- Ucol-shareholders - list.king.net.nz

Site meeting photos
by Maria Callau 13 Mar '20

13 Mar '20

Maria Callau 021 1847490 Sent from my iPhone

1 0

Wool carpet option
by Rainer Beneke 13 Mar '20

13 Mar '20

Hi all, This is for all who want to change from the synthetic carpet, as per our building specks, to a 100% wool carpet (https://www.godfreyhirst.com/au/hycraft/product/ravine?carpet=stonewall&roo…) This change will be a client request change and clients need to pay close to completion of the build. To get a quote from S&W we were asked to supply a list of the units who want to change, and they would give us one quote for all units (not separate quotes). This is far more cost effective. While no one at this stage is committing to wool, we need a fair commitment to wool carpet change. It is preferred not to go forth and back. I can not find my previous records but this change might cost $1500 plus or minus per floor (correct me if you can?). A- and D-units have 1 floor, H-units 2 floors, C-units 1/4 floor. At last nights meeting following units showed interest. A5, A6, H1, H2, C4, C5, D1, D2, D4, D6. Any others? Can you please confirm your interest to me by Monday 16th, as there is a PCG meeting on Tuesday. Thanks Rainer Please call me if you need an urgent reply. Rainer Beneke +64 21 144 7700

1 0

Site meeting
by Rainer Beneke 13 Mar '20

13 Mar '20

Hi All Sorry no photos again. all of the high street block facing the common has the top coat of paint. The first doors and windows are in at the Alva block. The new door for the common house facing Montpelier Street is in, you can see it from the road. Scaffolding for the first 4 units is now scheduled to come down after the 23rd this month (after open day) There will be an open day 19th 3pm to 6pm (7pm?). Open will be H1, C4 and D1 (which will most likely be gib-stopped by then!). But no panic, we can also organize a site visit for us in a few weeks, when scaffolding is down and the first exterior stair case / balcony is up. Our roof shout for the Alva block is on Wednesday 18th at 10am on site. Read the still to come email if you are hoping for a wool carpet. Regards Rainer Please call me if you need an urgent reply. Rainer Beneke +64 21 144 7700

1 0

Wool Carpet - Ravine | Hycraft Wool Carpets
by Rainer Beneke 12 Mar '20

12 Mar '20

This is the wool carpet suggested by Frances and Marianne as an alternative to the synthetic carpet in the contract. Price information may be available coming meeting. Regards Rainer https://www.godfreyhirst.com/au/hycraft/product/ravine?carpet=stonewall&roo… Please call me if you need an urgent reply. Rainer Beneke +64 21 144 7700

1 0

Agenda for those who couldn't open the last one – sorry
by Gay Buckingham 11 Mar '20

11 Mar '20

Gay Buckingham +64 27 4544012

1 0

Agenda for 12/3/20
by Gay Buckingham 11 Mar '20

11 Mar '20

Please send apologies to Jan or me. See you tomorrow Gay Gay Buckingham +64 27 4544012

1 0

Decluttering
by Sandy Ross 11 Mar '20

11 Mar '20

Hi everyone, Here is an opportunity to rid your houses of all of those little things you do not want to take with you into your new cohousing house. We are running a garage sale on Saturday to support a group from our church who are going to Vanuatu to help with a school rebuilding programme on the island of Parma. All proceeds of the sale go towards materials for the school. If you were to bring a box of things you no longer need to our meeting tomorrow night, we will make sure they are offered for sale on Saturday. Nothing too valuable - garage sales tend to be places where people want a bargain! If you would like to come to the sale (and buy more things!!), it is in the Coronation Hall on Balmacewen Road from 9 - 11 am on Saturday. Cheers, Frances

1 0

Re: [Ucol-shareholders] Reply to Alex email - Body Corporate Rules v5.6 25 Feb2020
by Y Lee 07 Mar '20

