Ethics Question?

This is exactly why I will not work for developers. They are motivated by greed and greed alone.

Once I notified the company I worked for that I had found the site they were planning to develop was a habitat for animals identified by the National Heritage and Endangered Species Program. They told me not to say anything about it and nobody would find out.

When I told them I could not ignore the information about the animals, I got fired.?ÿ?ÿ

Developers don't know ethics.

I don't blame you.?ÿ A good surveyor knows his own parameters within which he works.?ÿ And I'm not one that feels I have to explain to anyone my choices.?ÿ If I'm uncomfortable with something I usually move on.

The way I look at it is my professional principles will be around a lot longer than a lousy check from some developer.

If others do their job, there will never be a mortgage, nor building permit on those lots.

Do what you think is right. ?ÿAs long as you reveal that the property is located in a flood hazard area you arenƒ??t violating any professional ethics. Your note puts them on notice. ?ÿAdults have a right to make their own decisions good and bad. ?ÿI think itƒ??s crazy that people continue to rebuilt below sea level but I support their right to make that decision.

I would not continue on such a project once I realized the flood issue.?ÿ Absolutely not.

Meanwhile, someone else will jump on it with glee.

I would put this developer in the same category as oil and gas speculators and horse traders.?ÿ No good will come from associating with thieves.

About 20 years ago I turned down a project because it was going to be entirely within the flood plain.?ÿ Another company drew the plat.?ÿ The developer then dug up about half of their entire tract to build up the portion within the platted area such that it is now about three feet below the BFE.?ÿ Then they had the surveyor set the monuments.?ÿ A convenience store, carwash, dollar store, Subway and a chiropractor now own the lots.?ÿ The stream is next to Subway.?ÿ One of these days, they will all learn why they would have been better off somewhere else.?ÿ Buttttttttttttttttttttttt, so far, there has been no harm done.?ÿ Meanwhile, the remainder of the overall tract is a worthless mess.

Maybe I'm naive but I don't see an ethical problem with doing the project.?ÿ I think what would concern me more is being dragged into a lawsuit by a careless buyer some time down the road if the area does happen to flood.?ÿ So, maybe the project is worth avoiding for multiple reasons.

Iƒ??m curious how such a development could get permitting to begin with given the flooding potential.?ÿ

There is no need to get our opinions. You have every justification to do what you feel is right. Make the decision that allows you to sleep easily. Money that comes with perpetual regret is not worth it.

On the other hand, people who want to take the risk should be allowed to do so. They will be put on notice when flood insurance is required for the mortgage. You won't be helping anyone because the plat will get done with or without you. I don't know anyone, when making their decision to buy, factored in which company signed the subdivision plat.

I recently surveyed some bottom land. It'll flood to the tune of some 12' or 15'.?ÿ

I threw a disclaimer on it. Eventually, somebody will put some houses on stilts on it. I'm not worried, alot. But, a little. This river is boss, in her banks.?ÿ

N

Most of us have potential customers who we think violate wetland, zoning or other regulations. Maybe we just don't like their politics. You can think like a criminal defense lawyer that everyone has the right to a good surveyor regardless of their behavior. Or you can judge every customer and decline to work for those whose behavior you don't approve of. Mostly we need to find a place on that spectrum to make a living and live with our decisions.?ÿ?ÿ

Posted by: @williwaw

Iƒ??m curious how such a development could get permitting to begin with given the flooding potential.?ÿ

This is my question, too. I thought the NFIP required participating municipalities to enact regulations to prevent such stupidity.

?ÿ

It is not uncommon along the Mississippi River for people to develop the low laying land between the river and the levees.?ÿ These developments are usually in the form of hunting and fishing camps where all of the buildings are on stilts.?ÿ We were asked to provide elevation certificates on one such camp.?ÿ Seeing the finished floor elevation being 18' above the highest adjacent grade makes you look closer at the entire document.

On this particular development, there are few mortgages. Most lots is owned outright, but the county requires flood insurance documentation to be submitted with the county taxes each year.

Different rules for different places.

There would be no chance getting a subdivision through the process here with that flood plane. However, we just finished one with the major portion of the subdivision in the 100 year zone. Each lot had to have building areas outside the zone.

But to have a subdivision entirely under a flood zone, and this sounds like more like a floodway; not going to happen here. But stilted house can't really work where it gets below zero for weeks on end, maybe it's workable down south?

I guess you put the flood map on the subdivision and let the county add restrictions to the lands.

How can they even sell them??ÿ

If you clearly show the line for the BFE and shade those areas that fall below the BFE, while at the same time add the proper notation calling out the flooding possibilities and noting the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map panel number and also reference that information in your descriptions where applicable, you have done your job while also pointing out potential risk.?ÿ It's a case of Caveat Emptor where you have demonstrated the aware part and excluded yourself from any liability.

I will say this without hesitation though, after Hurricane Sandy made direct landfall in NJ in 2012, there is no way in the world that project would get permitting and approval in NJ.?ÿ?ÿ