Review

● The taking of said family's property for commercial purposes by the City of Bridgeport's partner Platinum Properties was without said family's knowledge.

● The City's breaks decades of precedent and rezoned said property after the developer's buildings were constructed on the generational family's property.

● Rezoning was was completed without said family's knowledge.

● The rezoning matched what Platinum Properties had already built. Thus; said rezoning covered for the developer's and the City's mistakes; An apparent strategy to avoid mitigation of 113 Platinum Drive.

● Subsequent and massive adverse environmental effects occur that all "Partners" were forewarned about. However, they did nothing.

● Platinum Properties (Previous City Planner), initially points blame at the City of Bridgeport. However, during or directly after this period, they were working on a partnership with the City of Bridgeport.

● In September 2003 they consummated their agreement and the "Partnership" was created.

● Any requests we made for relief received a " Landowner's issue" response.

City Employee Confusion

● City employees were instructed to state the "Landowners Issue" strategy.

● The COB; City Planner stated that he tried to intervene, but he was informed that it was a "landowners' issue", by the city attorney.

● Two City employees looked over the developer's main drainage ditch line in 2003. They were later informed that they could not intervene in the water runoff situation, as it was a "landowners' issue".

Landowners' Issue

● The Department of Environment Protection Did Not Consider it a landowner’s issue; The developer stopped work for the DEP agent.

● The US Forestry Service Did Not Consider it a landowner’s issue; Responded to the US Forestry Complaint.

● The Public Service Commission of West Virginia Did Not Consider it a landowner’s issue.

City Regulatory and Managerial Oversight Confusion:

● 2003, A COB Supervisor was discouraged from taking steps to address the deterioration of our access road Corpening Drive.

● 2005, The Bridgeport City Planner stated that he had no idea that a tract of our property had been taken into the City of Bridgeport without our knowledge.

● 2007, The developer started work on a crucial property area. The City of Bridgeport Engineer stated that he had no idea.

● City of Bridgeport public servants, on the surface, appeared to be held back or out of the loop.

Timeline Review

● 2003; The initial meeting with Platinum Properties representative.
We thought the fence line / lot area would be corrected. The area was Not corrected.

● 2004; The Forestry Service complaint, filed by a former Enraged City of Bridgeport Supervisor, and the subsequent placement of a temporary curb.
We thought the fence line / lot area would be corrected. The area was Not corrected.

● 2004 and later; multiple contractor / individuals recommended that large vehicles, especially garbage trucks, avoid the rear lot area of these two buildings until the area was corrected.
Even with all the recommendations the Large vehicular traffic was Not diverted.

● 2005; The Written Agreement with Platinum Properties and their Insurance Company Cincinnati Insurance to correct the area.
We thought the fence line - lot area would be corrected. The area was Not corrected.

● 2006; T he oral contract with CityNet, (Platinum Properties sister company).
We thought the fence line / lot area would be corrected. The area was Not corrected.

● 2006, The Letter from Platinum Properties informing us the area would be corrected when they built the new CityNet complex in the spring of 2007. (Drainage is not mentioned, though an added qualifier is).

● 2006 / Early 2007; Platinum Property's Building 109 Platinum Drive Buckles to a Greater Degree, than in 2001

● February 26, 2007, WBOY News Article stating that "Repair work on these two buildings started about two weeks ago".

● February 21, 2007; Mavis Lacaria's basement has three feet of water. Anthony Lacaria is informed of a slip on his property. (No record of precipitation).

● 2007: The sinking of the lot area behind building 113 Platinum Drive exponentially increases. Large vehicular traffic was diverted.

● 2007; Property Correction started on 8/3/07. Work began to correct the area by the implementation of a so called engineering design.

2006 /2007 Drainage Review

● The roof drainage systems of 109 and 113 Platinum Drive was released into a single shared six inch drainage line;

● Said six inch drainage line traversed underground and out of site for a distance of over 500 feet.

● Said six inch drainage line was damaged / ruptured underground at the rear of 113 Platinum Drive..

● Large vehicular traffic plays havoc on a lot area that exists over an ever-increasing ruptured underground drainage junction.

● Undersized, (thus pressurized) drainage lines that are absolutely dependent on a non supported and non compacted loose fill slope that was dependent on a locusts post and grid fence for support..

● The lot area is sinking: An existing six inch high pressure water supply line, that traversed through said support area, is stressed. A fire hydrant sinks and pulls toward the direction of their slip.

● The Roof drainage system damage / collapse results in subsequent drainage restrictions. (A sink with a clogged drain), drainage backs up.

● Building B 109 Platinum Drive is heavily affected, raising, the front corners dropping, confusion. Pyrite Fill" is reported at the cause. (It was built over a coal seam; Coal Swells).

● However, Building C 113 Platinum Drive Is Not effected Structurally Effected; Though It Sits On Three Times The Volume Of The So Called "Pyrite" Fill".

● February 26, 2007 News article: "Repair work began at this office building About two weeks ago". (Release of pent-up up drainage).

● February 21, 2007; Mavis Lacaria and Anthony & Valerie Lacaria's properties heavily effected.