Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 7
th, 2016 at 9:45am:
There's not the slightest chance that the owners of those properties didn't know this was on the cards and highly likely to happen within a very few years. They themselves could see with their own eyes the ongoing erosion just metres away in front of their properties.
No sympathy from me whatsoever. I don't sympathise with culpable stupidity. They bought those properties for prestige reasons without giving the practicalities any serious consideration. Egos trumped commonsense.
And they did absolutely nothing about it.
There are simple means of using reinforced concrete to give stability to the ground facing the sea. Not rocket science, and relatively inexpensive.
If they couldn't afford the insurance on those places - then they should never have bought those properties, and if they couldn't find an insurance company willing to insure against sea-damage, then that in itself should have alerted them to the fact that these properties were on Death Row and shouldn't be bought.
Those seafronts have been crumbling into the sea since Captain Cook arrived, and it was always a case of Buyer Beware for anyone stupid enough to buy those houses.
Who makes the money from these ocean front lucrative properties?
Who allows it?
If insurances won't insure these places because of a high risk factor, and if insurance companies know something...
.... then all the following that make their money from it, must surely know...but are keeping a blindfold on... (for obvious reasons).
a. council
b. builders
c. stamps duty office
d. and of course, real estate agents
....yet, with all the so called 'soil testing' etc. and by the looks of those collapsed back yards, there isn't enough stabilization of rocks/concrete to stop the pounding of the ocean deteriorating the sand/soil.
Why is not some type of 'risk assessment' being conducted, every so often?
I totally blame council, for allowing sub divisions of land, and buildings to be erected, so close to the open ocean!
How can council sit back and not have any responsibility with what happened?
Perhaps councils should have insurance companies teach them something about what is obvious?
What would you do? Sue council? Surely, something has to come back to bite them on the bum?
I am so disgusted with councils for their disregard of what would have disastrous consequences for say, new people coming to live in an estate....and I give this as an example...
Rockhampton. It's just one area known to have major floods (just go ask the council for a copy of the 100 year flood map).....and the last one was no exception (was it 2011?)
This is how common sense hits me (back in the mid 2000's), (and yet the shire knew this area would flood)....on the way to Mt. Archer, I see a old Queenslander home, on flat plains, on huge wooden stumps, about 12 feet high or more!
Must have been an old banana or sugar plantation, as there was a lot of subdivision going on around nearby, with modern single story brick homes being built on concrete slabs.
I recall seeing that old Queenslander home and thought
"Gee, the flood waters must rise very high here"
and then, see those low houses being built, and I thought, no way I would buy a house there. I was so puzzled, why it was being done.
Well, you guess which were worst effected in the last huge flood they just had? Yep, those new homes, only the point of their roofs were above the flood water line.
Why do they do that? (Shire office/councils) Is it for the money? Do builders entice them with that stupid decision also?
Forum
Pages: 
Sydney mansions washed out in the oceans (Read 19152 times)
