Sunday, September 28, 2008

Sinking in Unregulated Risk

From 1970 to current date, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources investigated nearly 200 reported collapses and found that most were less than 10 feet in diameter and depth.  (Kauffman) However, there have been some documented that have covered numerous acres and have caused massive property and ecosystem damage.  Much of this could have been avoided.  Tighter regulation of development, requiring basic studies of the geology and hydrology of the area in question, could go a long way to further securing the public safety and welfare, and saving millions in property damage.

Surrounded by a suburban subdivision, the 23-acre Lake Chesterfield in St. Louis drained in just a few days in 2004, after a sinkhole emerged in the lakebed.  (Currier) The artificial lake, and accompanying subdivision were built in the mid-1980s, and the only reported review of the structural integrity of the land had been through aerial photos taken by the county.  The photos did not indicate the presence of past sinkhole formation, or that the landscape would be prone to this sort of development.  However, it is impossible to ascertain anything by simply reviewing aerial photography.  Most sinkhole activity happens slowly on a minute scale, over an extended period.  A minor, hidden sinkhole could easily have been overlooked.  The water from the lake might have begun to seep into a small crack around an overgrown or underwater sinkhole and leaked out a thimble full of water every day for years, until just enough erosion occurred to allow for a greater drainage; at which point it would be much like someone pulling a plug on drain.

There are usually some common elements that a structural engineer, geologist or hydrologist can easily recognize.  In reviewing this particular case, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MoDNR) found that the rock layers beneath the lake were very “prone to solution activity where soils are thin.  The areas have always been a prime candidate for sinkhole development, and intensive studies should have been done, prior to any development.”  (MoDNR)  Currently, plans are being made to seal the sinkhole and refill the lake, but at great cost to the homeowners of the subdivision.  As private property, the city is not obligated to restore the lake, or repair any damages done, but the developer should certainly be held accountable in some way.

With the number of incidents on the increase in southern parts of Missouri, property owners are facing growing repair costs.  A simple Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis (Comer) conducted in the spring of 2008 discovered that there are very specific areas within Missouri, which are at a higher risk; the City of Nixa is one such area.  Situated just a few miles immediately south of Springfield, the community sits squarely on one of these higher risk areas, and it has been known for years to be prone to sinkhole development.  In 2006, a sinkhole measuring approximately 60 feet wide and 75 feet deep, opened and swallowed portions of a couple of homes in a half-block area of  city.  Spokesperson for the City, Bryan Newberry stated, “These homes had been there without problems until this point.”  (AP)  Typical for sinkhole formation, there is usually very little warning prior to a collapse and many small towns like Nixa and rural areas are ill prepared for situations such like this.  Building codes are either not in place, or because the construction is technically outside of city limits, city development regulations do not apply.  

As recent as April 2008, new sinkholes have begun to form in and around Nixa.  While there are no regulations requiring that there be a study of overburden integrity prior to any construction, with new development on the increase, Nixa city leaders have taken notice.  The City is now beginning to consider regulations that would require a study of the structural integrity of the land under consideration for new development.  (KY3)

On the east side of the state, the City of Cape Girardeau has been witnessing a steady increase in sinkhole activity, at an alarming rate.  In April 2008, the city had recorded 20 new sinkholes over a nine-month period.  According to Ken Eftnick, director of development services for the city, they “have been seeing one show up every week or so and don’t anticipate that changing anytime soon.”  The sinkholes appear related, but the cause is still a mystery, and the concerns of property owners continue to mount.  Utilities are already working to move lines to areas more structurally sound and the Burlington-Northern Sante Fe Railroad has installed ground movement sensors to alert oncoming trains if there has been significant disturbance to the integrity of the rails, and workers in the city have made efforts to stabilize and fill recent sinkholes.  There really is no good way to fill a sinkhole though and be certain it will not reappear.  


Currently, the biggest concern for the city is a wastewater treatment facility, which lies perilously close to the area that the collapses have been occurring.  Widespread contamination of groundwater and ecosystems could occur if a sinkhole forms beneath this facility.  Fortunately, the city has reached out to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to help identify and propose solutions to the problem before such an eco-disaster happens.

