The City of Kent has recently updated its laws concerning fireworks. Go to
http://www.ci.kent.wa.us/fireprevention/education/fireworks.asp
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Towing charges
Current charges for private impound services in the Renton, Auburn, Kent and surrounding areas are $195.00 per vehicle.
Saturday, June 11, 2005
Important section (Part two)
The meeting minutes taken on November 16, 2004 seem especially important. Here is the second paragraph:
A decision was reached to attempt to replenish our depleted reserves account in the year 2005. In years past, the dues have been raised in order to replenish the reserves that become depleted due to expenses. As was stated in the previous minutes, expenses have risen dramatically due to increased costs, as well as to certain difficulties with homeowners who have trouble paying their dues (or not paying at all). Because of this, our deposit to reserves line shows an amount that is one third of what it normally is in any given year. A minimum increase in the dues of 10% was therefore necessary. This 10% increase only replenishes our deposit to reserves line to an amount a little over 65% of where it is typically maintained. Therefore, we as an association are taking in less funding than we need to. But an increase in homeowners dues greater than 10% was determined to be too burdensome, given the recent 10% increases in years 2003 and 2004.
By spending only on those line items listed above that we have already committed to and nothing else, and by actively pursuing those homeowners who consistently pay their dues late or not at all, the Kenthill Townhomes Homeowners Association Board hopes to slowly build back up our reserves and hold the line on homeowners dues increases in the future.
A decision was reached to attempt to replenish our depleted reserves account in the year 2005. In years past, the dues have been raised in order to replenish the reserves that become depleted due to expenses. As was stated in the previous minutes, expenses have risen dramatically due to increased costs, as well as to certain difficulties with homeowners who have trouble paying their dues (or not paying at all). Because of this, our deposit to reserves line shows an amount that is one third of what it normally is in any given year. A minimum increase in the dues of 10% was therefore necessary. This 10% increase only replenishes our deposit to reserves line to an amount a little over 65% of where it is typically maintained. Therefore, we as an association are taking in less funding than we need to. But an increase in homeowners dues greater than 10% was determined to be too burdensome, given the recent 10% increases in years 2003 and 2004.
By spending only on those line items listed above that we have already committed to and nothing else, and by actively pursuing those homeowners who consistently pay their dues late or not at all, the Kenthill Townhomes Homeowners Association Board hopes to slowly build back up our reserves and hold the line on homeowners dues increases in the future.
Monday, June 06, 2005
Roof project information
The following document was provided by one of the roofing contractors who did an estimate for the roofing project here at Kenthill Townhomes. The article is entitled, " Condominium Roofing: Replacement or Recovery - Defining the Difference".
Roof replacement.
A roof replacement project involves complete removal of all existing roofing materials down to the structural deck. The deck should then be inspected and repaired, if necessary. Finally at a complete new roof system is installed. The new system generally consists of an insulation bed, a waterproof membrane, and some type of surfacing.
Roof recovery.
In a roof recovery project, the existing roof assembly is left in place and the new roof system is installed directly over it. Although there are rare instances when this approach makes sense; in general, it is poor roofing practice to recover an existing roof.
Condominium associations most often decide to recover roofs instead of replacing them, because of that initial savings in cash outlay. However, just because an option cost less front does not mean that it is financially wise. For a number of reasons, recovering a roof can end up costing an Association much more over the long term than the complete roof replacement.
New roof over existing.
First, the Association must remember why they need a new roof. The roof that is in place has likely failed. It is no longer capable of providing the building “envelope protection” that is required of a roof system. If leaks have been occurring, then there is probably moisture trapped within the installation bed. Installing a new roof system over an existing roof assembly with wet insulation will result in a shortened life for the new roof. The trapped moisture will cause premature deterioration of the new roof system by attacking it from below.
Roof deck deterioration.
