|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 19, 2008 13:32:25 GMT -6
There seems to be a little misunderstanding of where the school is going exactly on the AME property (even my wife was confused, she was unaware it was on the northern part of the property and overlaying the Peaker Plant). To help people better understand, I've taken the liberty of scaling the School districts plans from the Site Recommendation, adding Transparency (a massive play on words, purposely intended here ;D), and overlaying them on a Google Maps satellite view, lining up the prairie path and Eola road exactly so everything is to scale. Hopefully this will add value to the discussion. In the interest of objectivity, I'll try to get the location each photo was taken from and a vector for the direction it was taken added from the original photographer.   |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jan 19, 2008 13:33:33 GMT -6
I'm having a hard time understanding why the people who live near this site and are very familiar with what it looks like are overjoyed at the prospect of sending their kids there. Do you people think we are morons that don't care about the safety of our own children and others? The people complaining the loudest about safety of AME seem to either be currently in NV boundaries and potentially moving to WV boundaries, or currently in WV and not wanting a long drive to MV if the boundaries turn out that way (except I know arch has said distance is not the issue for him). Everyone I've talked to from any of the 4 furthest north schools is happy with AME. As one who has posted some clarifications about the site, let me make it perfectly clear that I am not endorsing the site. Our youngest is a sophomore and won't be affected by the school no matter what happens. Of course, I am concerned with the safety of everyone's children. What I am equally concerned with, and have been for many years, is the apalling lack of honesty and transparency from our school board. After the BB fiasco, many more people seem to share my frustration. That said, when people on this board resort to hyperbole and misleading or incorrect info to support their positions, it lowers the quality of debate and lessens the credibility of this board. . A lot of info on this board is accepted as gospel and repeated within the larger community. All I'm saying is that when our info is incorrect, we are all subject to being called on the inaccuracies and our credibility suffers. Many are justifiably critical of the SB for pushing an agenda and twisting the facts to suit the desired outcome. I would hope that we would do better than that, that's all. I hope I haven't offended anyone. I recognize that others do not always ( or ever) share my opinion. Everyone is entitled to an opinion -- I'd just like to see the info on this board remain as accurate as possible -- Credibility is important -- I think most would agree that the SB has squandered theirs -- let's keep ours. Sam2 , I would agree your posts are well thought out.. would you agree then that trading a 15 minute bus ride ( per the Laidlaw schedule) - for a 40-42 minute bus ride - direct from SD admin. - would be far less than something most would accept willingly ? ( and longer than any benefit change that has been posted here by anyone- and one person is north of I88- about the greatest difference I would think- and I trust their facts ) Would you agree that 50-54 extra minutes on a bus per day is no benefit, and likely a detriment to the students who have to do this ? Would you agree that if the bus difference is that great, that sending a 16-17 year old out to drive this differential twice a day for 3 years would inherently be more dangerous than what they currently have ? No hyperbole here- pure fact. just checking - as I see no spin to any of this data. The only spin I have seen is from those who claim that I and now the SD are both somehow wrong on this. Want to make sure none of this is on your hyperbole radar - and if it is - why ? |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 19, 2008 13:51:53 GMT -6
FYI - Per my eyeball/ruler estimation using the scale on the School District plans and that overlay that I created, the NE corner of the new school building is 800 feet from the SW corner of the power substation that will remain.
If the school district administration will share the location that the EMF values were taken and their levels, I will gladly add them to the composite and republish it.
|
|
ziggy
Frosh
...is there life on Mars ?
Posts: 8
|
Post by ziggy on Jan 19, 2008 13:55:08 GMT -6
There seems to be a little misunderstanding of where the school is going exactly on the AME property (even my wife was confused, she was unaware it was on the northern part of the property and overlaying the Peaker Plant). To help people better understand, I've taken the liberty of scaling the School districts plans from the Site Recommendation, adding Trasparency (a massive play on words, purposely intended here ;D), and overlaying them on a Google Maps satellite view, lining up the prarie path and Eola road exactly so everything is to scale. Hopefully this will add value to the discussion. In the interest of objectivity, I'll try to get the location each photo was taken from and a vector for the direction it was taken added from the original photographer. would the view from the stadium ( whenever that is actually added) not be what we are looking at here ? |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 19, 2008 13:58:57 GMT -6
One thing that's clear here - the Church kept the absolute best land for themself. They carved slivers of junk off th North and East for us. It looks like most of the land comes from Midwest Generation.
