Kim said... >My original obsession was outrageously out of hand and I loved it. [...] I'm keeping to the level area as much as possible. Weeding that slope is offensive enough without having to traipse up and down, sliding on every other step, to maintain anything down there. I know I will resent the ones which go on the slope and will eventually allow them to go the way of the Dodo, so I'm choosing to rid myself of them, instead. That's a LOT of roses, quite a few of which are seedlings either generated through my obsession or those shared with me by other "obsessives", but that is what it is going to take to keep this "fun", doable and prevent the water requirements from eating me out of house, home and desire. Weeding through them to maintain those which are just happier to be here with me and those which are endangered, has been a real chore. Now, if there was a ton of level land with high ground water. Hi Kim, Back in the Dark Ages we lived in California in just the sort of spot you are conjuring up as a high ground water fix. But native trees really like spots like that too... and our house had lots of shade, too much shade for most roses. Still, we wouldn't have dreamed of cutting down a tree. We didn't own the house, we like trees, and anyway, removing a tree was illegal without a good reason for a permit where we lived (a Monarch Butterfly preserve). Anyway, we were relative youngsters at the time and didn't know just how wet that property was until our vegetable garden was swimming in water during the winter months. It was fine, fine black silty sand that held on to the water pretty well too. Your post made me think about what we'd do if confronted with your lack of water problems back in California again. What you're doing makes a lot of sense. But I also am wondering whether a bank full of Renaes rambling around might not survive and also keep the weeds down once they proliferated and established themselves? They might take over the other remaining roses, but if you weren't still trying hard to keep those... A bunch of Renaes might not require so much watering once established? I don't think a big crowd of them would look bad at all, depending on personal tastes, of course. In fact, I prefer that kind of look. We've done that crowded thing in a pretty good sized area with azaleas and rhododendrons here; they all grow together and if there's a weed under there somewhere, well, you can't easily penetrate to find or see it. Once in awhile there's a tree sneaking in that will have to be pulled up, but basically it's too shady under all the plant thickness for most weeds to grow. And I adore the looks of those crowded plants! No, we don't have big problems with fungal diseases, even with the crowd. Maybe fewer than average problems, though phytopthera wilt sometimes does require some cutting back of rhododendron limbs. You know a big problem with azaleas and rhododendrons is that they aren't drought tolerant. Well, we have lost huge numbers since our drought problems began big time here around 2001. It's been wonderfully rainy most of the time during the last couple of years, but the next drought period is probably just around the corner... and if we lose some more azaleas and rhododendrons then, well, I'm thinking of trying to establish some Renaes and Annie Laurie McDowells in their place in the relatively sunnier spots... along with some more camellias, which are drought tolerant after the first year. (Though blooming is less than ideal if August and September are dry.) We lost our Annie Laurie McDowell to Rose Rosette Disease last year, but I am figuring that if it's anything like our Renae here, well, it's as no-care, no-worry a plant as any other plant of any kind we've ever had in our yard. Not a touch of blackspot or any other disease here thus far (though that may well change just a bit as we get more shade as the sun angle changes during the fall). Anyway, I'm hoping for another Annie Laurie McDowell eventually too. Ours is a no-spray all-organic yard for everything we grow and Renae fits well into that way of doing things. I think Annie Laurie McDowell will too. I know it hurts to cut back some on what you are able to continue doing, Kim. But I keep thinking mostly about your achievements and how much you have helped so many others in what you have already contributed. Thank you! Best wishes, Mary

We are doing time and materials plus his % markup on most, but not everything. You might think that would mean the GC had no motivation to help us manage costs, but that has not been the case. He's mindful of our budget because he wants us to be able to finish the house and to be happy! It really depends on the person (and we are also in a small community.) Another benefit of having things in writing is just to get you on the same page-- the value can be from the discussion that gets you there as much as the final document. We actually got through foundation and started framing before our contract was finished-- (I know, appalling to many.) Our GC has also helped us out by having us pay some of the subs and materials directly, which means he does not mark them up. In some cases (cabinets), he did not have to spend his time dealing with them, but in others (foundation), he did. We have offered him flexibility in timing in exchange. (A later start than we'd originally planned, a month off in the middle for another project, and no hard move-in date because we aren't moving in for a few years.) There are a lot of ways to do things. People can have great contracts and crummy contractors. Good luck with your project!

folkvictorian - The companies obviously want to limit their costs. It's possible that there are other locations where they can tap into the line but perhaps you land is the easiest. Or they may have already been turned down by other homeowners and you're next on the contact list. Lizbeth's post reminded me that the Gas company that wanted to run the new line on our property was doing it as part of a project to replace and enlarge the old lines. They wanted our property because it would have been easier and cheaper for them to run a new line and then cap off the old one rather then replace the existing line they already had. She is right when she says they promise everything and downplay any negatives. Four years ago the Susquehanna Power Company wanted to run high power lines on 200' towers through our property. These lines would carry electricity from the nuclear power plant in Berwick, PA to New Jersey and New York. No one in our town even gets electricity from this company. They held a series of public meetings that were well planned out. When we entered the meeting room they had executives placed at tables all around the room to 'answer' our questions. They never spoke to the attendees as a group but kept all discourse to one to two people in a conversational tone. Rather smart on their part. That way no one in the audience could stand up and raise objections and galvanize the group. It took several months and many phone calls to find out that the towers would be 400' from my home and that I would be able to hear the constant 'hum' emitted from the lines. The towers would have run almost through the middle of my 135 acres. And it's not over yet - while the power company and the state PUC have selected an alternative route which uses the existing utility right of way, the National Park Service is objecting - they don't want the power company to cross the Delaware River on park land even though the power lines are already there, they're just on shorter towers. What's ironic is that the park only exists because the Federal government wanted to build the Tocks Island Dam on the Delaware River in the 1950's. After acquiring thousands of acres and eradicating the town of Dingman's Ferry the whole thing was canceled and the Delaware Water Gap National park was created. My examples are probably way more involved than what you're experiencing. I guess I relate them because it might help to know what can happen to the average landowner.

There is not much of a performance difference between the 4TEE3C07 and 4TEE3F65 (the 65 has higher heating efficiency by .25 HSPF and a little more cooling capacity). The main difference is physical size - the 65 air handler is around 5" taller. Although since it has the same width and is also a 2-piece unit, I don't see why there was an issue installing it. I won't speculate since I can't see the situation, but it should be no issue dealing with 5" of added length (being a horizontal application) of the air handler if the width is the same. In fact I'd think it's easier to install the 65 since it is a 2-piece model. Could be they didn't want to deal with the larger unit, and the 07 was cheaper and still got you the tax credit. The 800 thermostat (actually the 802 or 803 - if they installed the 800 then you have another issue) is like the VisionPRO 8000, not the IAQ. If you want the dehumidification capabilities of the IAQ, then the 800 series thermostats won't do that the same way. Make certain the installers know how to wire the IAQ module to the dehumidification contacts on the air handler control board. Easily done if they read the instructions. Of course the 800 thermostat was cheaper to purchase than the IAQ. How does the installation look over all? Some pictures can say a lot about the overall quality of installation. No, you aren't exactly getting what you paid for to answer your question.