|
|
Post by rural on Apr 4, 2008 9:32:49 GMT -6
You owe me no explanation, Doc. If you say you have issues with enviro, I take you at your word. I am just pointing out that no matter if you actaully believed the site were clean, you would not send your child there. No period. Just a fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 4, 2008 9:34:55 GMT -6
You are right. I stand corrected. Please, Arch, tell me how these two important factors relate to the enviro-related concerns on the site? I was curious myself after you posted the false personal dig against the Doc. This is a thread about pipeline BTUs and the heat danger that is calculated to be present in the event of a failure. Do you have any math that disputes the calculated 650-700 foot PIR of the pipelines through the center of the property? In the event of an accident, nearly the entire school is inside of that circle, depending on the location of a failure if one were to occur. Do you have anything to add or dispute this circle or high consequence area? What in my post was false? |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 4, 2008 9:38:27 GMT -6
I'm not suggesting that there aren't. I am reiterating that even if the site were 100% clean, Doc has stated that he would not send his child there simply because of the distance she would have to travel. If you bothered to do what I suggested you would also see another reason is because it will now be an incomplete school with no varsity sports. Being that he has stated he has children who engage in these sports and a previous one got wonderful scholarships playing them, it is an important factor in making the decision about where she will attend school. And let me clarify -- the no varsity sports is because HS kids only get a chance to do that once in their life-- it is not an equal HS experience. For my daughters sport- 100% of the scholarships come from club ball- not from HS sports -- so it is a school pride issues, not financial. It is a HS life experence - as most of the kids one will play with are not scholarship athletes, but friends. Kathy B ( who used to coach this sport btw in the district) - and I have had that conversation - and she also agrees it is not about scholarships. This is basically true for soccer / volleyball and mostly basketball now also. However football a whole other issue - so Arch is right: 1. distance is an issue for my area 2/ no varsity sports 3/ no gym/ auditorium upon opening4 4/ we are a central location and except for Cowlishaw- our closest neighbors not going to MV construction going on - who knows what for parking lots - and other programs that need to use a gym- auditorium -- this is NOT a HS experience. Again, I keep asking but never a response - whenit was BB people screamed about ANY HS construction going on while kids there- yet many who complained now see NO issue with MV having major construction going on the entire 1st year. Why is that ? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 4, 2008 9:41:53 GMT -6
I was curious myself after you posted the false personal dig against the Doc. This is a thread about pipeline BTUs and the heat danger that is calculated to be present in the event of a failure. Do you have any math that disputes the calculated 650-700 foot PIR of the pipelines through the center of the property? In the event of an accident, nearly the entire school is inside of that circle, depending on the location of a failure if one were to occur. Do you have anything to add or dispute this circle or high consequence area? What in my post was false? You: "Doc, you have always been clear that you will not send your daughter there because of the distance. Period. " There are plenty of other reasons and not the single one you pointed out and tried to imply was his only reason for not sending her there. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 4, 2008 9:43:12 GMT -6
You owe me no explanation, Doc. If you say you have issues with enviro, I take you at your word. I am just pointing out that no matter if you actaully believed the site were clean, you would not send your child there. No period. Just a fact. Thank you- I would not make it up just to make a point - that would be stupid in my book the combination of no varsity sports - no gym - no auditorium - no pool - construction, and the lousy distance ( time on the bus - long car commute) - you are correct. I want no part of it even if site safe. I was unhappy with no varsity sports at BB also- and if you do the research you suggested Arch do, you will see that I was still fighting that - had solicitied help from SB members and Admin - and had talked to our Asst Super on numerous occasions about it. I would have been unhappy about it at BB- but none of the other factors were in play so I would have lived with it if we had to. adding all the factors in though just too much for me-- even if safe, but for others safety is the only issue, they would be unhappy about all the rest, but would live with it. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 4, 2008 9:45:20 GMT -6
I was curious myself after you posted the false personal dig against the Doc. This is a thread about pipeline BTUs and the heat danger that is calculated to be present in the event of a failure. Do you have any math that disputes the calculated 650-700 foot PIR of the pipelines through the center of the property? In the event of an accident, nearly the entire school is inside of that circle, depending on the location of a failure if one were to occur. Do you have anything to add or dispute this circle or high consequence area? What in my post was false? As I have always stated , distance was a major factor, but so was no gym, no pool, construction, no auditorium -- it is not a HS experience. A complete HS experience shouldn't have to wait until Junior year for 8th graders today - that is lousy - and not the 'equitable' experience everyone clamored for with BB couple that with a crummy bus ride and even worse drive commute from my area- and my neighbors have plenty to be upset about -- and then to get totally ignored by the SB in the proceedings - while an area 2 minutes south ( Brighton Ridge' was deemed a 'must fix' -- it's the whole package, not just distance- so that was false. and again the environ issues completely override any of this - even if the site was close to my home. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 4, 2008 9:48:21 GMT -6
With a clean bill of health on the soil and if the pipelines were ONLY out by the tracks and the school on the western edge of the property, I could live with it. Running through the center and putting the physical structure inside the PIR... BZZZT
Just out by the tracks, the PIR would not extend to the physical building or to the areas where kids would be while out at PE. This is what is the ultimate deal breaker for me.
People point out that the Carlsbad NM 12 deaths were because the people were trespassing. They were. They were INSIDE the PIR zone of those pipelines and an accident happened and they all died.
