Your Leaking House - An NACBI Affiliate
September 20, 2018, 09:12:32 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Watch Out Spammers, the Spam Squad is in Force!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: September 16, 2018, 02:11:23 AM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Ray Koenig
another win for bad builders.
another win for bad government.
another loss for USA consumer-homeowners.


some things never change--and, never will--as long as USA homeowner-consumers are closed-mouthed--while taking it on the chin.





http://customertalk.blogspot.com/2018/08/how-shenandoah-co-va-mishandled-clear.html




 2 
 on: September 15, 2018, 03:11:59 PM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Carl Brown
How goes the battle Ray?

 3 
 on: August 28, 2018, 03:53:15 AM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Ray Koenig
customertalk.blogspot.com/2018/08/how-shenandoah-co-va-mishandled-clear.html

"customer talk" is just one of my blogs where I "spread the word" about bad builders and bad government inspectors.

it's unfortunate that more victims of bad building and bad government inspection don't do the same.

 4 
 on: August 08, 2018, 02:18:38 PM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Carl Brown
There is a special warm place where HITLER and a lot of others reside,they will welcome the company!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don`t  over work yourself.

 5 
 on: August 08, 2018, 11:34:28 AM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Ray Koenig
Hi, Carl.

http://customertalk.blogspot.com/2018/08/how-shenandoah-county-virginia-handled.html



I think that I may have it figured out--a waterproof swale.

LOTS of topsoil, polyethylene (the builder left a roll in the crawl space), cool days, and time. the cool days are coming. I have the time. all I need is topsoil--a little at a time--easy as I go.

 6 
 on: August 08, 2018, 10:03:35 AM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Carl Brown
How is it going Ray ?

 7 
 on: August 04, 2018, 07:54:51 AM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Ray Koenig
customertalk.blogspot.com/2018/08/foundation-drainage-for-dummies.html

 8 
 on: July 30, 2018, 08:00:49 AM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Ray Koenig
Comments on the Lellock plan

1.   Contrary to what’s stated in “proposed improvement”, there are no physical barriers that prevent grading between 144 and 148 from conforming to the approved 2003 grading plan and R401.3.
2.   The Lellock plan does not conform to the letter or the intent of R401.3 of the Virginia Residential Building Code (see note 4 in “project notes”). The purpose of R401.3 is to direct runoff a minimum of 10 ft. away from foundation walls. The Lellock plan does not do this.
3.   The Lellock plan does not conform to the approved 2003 grading plan. The 2003 approved grading plan, with ground sloped away from foundation walls for a minimum of 10 ft., conforms to R401.3.
4.   The Lellock plan directs runoff to a french drain that is located next to the landscaped area that is approximately half the distance from the foundation wall as R401.3 requires. As conceived, runoff in the french drain will saturate soil around and under it and foundation walls. This violates both the letter and the intent of R401.3.
5.   Grading per R401.3 keeps runoff away from foundation walls by diverting it to a surface swale 10 ft. minimum from foundation walls. Runoff in a properly graded swale will intercept surface runoff and will not saturate soils near foundation walls as the Lellock plan will.
6.   The Lellock plan does not adequately address runoff from 144’s roof and landscaped area in front of 144. The surface swale shown in the approved 2003 grading plan will intercept runoff from 144’s roof and landscaping bed at the surface, 10 ft. away from 148’s foundation walls. A properly graded swale will keep the runoff 10 ft. away from foundation walls. This will conform to the letter and the intent of R401.3.
7.   The contributing drainage area in the Lellock plan doesn’t include 148’s roof.                       
8.   Considering the many instances in this development where buried flexible plastic pipes--with more fall than the 6” buried flexible plastic pipe in the Lellock plan will have--have dips and low spots, it’s inconceivable that the 6” buried flexible plastic pipe in the Lellock plan will have a uniform 1% (1/8” per ft.) grade. With a surface swale, it’s easy to see if it’s properly graded.
9.   What’s to prevent critters with nesting material from entering the outlet end of the 6” pipe and creating obstructions? With 90o connections, how will these obstructions be cleared without great difficulty? Obviously, this is not a problem with a surface swale.
10.   Will the trench be exposed? We didn't buy a house with a gravel trench running down the side. In fact, if we had seen a gravel trench running down the side yard, then we would have been alerted to the drainage problems here, and we probably wouldn’t have bought the house. Who, given the choice between a gravel trench or grass, would choose a gravel trench?
11.   The Lellock plan does not address the front and back of the house. Grading in neither the front nor the rear of the house conforms to the approved 2003 grading and drainage plan and R401.3. Further, judging from the amount of standing water in the front and rear of the crawl space, much of the runoff is coming in through the foundation walls in the front and the rear of the house.
12.   I disagree that the Lellock plan has the same drainage pattern as the approved 2003 grading and drainage plan. Obviously, concentrated drainage from a 6” pipe is not the same as drainage spread out in a 20 ft. wide swale. Depending where the outlet end of the 6” pipe is located (the Lellock plan is not specific), drainage intended for the stormwater management pond in the 2003 approved grading and drainage plan may not end up reaching the stormwater management pond with the Lellock plan.
13.   The house on 144 and the house on 148 are not parallel. The space between the houses widens from front to rear.
These partial comments address the overall unsuitability of the Lellock plan (comment #4 of “project notes” in the Lellock plan). The Lellock plan does not conform to the approved 2003 grading plans or R401.3 of the Virginia Residential Building Code.
Lot 148 should be regraded to conform to the 2003 approved grading plan and R401.3.
If the Lellock plan is withdrawn, as it should be, and Lot 148 is regraded to conform with the approved 2003 grading plan and R401.3, as it should be, then further comments that I have on the Lellock plan (e.g. soils data, soil borings’ locations, etc.) don’t need to be addressed.

 9 
 on: July 26, 2018, 03:27:06 PM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Ray Koenig
Quote
Might not have to dig that deep some are not that smart!

exactly! especially in this neck of the woods!

 10 
 on: July 26, 2018, 02:09:46 PM 
Started by Ray Koenig - Last post by Carl Brown
Might not have to dig that deep some are not that smart!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!