It will be interesting to review the results of their research, especially since the City has chosen to ignore one of the prime suspects in the situation.  Many of the sinkholes have been developing around the local Cape LeCroix Creek, which by way of infiltration, appears in the walls of nearby Buzzi Unicem quarry.  At minimum, it seems rather obvious that intense vibrations from the blasting at the quarry, coupled with erosion from ground water movement, could be compounding the problem, if not creating it.  When questioned about the significance of the quarry operation, the GIS Analyst for the City stated that they “do not believe that the operations at the quarry are contributing to the problem in any way,” and they “are not considering an investigation of the quarry.”  (Anand)  As the “biggest employer and highest taxpayer in Cape Girardeau,”   (McNichol) this certainly raises the concern that the city could be ignoring critical evidence, as well as the safety of the public, in the interests of preserving their employment and tax base.  It would not be the first time that a government entity has set aside public interest, in favor of business, and certainly will not be the last.

Identifying the immediate cause of sinkhole development could take years, though.  Many of the factors that contribute to this problem are not constants, and persistent monitoring of them will be essential in obtaining a better understanding their significance.  Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the property owner to do their best to protect themselves from naturally occurring phenomenon, such as sinkholes.  However, community planners can also take steps to help property owners become more aware of the potential, and regulate to avoid unnecessary risk in areas that are at higher risk.  This is particularly true for any development by utilities and businesses.  

Sources:

GGP345 – Land Use Planning

No comments:
Tags:
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO, USA

Spot-Zoning Public Welfare

Borrowed from SeattleforGrowth.org

One contradictory argument in land-use appears to be that of “spot-zoning.” While there are as many arguments against spot zoning as there are for this practice, none of them holds much weight when viewed in light of the needs of the surrounding community. In the book Land Use in a Nutshell, by Robert Wright and Morton Gitelman, it states that spot zoning “is invalid because it amounts to an arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable treatment of a limited area within a particular district.” (185) This seems to be a very narrow opinion in a field that purports to be representing the interests of the bigger picture; as well, the safety, health and welfare of the public.

The first question that comes to mind is, why is “arbitrary” and “capricious” not good for communities? They are that way, by their very nature, despite the level of planning that goes in to them. Indeed, for centuries, perhaps as long as a few millennia, whole cultures, and societies have thrived along these lines because they have recognized a few basic premises. The needs of the community change over time, or become better recognized, and cannot be planned for with strip malls and mega-stores in locations that are inaccessible or convenient. In addition, denial of specific types of spot zoning is actually in defiance of the public welfare; consequently, should be allowed with discretion towards the surrounding community, even planned for by those that would deny its viability.

In the United States, from New York to Los Angeles, every major city has had to recognize necessity of spot zoning. Probably the best example can be witnessed in those cities with a higher population density, but also in rural areas. In many neighborhoods, a small grocery can be found placed in the middle of a residential area. As well sometimes, a laundry, drug store, perhaps even a gas station, can be found tucked away in an older neighborhood of an urban area.

One local planner recently suggested that it is likely that, in most of these cases, the neighborhood probably grew up around the grocery. While this may be partially true, in older cities, quite the opposite can be observed. More often than not, the neighborhood grocery grew up with, provided, and continues to provide for the welfare of the community.


Across the river from New Orleans in Algiers, is one of the best examples of spot zoning that works well. River Fine Foods on Patterson Drive, has been a landmark, and has provided a place to eat, pick up the essentials, and “lease to common ground, where neighbors meet and strengthen their community ties” (Swerman) for as far back as many can remember. This grocery is positioned at the end of Whitney Avenue, facing the levee, and flanked in all directions by the modest homes of its customers. It has been a grocery in one form or another for at least 50 years, while many of the homes have been there for nearly 100.

borrowed from http://algierspoint.org

This is the nature of Algiers though. In one area, there is a small theater in the middle of a neighborhood, right next to an old firehouse. There is a barbershop attached to the front of another’s house, which has been there for more than 50 years. There are a couple of taverns in the middle of residential neighborhoods, one of which has been there since the town was founded in 1797. There is a gas station surrounded by homes on all sides. As well, there are many other small community businesses peppered throughout this historically residential area. (Old Algiers). These businesses have grown with, and in response to the needs and welfare of the surrounding community. Indeed, they are seemingly, the glue that holds this small community together. Individuals can access essentials without spending money on transportation, or being forced to patronize a mega-store, where the essentials are sometimes unnecessarily over-priced.