It's that simple.
|
|
|
|
Post by mandmmom on Apr 4, 2008 18:26:35 GMT -6
Why are we fighting for such a polluted piece of land? Why are we not fighting for the best piece of land for our children? That is what I don't understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by specailneedsmom on Apr 4, 2008 20:15:00 GMT -6
The SB is fighting for this land because of egos. They are unwilling to admit they made a mistake. They believe they know more than everyone else based on the information they have and the will not concede. Because they are in a position of power to make the decisions they will succeed. We obviously elected bad decision makers. Our mistake. In the absense of any intervention on the part of someone or something more powerful than the SB, they will built MV at the Eola site.
|
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Apr 4, 2008 20:46:40 GMT -6
"This will be crucial in the future if there ever is a problem because the liability is that the district KNEW they are locating a school within the PIR of the pipelines"
Arch....I am not in favor or against this site...I just want it to be safe and get on with things....unfortunately others do not have the same motives as you....
you have done alot of research...what are the odds of the pipelines exploding vs. another situation where lives are lost? boiler room explosion, fire, tornado?
|
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Apr 4, 2008 20:58:54 GMT -6
DOC....
"Why would someone fight so hard so something with so many risks ?"
not sure doc....I don't know anymore than you do regarding the safety of the site. just waiting to hear more from the SB regarding testing...
"You're quick to judge people on comparing themselves to everyone included Jesus, and yet no one has taken that judgement with you."
you might have the wrong guy here.....not sure I said any of that...I did ask some questions though....
"but by your address you're not sending your children there either - so why so vehement for that site ?"
why does questioning you mean I am vehement for the site?
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 4, 2008 21:21:18 GMT -6
DOC.... "Why would someone fight so hard so something with so many risks ?"not sure doc....I don't know anymore than you do regarding the safety of the site. just waiting to hear more from the SB regarding testing... "You're quick to judge people on comparing themselves to everyone included Jesus, and yet no one has taken that judgement with you." you might have the wrong guy here.....not sure I said any of that...I did ask some questions though.... "but by your address you're not sending your children there either - so why so vehement for that site ?"why does questioning you mean I am vehement for the site? I did confuse you for a post by bbc at that same time - and I absolutely apologize for that as to the questioning - that's fine, but do you not agree there are at the very least increased risks at MWGEN , with at least the potential for real issues - and with the BB lawsuit pending, the nsfoc lawsuit pending, and no IEPA program until after we have long since started construction - this is a big gamble.... and why gamble with children ? Doesn't the Smartbuild program for Illinois as it realtes to schools make sense, yet we will break almost every warning within that guide. Yes, I know it's not a law - but for me it's not a gamble I'm willing to take, I wouldn't care if that site is where it is or a few blocks from my home. Also do you not think that some who are giving AME-MWGEN a 'free pass' trusting that all is hunky dory, yet were the same ones who had a fit over the possibility of any construction going on at BB when kids were in school -- would be raising the roof if Hamman was selected as the site ? We would not have built ON the landfill, but near it, just like the core sample areas ? I know they would. ( for the record I would not have wanted that site either) |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 4, 2008 22:02:49 GMT -6
"This will be crucial in the future if there ever is a problem because the liability is that the district KNEW they are locating a school within the PIR of the pipelines"Arch....I am not in favor or against this site...I just want it to be safe and get on with things....unfortunately others do not have the same motives as you.... you have done alot of research...what are the odds of the pipelines exploding vs. another situation where lives are lost? boiler room explosion, fire, tornado? Tornado we can not do anything about other than make sure construction is as hardened as possible. Boiler rooms can be hardened as well. Fires are mitigated with properly working and high flow sprinklers and detection pieces. Pipeline explosions are best avoided by not being around them in the first place because a worker can screw up (Crude Oil Nov 2007, MN -- same one out by the tracks, part of the 'lakehead' system), there can be corrosion (Carlsbad, NM 2000) or a construction person can dig in the wrong place (search the NTSB for plenty of those occurances). Everything you mentioned other than pipelines exist anywhere in the same probability. Pipeline explosion probability is 0 where they do not exist but higher than 0 where they do exist. Does that clarify it a bit better? |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Apr 5, 2008 17:31:11 GMT -6
DOC..... just looking at the property with an untrained eye would cause one to ask questions. but I know nothing about environmental issues, risks and remediation. That's why I am holding judgment until the experts do their thing...... the pipelines...it never dawned on me that one could explode. I have never heard of one doing so until arch's link on potluck........ the crazy thing about this fiasco is that there are 10 or more angles of attack for people against the new HS at MV......and plenty of questionable motives out there  |
|
|
|
Post by mandmmom on Apr 5, 2008 19:35:26 GMT -6
DOC..... just looking at the property with an untrained eye would cause one to ask questions. but I know nothing about environmental issues, risks and remediation. That's why I am holding judgment until the experts do their thing...... the pipelines...it never dawned on me that one could explode. I have never heard of one doing so until arch's link on potluck........ the crazy thing about this fiasco is that there are 10 or more angles of attack for people against the new HS at MV......and plenty of questionable motives out there Steckdad, thanks for your comments. There seems to be motives on both sides...the most alarming are the motives of our SB...they have lost sight of the goal, to provide the best school on the safest piece of land...and the way things are going now they are failing the parents, teachers and the children...and this is not acceptable...the children of 204 deserve better than this and I am amazed that there are parents that are fighting for this polluted land... |
|
