I can’t decide whether the architect is too inexperienced to recognize the damage that even a minor downpour could cause, or whether the photo/essay is deliberately obtuse about the heroic yet hidden measures that have been taken to avoid catastrophe. Either way, could any architect look at this photo and not wonder?
excellent question David.
forseeability of harm is a well established legal concept. ignoring this concept is a step toward negligence, if not gross negligence.
also hope that someone has thought about foundations. I am designing an earth-sheltered / ICF / SIPS house and the foundations due to weight and berms have to be above average. HERE in this photo flooded foundations would also be a bad thing for extra settlement.