In all, this level of spot zoning can and does benefit the community as a whole. Residents are close to the things that need and are not placed in a position to reserve assets for allocation to unnecessary expenses like transportation. Typically, many of them walk to the business. This is not just beneficial to the community, either; it also works to help the environment, both physical and psychological. The neighborhoods are more like a family. They recognize and support, as well as meet and greet one another in the local spot zoned businesses that they and their family have patronized for generations. They know one another, their families, about their good times and their bad times. They help each other. If all of this were erased and condensed in to a “planned” situation, it is likely that sense of community would be erased.

borrowed from http://www.algierscrossing.com/

Unfortunately, that may be closer than many of the people in these communities are ready to accept. City planners in New Orleans are already positioning themselves to ruin a situation that has worked well for more than 200 years. Plans are under way to use much of the riverfront in Algiers for a “13-acre master-planned community ... [featuring] 1523 apartments, additional housing, retail space, and public parks.” (Roberts). Ironically, the land in question already hosts as many modest homes, businesses (including River Fine Foods), and public parks. The current “master plan” will displace many of these businesses, in favor of brand names consolidated into a strip mall at the levee. This will probably be surrounded by the new housing, which will likely be priced out of the reach of the current residents, since it is literally “only minutes from downtown.” This is not planning for the benefit of a community; rather, planning for the benefit of powerful corporate developers desperately in search of land in the greater New Orleans area, which does not flood regularly. Algiers is one of two areas that usually do not; across the river, the French Quarter is that other “high ground.”

borrowed from http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/4a9c6/c19b6/4/

Unfortunately, in post-Katrina New Orleans, most residents do not have the resources to fight plans like these, as they continue to be absorbed in returning to their normal lives, and preparing for the next disaster. According to Mrs. Swerman, the community has attempted to communicate that it does not want or need this “master plan,” but the city planners persist, touting that it will provide a new and beautiful addition to an otherwise under-used portion of land. (Swerman) Ultimately, the result will be the same as it has been repeatedly across the United States. The sanitary, mega-strip-mall-store will be put in place, along with new apartments and homes affordable only to those in the upper middle class. Spot zoning which has worked well for nearly 200 years will be eliminated. Those local businesses that are not eliminated, will eventually fail, being unable to compete. Essentially, the entire social fabric of historic Algiers will lay in ruin, but it will at least have a nice shiny and glittering mega-strip-mall façade to hide the damage done to the welfare of the original community. Perhaps local business will find a way to empower itself and bring ruin upon the “master plan,” instead; one can only hope.

Sources:

GGP345 – Land Use Planning
No comments:
Tags:
Location: Algiers Point, New Orleans, LA 70114, USA

Thursday, September 11, 2008

The County Meets the Immovable Object

Hidden away on a quiet two-lane highway, right next to San Isabel National Forest, is one of the most interesting features of the Colorado landscape.  Built out of stone and iron, completely by hand, and soaring 160-feet into the air is a castle known simply as “Bishop’s Castle.” It is named after its builder, Jim Bishop.  

Complete with turrets, dragons belching smoke and fire, it was considered a nuisance by no one, except Custer County.  It is difficult to find any trace that there was previously a problem with this amazing structure.  However, the life of one man came under fire on numerous occasions, from the Department of Planning & Zoning of Custer County.  When zoning did not work, they resorted to harassment, which did not work either. 

Jim Bishop purchased the 2.5 acres in 1959, prior to a “Master Plan,” as well as zoning ordinances, and proceeded to work with his father to build a cabin in the mountains.  At some point, somebody told him that it looked kind of like a castle, and he got the notion to continue building until it was a castle.  (Owen) He applied for, and received permits to remove the stone he used, from the San Isabel National Forest.  Sometimes, people passing by the area would stop and they would talk about his construction.  According to Mr. Bishop, the trouble began when a representative of a local township inquired towards his building permit.  He explained that he did not need a permit from their city, since he was outside of the city limits, and then told them to get off his property before he had them arrested for trespassing.  Of course, this infuriated the local official, who went directly to the county.  The county was the next to stop in for a visit.


