appearance of the common property from Unit 409 without a 75% vote of approval that cost hundreds of extra expense to destroy, and will cost hundreds of extra expense to replace, or thousands to reinstate a tree of similar size.
leaving another shocking view between the windows of 409 and adjacent neighbours
that cost us $1400, which is more than a pretty penny
to restore privacy, hide the intrusive view, and relieve the psychic pain.
Council is persistently resisting the reinstatement of trees and is threatening to fine us for hanging this architectural glass to mitigate the damage it caused by destroying the tree.
Council is further attempting to offload the damage it caused by demanding that we sign an indemnity agreement taking responsibility for foreseeable future damage from the wind driven rain that occurred after the strata destroyed the tree and our wind chimes and spinners became active for the first time in decades.
The wind chimes were so noisy we took them down, but these wind spinners really go wild! Before the strata cut down the tree they barely moved at all.
When council refused to reinstate the ground cover for nearly 10 years I planted these flowers, under protest, but the strata gardeners keep pulling them out, for 2 years - calling wildflowers in bloom weeds - until 2016, when the gardener reinstated some of them, and added a bunch of poppies, in clumps
Council prohibited me from sowing flowers from seeds, or planting
anything in the ground - while Councillors Hennan and Baker plant marigolds and tulips, or whatever they like right across the street
DECEMBER 17, 2013
I don't want to be unfair, so maybe its just coincidence that at the same time that another tree was cut down on the east side of Unit 409 that Coquitlam city councillor (an experienced realtor and self-professed paralegal) Mae Reid had Unit 510 listed for sale.
We don't know why realtors list their own place with other realtors; we just know that a reason exists.
Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware. Ms. Reid's listing agent, Dianne S. Swintak, who claims to offer a personal code of honesty, integrity and trustworthiness, advertised common property as if it was Mae Reid's to sell the same as her strata lot.
The
Canadian Code of Advertising Standards (Code) sets the criteria for acceptable advertising in Canada, that it be truthful, fair, and accurate. Advertising common assets for sale as part of a strata lot is not truthful, fair, or accurate; it is inaccurate, unfair, untruthful, and a corrupt form of unjust enrichment as president Lynda Baker made so clear at the 2014 AGM when she contradicted my advice that extra decks are common property and swore that she bought a deck with the unit that Al MacLeod sold, she paid for it, and she "definitely owns" said deck.
As a defense Ms. Reid told me, “I am selling exactly what
I bought. The deck was here, all I have done is paint it.” If that is true, where did the gate for her dog, now dead, come from?
Considering Ms. Reid's background as a realtor,
paralegal, and politician I am surprised that she did not refer to the drawing of Unit 510 on
the strata plan or transfer documents to determine exactly what she purchased and owns exclusively, as distinguished from what she unfairly expropriated rent-free and owns in an undivided interest with ME as tenants in common.
For Ms. Reid to hold out common property as if it was her own to buy and sell based on the fact that an unauthorized
deck was in existence seems based, not in law, but on the notion that 2 wrongs
make a right in matters of unfairness and duplicity. Don't even talk about government. In my opinion Ms. Reid’s claim is, at best, legal fiction, and at worst, fraud.
When it comes to unfairness and deceptive practices, what is NOT mentioned by sophisticated sellers is just as material as what IS mentioned. It convinces purchasers like Lynda Baker, city staffer and strata council president, that they "definitely own" the extra deck next to their unit when the truth is that the strata could remove it completely at any time. CAVEAT EMPTOR, let the buyer beware.
Unit 510 was listed for sale at a price inflated by advertising the
LARGE deck at the entrance and the view off the balcony, and VIEWS to
the north, south, and west (not east). Large meaning
over twice the size of the balcony that was actually Ms. Reid's own to sell, which was in no way distinguished as such.
Omitted from Ms. Reid's ad was the pertinent and material fact that the large deck is common property which
all other strata lot owners in the development automatically own a
proportionate interest in; every one of us can use that deck automatically, and both it and the advertised views are attributable
to significant changes from the
strata plan NOT approved by 75% pursuant to the Strata Property Act,
or even approved for Ms. Reid's exclusive use and enjoyment at all.