Secondly, if leaks have been experienced, not only is the insulation likely to be wet, but the structural roof deck may also be deteriorated. [This is particularly true if the deck is manufactured from steel or wood]. The only way to confirm the condition of the deck is to completely remove the existing roof assembly. Recovering a roof may be covering up a serious structural problem
[Editor’s note: Roof recovery appears to be the method that was used on Building J. Note that no roof vents are visible].
Roof replacement.
A roof replacement project involves complete removal of all existing roofing materials down to the structural deck. The deck should then be inspected and repaired, if necessary. Finally at a complete new roof system is installed. The new system generally consists of an insulation bed, a waterproof membrane, and some type of surfacing.
Roof recovery.
In a roof recovery project, the existing roof assembly is left in place and the new roof system is installed directly over it. Although there are rare instances when this approach makes sense; in general, it is poor roofing practice to recover an existing roof.
Condominium associations most often decide to recover roofs instead of replacing them, because of that initial savings in cash outlay. However, just because an option cost less front does not mean that it is financially wise. For a number of reasons, recovering a roof can end up costing an Association much more over the long term than the complete roof replacement.
New roof over existing.
First, the Association must remember why they need a new roof. The roof that is in place has likely failed. It is no longer capable of providing the building “envelope protection” that is required of a roof system. If leaks have been occurring, then there is probably moisture trapped within the installation bed. Installing a new roof system over an existing roof assembly with wet insulation will result in a shortened life for the new roof. The trapped moisture will cause premature deterioration of the new roof system by attacking it from below.
Roof deck deterioration.
Secondly, if leaks have been experienced, not only is the insulation likely to be wet, but the structural roof deck may also be deteriorated. [This is particularly true if the deck is manufactured from steel or wood]. The only way to confirm the condition of the deck is to completely remove the existing roof assembly. Recovering a roof may be covering up a serious structural problem
[Editor’s note: Roof recovery appears to be the method that was used on Building J. Note that no roof vents are visible].
Sunday, June 05, 2005
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Important section (Part one)
The meeting minutes taken on November 16, 2004 seem especially important. Here is the first paragraph:
The Board returned to the table to review changes to the proposed budget and to accomplish additional work on it. Major line items that experienced increases were discussed at length. These were (1) legal fees (mostly attributed to the pursuit of homeowners dues paid late to the association, or not paid at all, as well as liens and foreclosures), (2) the increase in the budget amount for taxes on our common property (this was due to an increase in taxes), (3) the increase in the budget amount for repairs and maintenance (this was a result of repairs related to drainage problems near two of our buildings), (4) the increases in the budget amount for electrical (this increase is due to a repair to a light near one of our buildings, (5) an increase in the amount for propane (cost increase), (6) an increase in the amount for electricity (cost increase), (7) the 2004 revenues dedicated to the capital reserves were depleted by half because of the repair costs due to a fire in one of our buildings (the board elected not to submit the claim to our insurance as we would almost certainly have been penalized for it), and (8) our ongoing commitment to maintaining the funds necessary to do two new roofs per year.
The Board returned to the table to review changes to the proposed budget and to accomplish additional work on it. Major line items that experienced increases were discussed at length. These were (1) legal fees (mostly attributed to the pursuit of homeowners dues paid late to the association, or not paid at all, as well as liens and foreclosures), (2) the increase in the budget amount for taxes on our common property (this was due to an increase in taxes), (3) the increase in the budget amount for repairs and maintenance (this was a result of repairs related to drainage problems near two of our buildings), (4) the increases in the budget amount for electrical (this increase is due to a repair to a light near one of our buildings, (5) an increase in the amount for propane (cost increase), (6) an increase in the amount for electricity (cost increase), (7) the 2004 revenues dedicated to the capital reserves were depleted by half because of the repair costs due to a fire in one of our buildings (the board elected not to submit the claim to our insurance as we would almost certainly have been penalized for it), and (8) our ongoing commitment to maintaining the funds necessary to do two new roofs per year.