We recently had the opportunity to submit a bid to do an energy efficiency audit for a 231 unit HOA that comprises two towers, each 14 stories where each balcony has been enclosed. Not only are we looking at the HVAC system, but also energy loss through the windows and the possibility of solar.
We enjoy this type of work above all in that these projects can make such a difference to the people who live in an HOA in every aspect of their lives and we want to be part of this. Chris Crigler, President of CAP Management worked for a volunteer organization from 1992-1993 doing energy audits of institutional buildings in Brooklyn New York and Pecs Hungary. CAP Management has employed a Community Advocate, Adam Perkins who has a Master’s Degree in Urban Planning from the University of Colorado at Denver. As part of his course work he has worked on group projects in detailing energy use of institutional and residential buildings. He has also conducted greenhouse gas and energy audits. Our construction manager Jean McDonald has 30 years experience and a Class A contractor’s license and can add real world experience working with vendors in creating the Conservation Plan.
We have completed greenhouse gas audits under multiple internationally recognized protocols that can pinpoint potential energy and cost savings. We also have experience working with energy saving window treatments. Please see the attached documents from a project conducted for the Living City Block by our intern Andrew Iltis.
However, the most important aspect of a successful conservation plan is to involve the homeowners. Many long-term cost-saving projects require substantial upfront cost and the community must understand the importance of investing in these energy saving measures. In addition, it is necessary to gather community input on behavior and preferences. For example, each window treatment has positives and negatives and may effect the in-home experience; therefore, community input is needed to make the right decision. Our community advocate specializes in working with the homeowners on the front end to make sure that there is community buy-in of the conservation leading to successful implementation.
(An example of what the final document would look like is included as an attachment labeled Historic Window Document, and Historic Window Poster.pdf.
How to get homeowners to follow the ACC guidlines? Get them involved! We offer a service that does just that! By holding a series of meetings with homeowners we allow them to have a say in what they want to see in the guidelines. That way they have ownership! If they have a say in writing them they are much more likely to follow them – and know what they are upfront.
This is our methodology….
Create well-defined, specific design guidelines that:
1.1. Provide guidance to Owners regarding matters of particular concern to the ARC.
1.2. Contain both general provisions applicable to all of the Property, as well as specific provisions that vary according to land use and from one portion of the Property to another depending upon location, unique characteristics and intended use.
1.3. Are written in a manner that is befitting and appropriate for the residents and maintain a cohesive look and feel. This will be achieved by:
1.3.1. Selecting a predetermined exterior color pallet for residents to choose from when altering their residences.
1.3.2. Defining by means of use, material, size, location, and architectural style of development and construction.
1.3.3. Identifying appropriate landscape performance standards and requirements that will maintain a positive and attractive appeal of the community. Water usage will be weighted when selecting such elements.
1.3.4. Selecting lighting elements that are consistent with the current design elements of and provide suitable lighting that is not objectionable.
1.3.5. Any other design criteria determined necessary by the community at large.
1.4. Protects the character and value of community by permitting additions to the community that enhance value, while excluding changes that will negatively impact residents’ property values.
1.5. At all times, represent the best interests of the Residents.
1.6. Ensure that the design guidelines comply with any and all local municipal codes and guidelines.
1.7. Ensure that the design guidelines will allow for the incorporation of additional homes in the community while still maintaining and enhancing the character.
1.8. Create a bound document containing design guidelines professionally laid out with ample illustrations and examples of each guideline. Local Innovations will provide two (2) hard copies and one electronic copy that can be posted on the community’s website.
Create community ownership of the design guidelines in order to ensure maximum compliance and decrease future enforcement costs. The vested interest that all neighbors have in forging design guidelines only creates a more powerful document. Only by including multiple voices from the neighborhood, the needs and concerns of the community can be adequately addressed. To achieve community ownership, Local Innovations will:
2.1. Hold focus groups of 5-8 residents each to gather community input and interest.
3.1.1. This process will assist LI in identifying the aspirations and essential design elements that will guide all future development, construction, and landscaping within the community. We repeat the process with two unique sets of residents to grant LI direction when compiling such guidelines.
3.2. Hold up a community meeting that will reveal the draft design guidelines to the residents for review and comment.
3.2.1. The purpose of the meeting is to gather community feedback from those residents who were not able to take part in the focus groups. With the feedback from this community meeting LI will make any alterations that the community feels is necessary and forge a final document for the board and ARC to approve and ratify.
NEED HOA HELP? THAT’S WHAT WE DO.
Cost? $300 – $5000 depending on how many community meetings and how involved….
Writing Rules and Regs – We’ve been hired by an HOA to write their Rules and Regulations, and by another HOA to write their Architectural Guidelines. To be successful your MUST have homeowner involvement. By doing a series of HOA meetings we get Homeowner buy in to the process. They get to suggest what rules they feel are important, have a role in drafting them, and then are much more likely to follow them.
One thing that comes up is the fine policy. Sometimes Boards try to use a stick and impose hefty fines. In Colorado, the law states that you must have a hearing before you impose a fine. Just like you have to go to court if you get a speeding ticket.