When taken alone, not advertising the view to the east that was being so
freshly cleared could arguably be no more than just interesting timing.
When taken alone. The view to the east was not advertised, at
least not before more trees were cut down 10 years after Al MacLeod
first bestowed Unit 510's panoramic view at the expense of the strata, and particularly Unit 409, but nothing is as effective or as difficult to remedy than
pre-emptive tree cutting; although pre-emptive deck building is a close second.
Unit 510 was also advertised for entertaining, with ROOM FOR A PATIO SET, saying that these top 500 series units don't come up very often.
Nice.
Not so nice for the victims of those like Ms. Reid who take so much more and pay so much less than their share at the expense of others. Out of 68 units, only 4 lower units besides us survived the 10-year period of destruction and growing unfairness from 2003 through 2013. The units who paid the price of such unfairness come up for sale more often than the "top 500" series that they subsidize. It's no wonder.
The key role that Ms. Reid played in diverting special levy funds in a conflict of interest, depriving Unit 409 of room for a patio set, and use and enjoyment of our OWN property, is not a selling point.
Ms. Reid acted in her own self interest in failing to impose user
fees or comply with the votes of the owners and contributed to
significant extra expenses for others, amounting to a covert division in
maintenance between strata plan patio units and the far more expensive
to repair balcony units, compounded by time and a hidden 20% increase in
strata fees for Unit 409.
All of which Ms. Reid
dismisses as "pick pick pick" when she hasn't paid a penny in rent for
taking the common property for her own exclusive benefit
for all these years that she has been responsible for effectively
denying us of any, much less reasonably proportionate, use and enjoyment
the common property,
not even so much as a remedial 16 inches of shared use and benefit as
tenants in common.
Given the impact on us, we think that Mae Reid's actions over the years amount to trespass.
If Ms. Reid paid rent at market
rates in proportion to our respective unit entitlements and respective
exclusive use of common property for the past years, the strata
corporation would have the money needed to complete the repairs to Unit
409 and remedy the nuisance arising out of the extension of Unit 407's
patio, get the trellis planters off of our limited common property,
promptly and fully restore the function of our strata plan patio,
properly maintain the limited common property, reinstate the trees
around Unit 409, and act fairly and honestly.
Mae Reid took common property rent-free for her own exclusive use and benefit, acted in a conflict of interest with evidence of a guilty mind at the expense of others and called me a bitch for complaining at a hearing. Disparaging and vilifying me was an essential component in the process of keeping me off the council, avoiding user fees, and shifting property values so unfairly.
Now the trees are gone once again, and Mae Reid's view is wide open and Unit 510 is ready for another transfer of ownership. Ms. Reid is advertising common property (deck and air space views) for sale as if it was her own property along with artificially low strata fees (such a deal) which hide true maintenance costs, and the extra expense arising out of the consequences of Ms. Reid's actions are not
advertised.
When we bought Unit 409 we expected to use and enjoy our share of the common property and to be treated fairly. HOW SILLY, I know. We never dreamed people like Ms. Reid would come along and take twice their share, bully and abuse us, divert our strata funds, spoil our view, ruin our peaceful security and enjoyment, and then take off, leaving us to fight for our rights in court or be forever deprived.
The mature trees that the landscape architect put in front of and beside Unit 409, as well as the giant conifer put further down by an unidentified party, basically anything disturbing the views to the south, west, and east of Unit 510 were suddenly cut down when the unit was listed for sale.
It is not fair.
We paid strata fees for landscaping maintenance but the money was spent cutting down valuable trees, leaving pest infested bushes at Unit 409. Persistently. Repeatedly. It's an endless cycle.
As a typical lower unit, 409 had an beautiful magical view of shared common property. It was like living in a park. MOST units enjoyed this benefit to varying degrees, and ALL units had beauty in their views. Destruction of the trees was a significant change in the appearance of the common property not approved by 75% and it has a huge affect on comparative property values.
