I asked whether the extra decks were included in the levy. The answer was no. The meeting was advised that the scope of work and the special levy for the project covered all of the buildings on the strata plan, including balconies and decks, but it did not include extra decks, or any kind of deck additions at all.
I asked what would happen to the landscaping. The answer was that landscaping would be protected from loss as much as possible and that an adequate budget for landscaping reinstatement was included in the levy.
I asked to amend the resolution to confirm these facts and was told, along with the rest of the owners at the meeting, that those intentions had just been confirmed and that any amendment to the resolution would require that it go back to the lawyer to redraft or approve, all of which would require another meeting and only add to our expense.
It was on the understanding that trees would be preserved as much as possible and the strata would be dealing with the foreseeable issues involving reinstatement of deck additions later on, not in the resolution being voted on that night, that the special levy was approved. I specifically asked about the decks before the 2004 vote because approximately 25% of owners had exclusive use of extra decks, which we had traditionally understood in accordance with our bylaws that council held them responsible for.
New owners can't come in and change the facts in such a way as to further betray and cheat those who paid that special levy. Had painting strata plan decks been excluded and reconstructing extra decks been included, it is beyond any reasonable doubt that the resolution would have failed as a result of being significantly unfair. We think this is obvious.
We approved the special levy relying on the understanding that strata plan decks and balconies were equally included in the remediation. In fact, owners with strata plan decks paid pursuant to strata plan unit entitlement formulas in amounts much greater than owners with strata plan balconies, even though the balconies were in much worse condition, and the balcony damage cost so much more to repair, than the strata plan decks.
In 2005, Morrison Hershfield was retained to survey, classify, and evaluate the condition of all of the decks and determined ours to be an unaltered strata plan deck in good condition, except for the paint, which was described as being in "poor" condition.
We have already paid to have our deck painted, and we can't afford to be cheated again. Further to this, when the special levy was approved by the owners they did not contemplate paying for the added expense of extending all of the strata plan decks in order to accommodate a defective door design that significantly changed the use and enjoyment of the limited common property designated for strata plan decks. Had the owners been allowed to vote on such a resolution it would almost certainly have failed.