I will also say that we charge extra for this. What would you pay to have a set of guidelines that people actually follow? Where homeowners have skin in the game because they were part of the process? Where homeowners actually know what the guidelines are? Call us for a price, we scale the service. But I will say one HOA paid $300 and the other went all out with a series of community meetings, bar-b-q, and final draft at $4669.
If you have any questions about the process – just give us a call…..303-832-2971
“The Prisioner’s Delima” – When HOAs might not cooperate even if it is in their best interest to do so. (scroll down to the end for the Wikipedia definition).
We manage a HOA of 24 units on prime real estate in central Denver that has fallen into deep disrepair. They were $80,00 condos that are now selling for $20,000. A few homeonwers owe $80,000, many owe nothing and it is in everyone’s best interest to dissolve the HOA and sell it back into apartments, least of all because the City’s Code Enforcement has demanded $100,000 of improvements and balconies and sewer lines have collapsed necessitating a $7500 special assessment per unit if the HOA is not sold.
We had our second meeting last night with the owners. Everyone wants to sell, and everyone wants the highest price. The problem is that those who own their properties free and clear will have to give up some of their profit so that those under water can walk from their properties. In theory, everyone is in agreement. In reality, nobody has enough information to balace their desire to maximize their loss with the need to get out before the special assessments hit.
Partnering with Local Innovations (www.localinnovations.com) we used the example of the prisoner’s dilemma and the Dilbert video to show where everyone stood, and how by cooperating everyone gets a better result than if they were all out for their own interests and no one would be able to sell and everyone would get a special assessment.
Next Steps: We are surveying each homeowner to get a payoff from their mortgage company. Most important is to find out what their objectives are, and what they need to be happy. We really want a win win, indeed we cannot sell unless everyone agrees to a fair distribution of profits. But first steps first, find out their asking price, objectives and minimum they will accept to be happy before we meet again.
Stay tuned….
The Prisoner’s Dilemma
Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated the prisoners, visit each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies for the prosecution against the other (defects) and the other remains silent (cooperates), the defector goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full one-year sentence. If both remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only one month in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a three-month sentence. Each prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act?
If we assume that each player cares only about minimizing his or her own time in jail, then the prisoner’s dilemma forms a non-zero-sum game in which two players may each either cooperate with or defect from (betray) the other player. In this game, as in most game theory, the only concern of each individual player (prisoner) is maximizing his or her own payoff, without any concern for the other player’s payoff. The unique equilibrium for this game is a Pareto-suboptimal solution, that is, rational choice leads the two players to both play defect, even though each player’s individual reward would be greater if they both played cooperatively.
In the classic form of this game, cooperating is strictly dominated by defecting, so that the only possible equilibrium for the game is for all players to defect. No matter what the other player does, one player will always gain a greater payoff by playing defect. Since in any situation playing defect is more beneficial than cooperating, all rational players will play defect, all things being equal.
In the iterated prisoner’s dilemma, the game is played repeatedly. Thus each player has an opportunity to punish the other player for previous non-cooperative play. If the number of steps is known by both players in advance, economic theory says that the two players should defect again and again, no matter how many times the game is played. However, this analysis fails to predict the behavior of human players in a real iterated prisoners dilemma situation, and it also fails to predict the optimum algorithm when computer programs play in a tournament. Only when the players play an indefinite or random number of times can cooperation be an equilibrium, technically a subgame perfect equilibrium meaning that both players defecting always remains an equilibrium and there are many other equilibrium outcomes. In this case, the incentive to defect can be overcome by the threat of punishment.
In casual usage, the label “prisoner’s dilemma” may be applied to situations not strictly matching the formal criteria of the classic or iterative games, for instance, those in which two entities could gain important benefits from cooperating or suffer from the failure to do so, but find it merely difficult or expensive, not necessarily impossible, to coordinate their activities to achieve cooperation.
#HOAManagement – Taking the lead in a fire. First, don’t destroy evidence! While your restoration contractor might want to get right to work securing the premises, and the fire department may tell you they have all they need for their investigation, the insurance company will want to come back and do their own investigation. Not just the HOAs insurance, but each of the individual homeowners insurance companies. So just sit tight, know that it will take 4-6 months to rebuild, and that an extra week or two of investigations won’t affect that timeframe. Step by step, the engineers will be the first people in, and can do what they need to do that if you haven’t completely cleaned up.
Questions? Call Chris Crigler, President CAP Management at 303-832-2971 x1.
We are pleased to announce that we have moved into our new office on the 16th Street Mall. Please feel free to stop by and see us at the University Building. 910 16th Street Ste 1010. Centrally located we will be better able to serve you and frankly, we were tripping over each other in the old space. http://www.capmanagement.com
The Working Session Meeting on Wed. night was very productive. Thank you all for your time. Following is a brief update of my actions this week and a recap of the construction items from the Session:
Monday – Otto and I shut down the job site for the day due to weather. Scaffold installation was rescheduled for Tues. It was a great day to catch up on paper work, emails and finalize the Cost To-Date Report, Owners’ Concern Report and Schedule for the Wed. Working Session
Tuesday – Reviewed the Proposals for the Mitigation at the Watters unit. Called contractors for clarification, etc. No Construction Mtg. was held.
