Deluge of rain effects

[Name]

It kinda sucks to watch on the news stories of sink holes swallowing homes, and homes sliding down the sides of hills. However, If you live on the side of a hill, wouldn't that be a known risk during the winter rainy season? Shouldn't soil stability be taken into consideration before a home is built on the side of a hill?

[€uroMeinke]

In our litigious society there are disclosures for every possibility to the point of ridiculousness. Our last home required us to sign a right of way agreement for errant golf balls - a golf course being within a mile of the development.

Our current home is in a potential "Tsunami Inundation Zone" - we laughed at then when we sign it among all the other forms and disclosures. Perhaps, that one isn't so funny anymore.

But the point is, I'm sure they knew of it, but not so certain they knew realisticly what the risk might be. Afterall, we all know it's the other guy that gets into the car accident.

[wendybeth]

We live on the side of a very big hill, near the top. When we moved in we were reassured that, beneath the very sandy soil, there was a solid mass of basalt rock and we were in no danger of mudslides. Still, when I look at the mudslides in California, I can't help but notice how very much those neighborhoods look like mine, and I get nervous. :rolleyes:

[Ghoulish Delight]

What irritates me is these neighborhoods that have slid before, and slid even worse this time, and now the residents are demanding to be allowed to rebuild. Oh, and by the way, demanding that the cost of stabilizing the hill be absorbed by the state. That's when the dictator, er, governor uttered this gem. “In the last few days we have seen the power of nature to cause damage and despair. But we will match that power with our own resolve." Yes Arnold, we will match the power of nature. Whatever you say Arnold.

Sorry, but I ain't footing the bill for their stubborness, luxury, and obstinance.

[wendybeth]

If insurers refuse to insure, can the homeowners still rebuild? Gee, would Arnie still be so eager to throw public funds at this if it were occuring in Watts? Or El Segundo?

[sleepyjeff]

If insurers refuse to insure, can the homeowners still rebuild? Gee, would Arnie still be so eager to throw public funds at this if it were occuring in Watts? Or El Segundo?

Sure he would..........gentrification may be the result though :)

[Not Afraid]

I'm now singing "It never rains in California......"

[Tramspotter]

Sorry, but I ain't footing the bill for their stubborness, luxury, and obstinance.

But you are willing to saddle our economy with an even bigger bureaucratic landslide, allow thugs in black the luxury of circumventing legislation from the bench and support a party that stubbornly burns taxpayers money to keep the unions warm... :rolleyes:

I'm confused why your so angry at these property owners they finally have gotten with the program and started sucking from the government teat just like everyone else. Don't fault em for that hey their just getting with the program man... :D

[Name]

allow thugs in black the luxury of circumventing legislation from the bench luxury? I thought that was the point of the supreme court, you know part of the checks and balances put in place from the beginning.

[Ghoulish Delight]

But you are willing to saddle our economy with an even bigger bureaucratic landslide, allow thugs in black the luxury of circumventing legislation from the bench and support a party that stubbornly burns taxpayers money to keep the unions warm... :rolleyes: Um, wow, way to change the subject. Yup, that's the way I do things, have one sweeping opinion that covers all things political. :rolleyes:

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Tramspotter, do you want to pay for the police/rescue/cleanup/higher insurance rates when the new homes fall down too? Not to mention "stabilizing the hill"? Or sit in traffic when a home slides onto a street?

These people shouldn't be allowed to do this to us.

[alphabassettgrrl]

I heard a story on the radio (no, I don't have references) but they were talking about a couple in L.A. who were denied a building permit, sued to get one, and then sued the state when their home slid down the hill or whatever happened that caused the city to deny the permit in the first place.

They won that suit, too though I can't imagine why.

I also saw a news story that noted La Conchita has been sliding since 1900. And yet people live there, knowing it'll slide again.

We researched our home before we bought it. We talked to the City and found out about floods and fires and earthquakes. We live directly on a fault, but you're not going to get much away from them in California. In what they call a "500-year storm" our area is expected to flood to a depth of about a foot. And we are in no more fire danger than any other home in a city.

But I think we are definitely the oddity. The city engineers were surprised when I came in to ask about this stuff. They were happy to talk to me, though, and brought out all kinds of maps and stuff.

[Prudence]

We had similar problems up here a few years ago. It was revealed that in several instances home owners HAD built on stable ground -- then cut down all the foliage along the hillside to improve their views. And thus the slides started. And I'm sure our tax dollars paid for that, too.

[BarTopDancer]

Or sit in traffic when a home slides onto a street?

Which I had to do a few weeks ago when the houses in Aliso Viejo were sliding.

Building houses on a hill is pretty stupid to begin with. Rebuilding after your house slides down the hill is irresponsible. The people who have houses on those hills have money. Let them pay for the stablization of the hill and the rebuilding of the house if they want it so badly. And make them sign a waiver to not expect government money when their houses slide again.

Why can't they just thank their lucky stars they are alive. And go buy a 20million dollar house somewhere else.