07 Mar '20

Oops I seem to have missed reading Anna and Anthony's email earlier. Gay, I can see the new comments. Check if you have "Track Changes" under the Review menu turned on, and the comments may show up. Regards Min On 6/03/2020 11:12 pm, Gay Buckingham wrote: > Thanks Anthony and Anna. > Your comments didn't show up when I opened the doc. > Have others been more successful? > G > > Gay Buckingham > +64 27 4544012 > > On 6/03/2020, at 9:13 PM, Anna Maxwell <akmaxwell(a)orcon.net.nz > <mailto:akmaxwell@orcon.net.nz>> wrote: > >> >> Hi Min >> Many thanks to you and others for all your work on these rules so far >> - they’re looking good. >> >> We’ve made a few comments on the attached. Let me know if you can’t >> see them. >> >> Kind regards >> Anna and Anthony >> <UCOL-BC-v05.6-DistribCopy.docx> >> >> >> >>> On 25/02/2020, at 9:59 PM, Y Lee <yblees(a)orcon.net.nz >>> <mailto:yblees@orcon.net.nz>> wrote: >>> >>> HI Alex, >>> Thanks for picking out the typos. I've attached v 5.6 with the >>> errors fixed, and the items renumbered from 14 on wards. >>> >>> >>> I think some of Alex's questions may need to be answered by someone >>> with more legal background, but I think it's useful respond publicly >>> as others may have the same queries. This is how I understand things: >>> >>> Re: 1c. Owners and Occupiers. >>>> >>>> * 1c seems contradictory: >>>> >>>> “Owner” has the same meaning in these Rules as it has in the >>>> Act and for the >>>> purposes of these Rules also includes all Occupiers of a unit >>>> in the unit title >>>> development, unless the context requires otherwise. >>>> >>>> Which one is it, does "owner" in the rules mean "owner", or does it >>>> mean "owners and occupiers"? >>>> >>> As I understand it, the BC Rules apply to all owners. And they also >>> apply to non-owner people living in the units (occupiers). However, >>> some rules are specific to Owners only, for example, paying fees and >>> being on the Register of Owners. Some rules apply to owners even if >>> they don't live in the unit. >>> Occupiers can include the children, boarders, and tenants of Owners. >>> In general, the Rules apply to occupiers as well, unless it's not >>> applicable to an occupier - eg, paying body corp fees, attending >>> meetings for child occupiers, etc >>> >>> *Re: 10. Vehicle Parking - Electric car charging & water supply* >>>> 10 Vehicle parking: >>>> >>>> "Electric car charging stations and water supply for car >>>> washing will be available." I don't think this needs to be in >>>> the BC rules. Can you give a reference to where this was >>>> decided, and whether it was intended to go in the rules? I >>>> think it should be like any other operational policy, there is >>>> no particular need for it to go in the rules. I don't think >>>> facilities for cars should be special. >>>> >>> I agree they don't need to be in the BC Rules as they can be >>> separated out into Operating rules if required. If no body objects, >>> I can take 10.d out >>> * >>> **Re: Aerials, Signs, Setting up permanent laundry structures* >>>> >>>> * 11 Aerials, Satellite Dishes, Antennas and Air Conditioning Units: >>>> >>>> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the >>>> group decision making process? We all have different colour >>>> front doors. Why can't people just put up what they want? (may >>>> need to replace it with something giving effect to our resource >>>> consent conditions.) >>>> >>>> * 12 Signs, Notices, Advertising and Promotion: >>>> >>>> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the >>>> group decision making process? >>>> >>>> 16 Laundry >>>> >>>> I'm not sure it's really necessary. >>>> >>>> (There are a few more rules between 16 and 22 that I think are >>>> superfluous.) >>>> >>> >>> This comes down to the balance between having more Body Corp Rules >>> up front, vs sorting things out later. As I have been specifically >>> informed by multiple persons that it may not be appropriate to cut >>> down the number of rules in the existing document, this will need to >>> go to the group to decide. >>> * >>> **Re: 13. Rubbish, Waste Disposal, Composting* >>>> >>>> * 13 Rubbish, Waste Disposal and Composting: >>>> >>>> I would like to remove 13e "shall strive to keep the unit, >>>> including private outdoor areas free of vermin, rodents and >>>> pests." since it demonstrates a nature-phobic