Mt. Oliver homes' sinking problems a mystery
Mine subsidence probably caused several homes to shift off their foundations in Mount Oliver, according to state environmental regulators who will be on site Monday to test that theory.
The Department of Environmental Protection began investigating on the 100 block of Frederick Street Saturday morning, state and local officials said. DEP plans to return Monday to take core samples from below ground, which is how they'll tell what caused foundations to crack and sink last week, DEP regional spokesman John Poister said.
Fluorescent yellow do-not-enter signs closed off five homes Saturday afternoon.
Foundations appeared to shift more overnight. A pillar on the front of one home was several inches away from the porch roof it had been supporting.
“I've very concerned. Very very concerned. (This home's) all I got,” said Ray Augustine, 56, as he sat on his porch just outside the evacuation area. “I felt terrible for (neighbors). They had no place to go.”
Augustine and others there have said they suspected broken water pipes had been the cause. Pennsylvania American Water officials have denied that.
The American Red Cross provided food and shelter to five adults and six children after the evacuations started Friday.
Columbia Gas had not found any leaks or damage as of Saturday, an official on site said. The company is surveying the block once a day.
“I don't think it's anything real serious to worry about,” said George Adams, 65, who lives three doors down from the evacuation zone. “It ain't no real big deal unless you see a house sink down into the ground.”
Timothy Puko is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7991 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.