Joined: 14 Dec 2006
|Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:17 pm Post subject: Impressions of the Meeting 22/11/2007
Unfortunately the turnout for today's meeting wasn't that great, but it was a good chance to talk to the factors (Mr. G. Dunsmore) and a representative from the Police regarding the situation with the path at the west end of our development and H&P's quotation for work in that area.
My general impressions from the meeting were as follows. I am sure there were many other things said apart from what I mention here, so this is by no means an exhaustive list. If I have left something out, please feel free to add by replying to my message.
Regarding the path lighting and proposed fence:
*The city council have been confirmed to be responsible for maintaining and lighting the path joining Buccleuch St. and West Graham St. The factors and the police officer present have contacted the city council who have, in the first instance, indicated they would be UNWILLING to carry out lighting and cleaning work in the path. However, they have proposed a discussion to deliberate this matter further.
*The residents are largely opposed to erecting a metal fence around the western perimeter of the car park. The factors indicated that a considerably cheaper option to plant shrubbing that will grow on a temporary fence also exists, to which the residents responded positively. There was much confusion where the fence would be raised, if it went ahead, but at the end, pointing at a diagram of the development, mr. Dunsmore indicated that fencing would be placed adjacent to the northwestern parking areas and the pathway leading to the front doors, and would not enclose the grass areas on the west and north side of the buildings. This was received with some negativity.
*Mr.Dunsmore said that lighting the council-owned path could be done independently and at our expense. Costs for maintenance would also have to be met by owners, and they would very likely be quite heavy. Mr. Dunsmore however said that it is customary for the council to "adopt" any work erected by private parties at a later stage. The owners felt that more pressure should be put to the council to light the path but acknowledged that we should install lighting in the pathway joining the NW carpark to the front of the property in the interests of security, even if we have to pay and maintain it ourselves.
*The owners had mixed feelings about the efficacy of signage and dummy cameras (which were not part of the police recommendations) and did not want these suggestions to go forward.
*Mr. Dunsmore informed us that only 27 out of 131 flat owners sent a positive response to the quotes sent for this work by H&P and as such, there would be further consultation that will take into consideration the latest developments in the situation.
With regard to other matters:
*One of the owners said that the estimates provided by contractors were appaling and as he works in the construction industry, found them to be inadequate. He requested that further estimates include details like bill of materials, labour cost, markup on materials etc. He found the estimates on signage and road marking especially to be overly exaggerated. This was supported by other owners. Mr. Dunsmore asked for a template of what the owner in question would like to see, and he was told that this would be provided along with a list of contractors able to adhere to this standard.
*Other owners complained about the lack of signing-off of work. Some owners felt that we are being charged for work that is never actually carried out. Mr Dunsmore replied that in his opinion a clerk to check the work provided by contractors was not part of the service H&P are obliged to provide as administrators, but he did not comment on whether H&P could phone up and appoint owners or residents to sign off work carried out in the development.
*Owners complained about the situation with the staircleaners (C.A.S. and CleanSweep), who are have failed consistently to provide service of an acceptable standard. Mr Dunsmore promised to arrange a meeting between CAS representatives, himself and owners in the next couple of weeks to discuss the situation.
As I said, this is by no means an exhaustive list. Other people talked about the bollards, cars going round the wrong way on Buccleuch street and other general problems in the development and neighbourhood. I'm afraid I cannot remember the details of everything, so please feel free to step in and add it yourself.
My impressions from this is that a) we have to become more proactive towards approaching the council to complain about the situation in the path and b) we have to work together to put some checks in place for the work that gets carried out in our properties. I thought these were the most important outcomes of the meeting!!!