If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Oregon Live)   Spending $100k on the backyard pool you've always dreamed about? Be sure to apply for the building permit first. Also, don't destroy a protected wetland in the process   (oregonlive.com) divider line 194
    More: PSA, West Linn, wetlands, trimet, HTTP Secure, environmental mitigation, Gina Bundy  
•       •       •

14243 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jun 2012 at 10:00 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



194 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-11 10:01:51 AM
Must not be well liked by the neighbors
 
2012-06-11 10:02:58 AM
Must not be well liked by the neighbors or a really active municipality?
 
2012-06-11 10:03:58 AM
Link to the article and not just the comments: Link
 
2012-06-11 10:04:40 AM
I like the part where he implies that the wetlands he filled in weren't sustainable because they were on his property.
 
2012-06-11 10:06:05 AM
I really hate it when a-holes do something with their own property. Those bastards.
 
2012-06-11 10:06:05 AM
Ain't that the way, some folks try to spur the economy and provide jobs for some workers and gets hammered because he forgot to get a permit. Well I guess he will provide more jobs when they tear it down.
 
2012-06-11 10:06:29 AM
maybe try 5-HTP instead of building a pool. sometimes the little things in life are all u need
 
2012-06-11 10:09:06 AM

Welfare Xmas: I really hate it when a-holes do something with their own property. Those bastards.


Wetlands are important for pretty much the rest of the ecosystem, and when you buy property with a wetland, you know about it assuming the bank and realtors did their jobs properly. You can even move them around a bit; that's what Lowes did when they built a store in my town a couple of years back - just re-established the wetlands about 1000 yards south.
 
2012-06-11 10:09:36 AM
$100,000.....For that?
*scratches "build new pool" off list*
 
2012-06-11 10:10:51 AM
Because:

A) There is no such thing as private ownership of property. Your rights on "your" property only extends as far as govenment's good grace decides it should extend.

and

B) Government is not there to preserve your liberty, but to cut it off.
 
2012-06-11 10:11:03 AM

Welfare Xmas: I really hate it when a-holes do something with their own property. Those bastards.


It's not like this shiat just snuck up on them. Unless they had an unscrupulous realtor, that was disclosed before they bought the house and it was most certainly in the paperwork. They figured they could just ignore it, but it turns out they were wrong.
 
2012-06-11 10:11:43 AM
Wait... isn't it wetter now than it was before? What's the farking problem?

Also, if you don't want people doing stuff to pieces of land, don't sell it to them.
 
2012-06-11 10:12:37 AM
"I'd be happy to pay a fine that's reasonable," he said.

How generous of him.

"I'll pay a fine that I deem is reasonable". LOL


"I'd be happy to invest in a wetlands that's actually sustainable. I'd be happy to put the money wherever they want me to put it on their behalf.

"Srsly guys, I'd like to buy my way out of this, but you have to accept my price." Again, LOL

But what I'm saying is, let's exercise some common sense.

Like getting a building permit before you start building?

It's on my property. I've bought the land.

Yeah! He should put in a pig farm too, it's his land!

What more do you want?"

They keep telling you what they want, you just don't like the answer.
 
2012-06-11 10:14:45 AM
I bought 5 acres and it's got a lot of wetland on it.
I've been managing the stream back to normal using natual abatement procedures. I've been scratching people off my friends list when they come over and say, "Man, you could put a nice pond out there. "
I keep the ones that want to see my snapping turtles and wood ducks.
 
2012-06-11 10:15:12 AM
Sounds like they tried to get a permit, were told their backyard wasn't a buildable area, and did it anyway.

/The permit process is in place to avoid this very thing.
 
2012-06-11 10:15:51 AM

ladyfortuna: You can even move them around a bit; that's what Lowes did when they built a store in my town a couple of years back - just re-established the wetlands about 1000 yards south.


Seems to me that he moved the wetlands closer to his house, built a deck around it, and put a few chairs there.
 
2012-06-11 10:17:30 AM

IrateShadow: Welfare Xmas: I really hate it when a-holes do something with their own property. Those bastards.

It's not like this shiat just snuck up on them. Unless they had an unscrupulous realtor, that was disclosed before they bought the house and it was most certainly in the paperwork. They figured they could just ignore it, but it turns out they were wrong.


Precisely. There's nothing wrong with building whatever you want (exception: methlab) on your own property, but you need to buy the right property for your dream house/estate/compound. Don't fark up the land trying to do something that won't work there.
 