attitude. And >>>> would be inconsistent with people wanting to keep pet mice or >>>> rats. And the health aspects are already covered by rule 13c. >>>> Again most of 13 is fine but I'm not sure it provides any value >>>> over and above leaving it out and dealing with disputes. >>>> >>> I agree that 13e is already covered by 13c, and should be removed. >>> Have done so in the Body Corp Rules v5.6 >>> >>> *RE: Replacing Glass. (renumbered as 15 to avoid confusion)* >>>> >>>> *15 Cleaning and Replacing Glass >>>> >>>> I think 15a and 15b are problematic, since it may require >>>> owners to replace broken windows with new ones from Germany at >>>> huge expense. If this is to be mandated there should be a >>>> sharing of cost between the unit owner and body corporate >>>> maintenance fund. Is there a reference to the meeting where we >>>> made this decision? >>>> >>> 15a Replacing broken glass with one of the same weight/thermal >>> properties. Won't this be required for us to maintain the >>> Passivhaus rating? It was discussed in a meeting ages go, but I >>> can't find the minutes for it - from memory, someone asked Tim if >>> there was a NZ supplier of triple glazing, or if we would have to >>> import replacement windows from Germany in case of breakage. And >>> Tim said NZ manufacturing was not up to standard for the triple glazing. >>> >>> 15b Not replace with glass that will alter the external appearance >>> of the unit. I admit, I don't really care about this one. If >>> nobody else cares, I'll remove it. >>> >>> *Re: Notice of Damage, Defects, Accidents or Injury* >>> Oops. "Accidents or Injury" removed from heading. >>> >>> Re: Tenancy (renumbered to 24 to avoid confusion) >>>> >>>> *24. Leasing a Private Unit >>>> >>>> The following clauses seem to be huge over-reach: b (I can >>>> understand contact details, but entire tenancy agreement? It is >>>> nothing to do with the BC) and e. "the Body Corporate shall be >>>> deemed to be the agent of the registered Owner of the unit for the >>>> purposes of exercising the rights of the Owner in respect of any >>>> lease or tenancy" It is just unnecessary, as long as the occupiers >>>> are abiding by these rules and the group process, which is dealt >>>> with elsewhere (e.g. in a), there is no need for this? Or can >>>> someone explain it to me? >>>> >>>> I would be inclined to leave this whole section (apart from a) >>>> out, and instead keep a register of occupiers as part of 26, >>>> including part a there. >>> Clauses 24.c), d), and e) come from the Unit Titles Act. (d and e >>> are directly out of section 81). >>> And for the Body Corp to act on behalf of the owner, if the owner is >>> not available, as in part e, the Body Corp should have a copy of the >>> lease. I used "tenancy agreement" because that seems to be the >>> correct term for this type of lease. >>> * >>> **Re: 25. Working Bees* >>>> >>>> "The following suggestions for organising the actual operation >>>> of working bees are >>>> included for further discussion, with the outcome to be decided >>>> using the Group >>>> Decision Making Process.": >>>> >>>> Do we intend to leave that statement in the rules that we >>>> formally adopt, or are we going to do further work on 24 before >>>> adoption? The suggestions seem reasonable except : >>>> >>>> "f) Hours may be traded...." I don't want this in the rules. >>>> >>> >>> We can leave it as is, or work on it further if there is time. I'm >>> in favor of leaving Operational Rules separate from the actual Body >>> Corp Rules, as Operational Rules may have to be changed more often >>> as we test them out. >>> 25 f) Hours may be _traded _has been removed in v5.6. >>> However, there are good reasons for allowing hours to be bought out >>> - including that it will be useful to have extra cash for >>> improvements, especially during setup. And it allows flexibility for >>> those who occasionally find themselves time poor due to work or >>> other commitments to still contribute if they wish. We can write in >>> something about buying out work hours not being a permanent option. >>> >>> Regards >>> Min >>> >>> >>> On 22/02/2020 7:37 pm, Alex King via Ucol-shareholders wrote: >>>> >>>> A few queries, perhaps someone from the BC group can comment at our >>>> next meeting? >>>> >>>> * 1c seems contradictory: >>>> >>>> “Owner” has the same meaning in these Rules