Although Mae Reid and Al MacLeod have both boasted about unobstructed panoramic views, I estimate that there are only about 25 out of 68 units with views that increased in value when the trees were cut down. They are: all 14 of the top 500 series units along Rambler Way, namely 502,
504, 506, 508, 510, 512, 514, 516, 518, 520, 522, 524, 526, 528, and six units on the high side of the meridian, namely 417, 419, 421, 423,
425, 427, and possibly a few units on the low side of the meridian,
depending on your perspective, but not more than six, and more likely
five - or none at all, depending on your perspective.
This used to be the view from Unit 409's living room.
Owners had natural beauty in their windows.
It's not like a park for hardly anyone anymore. The view from Unit 409's living room now looks like this.
How does the view from your front window look? In comparison to ours?
How do you think the view from 409 and other lower units looks in comparison to how they looked with the trees? If you don't know, that's because most of the original owners who cared about the trees fled, and the new owners were not here to see the trees and have no idea what was lost.
Even new owners who didn't witness the destruction of hundreds of trees fled as they saw paving and underground pipes breaking all over the complex and the minutes started to suddenly and repeatedly report cracking and sinking in the buildings and advise that individual victims will bear the repair costs for their own units. It was a bonanza for realtors, Mr. MacLeod in particular.
The long row of evergreens pictured below combined with cement retaining walls supported and stabilized this slippery slope at the foot of Eagle Mountain - until trees were cut down throughout the complex to give "unobstructed views" to some at the expense of others, and the strata as a whole.
It might not have been so devastating but for the fact that no reasonable person would vote to pay a special levy to cut down trees and pay for extra decks to benefit a minority who mostly already paid 25% less than others and very persistently
avoided paying reasonable user fees to cover the extra expenses
attributable to their exclusive use and benefit of common property that was supposed to be shared.
Out of 68 units I estimate that the views of a minority of about 25 units became more valuable when the trees were cut down, and half of these units have a compounding benefit of big extra decks that are twice their unit entitlement shares to the common property while they are paying about 25% less in strata fees than most of those with only one patio.
It was always easy for us to see which members of council were most likely to be acting a conflict of interest. Look at who's been getting what, and why. Something to think about when taking sides or voting for council at an AGM.
From
what I can see, what with the overlap between 17 big extra decks ("X")
and 25 new views ("V"), a total of only about 30 out of 68 units
benefited in any significant way from the destruction of the landscaping. From what I can see these
30 units are a minority of the 68 and include: 208(X), 210(X), 328(X), 406(X), 410(X), 412(X), 415(V), 417(V), 419(V), 421(V), 423(V), 425(V), 427(V), 502(V), 504(V), 506(V), 508(XV), 510(XV), 512(XV), 514(V), 516(V), 518(XV), 520(XV), 522(XV), 524(XV).
Al Macleod's interest in avoiding user fees was unique and extraordinary. In addition to having a strata plan balcony and paying about 25% less in strata fees, for over 10 years he took TWO added patios for his own exclusive use and benefit, and he got the strata to shovel snow from his extra long driveway and open up his view, all at the expense of others. By the time he was through the common property was unrecognizable. Over 280 trees (mostly birch and pine) and thousands of shrubs were destroyed along with most of the low maintenance evergreen ground cover, all at shocking expense, direct and indirect.
You might be able to advertise this as a view, but it is not one we enjoy or want to live with.
It is dirty, hot, noisy, and heartbreaking. The stability of the slope and the extraordinary spectacle of a valuable urban forest was eroded and destroyed, imposing on 409 views of barren rooftops, stark buildings, windows looking straight into adjacent units, and repeatedly sinking buildings and patios, providing "unobstructed" views to others, most of whom have less unit entitlement and pay lower strata fees than we do and take so much more than their share. We're afraid that the sudden sinking of buildings, breaking of pavement, underground pipes, and door and window systems throughout the complex is just the beginning of damages arising out of persistently disregarding the law.
