Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Skimmed through the bill. Am I missing something? If your building is installing the sprinkler system, you are exempt from complying with "alternate fire prevention and fire safety systems". And you have until 2030 to comply with either. If you don't do the sprinklers, you have to make sure your building passes the alternative safety test. IDK, honestly 10 years from now is not really something I'm worried much about. HOA should be putting funds aside in a reserve anyways. If they aren't that's more of an issue with an individual condo/association than anything else. Also, I'd hazard a guess that many condos will be slow to adopt, and will fight for the extensions.
1. CONSTRUCTION
~ INItNJU<I-IrSFI
(Corridors and Exits) 3 3 3
3, t,URRI~R & UWEUJNL,
UNIT SEPARATION WALLS 0 0
4 DOORS TO CORRI~R -
5 5 5
S EXITACCESS
4 .4 -4
6 VERTICAL OPENINGS
2 2 2 2
7 HAZARDOUS AREAS 0
S SMOKE MANAGEMENT
3 3 3
9 EGRESS ROUTES 3 3
10 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM use 112 of item 10
1 1 0,5
11 SMOKE DETECTION 3 3 3 3
12 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS 0 0 0 0
13 SMOKEALARMS 2 2
14 STA~CPIPE SYSTEM 5 -
15 ELEVATORS
15 ttKbtNUY LK,H I AND EXIT SIGNS
Compliance shall be with either an automatic fire sprinkler
system throughout the building or alternative fire prevention and fire safety
systems in accordance with the requirements of a building fire and life
safety evaluation code assessment as achieved by a passing score on a
building fire and life safety evaluation code assessment pursuant to
Ordinance 18-14
Subject to the exceptions in [tho following cection]Section
13.3.2.26.2.7, the entire building shall be required to be protected by:
(a) An approved automatic fire sprinkler system; or
(b) Alternative fire prevention and fire safety systems as
approved by the AHJ,
within 12 years of [tho offectivo dato of this ordinanoo]Mav 3, 2018, except
where an extension is approved by the AHJ as provided in Section
13.3.2.26.2.7.
As far as the work increasing the value of the units in a building....and am not convinced that it will. Sorry to be negative about it, but there are some things in play that fight older buildings and units retaining their value. It was very hard to sell my unit. It was tastefully remodeled and in a ‘desireable’ building with great amenities, solid reserve, sane board of directors, excellent staff. But the thing is - dues never go down, even when expenses go down. Older buildings have things that need to get fixed, and fixing them is expensive. As dues go up, affordability goes down. To balance it out, prices don’t appreciate as much as the rest of the market. People want to buy in new buildings that don’t have the impending repairs and replacements that have to be paid for. Elevators, windows, piping - all of that stuff is crazy expensive.
And that’s even before you factor what will happen with the current economic disaster that is about to take hold. As people don’t pay their mortgages, they don’t pay dues either. The bills have to be paid, so who will pick up the slack? The other owners. So dues will go up, values will go down. Once they go up, dues are not going to go back down. And high dues affects affordability and brings prices down even further.
If your unit was hard to sell it's because the asking price was too high. That is the culprit exactly 100% of the time.
Condo associations can forcibly take ownership of a condo from an owner that is in significant arrears on condo dues. If the condo owner walks because the mortgage is greater than the value, the bank carrying the mortgage ends up paying the unpaid condo dues.
Condos are great starter properties and can perform well in appreciating markets. But generally agree with your sentiment that lack of control of (rising) maintenance costs is a big negative. The number of contractors that are willing to perform any type of work on condos also falls every year because of increasing liability and lawsuits. This all translates into big bucks to make repairs to things that could be a fraction of the cost in a single family home.
Skimmed through the bill. Am I missing something? If your building is installing the sprinkler system, you are exempt from complying with "alternate fire prevention and fire safety systems". And you have until 2030 to comply with either. If you don't do the sprinklers, you have to make sure your building passes the alternative safety test. IDK, honestly 10 years from now is not really something I'm worried much about. HOA should be putting funds aside in a reserve anyways. If they aren't that's more of an issue with an individual condo/association than anything else. Also, I'd hazard a guess that many condos will be slow to adopt, and will fight for the extensions.
