The water level is high at the lake. My dock is close to being under water. Mike Klein’s dock is under water. All three overflow tubes at the dam are passing water. If we get much more rain we could have some problems with docks. See pictures attached.
Pat Pagano says we might be getting another 2 inches or more of rain over the weekend.
The Pavilion Committee recently modified its previous proposal.
Members may not be aware that over the past few months, there have been large increases in the cost of dimensional lumber, as well as shortages in supply. As an example, the cost of trusses for our lowest structure quote increased by $5,000 dollars since May. Therefore, the quote was resubmitted with an increased overall cost. All 3 quotes are on the website for review
We have also provided increased clarity in the project scope. Changes from the previous presentation are in Blue or Red font
A very important change in that we will not be asking for your vote to approve funding the building of a pavilion structure.
Instead, at the Oct. 3rd Annual Meeting we would like to propose a non-binding vote to understand if Members would support a pavilion in the future if we could keep the structure cost at or below $65,000 dollars
This vote would NOT allow for appropriating funds for a building structure. It would only keep the committee active in looking to find alternative options for presentation, discussion and MEMBERapproval at a future date.
We ask that you take the time to review the updated information so you are fully aware of the changes.
The committee apologizes for any confusion or inconvenience to members regarding their consideration for the project proposal.
If any member would like the presentation sent to you directly from the committee, please contact or email Bill Klein (973-219-0384) or email@example.com
The Pavilion Project Committee
Jeff and Paula Galloway, Cabin 197
We agree with the points expressed by Gail Slockett and Sharon Pannucci, and we agree that the questions raised by Dick Leigh are important ones. To those points we would add or elaborate:
- Rather than spend a huge sum on a project with speculative benefits, we should hold our savings until we know how much we may need to spend to protect the Lake itself in light of the deteriorating condition of the dam.
- Significant dam repairs may be necessary to maintain the dam in a condition that can continue to hold Longwood Lake at its current fill level.
- Besides the picnic and annual meeting, the other proposed uses in the pavilion proposal presentation – board games, card games, trivia or bingo games, nature seminars, etc. – could easily fit in the existing clubhouse.
- The main clubhouse room is about 500 square feet. At standard occupancy rates of 15 square feet per person, the clubhouse could comfortably accommodate 33 people for any of these events. We have photos from the 2017 filming of the LLCOA movie, showing 22 people in a nowhere-near-full clubhouse.
- In fact, at the 2015 Annual Meeting, when the clubhouse was proposed and approved, those exact same uses were offered as reasons for building the clubhouse. Since 2015, there has been no demand for any of those types of organized events, and virtually none have been scheduled for the clubhouse. (The clubhouse has been used for filming the annual movie and some LLCOA Board and Committee meetings, but not for any of the additional social events predicted.)
- We only have 92 cabin units. On a typical summer weekend, we have at most about 50% occupancy – 46 cabins. The existing clubhouse could easily hold the number of people out of those 46 cabins likely to be interested in attending extra social events, as opposed to relaxing at their lakeside cabins with family and friends.
- The pricing in the pavilion proposal is very soft. None of the price quotes supplied contain drawings or meaningful project specifications. The pavilion proposal does not address how cost overruns will be handled.
- Before we give serious consideration to such an expensive project, we should carefully survey our fellow Members’ actual interest in the types of events contemplated for the pavilion.
- We could send out an email requesting if anyone is interested in nature seminars, card games or trivia night at the clubhouse, and see how many people express interest.
- Spending $70,000 or more for a structure before determining whether there is interest in using the structure is not wise.
• The project costs at least $66,000 for the pavilion and $4,000 for the expanded concrete slab. Total $70,000
• It will cost a minimum of $1000/year just for taxes and insurance
• A structure this big is only necessary for the picnic and the annual meeting
• Picnic tent costs $1340 and church for annual meeting is $100. $1440 total.
• $1440 – $1000(taxes & insurance) = $440/year in savings
• It will take 159 years to pay for itself
• Large events such as the picnic and dinner dance cost at least $9000 each
• Each additional event requiring a structure that size would mean an increase in dues of at least $85/cabin
• Card games, bingo night, nature talks, etc. – could easily be accommodated in the existing clubhouse
• If the funds set aside for the dam are not enough, we will all have to pay an additional assessment.
• $70,000 represents an assessment of $761/cabin
Gail G. Slockett
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your work to get bids at the lowest cost, but as of now, I don’t have any more critical information than I did before. I have to push a little harder:
Please supply either brochures or URLs (web addresses) for the two companies that submitted bids. The kind of information I’m looking for is below.
Please provide any documentation describing what Danny was asked to build or what he proposed to build. So far I know:
– It’s a 40 ft x 60 ft pavilion,
– To be built over existing 24 x 33 ft concrete pad, which would have to be extended.
– Open high ceiling, with “hip roof.”
– Roof could be one of many colors,
– Posts would be standard treated wood,
– That’s all I know.
To make a judgement, I would need to know:
– How the roof is surfaced – steel, shingle, PVC, or what?
– How is the framing laid out? What’s it made of?
– How many posts? Where? (I don’t require Building Dept. drawings, a sketch or written description would do.)
– How are the posts are attached? A rectangular structure is inherently unstable and needs reinforcement to withstand lateral forces (wind).
– What footings are involved – concrete? how large? How deep? How are the posts attached to the footings?
– Will the wood framing be painted at the quoted prices?
– What wind speed is the structure warranted for, if any?
And so on. I think that in order to vote we need to understand what we would be getting for the money at a much more detailed level than we have yet seen.
Bill, could you please post all three estimates and their cost breakdowns so we can compare what they are offering and for how much.
Thanks for your thoughtful inquiry.
I did not send out official RFP’s.
I first contacted Lowes and Home Depot to see if they had any pavilion kits we could purchase.
Both only carry pavilion kits up to 20’x20′, not large enough to meet the potential needs.
I then did a google search for companies that provided larger pavilion with a suggested size of 40′ x 60′ to match our previous tent.
I was only able to find the 2 companies that produced standard pavilions in that size.
When contacted, I requested quotes on their basic 40′ x 60′ pavilions.
At least one company, possibly both required mandatory on site assembly by them.
Companies providing custom work typically require up front money for drawing etc, and are expected to be more expensive than pre-packaged pavilions.
The committee was looking to avoid spending money up-front
We are certainly open to any input on possible other manufacturers or providers.
In addition, I contacted Danny to confirm his previous quote which was submitted earlier than the others.
Want to be sure all quotes are valid to date.
Hope this answers your inquiry.
Hello, Bill, Feliks, and Frank:
Thanks for presenting your Pavilion Proposal in advance of the meeting. That will allow a useful discussion to take place in the next few days.
Reviewing the proposal, I see the three bids submitted, but am having trouble evaluating them, since I don’t know exactly what the bidders were responding to. Would you please submit copies of the requests for proposals (RFPs) that were sent out, as well as any accompanying specifications? If different bidders were responding to different RFPs, it will be important to know what specs and conditions were in each one.
Thanks for your work on this.