396 replies to this topic

[sebberry]

I had a feeling that Reflections was going to be a bit problematic.

What's your source for the sinking issue?

[phx]

Are the problems related to combining concrete and wood-frame construction?

[concorde]

I had a feeling that Reflections was going to be a bit problematic.

What's your source for the sinking issue?

Several contractors who worked on the project. Its well known in the construction industry that its sinking

[sebberry]

Interesting. Did they build it on a swamp or something?

[bluefox]

No, but the architects apparently came out of one.

[aastra]

Does anyone have pictures of the damage?

[sebberry]

Does anyone have pictures of the damage?

[aastra]

No helicopter required in this case. Somebody just needs to walk by and take a few pics.

[LJ]

I go by there fairly often and I see no evidence of sinking. Maybe some minor settling, but if there were indeed the serious problems alluded to I would think there would be some major remediation work going on.

[snub]

^ I walk around it frequently and have seen the same as you....absolutely nothing.

[Holden West]

I thought that it goes without saying that settling issues big enough to cause problems aren't necessarily visible with a casual glance at the outside of the building.

And don't assume that when a major problem crops up the owners leap to address it. A recent Globe story uncovered a large Toronto condo building quickly becoming uninhabitable due to absentee owners refusing to authorize funds necessary for remediation.

Now, I'm sure the Reflections owners are more responsible, however, as a new condo, their contingency fund is probably still too small to cover extensive remediation. Anyway, it would takes many months or even years to uncover the extent of any problems, gather tenders etc.

[LJ]

Wouldn't any necessary work be the responsibility of the builder?

[aastra]

...it goes without saying that settling issues big enough to cause problems aren't necessarily visible with a casual glance at the outside of the building.

Fair enough, but does that jive with the following?

They have had extensive problems already and continue trying to mask the problem.

Maybe it does and I'm just not understanding the terminology...

[jklymak]

Wouldn't any necessary work be the responsibility of the builder?

I would think, if it were reported within two years. Either that, or the warranty provider.

[snub]

Still no pool!

I was up on the roof about 8 months ago and the pool is there. Apparently they are/were having troubles with the stainless steel 'surround panels'.
Apparently they are rusting.

[snaptee]

The pool was opened just in time to cool off residents for the blistering September heat. It's sure to be a hit come May 1 when it opens again. There are plans to have a volleyball tournament. At 16' x 7', the matches are sure to be exciting!

[jdsony]

heh I posted this here 4 years ago

"The outside of the building is nearing completion. I think this building is a good addition to Langford though the construction looks cheap from what I can tell and I'm not sure it will be the lasting building it originally appeared to be. The very closest surrounding area is pretty rundown and obviously quite poor/young people live in the nearby houses so either this will clean up the area or it will conform to it's surroundings."

Naturally my point was argued. Some of the newer buildings in Langford are architecturally well designed but almost all of them fail when it comes to finishing quality. The Granderson is another one. I like the design of the building but the actual finishing is poor. The brick, cement board, aluminum, twig like roof supports just look thrown together.