as it has in the >>>> Act and for the >>>> purposes of these Rules also includes all Occupiers of a unit >>>> in the unit title >>>> development, unless the context requires otherwise. >>>> >>>> Which one is it, does "owner" in the rules mean "owner", or does it >>>> mean "owners and occupiers"? >>>> >>>> * 10 Vehicle parking: >>>> >>>> The sub-numbering is inconsistent and needs to be fixed. (a b a >>>> b c). "Electric car charging stations and water supply for car >>>> washing will be available." I don't think this needs to be in >>>> the BC rules. Can you give a reference to where this was >>>> decided, and whether it was intended to go in the rules? I >>>> think it should be like any other operational policy, there is >>>> no particular need for it to go in the rules. I don't think >>>> facilities for cars should be special. >>>> >>>> * 11 Aerials, Satellite Dishes, Antennas and Air Conditioning Units: >>>> >>>> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the >>>> group decision making process? We all have different colour >>>> front doors. Why can't people just put up what they want? (may >>>> need to replace it with something giving effect to our resource >>>> consent conditions.) >>>> >>>> * 12 Signs, Notices, Advertising and Promotion: >>>> >>>> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the >>>> group decision making process? >>>> >>>> * 13 Rubbish, Waste Disposal and Composting: >>>> >>>> I would like to remove 13e "shall strive to keep the unit, >>>> including private outdoor areas free of vermin, rodents and >>>> pests." since it demonstrates a nature-phobic attitude. And >>>> would be inconsistent with people wanting to keep pet mice or >>>> rats. And the health aspects are already covered by rule 13c. >>>> Again most of 13 is fine but I'm not sure it provides any value >>>> over and above leaving it out and dealing with disputes. >>>> >>>> * Unit Cleaning, Maintenance and Fencing >>>> >>>> Presumably this should be a heading and be numbered 14, with >>>> the remaining sections renumbered. >>>> >>>> *14 Cleaning and Replacing Glass >>>> >>>> I think 14a and 14b are problematic, since it may require >>>> owners to replace broken windows with new ones from Germany at >>>> huge expense. If this is to be mandated there should be a >>>> sharing of cost between the unit owner and body corporate >>>> maintenance fund. Is there a reference to the meeting where we >>>> made this decision? >>>> >>>> * 16 Laundry >>>> >>>> I'm not sure it's really necessary. >>>> >>>> (There are a few more rules between 16 and 22 that I think are >>>> superfluous.) >>>> >>>> * 22. Notice of Damage, Defects, Accidents or Injury >>>> >>>> This title should be changed because none of the rules relate >>>> to injury. >>>> >>>> * 23. Leasing a Private Unit >>>> >>>> a) is missing "and" from the last line. >>>> >>>> The following clauses seem to be huge over-reach: b (I can >>>> understand contact details, but entire tenancy agreement? It >>>> is nothing to do with the BC) and e. "the Body Corporate shall >>>> be deemed to be the agent of the registered Owner of the unit >>>> for the purposes of exercising the rights of the Owner in >>>> respect of any lease or tenancy" It is just unnecessary, as >>>> long as the occupiers are abiding by these rules and the group >>>> process, which is dealt with elsewhere (e.g. in a), there is no >>>> need for this? Or can someone explain it to me? >>>> >>>> I would be inclined to leave this whole section (apart from a) >>>> out, and instead keep a register of occupiers as part of 26, >>>> including part a there. >>>> >>>> * 24. Cohousing Working Bees and Administration Duties >>>> >>>> "The following suggestions for organising the actual operation >>>> of working bees are >>>> included for further discussion, with the outcome to be decided >>>> using the Group >>>> Decision Making Process.": >>>> >>>> Do we intend to leave that statement in the rules that we >>>> formally adopt, or are we going to do further work on 24 before >>>> adoption? The suggestions seem reasonable except : >>>> >>>> "f) Hours may be traded...." I don't want this in the rules. