|
|
In article <1140581261.945831.70450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
maramigua@xxxxxxxxx (MoGeo) wrote:
> Hope this isn't a duplicate-- the other didn't show up. I'm sorry, but
> there wouldn't be Supreme Court cases if both sides were a little more
> reasonable.
>
> I know of a construction site where a 250,000 gpd spring (measured on
> several occasions) which fed a 5 acre sodden (I waded it and have
> photos) spongy wetland was bulldozed over and had glacial loess dumped
> on it to destroy the spring and wetland in order to build jam-packed
> $300,000 houses with basements with construction slated for this year.
> The wetland did not officially exist, because ACE engineers said it
> wasn't a wetland, even though it was about a foot deep in water, and
> it did connect by a ditch to a creek to the Mississippi River (within 4
> miles) and said engineer was shown the ditch and the connection. There
> is also a wet weather fall line of about 6 small seeps/springs uphill
> from this spring, a now drained and 'filled' 30 acre pond with bottom
> springs which did not dry out (they too were buried). Local P&Z did
> nothing (like require channelization or a detention pond) because the
> sodden ground was 'not legally a wetland'. Local nearby residents
> weren't against development; they were against cheap development, and
> this is exactly what is being done on this tract. The submitted sworn
> affidavits that the water existed year round (in high water, they drove
> through it to their houses up the hill), but nothing availed.
>
> Political appeals fell on deaf ears. Photos of the spring and fall line
> seeps did nothing to sway anyone. So now, some unknowing buyers are
> going to be stuck with overpriced, poorly site engineered houses,
> likely with leaky basements and perhaps foundation problems, all
> because this is America and we do things, cheap, stupid and for the
> fast buck.
Hey, I know a lawyer with one of those houses, complete with leaky basement,
and
he dared to call my house, which is very well constructed, "A Hovel" and he was
ranting about how "This is America" and I don't know anything about it, and my
"This is America" page remains dedicated to him until the day he apologises.
> Was this a pristine ecological gem? No. Could it have been engineered
> around? Probably. Could the houses still have been built? Nearly all
> of them, certainly.
> Are there going to be lawsuits over shoddy construction? Most likely,
> and definitely will be homeowners screaming at the county, state and
> other governmental agencies because of this, when that quarter of a
> million gallons ends up in someone's basement.
>
> We could avoid such stupidity. But there must be the will to do so. And
> if the Supreme Court says, nope, not the state or fed's problem, mon,
> the only people who will continue to get rich are the lawyers and the
> unethical, shyster developers, since 'caveat emptor'' cannot rightly
> apply, especially since with little geology/hydrology being taught in
> school, 97% plus of the homebuying population doesn't even know there
> is a problem until it ends up bursting their foundation.
Alan
http://www.veloceraptor.free-online.co.uk/enigma.html
veloceraptor.blogspot.com/">http://veloceraptor.blogspot.com/
www.bushflash.com/pl_lo.html">http://www.bushflash.com/pl_lo.html
|
|