While most of the extra decks I complain of on 2-bedroom units take about twice their corresponding unit entitlement share of common property, most of the patio extensions on 3-bedroom units are comparatively small and far more in keeping with their proportionate strata fees.
Unit 407's patio is a notable exception. It was enlarged to about double its original size, with the unauthorized removal of an important tree that the landscape architect had planted between the buildings to stabilize the slope and provide privacy to screen the views between the windows of 409 and 508.
This not only cost the strata tens of thousands of dollars (I think it cost approximately $27,000 in about 2001 for structural repairs to Unit 407 when it sank after they cut down the tree and all the bushes between the buildings to extend 407's deck) but it opened up clear lines of sight between the buildings, and all the way through Units 409 and 508, clear into each other's en suites.
It's an ongoing violation of the nuisance bylaws that Council is supposed to comply with and enforce
but instead of having the extra decking taken down to reinstate the tree on the common property, we were told to put up trellis planters on Unit 409's patio as a substitute privacy screen. So we did, and they have been trespassing on our patio for decades, rent-free, depriving us of space for our patio umbrella set and outdoor dining area.
After more than 5 years of barren dirt, debris, virulent weeds, and eroded land that followed the destruction of the landscaping, further havoc was wrecked on this multi-million dollar real estate with the addition of a high maintenance stockade fence and high maintenance grass, neither of which the strata can afford to maintain in good condition, and certainly not without sacrificing something else, like pest control, fertilizer, pruning, weeding, watering, planting. or anything that costs money.
Making matters worse, having replaced high quality low maintenance landscaping with low cost high maintenance grass and lattice the strata acts deliberately to offload or ignore its maintenance obligations.
Bushes around Unit 409 have gone without pruning until they are turning into trees that block the sky. I don't know if the landscaping around Unit 409 is designed to become oppressive, or not, but the bush on the north side needs to be pruned back to let light back onto our patio, including this purple one and the white lilac tree has to be moved back before it gets bigger and crowds in closer.
Unit 508's window is above this bush and 407's window is behind it. The bush is so solid we are afraid it will block out the light from the window of 409 if it grows tall enough.
This level of quality is far below the original landscaping.
Of course the trees and greenery along Rambler Way for units like those of Al Macleod and Mae Reid were spared from destructive vandalism and survived beautifully.
most of the loss of landscaping was not because of the building envelope repairs
ground cover in the photo above was green
until it died suddenly and mysteriously
after the building envelope repairs were completed
After the scaffolding was removed most of the trees were still standing
and the landscape architect's bushes were growing back quite quickly
even trees that were cut down but had roots left intact were growing back quickly -
really quickly -
until they were killed, cut down, and torn out without regard to the costs, or the law, leaving the common property looking like a war zone from 2004 to 2010. Nearly 6 years; very LONG years.
From what I could see Al Macleod, our number one resident realtor, was instrumental in destroying this property for his own benefit to provoke sales from distressed owners and generate commissions through buyers of "unobstructed" views and "bonus" extra decks. The costs to others were staggering, and the costs to the strata continue mounting. This includes, but is not limited to, loss of the landscape architect's low maintenance design with mature trees, shrubs, and ground cover that would cost millions of dollars to reinstate, 5 years of derelict grounds and the perpetual added maintenance costs of a wooden stockade fence, broken gates, barricaded access points, graffiti, sinking buildings, cracking walls, bursting pipes, garage door downgrades, and labour intensive grass. All of which provokes hidden strata fees to offset the expense without disclosure of the costs.
It is not just how much it would cost to reinstate about 2,000 square feet of high quality professionally designed landscaping now covered over with extra decks, or the special levy funds diverted to pass on the added expense of their demolition and reconstruction to others, it is the illegal activity, and who knows how much in an ongoing flow of extra expense and future losses.
