Idea number two: Bury a sewer pipe under a creek that is a treasured natural resource. I’m no engineer, but it seems foolish to me to risk pollution, even on a minor scale, to a creek that is strategic to agriculture and farming. That idea gets even worse when the only reason to mess with Mother Nature is to provide sewer service for 24 homes built on a flood plain.
Idea number three: develop a plat with 24 single-family residences, and plan its major access to enter and exit on a road that is already jammed with so much traffic twice a day that safety officers are needed to direct it. Anyone traveling Ky. 29 between 3-4 p.m. on a school day already knows that building three schools with entrances less than a mile apart was at least a questionable idea. Adding another subdivision on the same road is clearly a bad idea.
Idea number four: buy property in a 100-year flood plain, plan to develop it using a sewer line in a bore hole under a creek, and ignore the failure of a previous developer after sixteen years of trying.
Compound the mistake by doing so in the face of vehement objection of neighboring property owners, and on a road with traffic already congested by schools. I think this is the biggest bad idea.
The only reason to ignore all the bad ideas and proceed with construction of the Westgate subdivision is the vain hope of the developer to turn a profit. A bad idea doesn’t suddenly become a good one because there is a slight possibility of making money. All the money spent paying attorneys and engineers will likely wipe out the potential profits. And the bad publicity surrounding the project has likely already doomed it.
Where are the potential homeowners chomping at the bit to purchase these homes, and why would they desire to do so when the houses are built on a flood plain? Refer to bad idea number one. I don’t think there is enough of a market demand for these homes to risk irreparable ecological damage and more disastrous traffic on Ky. 29.
It’s frustrating to me that our meeting dockets and courtrooms are clogged with motions, suits and injunctions just because a developer with a bad idea insists it’s a good one.
It would be better, less expensive and less trouble for everyone if this bad idea just died.