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 20/02/20 8:56 pm, Y Lee wrote: >>>>> _BODY CORPORATE GROUP REPORT - 20th February 2020_ >>>>> >>>>> In January this year, Claire Loftus offered her proofreading and >>>>> editing skills to get our Draft Body Corporate Rules document into >>>>> a consistent format. This month, the document was returned to me >>>>> with the full glory of "track changes", and lots of Claire's very >>>>> useful comments. >>>>> >>>>> On the 9th of February, Gay, Warren and Min met to read through >>>>> all the 'track changes' and comments, and eventually agreed on a >>>>> copy to be sent out to the rest of the UCOL shareholders. >>>>> >>>>> The Ucol Body Corporate Rules v.5.5 is attached to this report as >>>>> a PDF. Anyone who wants the Word document, email me for a copy. >>>>> >>>>> A few Definitions used in this document: >>>>> >>>>> 1. The Ucol build is a *Unit Title Development*, and subject to >>>>> the Unit Titles Act 2010 >>>>> 2. *Owner* means the people who's names are on the purchase >>>>> agreements. >>>>> 3. *Occupier* means anyone living in one of the units, including >>>>> children, tenants, etc >>>>> 4. A *Tenant* issomeone who rents a home from a landlord and is >>>>> named on a signed tenancy agreement. Tenants are covered by >>>>> the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 >>>>> 5. A Flatmate lives in the rental property, but is not named in >>>>> the tenancy agreement >>>>> 6. A *Boarder *is someone who lives in the home with the owner. >>>>> 7. Flatmates & Boarders are not covered by the Residential >>>>> Tenancies Act, but they are both still *Occupiers*. They have >>>>> to obey the Rules, but should they have voting rights in the >>>>> group when they are not required to attend meetings? >>>>> >>>> I think they should have voting rights in the group. However for >>>> sure since they are bound by the body corporate rules, it seems >>>> only fair that they would get a vote when the rules are amended? >>>> >>>> The principle "Responsibility for decisions shall be shared by >>>> Owners and adult (18+ years) >>>> Occupiers" seems to suggest to me that occupiers (18+) get a vote. >>>> >>>> Also, I would like to change the "adult" age to 16+. >>>> >>>>> Items in the BC Rules that need another Discussion Workshop >>>>> >>>>> 1. _Shared Meals_ (25) - We have had one workshop discussing >>>>> shared meals. However, when Gay, Warren & Min went through >>>>> this document, we could agree on only three things (see 25). >>>>> So it may be advisable to have another workshop for open >>>>> discussion and brainstorming on Shared Meals before we can >>>>> progress to formulating operating rules. >>>>> 2. _Procedure to Amend the Rules (29.e)_. We need to agree who >>>>> forms part of the "Group" in the Group Decision Making >>>>> Process. Whose colour card vote must be counted as part of >>>>> the 75% quorum required to amend the Rules? Definitely the >>>>> owners and tenants as defined above. But what about other >>>>> non-owner, non-tenant occupiers. What about children, >>>>> flatmates and boarders. Note that they are all also subject >>>>> to these Rules. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NEXT WORKSHOP. The February Body Corp Discussion workshop was >>>>> originally scheduled for this weekend, but it was cancelled as I >>>>> was busy and could not host it. The next Body Corp Workshop >>>>> should be either on the 21st or 22nd of March. I am away in >>>>> April, and prefer not to organize anything for that month, so I >>>>> strongly recommend we have a the Workshop in March to discuss the >>>>> above two items, or else postpone discussion until May 2020 >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> Min >>>>> >>>> Thank you Min and everyone for your work on the rules. I look >>>> forward to a lively discussion :) >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ucol-shareholders mailing list >>>> Ucol-shareholders(a)list.king.net.nz >>>> https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders >>> >>> <UCOL-BC-v05.6-DistribCopy.docx> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ucol-shareholders mailing list >>> Ucol-shareholders(a)list.king.net.nz >>> <mailto:Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz> >>> https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders >> _______________________________________________ >> Ucol-shareholders mailing list >> Ucol-shareholders(a)list.king.net.nz >> <mailto:Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz> >> https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders

