Let nature take its course.
Couple of questions come to play here :
1. Why/How were the timbers allowed in the first place knowing they would fail?
2. Did we get a vote on this when they were first placed in?
3. Why put blocks in if those are going to fail? To pay another assessment again in 15 years?
4. We're we told of this when buying our houses?
5. Shouldn't the HOA, Village, or Kipling be responsible since they knew timbers would fail? Why are we responsible for their mistake?
I do like Kenneth's idea of research lawyers etc and would love to help that. That is much cheaper than 3000 that nobody planned for. There should definitely be a meeting on this before we have to pay.
J
Joseph and Jackie Kararo
10 years ago
Featured
There is no requirement for walls per the village. The timbers were put there by the builder so he could add to the cost of those homes along the drainage area. If grass is allowed to grow there will not be erosion. Look to the east and west of the drainage area ( the beginning and the end where it enters and exists ) no timbers or walls and no erosion.
J
Jeri Madison
10 years ago
Do not support replacing the timbers with landscaping blocks.
R
Robert and Linda Janik
10 years ago
Brick walls will fall in unless they have proper drainage. Also a footing of 3feet is required.
J
Joseph and Jackie Kararo
10 years ago
No Walls
S
Susan Mazur
10 years ago
I believe that taking no action to repair or replace the timbers is a failure of the HOA to responsibly manage this property. "Mother Nature's course" would be to create a problem of erosion along the creek and a potential for property flooding which doesn't exist now. Of course no one wants to pay for such a big project, but this may be short-sighted. One person who commented suggested perhaps obtaining a loan to cover this project. Is this ideal? No. But doing nothing is definitely not the answer.
N
Nancy Urbanczyk
10 years ago
I agree we should not replace the timbers, and just let mother nature do her thing. That is a lot of money to replace the timbers for people on social security
V
Vic and Norene Mazylewski
10 years ago
let nature live
R
Rita Kvalheim
10 years ago
Bill Lureau and Rita Kvalheim are in favor of letting "Mother Nature" take course
W
William Mikuska
10 years ago
Let Mother Nature take its course
M
Morey
10 years ago
Neither proposal is acceptable. As an engineer, I assure you that those retention walls need to be restored. As a homeowner, my objective is to only pay for what I use. The HOA needs to obtain financing for the project, and only assess current homeowners to cover the cost of debt service. Lastly, the remaining lots should be developed to increase the number of HOA participants. We don't want the neighborhood turning to ghetto trash (let nature run it's course). Fix the problem, and finance it intelligently. Otherwise legal action will be required to compel the HOA to properly maintain the infrastructure.
M
Michael McDormett
10 years ago
Let nature take care of this
S
Shane Young
10 years ago
Might be worth posting this on the nextdoor site too:
https://nextdoor.com/invite/htfqhqntvzvstagtaudp
K
Kenneth DeCamp
10 years ago
Would further note that some of the residents have no idea from the letter sent out, how to sign the petition. Some are not computer savvy and it wasn't really clear whether they sign that letter and return it or go to a web site to sign.
K
Kenneth DeCamp
10 years ago
Featured
When we bought into Devonshire, we were never told that we would be responsible for maintaining a retaining wall that is nowhere close to our building site. I support challenging the HOA Committee in assessing us this responsibility. I will be going to Will County Building and Zoning to inquire whether Kipling was lawful in building certain houses close to a waterway/drainage ditch. As you know, there are several houses that are teetering on the edge of this waterway......curious to know whether these were legally built.....will keep you informed! I would much rather pay $1,000 to hire a lawyer to fight this imposition than $3,000 for blocks that may need replacing in my lifetime here in Devonshire.
T
Trena Julian
10 years ago
I don't support replacing the timbers with lanscaping blocks. It clearly is an unnecessary expense when mother nature will provide a better show case of our neighborhood!
L
Lawrence and Jacqueline Nawojski
10 years ago
Don't need another assessment. Let Mother Nature take care of it. Not replacing timbers is good idea.
R
Roger and MaryAnn Feiertag
10 years ago
Cost of replacement too high. Mother Nature will do a better job, and will appear more attractive than "cement". We are not aware of any flooding of homes near creek.
T
Tony and Joyce Schreiber
10 years ago
The cost just keeps going up. Not replacing the timbers sounds like a good idea.
These
Let nature take its course. Couple of questions come to play here : 1. Why/How were the timbers allowed in the first place knowing they would fail? 2. Did we get a vote on this when they were first placed in? 3. Why put blocks in if those are going to fail? To pay another assessment again in 15 years? 4. We're we told of this when buying our houses? 5. Shouldn't the HOA, Village, or Kipling be responsible since they knew timbers would fail? Why are we responsible for their mistake? I do like Kenneth's idea of research lawyers etc and would love to help that. That is much cheaper than 3000 that nobody planned for. There should definitely be a meeting on this before we have to pay.
There is no requirement for walls per the village. The timbers were put there by the builder so he could add to the cost of those homes along the drainage area. If grass is allowed to grow there will not be erosion. Look to the east and west of the drainage area ( the beginning and the end where it enters and exists ) no timbers or walls and no erosion.
Do not support replacing the timbers with landscaping blocks.
Brick walls will fall in unless they have proper drainage. Also a footing of 3feet is required.
No Walls
I believe that taking no action to repair or replace the timbers is a failure of the HOA to responsibly manage this property. "Mother Nature's course" would be to create a problem of erosion along the creek and a potential for property flooding which doesn't exist now. Of course no one wants to pay for such a big project, but this may be short-sighted. One person who commented suggested perhaps obtaining a loan to cover this project. Is this ideal? No. But doing nothing is definitely not the answer.
I agree we should not replace the timbers, and just let mother nature do her thing. That is a lot of money to replace the timbers for people on social security
let nature live
Bill Lureau and Rita Kvalheim are in favor of letting "Mother Nature" take course
Let Mother Nature take its course
Neither proposal is acceptable. As an engineer, I assure you that those retention walls need to be restored. As a homeowner, my objective is to only pay for what I use. The HOA needs to obtain financing for the project, and only assess current homeowners to cover the cost of debt service. Lastly, the remaining lots should be developed to increase the number of HOA participants. We don't want the neighborhood turning to ghetto trash (let nature run it's course). Fix the problem, and finance it intelligently. Otherwise legal action will be required to compel the HOA to properly maintain the infrastructure.
Let nature take care of this
Might be worth posting this on the nextdoor site too: https://nextdoor.com/invite/htfqhqntvzvstagtaudp
Would further note that some of the residents have no idea from the letter sent out, how to sign the petition. Some are not computer savvy and it wasn't really clear whether they sign that letter and return it or go to a web site to sign.
When we bought into Devonshire, we were never told that we would be responsible for maintaining a retaining wall that is nowhere close to our building site. I support challenging the HOA Committee in assessing us this responsibility. I will be going to Will County Building and Zoning to inquire whether Kipling was lawful in building certain houses close to a waterway/drainage ditch. As you know, there are several houses that are teetering on the edge of this waterway......curious to know whether these were legally built.....will keep you informed! I would much rather pay $1,000 to hire a lawyer to fight this imposition than $3,000 for blocks that may need replacing in my lifetime here in Devonshire.
I don't support replacing the timbers with lanscaping blocks. It clearly is an unnecessary expense when mother nature will provide a better show case of our neighborhood!
Don't need another assessment. Let Mother Nature take care of it. Not replacing timbers is good idea.
Cost of replacement too high. Mother Nature will do a better job, and will appear more attractive than "cement". We are not aware of any flooding of homes near creek.
The cost just keeps going up. Not replacing the timbers sounds like a good idea.