According Mr. Bishop, the county official told them that he needed to submit plans for his structure, prior to its construction.  It was a little late for that, and he told them he had no plan anyway.  Consequently, the county official told him that he had to stop construction immediately.  Fortunately, Mr. Bishop knew the laws fairly well.  He was aware that that at the time he began construction, there were no requirements of the kind and chose to ignore the county and continue.  This went on for several years; the county drafted zoning restricting the area to single-family residences on 35-acres (now 10-acres).  In response, Mr. Bishop built a log cabin next to the castle, moved in to it, and began calling the castle his “art.” 

At this point, the small county was helpless and turned to the state for help.  It is unclear what measures the state took, but they obviously had little effect.  In one instance relayed to me by Mr. Bishop, the state arrested and held him on the property until Federal Land Management authorities could verify his permit to remove stone from the San Isabel National Forest.  Their representatives indicated that they had no record of that type of permit.  Fortunately for Mr. Bishop, a National Forest Ranger happened to be in the area, had heard what was going on, and stopped in to clear things up.  When it was all said and done, the Federal authorities simply shrugged their shoulders at the state and county officials that were there at the time and told them it was their jurisdiction, not the Federal governments, and left.

The county continued to harass Mr. Bishop over the years.  There were numerous attempts to hold hearings, which Mr. Bishop would show up for, and answer their questions, but refuse to do anything they asked.  His primary argument through all of this was that they were attempting to interfere with his freedom of expression through art.  They also attempted to have him arrested for non-compliance with their regulations and zoning.  However, according to Mr. Bishop, the County Sherriff refused on the grounds that he had broken no law and that he did not serve the county in such a capacity as to imprison people for creating art, much less violating a zoning regulation that was affected after construction had already begun.  

The county was definitely at odds with what to do about Mr. Bishop, but not out of resources.  According to Officer Mike Drake of Colorado State, “they had friends at the state level” and began to harass him on the highways, at his business in Pueblo, among other things.  Most of these attempts at harassment were petty at best, such as traffic tickets, drunken driving tests, yearly audits on his business books, refusing to renew his business permit.  The State Visitor’s Bureau even refused to list his castle in their annual publication, despite the fact that it had become a tourist attraction equal to many of the others in the state.

Through all of this, Mr. Bishop retained his composure as best as was his nature (he has habit of being rather defensive to the point of shouting).  The county lost their mind in frustration.  They contended that he was a nuisance.  His castle was causing disruptions in traffic on his secluded mountain highway.  He had inadequate parking facilities, restroom facilities, no insurance; the list is probably a mile long of the things they tried and failed to get him to “cease and desist,” but he just kept building.

These days the harassment has stopped, and the county has given up, is regrouping for another battle, or is just waiting for him to die so they can tear down the structure.  Unfortunately, the public outcry over the destruction of his either would probably prevent the later from happening.  Besides, it seems more likely that they county has simply given up and finally begun to recognize that this is a genuinely amazing feat and will stand as a monument to the people of Colorado for many years to come.  Supporting this theory is the one shred of evidence that could be found tying the county to Mr. Bishop.  The Custer County  Master Plan, adopted on April 10, 2002 says simply, “Several public campgrounds and hiking trails are located in the Wet Mountain Zoning District, as is Bishop’s Castle, a popular tourist attraction located” between San Isabel and McKenzie Junction along SH 165.”  This is definitely a step in the right direction, considering that for the longest time, the county and the state completely refused to recognize the existence of the castle.  This is as should have been in the first place.  He was hurting no one and was miles from anyone; he was nuisance only to the county, because he would not recognize their right to tell him what to do with his land.  

GGP345 – Land Use Planning


No comments:
Tags:
Location: 12705 CO-165, Rye, CO 81069, USA
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Popular Variations