Disappointment - Cont'd

[WeBe204]

proschool said:

How much does BB want to drop everything and sell another 40 acres right now? Obviously they don't want to keep it so what's the price. Does anyone even know?

I heard from someone in real estate developement that the PREIT project has been suspended.

This is an out take for a board member's email on the topic. The Friday mentioned would have been the week before the land vote

"last Friday Brach approached us with a $27M
offer and Brody wrote us and said that Brach doesn't speak for Brody
and that the jury's decision was the price for the land! $27M was
still too high, but the fact that B and B couldn't agree on a pricing
strategy was the last straw."

I think this is an often missed fact. BB where not exactly on the same page. I am not defending either side. Just trying to provide some data.

[Arch]

brad204 said:

archwinsome said:

I can't in good faith support that site either due to substation and RR tracks.

BB and Wagner, or Plainfield East turnkey ready to go in August 2008 I could

No worries. I was not really expecting a positive response. Just putting the ball on the tee and waiting for someone to smack it.

Truth be told, every ball is still in play until the the sale is consummated.

[Arch]

archwinsome said:

brad204 said:

No worries. I was not really expecting a positive response. Just putting the ball on the tee and waiting for someone to smack it.

Truth be told, every ball is still in play until the the sale is consummated.

Also, Macomb does not have transit lines running down through the middle of the property.. so that's at least a + over MWGEN in addition to being closer to the remaining growth / build out left.

[WeBe204]

doctorwho said:

was not th followup to that though that Brodie was willing to go back in front of a judge the following week- but after 2 years of sticking with it - we had a catharsis and decided no, we wouldn't dothat

Honestly, I do not know. I need a full color pop-up book with a time line to follow the full drama.

[proschool]

brad204 said:

proschool said:

How much does BB want to drop everything and sell another 40 acres right now? Obviously they don't want to keep it so what's the price. Does anyone even know?

I heard from someone in real estate developement that the PREIT project has been suspended.

This is an out take for a board member's email on the topic. The Friday mentioned would have been the week before the land vote

"last Friday Brach approached us with a $27M
offer and Brody wrote us and said that Brach doesn't speak for Brody
and that the jury's decision was the price for the land! $27M was
still too high, but the fact that B and B couldn't agree on a pricing
strategy was the last straw."

I think this is an often missed fact. BB where not exactly on the same page. I am not defending either side. Just trying to provide some data.

Thanks for the info. I wonder if the school board apprached Brodie.

Assume that Brodie wants 1/2 of $31 million. Brach wants 1/2 of $27 million. That averages out to $29 million. I think that it's odd that Brodie wants more money for this land than it received for the land on Route 59. Hmmm...if PREIT backs out of its deal BB looses its claim of damage to the remainder too.


The school board said they could be more efficient with the land and perhaps we could shave off 10-15 acres and sell some of the land facing 75th street. it would not have arrived from condemnation proceedings so presumably we could sell it to whomever we pleased. Plus we leave MDGEN on the tax rolls.

BB saves transportation costs, redesign fees and leagal fees.

I still think BB might be worth it.

[Arch]

proschool said:

I still think BB might be worth it.

They can have double from me what they asked for last time if it buys a site w/ the least amount of hazards...even if my kids get assigned elsewhere.

[proschool]

archwinsome said:

proschool said:

I still think BB might be worth it.

They can have double from me what they asked for last time if it buys a site w/ the least amount of hazards...even if my kids get assigned elsewhere.

Me too.

[concerned]

wow, some common ground. The site is the wrong site!!!!!Now how do we get them to stop before it is to late.

[confused]

If they won't realize it/stop it, maybe the people who wrote the ad were on to something. Maybe we need to get someone on the state level involved?

[joe6pack]

confused said:

archwinsome said:

SB could move from NV too since it has no walkers. Or does it?