1 0

Next meeting 12 March. Agenda items to me please
by Jan Burch 07 Mar '20

07 Mar '20

7.30pm Thu 12 March NumberWorks'nWords, 90 Crawford St, *Parking is dependent on what is happening opposite at Indoor Sports. If you have trouble finding a park outside, suggest you go left, left. Usually plenty of spaces in Bond Street and you can shortcut through the carwash.* Gay to chair. Jan to notetake.

1 0

Re: [Ucol-shareholders] Reply to Alex email - Body Corporate Rules v5.6 25 Feb2020
by Anna Maxwell 06 Mar '20

06 Mar '20

Hi Min Many thanks to you and others for all your work on these rules so far - they’re looking good. We’ve made a few comments on the attached. Let me know if you can’t see them. Kind regards Anna and Anthony >> On 25/02/2020, at 9:59 PM, Y Lee <yblees(a)orcon.net.nz> wrote: > HI Alex, > Thanks for picking out the typos. I've attached v 5.6 with the errors fixed, and the items renumbered from 14 on wards. > > > I think some of Alex's questions may need to be answered by someone with more legal background, but I think it's useful respond publicly as others may have the same queries. This is how I understand things: > > Re: 1c. Owners and Occupiers. >> >> * 1c seems contradictory: >> >> “Owner” has the same meaning in these Rules as it has in the Act and for the >> purposes of these Rules also includes all Occupiers of a unit in the unit title >> development, unless the context requires otherwise. >> >> Which one is it, does "owner" in the rules mean "owner", or does it mean "owners and occupiers"? >> > As I understand it, the BC Rules apply to all owners. And they also apply to non-owner people living in the units (occupiers). However, some rules are specific to Owners only, for example, paying fees and being on the Register of Owners. Some rules apply to owners even if they don't live in the unit. > Occupiers can include the children, boarders, and tenants of Owners. In general, the Rules apply to occupiers as well, unless it's not applicable to an occupier - eg, paying body corp fees, attending meetings for child occupiers, etc > > Re: 10. Vehicle Parking - Electric car charging & water supply >> 10 Vehicle parking: >> "Electric car charging stations and water supply for car washing will be available." I don't think this needs to be in the BC rules. Can you give a reference to where this was decided, and whether it was intended to go in the rules? I think it should be like any other operational policy, there is no particular need for it to go in the rules. I don't think facilities for cars should be special. >> > I agree they don't need to be in the BC Rules as they can be separated out into Operating rules if required. If no body objects, I can take 10.d out > > Re: Aerials, Signs, Setting up permanent laundry structures >> * 11 Aerials, Satellite Dishes, Antennas and Air Conditioning Units: >> >> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process? We all have different colour front doors. Why can't people just put up what they want? (may need to replace it with something giving effect to our resource consent conditions.) >> >> * 12 Signs, Notices, Advertising and Promotion: >> >> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process? >> >> 16 Laundry >> I'm not sure it's really necessary. >> >> (There are a few more rules between 16 and 22 that I think are superfluous.) >> > > This comes down to the balance between having more Body Corp Rules up front, vs sorting things out later. As I have been specifically informed by multiple persons that it may not be appropriate to cut down the number of rules in the existing document, this will need to go to the group to decide. > > Re: 13. Rubbish, Waste Disposal, Composting >> * 13 Rubbish, Waste Disposal and Composting: >> >> I would like to remove 13e "shall strive to keep the unit, including private outdoor areas free of vermin, rodents and pests." since it demonstrates a nature-phobic attitude. And would be inconsistent with people wanting to keep pet mice or rats. And the health aspects are already covered by rule 13c. Again most of 13 is fine but I'm not sure it provides any value over and above leaving it out and dealing with disputes. >> > I agree that 13e is already covered by 13c, and should be removed. Have done so in the Body Corp Rules v5.6 > > RE: Replacing Glass. (renumbered as 15 to avoid confusion) >> *15 Cleaning and Replacing Glass >> >> I think 15a and 15b are problematic, since it may require owners to replace broken windows with new ones from Germany at huge expense. If this is to be mandated there should be a sharing of cost between the unit owner and body corporate maintenance fund. Is there a reference to the meeting where we made this decision? >> > 15a Replacing broken glass with one of the same weight/thermal properties. Won't this be required for us to maintain the Passivhaus rating? It was discussed in a meeting ages go, but I can't find the minutes for it - from memory, someone asked Tim if there was a NZ supplier of triple glazing, or if we would have to import replacement windows from Germany in case of breakage. And Tim said NZ manufacturing was not up to standard for the triple glazing. > > 15b Not replace with