|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 15, 2008 23:09:19 GMT -6
BB site the wooden power lines run along 75th and 59 on the school property. If I'm looking at the right site. Isn't BB located on the southwest corner of 75 and 59? No part of the BB site considered for the school touched Rt. 59. The land was SW of that intersection, yes, but its eastern edge was further to the west down 75th Street leaving a tract of land along Rt 59 for retail. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 15, 2008 23:11:20 GMT -6
I thought that Eola has the same wooden power lines along the West portion of the school (which according to the map looks very close to Eola Rd). However, the EMF map readings only show a reading of 4.48 taken at the NW corner and that they did not continue down Eola Rd. That seems to be the same thing that you are talking about on BB, but we have yet to see how close/far you were to the actual school site when you took the readings. Why they did not talk about the wooden power lines along Eola is a question that has been on my mind - it has become more concerning in light of the information that you just provided. Rural, please save me a drive and confirm whether or not there are the wooden powerlines on Eola. I thought that when I talked with Mr. Crawford from ENVIRON he mentioned them. BB site the wooden power lines run along 75th and 59 on the school property. If I'm looking at the right site. Isn't BB located on the southwest corner of 75 and 59? If you are truly interested about where the school was sited here is a picture. You can see the football stadium. www.greatstreetrealty.com/property_listings.htmlpage down to NEW DEVELOPMENTS SWC Rte 59 & 75th St. Aurora, Il click on it and on page 3 is a site map. You can't see the entire school site but you can see the football stadium and parking lots in relation to 75th and RT 59. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 15, 2008 23:11:46 GMT -6
Double yup! Suddenly on January 21st Hillmom became concerned about EMF levels at the BB site? So concerned, she ran out and tested them. Wow, I am having a hard time not injecting sarcasm. I'm trying though! January 21? Hillmom, what motivated you to go read EMF at BB on that date? Seems a little fishy to me. Sorry Hillmom. Take your ghostbuster machine to Eola and Molitor tomorrow and report back. Arch, doesn't seem to think it's a ghostbuster machine. I merely suggested a way that we would attempt to 'calibrate' the readings between hers and the one Environ used by taking a reading from the exact same spot @ AME. A little social engineering w/ a security guard could go a long way to getting us a reading from her machine so we could at least start comparing. Nothing illegal about that. |
|
|
|
Post by yeson321 on Mar 15, 2008 23:15:31 GMT -6
Yes, definitely on the other side of Eola. Four lanes and a median between. Thanks for the help! |
|
|
|
Post by hillmom on Mar 15, 2008 23:16:01 GMT -6
Yes I realize that - i wanted to form an opinion about what they would be voting on since everyone days before was all up in arms about the EMF's. Many people formed opinions between the time the site info was released and then voted on! Not too abnormal to be following the whole process. I am assuming you just got involved once it became an issue for you. I've been following it since it became an issue for the entire distirct - years back. Just doing my homework based on the data they provided. So if you wanted to form this opinion, you could have easily taken readings from the AME site before the other group started taking the pictures. If you were doing this years back then you had another oppty to take a reading at AME, b/c it was in the running 2 years ago, but then it became discounted b/c of the questionable land...so are you saying this didn't peak your curiosity....if you were so diligent with BB and other schools, why not the AME site....IMO, this does not add up or you forgot to do part of your homework assignment. I feel like I'm talking to a toddler - let me be more clear - pulling the whole EMF thing is commonly used as a scare tactic - plain and simple. Again - if you had any working knowledge of powerlines you would know that the part that matters is the distance - I know the distance at the the AME from the power lines and the power lines are at such a distance that the EMF levels would disipate to normal background levels. That is basic electrical line principals. Doesn't matter how hot or cold. You are arguing a point that is irrelevant because of distance. Everyone keeps pointing at ugly power lines - you got it there ugly but they are not going to effect that property becasue of the distance. I took other readings to put things into perspective. How can you actually continue to argue about EMF's when you are sitting in front of a computer that is emitting more EMF's than the highest point disclosed to you on any of the sites!!! The point is the EMF argument is ridiculous unless you plan to move to a tepee out in the middle of no where!! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 15, 2008 23:18:42 GMT -6