Wed. – On site to meet with a couple of homeowners. A report on their concerns will be issued early next week.
Wed. Working Session:
Martin/Martin Engineers present to explain the concerns with “anchors and hold-downs” and issue their Field Report. The Board decided to discuss this issue with legal counsel
Phase II Construction Schedule for 2011 was presented. Jean will obtain 11 x 17 enlarged schedules for the Board. A detailed “Task Schedule” can be viewed by the Board Members at any time. It is on display in Otto’s office (the Otto Zone)
Proposals for the Mitigation at the Watter’s unit were discussed. The Board would like to award this to Jordy Construction. Carrie will contact legal counsel for access to the unit.
There are still satellite dishes on decks at Bldgs. Q, R & S. I got the list to John Marvin and all but one of the owners has responded. Carrie and John will review the Declarations and Rules & Regs. for satellite rules for future installations.
CAP has issued the 2011 Budget for Board review and approval. The Budget will be discussed at the Annual HOA Mtg.
Per my request, Kitchell Engineering conducted a Warranty Inspection. Warranty work was issued to Palace Const. Amy, at Palace, promised a response by Jan. 18. Jean will mail the final check for $615.00 to Palace.
A few PT cables were missed during the repairs. Most are next to or behind downspouts. Otto will schedule the repairs for these at Bldg’s B, V, G, H, M & T
There are a few cables that were not connected correctly to the embedded collars. When the ends were cut for sealing – the cables shrank back into the foundation. Martin/Martin is reviewing these to see if any additional action is necessary.
Missed my goal for a revised concise 2011 Construction Budget. The final numbers for Bldg.s A, B, D & F are not into Jordy yet. There will be substantial savings.
Minimal repairs necessary at Bldg. M are completed except for brick rowlock work.
Otto and I walked the site on Friday.
All of the installed sidewalk chases are working and have eliminated much of the icing problem. The Board may want to consider one more chase near Bldg. e #002.
The new gutters at Bldg. E are not working as well as expected. Otto will check them out by ladder next week to see if it is an installation problem. We also noticed several leaks in the gutters at the roof line. Leaks at these upper most gutters are causing icing at the garden level entries. I’ll get the list to John Marvin.
The owner of 10290 #106 is going to remove the granite tile from his deck. I told him this must be done by the end of next week.
Please note building start dates are approx. and will be affected by severe weather:
Bldgs. Q, R & S begin 01/10/2011
Bldgs L & P begin 01/31/2011 (moved forward to allow transition of the 3 story scaffolding from S)
Bldgs. K, J & V begin 02/14/2011
Bldgs. G & H begin 03/07/2011
Ongoing Efforts:
Monitoring of ground water at Bldg. P – no substantial change to report I’ll ask CTC to check after the snow melt.
Coordinate repairs of gutter leaks – compile list with John Marvin
Coordinate movers for Millie’s garage stored items (Anomaly Bldg. G) – POD scheduled for delivery 01/01, demolition 01/20 & 01/21, engineers scheduled for 01/24
Schedule “water tests” at entries to units – 4 each
Contact owner’s to schedule attic access through their units to start “area separation wall repairs”
I continue to field questions from homeowners, responses are copied to John and Carrie
Thank you all for the continued privilege of working for and with you all.
M. Jean McDonald
Construction Management Consultant comjmcdnld@yahoo.com
cell 303 304-1268
CAP Management
The Franklin
1240 Ogden St #6
Denver, CO 80218
Ph: 303-832-2971
Fax: 303-832-2972
We’ve partnered with Local Innovations to work with a community in Parker that was to be 500 units but their developer went b/k after building only 100 units. Check out this link for more information. http://healthyurbanism.com/
We had two interviews this weekend with HOA’s that are effectively insolvent. We did find out from an attorney who was a homeowner at a meeting, that it is against that law to produce a budget with a deficit.
In speaking with each of these HOA’s it appeared that there were a large number of homeowners who were not paying their dues. First things first – get everyone not paying into collections! After that look at options. Someone who is going into foreclosure, as soon as that happens, the HOA will get Colorado’s six month superlien. That means 6 months of HOA dues in the form of a check to the HOA. The rest of what was owed is written off as a bad debt.
Once the bank owns the property you have alot more leverdge to collect dues. Banks don’t pay dues thinking that they will get away with the 6 month superlien when they sell the property even if they hold onto the property for 2 years. Where a HOA can act is to file a judicial foreclosure on the property for CURRENT dues not being paid. Then the bank is forced to pay up because they do not want to loose the property for what amounts to six months of HOA Dues.
This does not work with someone still in possession of the property before it goes into foreclosure. Why? Because then the HOA will have to pay off the first mortgage holder in order to get the property. After forclosure, the debt is wiped clean, the bank owns the property free and clear, and the HOA can foreclose for HOA Dues.
CAP Management 