Boundaries with MS-North

[EagleDad]

My map also doesn't show that fact that a school on this location would be about the same distance from 88 and Eola (future interchange to be added) as Rt 59 and Diehl is now.

Think about that Current interchange (59 and Diehl), do you want your school there?

There is no access to this property other than Eola.

[doctorwho]

eagledad said:

wvhsparent said:

The further south "power thingy" are old mothballed peaker generators. Those Manufacturing Dohickies are on the other side of the EJ&E tracks.

Otherwise known as jet fuel generators - high explosives.

Thanks for reminding us of the EJ&E tracks which are looking at a quadrupling of freight trains PLUS the star line.

Yeah, this place rocks!

What no mercury buried there from old mirrors, or lead reserves buried in the ground......heavy water ?

This place making Chinese toys look safe !

[momto4]

eagledad said:

My map also doesn't show that fact that a school on this location would be about the same distance from 88 and Eola (future interchange to be added) as Rt 59 and Diehl is now.

Think about that Current interchange (59 and Diehl), do you want your school there?

There is no access to this property other than Eola.

I'm hoping that *if* the school goes there they find a way to make an access road to Diehl and possibly another through the neighborhood to the south (where they are just now adding a light at North Aurora Rd.).

[doctorwho]

eagledad said:

My map also doesn't show that fact that a school on this location would be about the same distance from 88 and Eola (future interchange to be added) as Rt 59 and Diehl is now.

Think about that Current interchange (59 and Diehl), do you want your school there?

There is no access to this property other than Eola.

After driving 10 miles to get there in the snow in winter - what's a little bumper to bumper semi trailer truck traffic --- getting there starting to sound more like a quest on one of those Warcraft video games

[EagleDad]

momto4 said:

I'm hoping that *if* the school goes there they find a way to make an access road to Diehl and possibly another through the neighborhood to the south (where they are just now adding a light at North Aurora Rd.).

That would be good, because we know that Diehl is a nice, bucholic, leisurely drive, and not an East-West drag-strip through industrial/office parks.

[gatordog]

Readings are one method to judge. Following standards are another.

The very nearest north corner of AME property meets the CA transmission line set back standards , as I understand it. Worst case they gave required 350 feet for 500-550 kV line.

Its a nationwide issue as suburban areas near buildout, the remaining open areas available for final phase of school construction has various levels of issues or (edit) potential hazards. Thus California developed a standard for one of these common issues, power lines.

[macy]

gatordog said:

Readings are one method to judge. Following standards are another.

The very nearest north corner of AME property meets the CA transmission line set back standards , as I understand it. Worst case they gave required 350 feet for 500-550 kV line.

Its a nationwide issue as suburban areas near buildout, the remaining open areas available for final phase of school construction has various levels of issues or (edit) potential hazards. Thus California developed a standard for one of these common issues, power lines.

Huh?

[wvhsparent]

momto4 said:

eagledad said:

My map also doesn't show that fact that a school on this location would be about the same distance from 88 and Eola (future interchange to be added) as Rt 59 and Diehl is now.

Think about that Current interchange (59 and Diehl), do you want your school there?

There is no access to this property other than Eola.

I'm hoping that *if* the school goes there they find a way to make an access road to Diehl and possibly another through the neighborhood to the south (where they are just now adding a light at North Aurora Rd.).

There is a street in the residential neighborhood that ends at the field now. Could be another entrance to a school there.
But never mind, I know you don't like AME and nothing will change that, and I am not planning on trying, and on the same token, I do like it and nothing will change that.
I'll just accept the fact that your priorities/desires are different than mine.
I will however support the school wherever it gets built. I may not like it, but I will support it.
The SB members may not fare so well come re-election time however. And that also is regardless of the site chosen.

[gatordog]

macy said:

gatordog said:

Readings are one method to judge. Following standards are another.

The very nearest north corner of AME property meets the CA transmission line set back standards , as I understand it. Worst case they gave required 350 feet for 500-550 kV line.

Its a nationwide issue as suburban areas near buildout, the remaining open areas available for final phase of school construction has various levels of issues or (edit) potential hazards. Thus California developed a standard for one of these common issues, power lines.

Huh?

To put it simply, the State of Calif says it would be acceptably safe to build a school on AME site (in regards to health risks from power transmission line).

Note, I could not judge the Macom site at all because I am not sure where the school would be placed, especially given that transmission lines are near the center of the property.

Granted this is all my non-expert reading. Please read it and draw your own conclusions.

[EagleDad]

if you can't be sure on the Macom property where the school would be placed, how is it you are sure on St Johns?

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

momto4 said:

I'm hoping that *if* the school goes there they find a way to make an access road to Diehl and possibly another through the neighborhood to the south (where they are just now adding a light at North Aurora Rd.).

There is a street in the residential neighborhood that ends at the field now. Could be another entrance to a school there.
But never mind, I know you don't like AME and nothing will change that, and I am not planning on trying, and on the same token, I do like it and nothing will change that.
I'll just accept the fact that your priorities/desires are different than mine.
I will however support the school wherever it gets built. I may not like it, but I will support it.
The SB members may not fare so well come re-election time however. And that also is regardless of the site chosen.

I would agree that there will be opportunity next election for someone willing to run....

Also the 4 members up for re-election, am I not remembering right or did JC already say this may be it anyway - and I have heard rumors ( I know wrong thread ) that may be true for at least one other.

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

macy said:

Huh?

To put it simply, the State of Calif says it would be acceptably safe to build a school on AME site (in regards to health risks from power transmission line).

this from a state that builds entire suburbs ( Irvine) on top of major faults - ;D

[gatordog]

eagledad said:

if you can't be sure on the Macom property where the school would be placed, how is it you are sure on St Johns?

From pwr hazard thread:
"An aerial mapquest look at Eola/Molitor area shows me that the the extreme NW corner of what I understand St John property is is about 500 ft from power lines. And the SE corner would be about 600 ft. (Of course distance to actual bldg could/would be greater, if bldg placed instead toward SW corner."

So I am just giving distances to property edge only. And 500 ft>350 ft worst case for Calif standard.

I didnt do this for Macom because I was less certain of north south property boundaries. And also I have no idea how existing power line would be moved. If somebody else wanted to play around with aerial photos and lay things out for that site, that would be great.

I am not saying Macom could not also meet these standards. But I am saying that to me, as I read it, the St John's property does meet these standards. And it meets it now, with no Com Ed work required, no expensive burying lines, and no special restrictions on building placement.

[rew]

The SB has to buy a site ready to build on "as is". They have proven themselves incompetent at negotiating, managing or thinking past the end of their nose.

[rew]

ED, You will never get the accounting you want. You will only get "SB speak". MM is especially good at this, it is very valuable that he is the sitting Pres.

And I will predict that the line will be "we had NO other option."

That is why everything is going on behind closed doors. Makes it easier.