1. CONSTRUCTION
~ INItNJU<I-IrSFI
(Corridors and Exits) 3 3 3
3, t,URRI~R & UWEUJNL,
UNIT SEPARATION WALLS 0 0
4 DOORS TO CORRI~R -
5 5 5
S EXITACCESS
4 .4 -4
6 VERTICAL OPENINGS
2 2 2 2
7 HAZARDOUS AREAS 0
S SMOKE MANAGEMENT
3 3 3
9 EGRESS ROUTES 3 3
10 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM use 112 of item 10
1 1 0,5
11 SMOKE DETECTION 3 3 3 3
12 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS 0 0 0 0
13 SMOKEALARMS 2 2
14 STA~CPIPE SYSTEM 5 -
15 ELEVATORS
15 ttKbtNUY LK,H I AND EXIT SIGNS
Compliance shall be with either an automatic fire sprinkler
system throughout the building or alternative fire prevention and fire safety
systems in accordance with the requirements of a building fire and life
safety evaluation code assessment as achieved by a passing score on a
building fire and life safety evaluation code assessment pursuant to
Ordinance 18-14
Subject to the exceptions in [tho following cection]Section
13.3.2.26.2.7, the entire building shall be required to be protected by:
(a) An approved automatic fire sprinkler system; or
(b) Alternative fire prevention and fire safety systems as
approved by the AHJ,
within 12 years of [tho offectivo dato of this ordinanoo]Mav 3, 2018, except
where an extension is approved by the AHJ as provided in Section
13.3.2.26.2.7.
No, you seem to have it down right. For my building, have until 2028 as we have 16 stories, so are in the 10-19 stories building category per Section 13.3.2.26.2.7 of the bill.
I see the upsides of moving now on this project, but I just hope that the Council doesn't go back on its word down the line and eliminate the requirement, especially since there is not a reasonable fire risk for my building due to fire safety measures already in place.
Owners in those buildings that do take a while to get the ball rolling will rightly have reason to be pissed with their associations. IMO, every impacted building should at least be looking at this.
In terms of sprinklers vs. other fire prevention methods, some buildings may be in the case of my building where the only feasible alternative is the sprinkler system. For other buildings, sprinklers may very well be the more cost effective measure, especially if the building needs extensive fire/wall proofing throughout units and common areas.
I sold my condo in an older building a few months ago.
I am not buying a condo in Honolulu again. Now that I know...the math just doesn't work. It is less expensive to rent, hands down.
If I knew the building I could probably tell you exactly why you had issues selling the unit. Price, being an older building, your realtor, location, comps, staging, etc are all factors.
Anyway, yes - when the market is high, which has been the case the past few years - it is less expensive to rent. That typically flips when the market goes down. Rent typically doesn't ebb and flow with the market rate of a home.
If your goal is wealth creation - typically buying versus renting is how you get there. Renters typically don't have the mindset to take the savings they got from lower expenses and invest/save that money.
i actually think this whole thing is mostly bs. there is additional risk to living in a residence without sprinker, whether condo or single family home or townhouse. but the marco polo thing wasnt a typical circumstance. building is basically designed to take advantage of winds, built like a wind tunnel. residents were widespread in their flagrant violations of fire code, from not having fire doors, to having screen doors and doors propped open, including the fire exits,inadequate alarm system, and safety procedures, etc. the effect of the combination of firecode violatuons was like throwing gasoline on an open flame.
the fire department shares a lot of the blame for that tragedy, as well as the initial homeowner who left their door open to flee the fire, causing ut to spread way faster.. if the fire department actually enforced the existing fire code, the tragedy likely would not have occurred the way it did.
i actually think this whole thing is mostly bs. there is additional risk to living in a residence without sprinker, whether condo or single family home or townhouse. but the marco polo thing wasnt a typical circumstance. building is basically designed to take advantage of winds, built like a wind tunnel. residents were widespread in their flagrant violations of fire code, from not having fire doors, to having screen doors and doors propped open, including the fire exits,inadequate alarm system, and safety procedures, etc. the effect of the combination of firecode violatuons was like throwing gasoline on an open flame.
the fire department shares a lot of the blame for that tragedy, as well as the initial homeowner who left their door open to flee the fire, causing ut to spread way faster.. if the fire department actually enforced the existing fire code, the tragedy likely would not have occurred the way it did.
Oh, I agree. This was a feel good, make it look like they are doing something measure that went way overboard. It's a one size fits all approach where one isn't needed. I could see a sprinkler requirement for buildings above a certain height where firetruck ladders could not reach in the event that certain measures weren't taken like closing fire doors on the way out (and even then they probably wouldn't be necessary in most cases).