5.9 miles to send them to WV


5.9 mi – about 15 mins

1. Head north on Gleneagles Dr toward 87th St
0.1 mi
2. Turn left at 87th St
1.6 mi
4 mins
3. Turn right at Book Rd
0.5 mi
1 min
4. Turn left at 83rd St
2.8 mi
6 mins
5. Turn right at Middlebury Dr
0.2 mi
1 min
6. Turn left at Long Grove Dr
0.6 mi
2 mins
7. Turn right at S Eola Rd
0.1 mi


There you go Fry.. send SB to WV.. it's not the farthest school and there are no walkers.

And if they go to WV, there would be no split middle schools.

Hey guys, this isn't true is it? Wouldn't that just split Gregory? Also, since the administration has suggested adding 200+ students from Builta to Springbrook, I imagine they're not eager to send those students to WV as well...

Of course, I'd never want to predict the next move...

[joe6pack]

archwinsome said:

proschool said:

I still think BB might be worth it.

They can have double from me what they asked for last time if it buys a site w/ the least amount of hazards...even if my kids get assigned elsewhere.

I'm not sure about *double*, but I'd be willing to part with more of my money if we could get BB back.

(ok, back to lurking for another year or two, thanks).

[Arch]

confused said:

If they won't realize it/stop it, maybe the people who wrote the ad were on to something. Maybe we need to get someone on the state level involved?

Perhaps someone at the state level needs to review their building permit and all submitted data for accuracy.

There's enough inaccurate data that we have found in a relatively short amount of time.

Were their Safety Reference Plans complete with the hazards pointed out on this site that were misrepresented in the Jan 22 presentation?

There is an unsafe conditions clause that deals with existing structures and specifically mentions dangerous or unlawful amounts of combustibles, explosive or otherwise hazardous materials.

tinyurl.com/3cs5qh

There are also guidelines within their grant program that I believe MWGEN violates: www.cdb.state.il.us/schools/skulrules.htm

c) Standards for School Site Selection and Approval
2) Suitability for Development and Construction

A) The site must be free of physical structures, topographical
features or subsurface physical conditions that would preclude necessary construction,
present insurmountable obstacles to safety or normal utilization, shorten building life,
cause excessive delays in project completion, or cause costs to exceed the funds available.
"Necessary construction" shall include but not necessarily be limited to: buildings, utility
lines, storm water disposal arrangements and paving. The local district shall provide a
report, acceptable to the Board, on soil conditions based on the removal of soil for testing.
The cost to the local school district of the soil test and report of that test shall be
considered as a credit to the local share of the recognized project cost if the site is
approved and a grant award is made.

B) The site must not be subject to existing or foreseeable,
harmful or disruptive environmental hazards and nuisances. Such hazards and nuisances may
include, but are not necessarily limited to: excessive dust, smoke, noise, odors, air
pollutants, soil pollutants, floods, ground water incursions, vibrations, explosions, and
electrical discharges. Site acquisition shall be subject to the Farmland Preservation Act
[505 ILCS 75], Interagency Wetland Policy Act of 1989 [20 ILCS 830], Illinois State Agency
Historic Resources Preservation Act [20 ILCS 3410], Archaeological and Paleontological
Resources Protection Act [20 ILCS 3435] and the Illinois Endangered Species Protection Act


^^^^^^^^
I think that right there is as good of a reason one will find.

[sushi]

The impression I got at the last meeting was that the board had absolutely exhausted efforts to "deal" with BB (I heard the same thing Brad did). The only thing that would get them to re-open it, IMO, would be if the MWGEN site has been ruled out. At that point, we would, obviously, have no bargining power. I think it is a dead issue.

[rew]

I think there is MUCH MORE to the story than the BB attorneys were unccoperative. The question is why?

They are obviously in the market to sell the site. Other buyers have successfully negotiated purchase of property with them. Why NOT the SD? Do the BB attorneys hate education? Hate children?

I think the breakdoiwn in the sale had a lot more to do with the BUYERS than the sellers.

[sushi]

What I heard is the Atty's are trying to drag this out as long as possible because there are no heirs to the estate - cats and dogs - and they are trying to bill as much as they can as long as possible.