409 has been hurt more than any other. 409's views and patio were both ruined by other people tampering with the common property, our driveway is next, and a hidden increase of 20% over our unit entitlement strata fees was imposed with a bogus painting bylaw after Al MacLeod broke the bank and left the strata unable to afford to maintain the common property for so many years.
We have never seen drawings by a landscape architect for a design with such lack of appeal. The fact that he quit and his work was withheld from us convinces me that this is NOT his work. As owners, we were unable to find out whose design it is. Is it Georgia Title? Al Macleod? It's a significant change to the landscaping never approved by us or 75% of owners, and it devalues everyone's property values to a FAR lower standard than our original pride and joy in this community.
Our building envelope project was completed in October 2005 but the cladding on the hydro kiosks was not replaced to match the buildings as it did originally. The one in front of unit 409 was left looking like this for YEARS. It was disgusting.
Although it looked a bit better washed and dry than dirty and wet it was still a significant change, a horrific eyesore, and an ongoing nuisance.
Paint does not reinstate the original match with the cladding on the building. We expected the strata to have the cladding that was left lying out on the ground for years installed on this kiosk, but restoring the common property was sacrificed in favour of illegally added extra decks and views.
Special levy funds were collected from owners for Building Envelope Rehabilitation with a $50,000 budget to protect or reinstate all trees, shrubs, and landscape elements damaged by necessity. That is what received the 75% vote of approval, and $50,000 was MORE than enough to
reinstate what was lost during the building envelope repairs.
Change orders to make senseless downgrades to the original specifications, and coercive delays and wanton destruction to the landscaping after the building envelope repairs were complete is all evidence of the conspiracy to force significant changes and spend over 5 times the budget, diverting special levy funds to illegally create views and repeatedly demolish and reconstruct illegally added extra decks for a corrupt minority, contrary to the direction of the owners. It was beyond belief.
What used to be beautiful greenery on this high profile street corner
was replaced with mismatched wooden patio fencing, but the worst was yet to come.
This was so shocking to see on such a high
profile street corner that the whole property was stigmatized in the
eyes of passing traffic, but the major destruction was yet to come.
What was left was then destroyed and replaced with a field of bark mulch behind a stockade fence
costing over $40,000 to build and paint, with gates so poorly constructed they proved to be impossible to maintain.
Now a drive-by of our once proud common property bears more resemblance to the cover up stockade around the Hell's Angels compound on Brunette in Maillardville.
After over 9 years, this property is still devastated.
.
This graffiti board fence covers up a terrible mess and hides what was once landscape design displayed so proudly on this high profile corner that it was equal in beauty to the street of dreams
The strata is too impoverished from the cost of panoramic views to pay the cost of maintaining troublesome fences and gates, so owners are endangered and forced into the road to pick up mail because the stairway gate is barricaded!
I say restore the landscaping, and install functioning gates before someone gets hurt, or remove the fence between the gates and keep the 7-11 high school crowd away with a sight line security barrier from the end of the fence to the adjacent building as shown below.
Contrary to former realtor Al Macleod's claim that this is a 17 million dollar property that figure only covers the insured value of the buildings, there is at least another 7 million in land which he placed no value on so that he could avoid paying user fees. Sunridge Estates is closer to a 25 million dollar property, which Mr. Macleod played an instrumental role in devaluing through corrupt governance and the destruction of millions of dollars worth of trees.
The costs keep mounting...relentlessly, and the impact on the strata complex shows.
Here when the underground pipes suddenly broke after the roots of the trees decomposed, the guy doing the repairs suggested that the cause was settlement, and a year or so later the land settled again, in 2016. I nearly tripped and fell on the huge drop, it was so steep and abrupt, but I was too demoralized to take a picture of it.
If some kind of report, depreciation, or other, for this strata corporation included a true economic analysis of unit entitlements and corresponding strata fees in comparison to shared use of common property we think it would show the true cost of the destruction of valuable landscaping that the original owners like us paid a premium price for, and how cutting down trees only benefited a minority of owners (most of all Mr. MacLeod) at the expense of the majority (most of all Unit 409).
