Amazing? Yes, without a doubt. This thing will pull, tow or move anything you want and it's 12hp is about even with "big box" 25hp machines. LOL Mine is all original but forgive me for not being as up to date on the history of the models. It does have original electric ignition (what kind I don't know) and the original engine is still hard at work. It's been maintained very well throughout it's life and shows no signs of giving up. I relish any chance I have to bring it out of the garage to pull the aerator, dethatcher, trailer, etc... I have a 4ft drum lawn roller that I've filled with pea gravel. The wheelhorse laughs at it. Pulls it easy. The only complaint I've ever had with the wheelhorses it the cut from the mower decks. I was just never that impressed with the overall cut. Simplicity for the cut quality and wheelhorse for any work that needs done. FTW

When people first think of wheelchairs and planter boxes, they visualize something like a raised box that a person in a wheelchair can 'drive' under, so they are facing the box. While not impossible, it does complicate the design and increase the expense. The boxes themselves would need to be at least 8" deep (10" would be better), about 3 ft wide, and as long as practical, depending on where they would be placed. The boxes would have to sit on a frame, and I think that's where the problems would come in with this design. Most wheelchair seats are about 19" from the ground. Allowing 6" clearance, that would put the bottom of the box about 25" from the ground. If the box is 8" deep, the top edge of the box would be 33" from the ground. This is about chest-high to the person in a wheelchair. If you used 2" lumber for the box (for strength and rigidity), the top of the box would be 34.5" from the ground. This is getting pretty high for a smaller person in the chair. Even using a lightweight soilless potting soil, with water added, you would have a pretty heavy box. And it would need drainage. You would need some kind of specific drainage, not just perforations, so the water wouldn't drip into the laps of the person in the wheelchair. It would have to gather in the center or something, and drain down via a tube or something, probably into a bucket. Then you would need the supports under the box. Two-by-fours would be the smallest you would want to use. To allow for rolling the wheelchair under the table, you couldn't have any crosspieces that would brace and stabilize the legs, and I suspect the weight of the moist soil would tend to make the legs want to spread outwards. After some period of time, this could be a danger if the legs spread out enough to allow the box to collapse on top of someone sitting under the box. Personally, I would make the boxes so they almost sat right on the ground. 'Almost' because I think they should be elevated on 2x4s for good drainage. These boxes could be 24" high, which would be a good height for most people in wheelchairs. (Actually, it would be about 25.5" high with the 2x4s underneath. The person in the wheelchair would have to park alongside the box, but I think the lower cost and higher degree of safety would offset any small inconvenience. Even this wouldn't be cheap. If you used something like that Trex deck material (composite boards of wood & plastic), one box would cost about $280 for the side boards alone (for a box 12'x3'x2'), never mind the braces, screws, etc. More if a bottom was built in (maybe about another $250). You could use cedar or some other water-resistant wood if it was available in your area, or you could use pine or fir, and line it with heavy sheet plastic. Then you would get to fill it. The box with the above dimensions would hold 72 cubic feet of potting soil (or a little less, since you wouldn't want it right up to the very top). Sixty-six cubic feet (2.5 cubic yards) would be 33 bags of potting soil of the large size (2 cubic feet). That's about $400 worth of MiracleGro potting soil. If you could find some good soil mix in bulk (by the cubic yard) at a landscape materials source, it would probably cost closer to $65 to fill the box. Unless you're getting some really good donations of materials, you're looking at a lot of money. Still with me? Why not consider livestock water tanks? They come in plastic or galvanized steel, and while they're not as big, they're decently good-looking, long-lasting, and are designed to take a lot of abuse. One useful size is 6ft long x 2ft wide x 2ft tall (about 20 cu ft or .75cu yard) (see link below) for $135. The plastic ones go up to about 300 gallons (40 cu ft or 1.5 cubic yards) for $210. These already have drainage built in. I would raise them off the ground by setting them on 2x4s. The problem with the stock tanks is that there is nothing for the Eagle Scouts to build, unless you got the ones that are only one foot tall, and set them on sturdy stands. The advantage is that you could provide several tanks in different locations. Whichever way you go, try to solicit donations of materials or tanks. Tractor Supply Co. has bought out many smaller feed stores all over the country. You could offer to install a sign on the tank or box a company donates to your project: "Materials generously supplied by Lowe's" or "Containers generously supplied by Tractor Supply Co." Some free advertising can't hurt. Sue Here is a link that might be useful: Six foot galvanized stock tank

Fragrance from the grapefruit tab remains in the tub. Haven't found any transfer to glassware whatsoever. Method also makes a no-fragrance tab. Interesting that you don't get horrible detergent smell from the glasses by using powder. I hate the powders -- can't stand the smell (though the gel is worse). Tabs are a huge improvement for me. Like it or not, the rinse aid does matter as these machines are designed for its use. (Germans seem to have a thing for surfactants). As someone said on one of the threads, if you want a Miele, and dry dishes, it's necessary to accept rinse aid. Fortunately, it's adjustable. You might have a conversation with tech support on this issue. Perhaps the newest machines are more flexible on this. Everyone's water is different. In your house in may be fine to add extra heat and use Cascade. With my soft water I wouldn't dare. However, at one point they programmed the final rinse to be hotter than normal to improve the drying. With a cold-water hook up, which I have, and the onboard heater, a hotter rinse might not affect the cycle time. Occasionally get filming -- iridescent looking streaks on a glass. So I find it useful to an empty cycle on sanitize to clean out any residual soap every few weeks.

Castoff, Sounds like you have systems that are similar to Vermont's. We also have open and closed systems, distribution boxes, etc. The 2 systems with pumps that I described both had leaching areas remote from and higher than the tank and so had to be pumped. In this area if it is all clay soil, I can almost gurantee that a raised leaching area would be required..here they are called "mound systems." In my dealings (until new State laws were passed 3 or 4 yrs ago) each town or city had its own regulations. The smaller towns did nothing. They left it up to home owners and local contractors to design and build their own systems. In most of these cases they were rural communities and the landowners had many acres...the practice was to just build something big enough and to heck with any fancy design. The State of VT now has to issue permits for all designs. The trade off for this regulation is that they will now accept "modern" systems that allow systems in soils that would never work before. When a system is being designed a "perk test:" has to be done on the soil. A hole is dug with a back hoe and the engineer/designer establishes soil conditions at different levels. Then water is poured into the hole and a timing is done to determine how long it takes for the water to leach out. I can tell you that in the civilized areas here, the clay soild conditions that you describe, especially with seasonal high water, would never pass and would require a built up mound system I must confess that I haven't fooled with systems for about 8 years and don't know the specs on the new systems that are allowed or if the new tanks are 2 chambered. I know that many of the designers are requiring filters on the outgoing side of the tank. Possibly this serves the same purpose as the 2 chamber tank. Once a year, you pull the filter out of the inspection hole on the outgoing side and hose it off. I hope that the PO finds some solution. It would be too bad to find out that money had been spent on a design that doesn't work. If it only floods on a seasonal basis, then it does sound like a design problem. If that was the case and it wasn't too terrible, I would investigate anything that might lessen the water flow to the system.....low flow fixtures....toilets, shower heads, etc. I guess I'm trying to think of ways to save someone money, but this system could be beyond that. I don't know what part of Canada the PO is in. I owned property in rural Quebec in a small towwn. I can tell you that there was no regulation (20 yrs ago) over septic systems...at least no regulation that was enforced unless it was a newly constructed building. This town was small enough that the town clerk's office was in the living room of his house and was only open 2 nights per week:-)