So if you wanted to form this opinion, you could have easily taken readings from the AME site before the other group started taking the pictures. If you were doing this years back then you had another oppty to take a reading at AME, b/c it was in the running 2 years ago, but then it became discounted b/c of the questionable land...so are you saying this didn't peak your curiosity....if you were so diligent with BB and other schools, why not the AME site....IMO, this does not add up or you forgot to do part of your homework assignment. I feel like I'm talking to a toddler - let me be more clear - pulling the whole EMF thing is commonly used as a scare tactic - plain and simple. Again - if you had any working knowledge of powerlines you would know that the part that matters is the distance - I know the distance at the the AME from the power lines and the power lines are at such a distance that the EMF levels would disipate to normal background levels. That is basic electrical line principals. Doesn't matter how hot or cold. You are arguing a point that is irrelevant because of distance. Everyone keeps pointing at ugly power lines - you got it there ugly but they are not going to effect that property becasue of the distance. I took other readings to put things into perspective. How can you actually continue to argue about EMF's when you are sitting in front of a computer that is emitting more EMF's than the highest point disclosed to you on any of the sites!!! The point is the EMF argument is ridiculous unless you plan to move to a tepee out in the middle of no where!! Let's take this at face value and accept everything you say as true. EMF off the table. Next up, Pipelines. How many at BB? What size are they and how many BTUs of energy are in them and under the property at any one given time? Take your time. I'll be back on after we break camp tomorrow and hit the road. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 15, 2008 23:19:54 GMT -6
So if you wanted to form this opinion, you could have easily taken readings from the AME site before the other group started taking the pictures. If you were doing this years back then you had another oppty to take a reading at AME, b/c it was in the running 2 years ago, but then it became discounted b/c of the questionable land...so are you saying this didn't peak your curiosity....if you were so diligent with BB and other schools, why not the AME site....IMO, this does not add up or you forgot to do part of your homework assignment. I feel like I'm talking to a toddler - let me be more clear - pulling the whole EMF thing is commonly used as a scare tactic - plain and simple. Again - if you had any working knowledge of powerlines you would know that the part that matters is the distance - I know the distance at the the AME from the power lines and the power lines are at such a distance that the EMF levels would disipate to normal background levels. That is basic electrical line principals. Doesn't matter how hot or cold. You are arguing a point that is irrelevant because of distance. Everyone keeps pointing at ugly power lines - you got it there ugly but they are not going to effect that property becasue of the distance. I took other readings to put things into perspective. How can you actually continue to argue about EMF's when you are sitting in front of a computer that is emitting more EMF's than the highest point disclosed to you on any of the sites!!! The point is the EMF argument is ridiculous unless you plan to move to a tepee out in the middle of no where!! Did you raise these points regarding the Site Selection report in 2006 to Metzger and the board? Certainly that was the time to be up in arms regarding their assessment of the site. |
|
|
|
Post by hillmom on Mar 15, 2008 23:28:51 GMT -6
I feel like I'm talking to a toddler - let me be more clear - pulling the whole EMF thing is commonly used as a scare tactic - plain and simple. Again - if you had any working knowledge of powerlines you would know that the part that matters is the distance - I know the distance at the the AME from the power lines and the power lines are at such a distance that the EMF levels would disipate to normal background levels. That is basic electrical line principals. Doesn't matter how hot or cold. You are arguing a point that is irrelevant because of distance. Everyone keeps pointing at ugly power lines - you got it there ugly but they are not going to effect that property becasue of the distance. I took other readings to put things into perspective. How can you actually continue to argue about EMF's when you are sitting in front of a computer that is emitting more EMF's than the highest point disclosed to you on any of the sites!!! The point is the EMF argument is ridiculous unless you plan to move to a tepee out in the middle of no where!! Did you raise these points regarding the Site Selection report in 2006 to Metzger and the board? The peaker plant was still in operation in 2006 - that is the reason that site wasn't an option. That parcel was not available for sale. I didn't have a preference on site and did not take EMF readings as I disclosed until January 21st which for some reason Macy finds to be suspect - of what I don't know. that was the first time EMF's ever came up and again not worried about EMF's - I'm sure how collecting data to show EMF's are everywhere is suspect. It was not to show one was worse than the other just simply that we are fighting a losing battle on EMF's if you use power - end of sentence. It actually doesn't argue either point - just nullifies it as arch pointed out. |
|
|
|
Post by hillmom on Mar 15, 2008 23:30:45 GMT -6