Interestingly enough, my building had a fire in 2014. Due to proper safety measures being followed and due to the layout of my building, the fire was put out within the hour and did not spread to other units. Now, there's a building across the street from mine that had a terrible layout and did not have the same fireproofing as my building. It had a fire in 2019 that started in one unit and spread to three others rather quickly. I just feel like the requirements could have been much more nuanced and they should have allowed for city provided inspections to determine if these measures are actually justified based on specific buildings; this way, folks can't claim to have paid for a private company to come up with favorable results to skirt responsibility.
Going through this process now, we've had two reviews show that there is no reasonable risk of fire danger to my building, which makes the requirement all the more infuriating.
...
Condo associations can forcibly take ownership of a condo from an owner that is in significant arrears on condo dues. If the condo owner walks because the mortgage is greater than the value, the bank carrying the mortgage ends up paying the unpaid condo dues.
True, the board can take ownership, but that takes years in court. And typically the folks who don’t pay -also know how to use the courts to their advantage. So yes, in the end things do eventually run their course, but in the short term the rest of the owners take the hit and raised dues to make up the slack.
Oh, I agree. This was a feel good, make it look like they are doing something measure that went way overboard. It's a one size fits all approach where one isn't needed. I could see a sprinkler requirement for buildings above a certain height where firetruck ladders could not reach in the event that certain measures weren't taken like closing fire doors on the way out (and even then they probably wouldn't be necessary in most cases).
Interestingly enough, my building had a fire in 2014. Due to proper safety measures being followed and due to the layout of my building, the fire was put out within the hour and did not spread to other units. Now, there's a building across the street from mine that had a terrible layout and did not have the same fireproofing as my building. It had a fire in 2019 that started in one unit and spread to three others rather quickly. I just feel like the requirements could have been much more nuanced and they should have allowed for city provided inspections to determine if these measures are actually justified based on specific buildings; this way, folks can't claim to have paid for a private company to come up with favorable results to skirt responsibility.
Going through this process now, we've had two reviews show that there is no reasonable risk of fire danger to my building, which makes the requirement all the more infuriating.
Purely speculation on my part, but I'm wondering if the overboard measure is politically motivated. This bill is guaranteed to generate additional large contracts for construction companies over the next decade, at the expense of residents and under the guise of public safety. I'm also reminded of the bill and agreement that was passed to give unions priority over non-union for contracts. I'm not sure if that's really legal, isnt that discriminatory? Jobs are typically awarded according to low cost bidder & ability to meet the requirements of the proposal.
July 22, 2020 at 10:30 PM HST - Updated July 22 at 10:30 PM
HONOLULU, Hawaii (HawaiiNewsNow) - Honolulu’s Mayor and Hawaii’s construction unions have signed a new agreement that would give union workers priority for all city projects over $2 million.
Purely speculation on my part, but I'm wondering if the overboard measure is politically motivated. This bill is guaranteed to generate additional large contracts for construction companies over the next decade, at the expense of residents and under the guise of public safety. I'm also reminded of the bill and agreement that was passed to give unions priority over non-union for contracts. I'm not sure if that's really legal, isnt that discriminatory? Jobs are typically awarded according to low cost bidder & ability to meet the requirements of the proposal.
July 22, 2020 at 10:30 PM HST - Updated July 22 at 10:30 PM
HONOLULU, Hawaii (HawaiiNewsNow) - Honolulu’s Mayor and Hawaii’s construction unions have signed a new agreement that would give union workers priority for all city projects over $2 million.
It wouldn't surprise me. I still shake my head at the presence of a police officer (I imagine that the entity--to include the government--doing the construction work has to pay them overtime) at every construction site. You don't see this kind of thing back on the mainland and it wreaks of corruption.
True, the board can take ownership, but that takes years in court. And typically the folks who don’t pay -also know how to use the courts to their advantage. So yes, in the end things do eventually run their course, but in the short term the rest of the owners take the hit and raised dues to make up the slack.
Generally that doesn't happen. Normally, the lack of collections from deadbeats is made up with cash in checking/savings accounts which typically earn the AOAO virtually nothing. So there is no cost by offsetting some cash to cover the delinquency - the cash does not come from individual owners. If the AOAO is in such horrific fiscal shape that they have no cash at all (this is illegal in Hawaii) then the funds would come from a bank loan which is generally the lowest conceivable interest rate as banks see AOAO's as ultra-low risk. So at the end of the day, deadbeats cost owners pretty much nothing. And will most definitely yield the AOAO late fees and interest (which compound nicely over the years it could battle out in the court system). On top of all that, an AOAO could actually score a condo unit if it's free and clear (it has happened) or at the very least rent the unit out to more than cover the dues and spin off some decent NOI for the AOAO (this has also happened).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
