Homeowner modifying floor joists - how to protect the HOA's interests?

I'm a homeowner in a condo development where each unit is its own two-floor section of the building. Our CC&Rs have typical language for condos, and basically specify that subfloors and structural elements are part of the common area.

I'm planning to remodel my bathroom to add a curbless shower. This requires trimming and sistering the floor joists. Since this is a structural change, we've approached our HOA Architectural Control Committee to seek approval. They're supportive of the improvement, but they are concerned about the legal liability. Since this isn't a repair but rather an improvement that only benefits one unit, it doesn't make sense for the HOA to direct and pay for the work. But since the HOA is responsible for maintaining the common area, they need to ensure that they have legal recourse against the architect/engineer/contractor/etc if anything goes wrong.

Any advice on what a typical solution is for this problem?

The HOA would not need legal recourse against the Architect. Your application would have been rejected faster than you could count to one.As a management company I would have forwarded the rejected copy to the board as an FYI.

Our condo high rise ARC lingo in our CC&Rs gives the ARC or the Board the right to request that the Owner hire a structural engineer or PE or architect to give their expert opinion on this matter. Otherwise, given that the Board's duty is to s p/rotect the structural integrity of the building--NO.

WE just ended an owner who wanted to move a sovent drain line that serves his unit AND other units. Our expert PE, for whom the owner paid said NO.

If you are indicating that the application would have been disapproved by the MC (vs. the board or an architectural committee), I think that this would be improper.

Yes, we intend to do the work with all necessary permits and inspections. And we have already engaged a structural engineer to design the change.

One of my biggest concerns as an ACC member would be "ACC Application Creep." Namely: Neighbor Stever hears about the approval of KelvinL's structural alteration and now has his own ideas about changes he wants to make. The ACC repeats the massive effort it just completed for KelvinL's application, including consultations with the HOA attorney and trying to interpret an engineering report; what it means; whether the risks it mentions are negligible; and so on.

Would a judge rule that the ACC is being reasonable (which is Thee Test in cases like this) in rejecting the applications? I believe yes.

Actually, my job is to screen Arch applications to make sure they are complete prior to the submission to the Board, or the the ARC (that's a joke). In over 120 associations I have been involved in, none had ARC's. I tried to set up one at an association and I think thy might have lasted 28 days. Brand new developments still under developer control will have a working ARC, but over time they kind go away. I can't tell you the amount of enthusiasm that board members exhibit when they have to do research on a semi complex issue.

In a situation like this, I have a lawyer's opinion on why something like this can't be don't.

I already clarified this in a follow-up post. Sorry I was unclear in my original wording. No, I am not asking the HOA to foot any of the bill. When I said that it doesn't make sense for the HOA to pay for it, I was not stating a point of dispute. Rather, I was stating a position that we all agree upon.

The question was: how can the HOA ensure it has legal recourse even though the homeowner is the party directing and paying for all of the work?

I recommend reading the CC&Rs *thoroughly*. Ours contain language stating that no owner may make modifications to anything that affects the association's insurance liability. And if I were on the board/ARC, I would first talk to the association's insurance agent and get his take on it. In my community, any modification to the building's structure would be a NO. The board's desire to be "nice guys" and accommodating would not change that.

Whether something like this can affect adjacent units depends on the structure of the building. In some, individual condos are self-contained, in others anything affecting the structure of one condo can affect adjacent units. The age of the building and how far out of compliance it is with current building codes can also affect the answer to the OP's question.

I’m not a COA expert, but do understand how one builds a curbless shower when there are floor joists (big deal structurally, requiring removing height on joists, enhancing remaining amount of joists, or engineered rebuilding of surround joists, etc), vice concrete slab (just dig out more and pour more concrete).

My limited background on condos and their rules seems to point to anything like this being a really bad idea - and, anyone pushing really hard to do it is not considering the best interests of the association.

A better option would be to look for a low threshold, easy rollover fiberglas plan (there are some very nice ones). While not as nice as a tiled shower, I’ve personally installed one and it was admired by many.

I think this information is excellent.

Maybe this is fine. I tend to think not. My concern is that the owner, by paying for the legal consultation, arguably now has the right to see the HOA attorney's opinion. The HOA attorney's opinion is privileged to the extent the HOA board wants to keep it privileged. I think the Board should absolutely not release the HOA attorney's opinion to the owner, so as to "ensure it has [maximum] legal recourse" if something goes wrong.

I have the same concern regarding releasing the engineer's stamped opinion.

In the vein of JeffT2's thoughts, I think all this is creating new contractual obligations that muddy the waters greatly.

If the OP wants a curbless showier so badly, sell the condo and buy a stand alone house and they can do whatever their hearts desire. The liability would move to a new owner, but how do you document? Management changes and not every documents gets transferred and then somewhere down the run there is a problem.

Right, the owner certainly would have to disclose the alteration to prospective buyers. We keep such docs in the Owner's file and also, of course, the owner would have it.

In another recent case, an owner removed his fireplace and covered the interior of spark arrestor. Many owners have done this. But then he went a step further & removed 4-1/2" a panel in which the arrestor was embedded and replaced it with a glass pane for a better view. Without ARC approval! And we're now talking' common area! So called him to hearing, blah, blah. fined him and told him he must pay for an architect to examine the work and the missing "panel" to tell us if this structural change threatens the high rise structure. We just got his opinion that all is OK. So we will approve it. But, as Augustin observes, yeah, we now have to set up an entire procedure for owners to follow to do this if they wish.

The P.E's opinion we have in the owners's drain line relocation request is very clear and isn't privileged--neither our GC nor we wanted it privileged. Our HOA counsel's opinion was shared with the Board and the Owners. We (the Board) did say no. It would be too risky to other units and the common areas due to it being shared. The system is delicate and currently balanced, but relocation of a portion of it, according to our P.E., could upset the balance.

Based on JohnC, Sc's description, I can't see a threat to other condos or the common areas, but experts would need to determine that. So far as I know JohnC, WA has not managed high rises.

For what it's worth, a number of years ago I ended up with a mold issue in my first floor condo, as did my next door neighbor. It turned out that there was a pinhole-sized break in the solder of a pipe behind the wall of the unit above my neighbor. Once in a while, a drop of water would go *bloop*, and after about five years the bloops had accumulated. The water had to get through a firewall as well as a concrete floor, and when it hit the slab foundation it spread (which is how I ended up with mold in two rooms. Expensive repairs for me and my next neighbor, the guy upstairs with the leak had a minor repair. Which was all on us since mold is a maintenance issue, the association didn't get involved at all. My neighbor was *livid*.

So bottom line, the water got through a firewall (side to side) and concrete floors (up and down), and none of these had been disturbed or modified in any way. And this was pretty decent new construction at the time. Problems have a way of traveling in attached homes. If you change the framing, I'd be more concerned about odors (eg. tobacco or pot smoke) traveling between units, which may or may not be an issue in that particular state/community.