2012-06-11 10:17:54 AM

vudukungfu: I bought 5 acres and it's got a lot of wetland on it.
I've been managing the stream back to normal using natual abatement procedures. I've been scratching people off my friends list when they come over and say, "Man, you could put a nice pond out there. "
I keep the ones that want to see my snapping turtles and wood ducks.


Those aren't your turtles and ducks.

/But props to you for maintaining their home...
 
2012-06-11 10:18:20 AM

Inconceivable!: Link to the article and not just the comments: Link


Wow thanks! I was wondering what everyone was talking about.
 
2012-06-11 10:18:26 AM

scarmig: Wait... isn't it wetter now than it was before? What's the farking problem?

Also, if you don't want people doing stuff to pieces of land, don't sell it to them.


It is not clear that the wetlands are on their property. They dumped the pool dirt on the wetlands, so it sounds like they've farked up 2 different ways: 1) Build the pool without a permit and 2)Dump dirt on wetlands that may or may not be theirs.

That said, all you property rights folks need to understand that in some areas, lots are sold with easements or other rules that prohibit the lot owner from building or changing their property if there are wetlands, riparian areas or other types of desirable ecosystems that the local municipality or state would like to keep protected. The correct statement is not "Don't sell it to them", it is "Don't buy land with sensitive, protected ecosystems if you can't handle the responsibility."

These people are easily rich enough that they could have bought land elsewhere. Also, I'd be damned nervous about having my property perched between two wetlands. Subsidence and flooding come to mind.
 
2012-06-11 10:19:02 AM
I remember a stink a few years ago, a guy bought some land and found there was an old couch in the ditch blocking the drainage pipe. So he drags the couch out and viola, the "swamp" drains. Suddenly he's getting fined for ruining this natural wetland that the neighbors all say was a field a few years ago before it flooded. In the article he was saying he wasn't sure if they were going to make him put the couch back into the ditch, but it was leaning that way.
 
2012-06-11 10:20:27 AM

studebaker hoch: Sounds like they tried to get a permit, were told their backyard wasn't a buildable area, and did it anyway.

/The permit process is in place to avoid this very thing.


Exactly right. the wetlands are an ecosystem. They provide an environment that helps keep the air and water clean, a place for birds and critical plantlife. The TeaPublicans just want to pave the whole world over with abandoned mini-malls, cheaply built mcmansions and giant apartment complexes that start falling down after 20 years.

It's all about money for them. Everything is about money. Thats all they care about.

They know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing.
 
2012-06-11 10:20:57 AM

SevenizGud: Because:

A) There is no such thing as private ownership of property. Your rights on "your" property only extends as far as govenment's good grace decides it should extend.

and

B) Government is not there to preserve your liberty, but to cut it off.


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
 
2012-06-11 10:22:55 AM

Benjimin_Dover: ladyfortuna: You can even move them around a bit; that's what Lowes did when they built a store in my town a couple of years back - just re-established the wetlands about 1000 yards south.

Seems to me that he moved the wetlands closer to his house, built a deck around it, and put a few chairs there.


And then chlorinated it and stopped any drainage back into the watershed :P
 
2012-06-11 10:23:36 AM
As someone with a pool surrounded by flagstone like these people, I have to wonder who gave them the idea to use flagstone in Oregon. I have to work with a pressure washer and mold killer to keep the fungus down in Georgia. I can't imagine how much worse it is in Oregon. I can see from the picture that they're losing the battle.
 
2012-06-11 10:24:33 AM

scarmig: Wait... isn't it wetter now than it was before? What's the farking problem?

Also, if you don't want people doing stuff to pieces of land, don't sell it to them.


You don't just buy property in a protected area without being informed of the restrictions and covenants involved. You have to agree that you'll use the property in accordance with those covenants and restrictions, obtain whatever permits and inspections are required before doing anything, etc. etc.

I have no idea about this guy, but basically it usually goes like this:

1. Some yahoo intentionally buys property near wetlands because it's nice, it's legally protected from over-development, and you get to look at lots of pretty birdies and wildlife which is nice.

2. Aforementioned yahoo decides he wants to expand or build something prohibited by the covenant and gets denied his permit (or does it without a permit and gets in trouble).

3. Yahoo who intentionally bought in the wetlands starts whining about some make-believe property rights he has now that he's being held to the agreements he originally made.