I feel like I'm talking to a toddler - let me be more clear - pulling the whole EMF thing is commonly used as a scare tactic - plain and simple. Again - if you had any working knowledge of powerlines you would know that the part that matters is the distance - I know the distance at the the AME from the power lines and the power lines are at such a distance that the EMF levels would disipate to normal background levels. That is basic electrical line principals. Doesn't matter how hot or cold. You are arguing a point that is irrelevant because of distance. Everyone keeps pointing at ugly power lines - you got it there ugly but they are not going to effect that property becasue of the distance. I took other readings to put things into perspective. How can you actually continue to argue about EMF's when you are sitting in front of a computer that is emitting more EMF's than the highest point disclosed to you on any of the sites!!! The point is the EMF argument is ridiculous unless you plan to move to a tepee out in the middle of no where!! Let's take this at face value and accept everything you say as true. EMF off the table. Next up, Pipelines. How many at BB? What size are they and how many BTUs of energy are in them and under the property at any one given time? Take your time. I'll be back on after we break camp tomorrow and hit the road. Arch - I'm saving this for another day - looking forward to it - have church in the morning. |
|
|
|
Post by mandmmom on Mar 15, 2008 23:33:29 GMT -6
So if you wanted to form this opinion, you could have easily taken readings from the AME site before the other group started taking the pictures. If you were doing this years back then you had another oppty to take a reading at AME, b/c it was in the running 2 years ago, but then it became discounted b/c of the questionable land...so are you saying this didn't peak your curiosity....if you were so diligent with BB and other schools, why not the AME site....IMO, this does not add up or you forgot to do part of your homework assignment. I feel like I'm talking to a toddler - let me be more clear - pulling the whole EMF thing is commonly used as a scare tactic - plain and simple. Again - if you had any working knowledge of powerlines you would know that the part that matters is the distance - I know the distance at the the AME from the power lines and the power lines are at such a distance that the EMF levels would disipate to normal background levels. That is basic electrical line principals. Doesn't matter how hot or cold. You are arguing a point that is irrelevant because of distance. Everyone keeps pointing at ugly power lines - you got it there ugly but they are not going to effect that property becasue of the distance. I took other readings to put things into perspective. How can you actually continue to argue about EMF's when you are sitting in front of a computer that is emitting more EMF's than the highest point disclosed to you on any of the sites!!! The point is the EMF argument is ridiculous unless you plan to move to a tepee out in the middle of no where!! I am not arguing anything about EMF's, because it is over my head. My only point is that it would have been more credible to have the readings at AME….you stated that you took them at many different locations, in my mind it doesn’t make sense why you did not get them at AME….maybe you do have them and you are not sharing them…this is my opinion and I am allowed to have one. I have showed you respect and I would appreciate it if you do the same. No need to belittle me….I have not been nasty in my posts to you, so you should return the favor and be respectful to everyone on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 15, 2008 23:45:43 GMT -6
The peaker plant was still in operation in 2006 - that is the reason that site wasn't an option. ? Not according to the site selection report. The peaker plant was never a consideration. The entire AME parcel was ruled out due to the switching stations. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Mar 16, 2008 9:28:05 GMT -6
OK, I'll bite. Who here is concerned about the safety of the site lives near power lines. I'll start. I don't. Ah, but they are the ones concerned about the safety of the site. #1 spokesperson for NSFOC. Mr Andrews lives .10 miles near power lines and power thingy.  |
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Mar 16, 2008 9:31:29 GMT -6
Thank you so much for clarifying what we knew all along.
How about an aerial of the pool powerlines?
|
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Mar 16, 2008 9:38:19 GMT -6
Maybe we should also do a cluster diagram of the homes of those writing LTEs or op-ed articles for the Herald. Sorry, I am not really sure what this analysis is brining to the table. If this is starting a whole morning of TG bashing, I am checking out. I rather go burn some calories in the pool. Have fun!!
|
|
|
|
Post by yeson321 on Mar 16, 2008 9:38:56 GMT -6
That would be 528 ft. According to the ENVIRON report, Mr. Crawford stated that the "levels dropped off to normal background values at less than 300 feet from the lines" for the readings that he took. OK, I'll bite. Who here is concerned about the safety of the site lives near power lines. I'll start. I don't. #1 spokesperson for NSFOC. Mr Andrews lives .10 miles near power lines and power thingy. |
|
