Boundaries if we leave BB

[Arch]

wvhsparent said:

archwinsome said:

While you may be correct in their management's ability, all it takes are some very influential lobbyists to bend the right ears to get constituents to vote to approve money to put it in motion and pull it off. If certain folks want it to get done, it will eventually get done and like most cases, we pay the bill.

With all due respect. They have been saying they wanted to make a N/S Star line since before I moved in the area (Pheasant Creek Subdiv next to the tracks) in 1989. Nothing has ever happened. To me it's all white noise anymore.

Now that a steel outfit is going to invest in it, does that remove the possibility to buy open track time for the line?

[bob]

archwinsome said:

wvhsparent said:

With all due respect. They have been saying they wanted to make a N/S Star line since before I moved in the area (Pheasant Creek Subdiv next to the tracks) in 1989. Nothing has ever happened. To me it's all white noise anymore.

Now that a steel outfit is going to invest in it, does that remove the possibility to buy open track time for the line?

USX is selling and CN is buying so less chance for open track time.

[Arch]

bob said:

archwinsome said:

Now that a steel outfit is going to invest in it, does that remove the possibility to buy open track time for the line?

USX is selling and CN is buying so less chance for open track time.

If this will (in the future) cut the train traffic from what was proposed w/ the star line, then awesome. How many car spaces will be in the commuter lot at 248/250th ave and 91st/95th St?

ETA: Nevermind:

Project Description

The Park and Ride will be located at the southwest corner of 91st Street and Wolf's Crossing Road (formerly known as 250th Avenue) (PDF 26MB). The 2.5-acre facility will accommodate commuters who wish to drive, bike or walk to the facility, as well as commuters who are dropped off. Facility amenities will include:

* Bus shelter and loading area
* Over 200 vehicle parking spaces
* Bicycle parking
* Multi-use path connection to 250th Avenue
* Sidewalk connection to 91st Street
* Lighting

[macy]

forthekids said:

eagledad said:

So the wolf said the henhouse was safe? My gosh, we should fill it with chickens then

A funny story that a lot of people aren't aware of because most involved have moved away. I was one of a handful of people (Paul Lehman being one of them) who helped convince the school board in 1990 not to build Patterson near the power lines. Due to the extensive research our group had done, the original school site was moved to its current site. The experts we had spoken with all concurred that if you didn't have to build near power lines, you shouldn't. Now, of course, the shoe is on the other foot and Paul Lehman (for strictly financial reasons) is happy to have the district build a school near power lines. They are now, after all, "his" power lines, so it's OK. I haven't researched this topic in years but I bet if someone went out to the site with a gauss meter, they would find the readings are probably pretty high. The questions still remains, are EMF's dangerous to children's health? I don't have the answer and I certainly wouldn't trust ComEd to give it to me.

Not sure why Lehman was involved with the location of Patterson. I assumed from your post that he was a developer of Ashbury and had a financial stake as you mentioned and assumed is the current case for him in regards to the 248 property.

MAF was the developer, why was Lehman involved? What was the "financial stake" for him if he was not the developer of Ashbury?

As far as the EMF levels at the Macom site, who would you trust if you won't trust Com Ed? From what I know, the Com Ed folks deemed the 248 site well beyond the acceptable levels of safety in October of 2007. In fact, some of the readings came in lower than my blow dryer would emit. I'm sure the SB has had their own independent study done. Would you trust that information?

[forthekids]

Actually, Lehman had nothing to do with Ashbury. It originally started as a way to get the parent committee to take a look at other possible locations for the next elementary school (White Eagle), and that did affect him financially. He really wanted the school to be built in White Eagle sooner rather than later! The end result was the committee agreed that either site would work logistically for the next school but the issue of the power lines needed to be addressed. That was when the developer of Ashbury moved the school site so as to allow for the school to go to Ashbury first.

[forthekids]

macy said:

forthekids said:

A funny story that a lot of people aren't aware of because most involved have moved away. I was one of a handful of people (Paul Lehman being one of them) who helped convince the school board in 1990 not to build Patterson near the power lines. Due to the extensive research our group had done, the original school site was moved to its current site. The experts we had spoken with all concurred that if you didn't have to build near power lines, you shouldn't. Now, of course, the shoe is on the other foot and Paul Lehman (for strictly financial reasons) is happy to have the district build a school near power lines. They are now, after all, "his" power lines, so it's OK. I haven't researched this topic in years but I bet if someone went out to the site with a gauss meter, they would find the readings are probably pretty high. The questions still remains, are EMF's dangerous to children's health? I don't have the answer and I certainly wouldn't trust ComEd to give it to me.

Not sure why Lehman was involved with the location of Patterson. I assumed from your post that he was a developer of Ashbury and had a financial stake as you mentioned and assumed is the current case for him in regards to the 248 property.

MAF was the developer, why was Lehman involved? What was the "financial stake" for him if he was not the developer of Ashbury?

As far as the EMF levels at the Macom site, who would you trust if you won't trust Com Ed? From what I know, the Com Ed folks deemed the 248 site well beyond the acceptable levels of safety in October of 2007. In fact, some of the readings came in lower than my blow dryer would emit. I'm sure the SB has had their own independent study done. Would you trust that information?

The real issue is that no one is really sure what constitutes an acceptable level of EM exposure. I haven't looked into this issue for years, but it seems to me the jury is still out. There are so many variables when looking at cancer clusters. My preference is not to build something permanent and expensive that involves children anywhere near power lines. Just my opinion.

[rew]

I am not understanding. The same power lines running past Macom, run behind NVHS. And they run through Ashbury and even closer to Patterson School.

But more confusing to me is that there are houses surrounding the power lines all along it.

And there are huge power lines running along the AME site.

Are people saying they want both sites eliminated because of the power lines? I just want to clarify???

[proschool]

rew said:

I am not understanding. The same power lines running past Macom, run behind NVHS. And they run through Ashbury and even closer to Patterson School.

But more confusing to me is that there are houses surrounding the power lines all along it.

Most people won't buy one of those houses that back to power lines. When the sell the seller unually has to accept significantly less money to get the property sold.

[Arch]

rew said:

I am not understanding. The same power lines running past Macom, run behind NVHS. And they run through Ashbury and even closer to Patterson School.

But more confusing to me is that there are houses surrounding the power lines all along it.

Personally for me, it's the addition of the substation that makes power be 2 strikes not 1. Patterson has lines, but not a nearby substation. That gives it 1 strike not 2.

[rew]

Arch, there are switching stations at both the Macom and AME sites. The one at the AME site is huge.

What would people do if either of these sites were selected?

[Arch]

rew said:

Arch, there are switching stations at both the Macom and AME sites. The one at the AME site is huge.

What would people do if either of these sites were selected?

Pray for staying at WVHS.

[proschool]

rew said:

Arch, there are switching stations at both the Macom and AME sites. The one at the AME site is huge.

What would people do if either of these sites were selected?

I wonder if it would affect the district's insurance costs.

[proschool]

archwinsome said:

rew said:

Arch, there are switching stations at both the Macom and AME sites. The one at the AME site is huge.

What would people do if either of these sites were selected?

Pray for staying at WVHS.

I'll be fighting to stay at WV.

[EagleDad]

proschool said:

archwinsome said:

Pray for staying at WVHS.

I'll be fighting to stay at WV.

I'll be fighting to stay out of St Johns.

[proschool]

eagledad said:

proschool said:

I'll be fighting to stay at WV.

I'll be fighting to stay out of St Johns.

See you at Wabonsie.