Plus, the article isn't exactly clear, but it sounds like the problem is less the pool and more that he may have illegally dumped on the wetlands while building it:

The city wanted the Bundys to remove the pool and restore a wetland behind their home, where fill from the pool was dumped during construction


Maybe this is over zealousness, but I doubt it. He built a semi-extravagant, expensive pool without bothering to spend an hour and, what, $50 maybe, to get a permit for it first. That right there is enough to send up alarm bells about the rest of his argument.
 
2012-06-11 10:25:04 AM

studebaker hoch: Sounds like they tried to get a permit, were told their backyard wasn't a buildable area, and did it anyway.



Sounds like he backed the wrong guy in the last mayoral election.
 
2012-06-11 10:26:23 AM

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: scarmig: Wait... isn't it wetter now than it was before? What's the farking problem?

Also, if you don't want people doing stuff to pieces of land, don't sell it to them.

It is not clear that the wetlands are on their property. They dumped the pool dirt on the wetlands, so it sounds like they've farked up 2 different ways: 1) Build the pool without a permit and 2)Dump dirt on wetlands that may or may not be theirs.

That said, all you property rights folks need to understand that in some areas, lots are sold with easements or other rules that prohibit the lot owner from building or changing their property if there are wetlands, riparian areas or other types of desirable ecosystems that the local municipality or state would like to keep protected. The correct statement is not "Don't sell it to them", it is "Don't buy land with sensitive, protected ecosystems if you can't handle the responsibility."

These people are easily rich enough that they could have bought land elsewhere. Also, I'd be damned nervous about having my property perched between two wetlands. Subsidence and flooding come to mind.


This is my understanding FTA as well. It's not the building of the pool which is necessarily the problem, is dumping the dirt into the wetlands. Probably could have gotten off easy had they paid someone to properly remove the dirt.
 
2012-06-11 10:26:26 AM

Rapmaster2000: As someone with a pool surrounded by flagstone like these people, I have to wonder who gave them the idea to use flagstone in Oregon. I have to work with a pressure washer and mold killer to keep the fungus down in Georgia. I can't imagine how much worse it is in Oregon. I can see from the picture that they're losing the battle.


Karma's a biatch huh? Nature's trying to take it back almost as hard as the government is.

/something with high iron content would have been my first choice
//you can do whatever you want to your property unless it affects your neighbors
///personal responsibility, remember Teabaggers?
 
2012-06-11 10:27:19 AM

Deathfrogg: studebaker hoch: Sounds like they tried to get a permit, were told their backyard wasn't a buildable area, and did it anyway.

/The permit process is in place to avoid this very thing.

Exactly right. the wetlands are an ecosystem. They provide an environment that helps keep the air and water clean, a place for birds and critical plantlife. The TeaPublicans just want to pave the whole world over with abandoned mini-malls, cheaply built mcmansions and giant apartment complexes that start falling down after 20 years.

It's all about money for them. Everything is about money. Thats all they care about.

They know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing.


False. We want to buy up huge chunks of land to create our own personal Race War bunkers and private hunting lodges. We don't want malls and apartment buildings. We just want places where we don't have to smell the working class.
 
2012-06-11 10:30:05 AM
The reason why people do this with pools (not get permits) is to duck out of property taxes.

Not sympathetic one bit.

>real wetlands
>lame excuse

Yeah, no, still not feelin' the sympathy.
 
2012-06-11 10:31:03 AM

cig-mkr: Ain't that the way, some folks try to spur the economy and provide jobs for some workers and gets hammered because he forgot to get a permit. Well I guess he will provide more jobs when they tear it down.


I gotta hand it to you, I didn't see this particular brand of stupid comment coming. Kudos, I guess.
 
2012-06-11 10:31:32 AM

Splinshints: scarmig: Wait... isn't it wetter now than it was before? What's the farking problem?

Also, if you don't want people doing stuff to pieces of land, don't sell it to them.

You don't just buy property in a protected area without being informed of the restrictions and covenants involved. You have to agree that you'll use the property in accordance with those covenants and restrictions, obtain whatever permits and inspections are required before doing anything, etc. etc.


In addition, those types of restrictions reduce the cost of the property. I live in a neighborhood that is popular for knock-downs. People buy a 1950s brick ranch, they knock it down, and build a 4000 sq ft. house. However, some houses that are near streams have limited build footprints such that a knockdown is not feasible. This generally reduces the value of the house by $100k. It will sell for $200k rather than the $300k that it would be worth if it could be knocked down. The realtor will tell you before you even look at it. Mine did.

I say he knew what he was doing and thought he could get away with it.
 
