|
Even when addressing significant problems, such as
leaks, boards may opt for the obvious quick fixes, such as short-term
patching work, without addressing the underlying causes that aren’t
immediately apparent. A building survey conducted by an independent firm can
provide the objective analysis and broad-based expertise that the board
often lacks.
For smaller buildings (six stories or less, less
than 40 units, one or no elevators), a single engineer should be able to
conduct a comprehensive survey. For larger buildings such as yours, it’s
best to look for a firm that has all the major engineering specialties under
one roof, such as exterior/waterproofing, mechanical/HVAC, electrical,
plumbing, and structural. It still may be necessary to hire specialists for
some areas such as fire-safety systems; complex, state-of-the-art elevator
systems; sound transmission; and fireplace repair. In general, however, it’s
recommended that one firm handle the survey work to keep the different teams
from overlapping and tripping over each other.
Before the survey begins, your board should make it
clear to the engineering firm that you intend to use the report as a
comprehensive survey for funding capital improvements. Known problem areas
in the building and any previous repair history should be discussed ahead of
time so the engineer can make sure they are given proper attention in the
survey. Also, if the engineer has a rough idea of the building’s budget,
where needed he can suggest alternative repair and replacement
recommendations in the final report. Knowing the board’s plan and budget
will also help prevent the engineer from conducting unnecessary testing
beyond the scope of your specific objectives, which will help keep survey
costs down.
A comprehensive physical condition survey should
cover all the building’s major systems and components, both external and
internal, including the following areas:
• Roof and roof-level structures: roofing membranes,
base flashing, counterflashing,
parapets, copings, bulkheads, chimneys, caps, drains, and vents
• Facades
• Terraces, balconies, decks, patios, and railings
• Windows and entrance doors
• Heating, air conditioning, and ventilation systems
• Plumbing, drainage, and sanitary systems
• Electrical system
• Interior walls, floors, and ceilings
• Hallways, stairwells, and other common areas
• Elevator and compactors
• Laundry facilities and other amenities
• Site exterior: sidewalks, stairs, ramps, courtyards, fencing, and
playgrounds
• Garages and parking lots
• Fire escapes
• Intercom/video surveillance system
As part of their site work, the engineers will
likely conduct a few basic hands-on tests and probes. For example, the
engineer may ride a scaffold to check facades conditions up close, sounding
out loose or cracked brickwork and examining for missing mortar joints. The
engineer may also conduct investigative probes on external walls to check
the condition of underlying masonry, and moisture probes on inside walls to
locate the presence of leaks. Testing on electrical circuits and water
pressure may also be included, as well as sample testing for asbestos
containing material and easily removed paint chips for lead testing in
properties built before 1960 (when lead-based paint was banned in New York
City). For the size of your building, the site work and various tests may
take several days’ worth of visits.
To supplement the site work, the engineer should
provide residents with a questionnaire asking about conditions inside their
apartments. The purpose of the questionnaire is not to gather a laundry list
of cosmetic flaws or incidentals of individual units, but rather to look for
patterns that could be indicative of larger building problems.
Based on the results of the questionnaire, the
engineer should then survey the inside of approximately 5 to 10 percent of
the representative apartments to get a first-hand look of any potential
warning signs. Examples include discolored water or inadequate pressure;
cracked, shifted, or bulging walls; loose, sagging, or creaking floors;
stains or deterioration from leaks; and electrical switches that don’t work.
In older buildings with original electrical and plumbing systems, increasing
demands on supply (e.g., 220-volt appliances, Jacuzzis, garbage disposals)
could stretch or overload existing capacities.
After compiling and analyzing the survey findings,
the engineer will produce a detailed report describing the conditions of
each building system and component. As part of the narrative description,
the report should include a prioritized list of recommended repairs and
replacements along with associated budget projections and timetable. For
those systems and components not requiring immediate corrective work, an
estimated useful life expectancy should be provided. The report should
include captioned photos to visually depict building conditions,
particularly for out-of-the-way areas that residents don’t typically see. In
addition, the report should list any active code violations, such as those
issued by the New York City Department of Buildings and Environmental
Control Board.
The estimated funding requirements for repair and
replacement work should follow the Common Interest Realty Association
guidelines established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants. Repair funds are listed as current recommendations and future
allowances, which should be spread out so that funds are allotted each year
until the repair or replacement is made. For example, if an aging boiler has
an estimated five years of remaining useful life and will cost $300,000 to
replace, then the proper way to show the funding is $60,000 for each of the
next five years, not $0 for four years and $300,000 for year five. This
method helps boards plan each year for future upgrades instead of putting
off the issue until the last minute.
The survey report should highlight items that
require immediate attention. High-priority items would include items such as
active safety violations, such as electrical code issues; loose bricks and
other unsafe facade conditions; severely worn elevator cables; and a
contaminated water supply.
Large-scale systems in dire need of upgrade should
also be given top billing in the report. Outdated electrical and plumbing
systems that can no longer handle the loads they were originally designed
for are especially vulnerable. Old galvanized steel pipes, for example, can
corrode on the inside, causing particles to flake off and contaminate the
water supply. Heavy electrical usage over antiquated wiring will overload
circuits, creating a fire hazard. Replacing these systems causes a major
disruption for building residents: demolishing walls, cutting off power and
water, creating dust and debris, and so on. Because of the upheaval, boards
tend to put off undertaking the work, and instead choose to limp along until
the aging system suffers a major breakdown. A well-prepared engineering
report will spell out the steps and costs involved in undertaking such major
upgrades.
Once the report is completed, it’s recommended that
the board meet with the engineering team to review the findings and
recommendations before presentation to shareholders at large. Most boards
typically don’t have the funds to make all the repairs and replacements, so
the engineer can help the board decide the best course of action to make
sure the corrective work is performed based on proper priority.
An updated survey should be performed approximately
every five years to reassess previous problem areas and deal with future
needs, especially for buildings such as yours that have suffered neglect. By
staying aware of their building’s overall condition, boards can make plans
for necessary maintenance and repairs now to avoid costly emergency
situations later.
More Ask the Engineer
articles |