That type of activity has been going on forever. I remember back in college working at Pizza Hut and customers would give us their pin to enter their building or gated community and we added that to the customer details which is saved in database so we wouldn’t have to repeat all the information. A lot of our delivery drivers actually memorized codes for the more common delivery locations since the people taking orders wouldn’t know the building had a code and so the drivers didn’t have to wait to bet let in etc. and could deliver more pizzas.
God damnit I went a year without delivery because I didn’t want to give out my complexes gate code!
4 Likes
if your weren’t moving, you could just replant the bush. make it something impossible to get rid off, like bamboo or something.
my neighborhood has streets and ponds and they’re all owned by the city
There was nothing wrong about MAGA except it needed to be reverted back 500 years not 50
1 Like
“We work for months to go in one direction and at the very last minute objections are raised that should have been discussed and resolved right in the beginning,” Goldstein wrote in a September 2019 resignation letter. “This pattern has repeated itself over and over, ego battles, undermining the roles of fellow board members, circulation of gossip and mistruths. I am not presenting a very pretty picture of the functioning of our board and many before us, but it describes a board that works very hard but cannot for the reasons above accomplish the goals we set out to accomplish.”
Hmm
Debate over the cost and scope of the work, along with turnover on the volunteer board, dragged out preparations for the repairs for three years, according to previously unpublished correspondence, condo board minutes and other records kept by the homeowners association.
Despite increasingly dire warnings from the board, many condo owners balked at paying for the extensive improvements, which ballooned in price from about $9 million to more than $15 million over the past three years as the building continued to deteriorate, records show.
They tried to contact all the board members since 2018. None would talk with them. At least two are among the missing.
I mean, it would be really dumb for them to say anything to anyone without the presence and advice of a good lawyer.
1 Like
Yes, not surprisingly, my city also owns streets and ponds. Even some parks and buildings!
But I’m going to need you to lay out why the city would say yes to “here’s some streets and retention ponds we want to give to you. You’re now responsible for paying the maintenance on them. There is no upside for you. Thanks.”
I don’t understand the scenario you’re laying out. Like, you’re asking why the city would give the ponds to… who? The city doesn’t give them away, they own and maintain them, which seems to work fine all over the country in most places. You’re saying that some weird system that doesn’t exist wouldn’t work? Uh, sure, OK, I agree with you?
Most cities have a mix. Typically all the water infrastructure like storm, potable and grey are owned by the city. They are built by the developer then handed off.
Streets are often a mix with some in the hands of the community forever.
A developer may want to build a special amenity like an elaborate storm water wetland that requires extra maintenance. In this case they may agree to keep it as part of the community rather than hand it off to the city.
right, cities own tons of streets and maintain them, it works, and cities do it because it benefits their citizens and grows their tax base. Yes, there are also private roads owned by neighborhood entities and that works to. I don’t understand the weird nightmare scenario that fatboy is trying to claim won’t work.
I won’t pretend to be follow the argument, but his last post seems to hint at the idea of municipalities downloading maintenance responsibility for public spaces to private households, which would indeed be terrible (unless your whole town is made up of Ron Swansons).
The HOA currently owns the ponds and pays to maintain them. I’m asking you why the city would agree to take over that responsibility when it doesn’t increase their tax base?
Like if you owned a house with acreage and built a pond, how would you go about asking the city to take over ownership and maintenance of your pond? What benefit would the city receive in doing so, assuming the pond couldn’t be used for any sort of recreational activity?
Why stop at the pond? Aren’t you tired of mowing and fertilizing your lawn? Just call the city and tell them you would like to gift your front lawn to them as long as they maintain it for you.
ah, yes, I can see this, given that someone else already owns them, sure. The city has no reason to take it on now. I guess that’s what the dumbasses that live there get for agreeing to this dumb arrangement when the neighborhood was developed, they gave the city a freeroll.
Appreciate you calling me a dumbass. Thanks.
Also, the city has no reason to take responsibility of the storm ponds in developments. The city forces the developers to do it. They can either build the ponds and put them in the hands of the owners to maintain, or they can not build their development.
The city typically wants ownership of all this water infrastructure to ensure it is properly maintained as the downstream costs of poor maintenance can be very expensive.
The city regulates the pond maintenance and we have to have an inspection.
Yes this is normal. When they agree to allow a community to maintain they include a clause for inspection for the reason I stated about costs downstream.
I’d bet if you looked into the history there would be a special reason the HOA kept ownership of the pond. It was a developer request not the city I bet.
Exactly this is more and more becoming the norm. 30-50 years ago almost all development permits were set up to hand over the infrastructure to the municipality after the development was complete. Now it’s frequently the opposite. I’m not sure why anything you posted was unclear.
1 Like