2012-06-11 10:32:13 AM
Judge: " Did you have a permit?"
Bundy: " No Ma'am"
 
2012-06-11 10:32:27 AM
I don't understand what these eco-fascists really want. They claim they want to keep their precious wetlands (without paying for it, of course), and the man put in a pool.

Pools are made of water. Water is wet. The pool is IN THE GROUND, which is "land."

Wetland doesn't get any wetter than that.

Fascists.
 
2012-06-11 10:32:39 AM
3.bp.blogspot.com

Don't tax my gig so hardcore, cruster.
 
2012-06-11 10:33:29 AM
Plans for a new pool should be studied in depth.
 
2012-06-11 10:33:44 AM

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: "Don't buy land with sensitive, protected ecosystems if you can't handle the responsibility."


This.

And they should have waited for the permit to process, they'd at least have some documented footing. Saying they had the mayor's word will not hold up.
 
2012-06-11 10:34:36 AM

Louisiana_Sitar_Club: Plans for a new pool should be studied in depth.


This guy's plan sounds...(puts on sunglasses) all wet.
 
2012-06-11 10:35:27 AM
Be sure to apply for the building permit first. Also, don't destroy a protected wetland in the process

fark the wetlands. It's getting so you can't fart without some hippie biatching about the environmental impact.
 
2012-06-11 10:38:34 AM

DaddyRat: Those aren't your turtles and ducks.
/But props to you for maintaining their home...


Are you sure? Maybe he carved his initials in the turtles' shells and docked the ducks wings so they can't fly away. He's just trying to protect the natural beauty of the area.
 
2012-06-11 10:40:00 AM

DaddyRat: Those aren't your turtles and ducks.


They're more his than they are yours.
 
2012-06-11 10:43:57 AM
Keep in mind, that 'wetland' may be nothing more than a moist drainage ditch.
 
2012-06-11 10:44:37 AM

fredklein: Keep in mind, that 'wetland' may be nothing more than a moist drainage ditch.


And?
 
2012-06-11 10:44:38 AM

ArcadianRefugee: Be sure to apply for the building permit first. Also, don't destroy a protected wetland in the process

fark the wetlands. It's getting so you can't fart without some hippie biatching about the environmental impact.


0/10
 
2012-06-11 10:45:33 AM

ArcadianRefugee: Be sure to apply for the building permit first. Also, don't destroy a protected wetland in the process

fark the wetlands. It's getting so you can't fart without some hippie biatching about the environmental impact.


Wetlands protection is not just "some hippie biatching about the environmental impact." The land is wet for a reason. The water comes from somewhere and if you fill it the water will drain somewhere else. It could drain into a stream or onto the neighbor's property.

What would you do if you neighbor filled in an acre of wetland and now all that water flows through your property causing erosion and foundation issues for your house? In your fantasy land, you're farked since it's his property so he can do what he wants with it.

There is a good reason this dumb fark needed to get a permit.
 
2012-06-11 10:46:06 AM
CSB time...

I have relatives living on a lake. More specifically, then live on an overlook (~50 ft drop) at the edge of the water. Anyway, his dipshiat new (at the time) next-door neighbor decided he didn't like the cliff/overlook. He also didn't like that his shore wasn't a sugar sand beach. So, neighbor goes to try to get permits to fix these issues and is promptly laughed out of town.

What does dipshiat decide to do? Rent a farking crane, buy a shiat ton of fine sand and make a nice gradual decline from his home to the water. You say "his plan is illegal", to which he does not care.

So he started his to 'fix' his problem, when a new problem arose... once he started digging along the cliff, the ground suddenly wouldn't stop dropping away. End result is he farked his house. Is currently being sued by many people as he farked the land of his neighbor's too. And then there's the whole "altering shoreline w/o a permit" which I guess is a pretty big deal.
 
2012-06-11 10:46:58 AM
Rich people, no morals. Nothing to see here. Please disperse.
 
2012-06-11 10:47:45 AM
The Dumbass tag is getting lazy.

Why on earth did the pool contractor begin work on a pool when the required permits weren't in place? Whoever he is, I think he can expect a law suit and maybe lose his license to boot.
 
2012-06-11 10:48:28 AM

fredklein: Keep in mind, that 'wetland' may be nothing more than a moist drainage ditch.


If you're allowed to assert things without evidence, so am I. He's been dissolving the bodies of hobos he murdered in that "pool", which is actually a vat full of powerful acid.
 
Displayed 50 of 194 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report