If you guys don't think any of this information I'm attempting to add is valuable, let me know and I'll stop and you can just get what the District Administration provides.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 19, 2008 14:08:33 GMT -6
One thing that's clear here - the Church kept the absolute best land for themself. They carved slivers of junk off th North and East for us. It looks like most of the land comes from Midwest Generation. If you guys don't think any of this information I'm attempting to add is valuable, let me know and I'll stop and you can just get what the District Administration provides. Keep it coming, because it seems like no one else is really giving this serious consideration or putting the pieces of the puzzle together for a complete picture. Good job in taking the time to do that and Thank You. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 19, 2008 14:09:11 GMT -6
Sorry, I was busy this morning.
ED...I think Michael Moore is calling you.....He need more researchers like you.......
Why are you worried about AME? You are probably going to WVHS............
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 19, 2008 14:13:34 GMT -6
Sorry, I was busy this morning. ED...I think Michael Moore is calling you.....He need more researchers like you....... Why are you worried about AME? You are probably going to WVHS............ Why are you worried about him showing what it will be and where things will be located with respect to the surrounding areas? Might it show people a perspective they never thought of before and would never have until after the money is spent and the place is built? (When it's too late to consider an alternative). Suppression of evidence often leads to incorrect verdicts when all of the facts become known later afterwards. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 19, 2008 14:20:50 GMT -6
Just to be clear - I did not take the photos, there were send to me by someone as well as descriptions of where they were taken from. And I am very surprised (OK not really anymore) that you would stoop that low and post them without verifying them. They are extremely misleading and completley out of perspective and you know it! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 19, 2008 14:24:32 GMT -6
Just to be clear - I did not take the photos, there were send to me by someone as well as descriptions of where they were taken from. And I am very surprised (OK not really anymore) that you would stoop that low and post them without verifying them. They are extremely misleading and completley out of perspective and you know it! Are they of the site area and its surrounds or are they of some other location other than what is listed, like say from Batavia? |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 19, 2008 14:27:45 GMT -6
Sorry, I was busy this morning. ED...I think Michael Moore is calling you.....He need more researchers like you....... Why are you worried about AME? You are probably going to WVHS............ Why are you worried about him showing what it will be and where things will be located with respect to the surrounding areas? Might it show people a perspective they never thought of before and would never have until after the money is spent and the place is built? (When it's too late to consider an alternative). Suppression of evidence often leads to incorrect verdicts when all of the facts become known later afterwards. I am not worried. It is my job as a Forensic Investigator to document things properly. So this is one area I am very familiar with. These images while I will agree were taken from the general area. They would not pass muster in a court of law. Improper presentation of evidence is as bad, and in many cases worse than supression. |
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Jan 19, 2008 14:27:54 GMT -6
Just to be clear - I did not take the photos, there were send to me by someone as well as descriptions of where they were taken from. And I am very surprised (OK not really anymore) that you would stoop that low and post them without verifying them. They are extremely misleading and completley out of perspective and you know it! >> out of perspective. These are photographs. The map was dead on. Geesh if BB was "on route 59" as the detractors said then AME is on a nuclear waste dump. Really I am fine with it as long as I know my kids will never have to go there and everyone else is happy...but that doesn't seem to be the case. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 19, 2008 14:30:36 GMT -6
Why are you worried about him showing what it will be and where things will be located with respect to the surrounding areas? Might it show people a perspective they never thought of before and would never have until after the money is spent and the place is built? (When it's too late to consider an alternative). Suppression of evidence often leads to incorrect verdicts when all of the facts become known later afterwards. I am not worried. It is my job as a Forensic Investigator to document things properly. So this is one area I am very familiar with. These images while I will agree were taken from the general area. They would not pass muster in a court of law. Improper presentation of evidence is as bad, and in many cases worse than supression. Like calling the place 'safe' without quality raw data presented. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 19, 2008 14:50:11 GMT -6
Just to be clear - I did not take the photos, there were send to me by someone as well as descriptions of where they were taken from. And I am very surprised (OK not really anymore) that you would stoop that low and post them without verifying them. They are extremely misleading and completley out of perspective and you know it! I'm trying to get the location of the photos verified by the original photographer, but for now, based on the descriptions give to me I am going to guess that photos 1 and 2 were taken from Point A on this map (the current private road) facing in the direction of the arrow, and 3,4,5 were taken from B,C, and D repspectively. If I can get these points verified, will that do your honor (geez). maype youd like GPS coordinates?  |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 19, 2008 14:55:01 GMT -6
I hope whomever can snap a picture of the fuel storage tank at the plant.
Usually natural gas is stored in more spherical containers due to the internal pressure. That tank in the google satellite looks more like a petrol tank (diesel, jet fuel, gasoline, etc).
If MM said it was natural gas, (which I don't doubt due to the pipeline being right underneath it) then why the huge fuel tank? Documentation on the site listed it as burning both fuels, but our SB President mentioned only one type of fuel. I hope that was a simple mistake and not an improper presentation of evidence to attempt to pipe down the 'jet fuel' concerns.
|
|