glass that will alter the external appearance of the unit. I admit, I don't really care about this one. If nobody else cares, I'll remove it. > > Re: Notice of Damage, Defects, Accidents or Injury > Oops. "Accidents or Injury" removed from heading. > > Re: Tenancy (renumbered to 24 to avoid confusion) >> *24. Leasing a Private Unit >> >> The following clauses seem to be huge over-reach: b (I can understand contact details, but entire tenancy agreement? It is nothing to do with the BC) and e. "the Body Corporate shall be deemed to be the agent of the registered Owner of the unit for the purposes of exercising the rights of the Owner in respect of any lease or tenancy" It is just unnecessary, as long as the occupiers are abiding by these rules and the group process, which is dealt with elsewhere (e.g. in a), there is no need for this? Or can someone explain it to me? >> >> I would be inclined to leave this whole section (apart from a) out, and instead keep a register of occupiers as part of 26, including part a there. > Clauses 24.c), d), and e) come from the Unit Titles Act. (d and e are directly out of section 81). > And for the Body Corp to act on behalf of the owner, if the owner is not available, as in part e, the Body Corp should have a copy of the lease. I used "tenancy agreement" because that seems to be the correct term for this type of lease. > > Re: 25. Working Bees >> "The following suggestions for organising the actual operation of working bees are >> included for further discussion, with the outcome to be decided using the Group >> Decision Making Process.": >> >> Do we intend to leave that statement in the rules that we formally adopt, or are we going to do further work on 24 before adoption? The suggestions seem reasonable except : >> >> "f) Hours may be traded...." I don't want this in the rules. >> > > We can leave it as is, or work on it further if there is time. I'm in favor of leaving Operational Rules separate from the actual Body Corp Rules, as Operational Rules may have to be changed more often as we test them out. > 25 f) Hours may be traded has been removed in v5.6. > However, there are good reasons for allowing hours to be bought out - including that it will be useful to have extra cash for improvements, especially during setup. And it allows flexibility for those who occasionally find themselves time poor due to work or other commitments to still contribute if they wish. We can write in something about buying out work hours not being a permanent option. > > Regards > Min > > > On 22/02/2020 7:37 pm, Alex King via Ucol-shareholders wrote: >> A few queries, perhaps someone from the BC group can comment at our next meeting? >> >> * 1c seems contradictory: >> >> “Owner” has the same meaning in these Rules as it has in the Act and for the >> purposes of these Rules also includes all Occupiers of a unit in the unit title >> development, unless the context requires otherwise. >> >> Which one is it, does "owner" in the rules mean "owner", or does it mean "owners and occupiers"? >> >> * 10 Vehicle parking: >> >> The sub-numbering is inconsistent and needs to be fixed. (a b a b c). "Electric car charging stations and water supply for car washing will be available." I don't think this needs to be in the BC rules. Can you give a reference to where this was decided, and whether it was intended to go in the rules? I think it should be like any other operational policy, there is no particular need for it to go in the rules. I don't think facilities for cars should be special. >> >> * 11 Aerials, Satellite Dishes, Antennas and Air Conditioning Units: >> >> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process? We all have different colour front doors. Why can't people just put up what they want? (may need to replace it with something giving effect to our resource consent conditions.) >> >> * 12 Signs, Notices, Advertising and Promotion: >> >> Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process? >> >> * 13 Rubbish, Waste Disposal and Composting: >> >> I would like to remove 13e "shall strive to keep the unit, including private outdoor areas free of vermin, rodents and pests." since it demonstrates a nature-phobic attitude. And would be inconsistent with people wanting to keep pet mice or rats. And the health aspects are already covered by rule 13c. Again most of 13 is fine but I'm not sure it provides any value over and above leaving it out and dealing with disputes. >> >> * Unit Cleaning, Maintenance and Fencing >> >> Presumably this should be a heading and be numbered 14, with the remaining sections renumbered. >> >> *14 Cleaning and Replacing Glass >> >> I think 14a and 14b are problematic, since it may require owners to replace broken windows with new ones from Germany at huge expense. If this is to be mandated there should be a sharing of cost between the unit owner and body corporate maintenance fund. Is there a reference to the meeting where we made this decision? >> >> * 16 Laundry >> >> I'm not sure it's really necessary. >> >> (There are a few more rules between 16 and 22 that I think are superfluous.) >> >> * 22. Notice of Damage, Defects, Accidents or Injury >> >> This title should be changed