fortune11 said:
hello said:
eyephone said:
Should they do this to the great park also?
they should but they wont... too many people paid 7 figures to live on the land.
So what ... if EPA is paying for the cleanup , why would they care. And , if EPA ends up saying its not worth their priority , and nothing to see here move along, wouldn't that also be reassuring to home values
Unfortunately the history of EPA makes it difficult for me to believe or trust them to do the right thing. Flynt Michigan is an example of how the EPA tried to cut costs to avoid corrison controls and then chose to do nothing for months knowing full well lead levels were extremely high and dangerous. They also screwed up in Gold King mine when they flooded the colorado river with tons of toxic waste turning the river bright yellow. They ignored and tried to cover up radioactive wastes in St. Louis for decades until just recently. People in this area lived with radioactive materials in their water and homes for decades causing unusually high levels of rare cancers in this area. The list of their blunders go on and on.
If one chooses to live on a previous superfund site, its their decision. For me personally, there is too much unknown and the potential risk is not worth it. I can easily find another great neighborhood in Irvine to live in, one I know was not a previous superfund site.
