Board, homeowners clash over costly repairs at condo

A group of deeply troubled Riverdale homeowners has mounted a reputedly unprecedented challenge against their embattled board of managers — calling on every single one of them to resign.

The Committee of Concerned Hayden Homeowners at Hayden-on-the-Hudson condominium on Douglas Avenue claimed in a Nov. 1 memo to their board that a façade project was mishandled by excluding homeowners from the process, communicating contradictory facts, blurring what’s mandated by law and what’s optional, and being unclear regarding the project’s scope and funding.

All of this, they say, caused them to lose faith in the board — all of whom are resident homeowners, according to president Anthony LoCicero — with a majority of homeowners signing a petition calling on all board members to step down to make way for fresh blood.

Problems rooted in history

Built in the late 1960s and converted to condominium ownership in the 1980s, the Hayden has what LoCicero calls an “odd crescent shape” with “spectacular” views of the Hudson River and Palisades cliffs. It was there, on a chilly autumn night, concerned residents confronted their board in a special meeting to hold a vote for full removal.

Homeowners at the Nov. 13 meeting claimed they’d like a few qualities in particular in new members. Chief among those is transparency, and a thorough explanation of what their money’s being spent on in controversial repairs with a reported $5.5 million price tag.

“I realize that we’re faced with a very difficult situation, but these are necessary and required repairs,” LoCicero said ahead of the meeting. “I feel terribly that the maintenance wasn’t done properly and that they all came at once, but I have to make sure that people are safe.”

LoCicero described a sense of “shock and awe” over what was initially projected as a $650,000 repair — stemming from alleged negligence that preceded the current board’s tenure — skyrocketed into millions as “more and more damage was discovered.”

“I don’t think it’s a controversy over the need to do the repairs,” board vice president Ognian Shentov added. “It’s more about how quickly we do them, and how much they cost.”

The contentious project stems from a city building façade safety program involving Local Law 11 requiring owners of buildings six stories or higher to have their buildings inspected by a state-licensed architect or engineer every five years.

The architect or engineer must then file a report with the city’s buildings department about the condition of the building’s façade.

‘Serious and unprecedented’

The Hayden’s Local Law 11 repairs were progressing well, according to a letter from board members in response to the homeowners’ petition. Nevertheless, “it has become clear that leaders of the Committee of Concerned Hayden Homeowners are not interested in solving Local Law 11 problems,” the board wrote. “Rather, they seek to gain control of the project and want to remove the entire board.

“Removing the entire board is a serious and unprecedented event in Hayden’s history, and to our knowledge, in the history of condominiums in the city. Our community will carry the scars of this event long after the Local Law 11 project has been completed.”

That, in addition to the charged, polemical atmosphere of recent months, could negatively affect the building’s reputation and desirability, the board predicted, adding they’ve invested “many, many hours” to address problems they inherited from “poor planning and suspect practices” of prior boards.

Shentov estimates the building has gone four decades without major repairs and desperately needs proper maintenance.

“Once you hit 50, your joints start cracking,” Shentov said. “This is where we are. We need to fix whatever needs to be fixed right now.”

Too many secrets?

While board members and homeowners struggle to find common ground, some residents — including Barbara Rubens, who’s lived decades in one of the condominium’s townhouses — questioned the board’s staunch reluctance to share work contracts with homeowners.

“The board of managers has been deceptive when they insist the railings must be replaced, and have assessed the homeowners $5.5 million for this replacement, plus other debatable repairs,” Rubens said in an email.

But LoCicero insists the board isn’t hiding anything “sinister,” and claims after consulting with their lawyer, the board has decided to make the contracts available provided homeowners are willing to sign a confidentiality agreement.

What exactly is so secret about the project? LoCicero is concerned because a contractor was selected from a competitive bid process, and unit pricing and service charges aren’t typically public.

The contractor — York Construction — was one of the cheapest, LoCicero said, but also the only one offering pipe scaffolding and a sufficiently large crew to finish the project in a couple years rather than stretch it a decade.

York also has a “stellar reputation” for high-quality work and no connection to any board member, LoCicero said, adding he’s against “I know a guy” practices that violate the building’s bylaws, or hiring under-qualified labor for important upgrades.

As for necessity, LoCicero said the railings must be replaced for a variety of reasons, including the fact they’re a source of damaging water infiltration, which also affects concrete curbs that only worsen once water freezes and expands.

Compliance isn’t optional

The $5.5 million cost is based on a worst-case scenario of replacing all railings and curbing LoCicero said, but likely to be “much less.” And while the board tried to secure a loan to ease financial burden on residents, some homeowners reportedly tried to starve the project of funds in an attempt end it.

But “compliance with the law is not optional,” LoCicero said.

When all was said and done Nov. 13, the board remained intact. Out of 141 residents who showed up — in person or by proxy — three didn’t vote. Of the 138 who cast ballots, 78 voted not to remove the board, while 60 voted in favor. A majority of the 176 homeowners would have been required to prompt full removal.

For his part, LoCicero maintains he’s committed not just to resident safety, but also improving a unique structure within Riverdale and ensuring its survival.

“If it were two miles south, you’d pay multi-million dollars for these views,” LoCicero said. “But this fixed mentality of saying, ‘We’re going to do everything on the cheap,’ it just doesn’t work in the modern era.

“That’s what we’re up against. We’re trying to bring a very beautiful building into the 21st century, and people are just hanging on to what was.”