because none of the rules relate to injury. >> >> * 23. Leasing a Private Unit >> >> a) is missing "and" from the last line. >> >> The following clauses seem to be huge over-reach: b (I can understand contact details, but entire tenancy agreement? It is nothing to do with the BC) and e. "the Body Corporate shall be deemed to be the agent of the registered Owner of the unit for the purposes of exercising the rights of the Owner in respect of any lease or tenancy" It is just unnecessary, as long as the occupiers are abiding by these rules and the group process, which is dealt with elsewhere (e.g. in a), there is no need for this? Or can someone explain it to me? >> >> I would be inclined to leave this whole section (apart from a) out, and instead keep a register of occupiers as part of 26, including part a there. >> >> * 24. Cohousing Working Bees and Administration Duties >> >> "The following suggestions for organising the actual operation of working bees are >> included for further discussion, with the outcome to be decided using the Group >> Decision Making Process.": >> >> Do we intend to leave that statement in the rules that we formally adopt, or are we going to do further work on 24 before adoption? The suggestions seem reasonable except : >> >> "f) Hours may be traded...." I don't want this in the rules. >> >> >>> On 20/02/20 8:56 pm, Y Lee wrote: >>> BODY CORPORATE GROUP REPORT - 20th February 2020 >>> >>> In January this year, Claire Loftus offered her proofreading and editing skills to get our Draft Body Corporate Rules document into a consistent format. This month, the document was returned to me with the full glory of "track changes", and lots of Claire's very useful comments. >>> >>> On the 9th of February, Gay, Warren and Min met to read through all the 'track changes' and comments, and eventually agreed on a copy to be sent out to the rest of the UCOL shareholders. >>> >>> The Ucol Body Corporate Rules v.5.5 is attached to this report as a PDF. Anyone who wants the Word document, email me for a copy. >>> >>> A few Definitions used in this document: >>> The Ucol build is a Unit Title Development, and subject to the Unit Titles Act 2010 >>> Owner means the people who's names are on the purchase agreements. >>> Occupier means anyone living in one of the units, including children, tenants, etc >>> A Tenant is someone who rents a home from a landlord and is named on a signed tenancy agreement. Tenants are covered by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 >>> A Flatmate lives in the rental property, but is not named in the tenancy agreement >>> A Boarder is someone who lives in the home with the owner. >>> Flatmates & Boarders are not covered by the Residential Tenancies Act, but they are both still Occupiers. They have to obey the Rules, but should they have voting rights in the group when they are not required to attend meetings? >> I think they should have voting rights in the group. However for sure since they are bound by the body corporate rules, it seems only fair that they would get a vote when the rules are amended? >> >> The principle "Responsibility for decisions shall be shared by Owners and adult (18+ years) >> Occupiers" seems to suggest to me that occupiers (18+) get a vote. >> >> Also, I would like to change the "adult" age to 16+. >> >>> Items in the BC Rules that need another Discussion Workshop >>> >>> Shared Meals (25) - We have had one workshop discussing shared meals. However, when Gay, Warren & Min went through this document, we could agree on only three things (see 25). So it may be advisable to have another workshop for open discussion and brainstorming on Shared Meals before we can progress to formulating operating rules. >>> Procedure to Amend the Rules (29.e). We need to agree who forms part of the "Group" in the Group Decision Making Process. Whose colour card vote must be counted as part of the 75% quorum required to amend the Rules? Definitely the owners and tenants as defined above. But what about other non-owner, non-tenant occupiers. What about children, flatmates and boarders. Note that they are all also subject to these Rules. >>> >>> >>> NEXT WORKSHOP. The February Body Corp Discussion workshop was originally scheduled for this weekend, but it was cancelled as I was busy and could not host it. The next Body Corp Workshop should be either on the 21st or 22nd of March. I am away in April, and prefer not to organize anything for that month, so I strongly recommend we have a the Workshop in March to discuss the above two items, or else postpone discussion until May 2020 >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Min >>> >> Thank you Min and everyone for your work on the rules. I look forward to a lively discussion :) >> >> Thanks, >> Alex >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ucol-shareholders mailing list >> Ucol-shareholders(a)list.king.net.nz >> https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders > > <UCOL-BC-v05.6-DistribCopy.docx> > _______________________________________________ > Ucol-shareholders mailing list > Ucol-shareholders(a)list.king.net.nz > https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

Ucol-shareholders