2007 Issue 5

TRANSITION REVIEWS – WHAT THEY ARE AND
WHAT THEY AREN'T
By Timothy Wentzell, P.E.

With the construction boom in common interest communities a few years ago, we are now starting to see a large influx of associations that are now transitioning from developer to unit owner control, which previously had not happened for many years.  With this transition have come homeowners' concerns about the completeness of the property belonging to the common interest community and whether this property was built in accordance with expectations. 

The requests for transition reviews that we receive are frequently either from associations directly going through this transition phase or from attorneys whom they have hired to assist them in this process.  As this type of review has evolved over the years, so have the thoughts on what should be included in these reviews. 

Generally, we advise our clients that what we can offer them is a review of the construction documents to determine whether the association's infrastructure items appear to have been constructed in accordance with these documents, as well as whether what is generally considered to be common construction practices have been followed.  This review can be somewhat subjective.  Certain items such as a few missing plants or shrubbery would not compare to drainage backups, missing streetlights, detention basins filled with silt, etc., which we often find during these reviews.  Usually during these reviews we find a cornucopia of random issues that are straightforward to resolve.  These usually can be accomplished merely by the association transmitting our report to the developer for resolution.  But, just as often, significant issues are found, which, if not resolved, could result either in significantly greater ongoing maintenance costs or large one-time expenditures in order for the association to resolve the issues.  Issues with site grading, for instance, are a good example of this kind of problem, where the grading was not done in accordance with the plans or the plans did not anticipate some grading issues that could result in problems such as water backing up behind the units.  This could result in the need for either a significant re-grading of the property or to have drainage systems installed, which often requires going through the same kind of rigorous engineering design as the original site plans. 

Ironically, what we often find is that problems that crop up near the time of the completion of a complex just do not seem to get the same attention to detail from the developer as would have occurred during the initial municipal approval or even during the selling of the units.  For example, a recent review that we undertook at a complex showed a typical under-street drainage system of reinforced concrete pipe and structures, but also included a last minute addition of a rear yard drainage system of plastic pipe buried at most a foot deep that would, of course, freeze during the winter.  In another case, unit owners who complained about wet backyards arrived home one day to a two-foot-deep ditch just beyond their decks.  Obviously, in both of the above cases, the unit owners might have thought twice about buying their units with these features.

What is often not part of the review are many hidden items that cannot be seen by the eye, such as thin pavement in areas of the complex or the proverbial Waterbury I-84 missing drainage pipes.  This is because our reviews are visual in nature and do not involve underground structure camera or other intrusive exams that would involve digging up foundations or pavement or other areas that may be problematic.  Therefore, such issues as future foundation cracks or premature pavement failure are really unknown until problems occur.  Only good initial construction practices can typically insure that these kinds of problems do not exist. 

Therefore, before considering a review of this type, it is important for an association to recognize that this type of review is not intended to insure that the complex was constructed in accordance with the plans in all aspects, but is merely a professional set of eyes trying to assist the association in their transition to owner control.

Please address any questions or areas of interest that you would like answered in future columns to Timothy Wentzell, P.E., Connecticut Property Engineering, 630 Governor's Highway, South Windsor, CT 06074 (860-289-8121) (e-mail: ConnPropEng@cox.net).