new park near BP Ellwood

O

oceanmonkey

New member
according to five points, the land south of Ellwood/Melody is going to be a park area.
Any insiders have details about the park? looks like the contaminated area is right on that area.
 
irvinehomeshopper said:
Before I post do you have proof that this is the contaminated area?
Click to expand...


Im really curious why you want proof before you post.  In my honest opinion, they are already building in areas which are not safe.  Why would they stop now?
 
There is a map out depicting the contaminated areas. The concentration is southwest of the great park. To blanket the entire 2mi x 2mi as contaminated area is not a fair statement.
 
irvinehomeshopper said:
There is a map out depicting the contaminated areas. The concentration is southwest of the great park. To blanket the entire 2mi x 2mi as contaminated area is not a fair statement.
Click to expand...

this is like to say... living next door to a toxic chemical plant is perfectly safe, because the land is only toxic over your fence.

#wakeupIHS
 
oceanmonkey said:
irvinehomeshopper said:
There is a map out depicting the contaminated areas. The concentration is southwest of the great park. To blanket the entire 2mi x 2mi as contaminated area is not a fair statement.
Click to expand...

this is like to say... livingIrvine  next door to a toxic chemical plant Santa Ana is perfectly safe, because the land city is only toxicdangerous over your fence.

#wakeupIHS
Click to expand...
 
Isn't the toxicity problem already remediated by now? It would be highly irresponsible and legally liable if they were to have residents move in right next door without having it cleaned up.

Of course, if you don't trust the analysis that's a different story. In that case, you should not consider buying in BP or any where in GP for that matter.
 
irvinehomeshopper said:
There is a map out depicting the contaminated areas. The concentration is southwest of the great park. To blanket the entire 2mi x 2mi as contaminated area is not a fair statement.
Click to expand...

There is a large plume of TCE under many areas where people are currently living, so your statement is not correct.  Secondly this plume moves and thus areas of contamination will move as well.  Third, the map you speak of is a map of where we THINK the contaminated area is.  There is no way to know for sure all areas where there is contamination.  A good example of this is the toxic soil found while building the high school in portola. 
http://www.irvinecommunitynewsandvi...amination-discovered-at-new-high-school-site/

The thing that you should be most concerned about is the integrity of the people involved in this.  There has already been so much effort to cover up the dangers of the contamination EVERYONE should at the very least question how safe this area truly is regardless of what is told to you.

 
The sad thing about Irvine politics is that I have no idea if the "toxic" soil link is even true. Has any actual news publication (other than Agran's fraud machine) published anything?  I would presume if it was "real", we'd have seen all kinds of talk about the school on a toxic site. Agran is such a slimeball. 
 
Bullsback said:
The sad thing about Irvine politics is that I have no idea if the "toxic" soil link is even true. Has any actual news publication (other than Agran's fraud machine) published anything?  I would presume if it was "real", we'd have seen all kinds of talk about the school on a toxic site. Agran is such a slimeball.
Click to expand...

Agran may be a slimeball, but the toxic soil is definitely there:https://www.iusd.org/district_servi...ocuments/4.24.15LettertoIrvineCityCouncil.pdf
 
Ok so it did exist, but the paper made it sound far different than the IUSD at least wants you to believe. That said, I don't trust politicians to not cover up their own mistakes (and Agran has his own agenda since he was pushing a different location).  Sad that I have that little faith that I believe no one when it comes to this. 
 
Shouldn't there be checks on the city, state and federal level on the toxicity in the city since its on a former airbase. 
 
Bullsback said:
The sad thing about Irvine politics is that I have no idea if the "toxic" soil link is even true. Has any actual news publication (other than Agran's fraud machine) published anything?  I would presume if it was "real", we'd have seen all kinds of talk about the school on a toxic site. Agran is such a slimeball.
Click to expand...
http://www.latimes.com/tn-dpt-me-0501-irvine-council-toxic-soil-20150430-story.html
http://www.irvinecommunitynewsandvi...amination-discovered-at-new-high-school-site/
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/school-659967-site-soil.html
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2015/04...site-soil-contamination-at-portola-high-site/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/more-toxic-contamination-discovered-new-irvine-high-site-abercrombie


BUllsback, let me first say that I respect most things you say on this blog.  In fact I agree with many things you say.  But this last comment I thought was quite ridiculous.
these are the first 5 links that showed up on a google search.  I only linked these because its ridiculous that people question and dismiss this issue.  Your claim that this "toxic thing" is not true because due to the lack of coverage is illogical, especially if that is the only argument.  The facts are there and rather I feel you should be appalled at the lack of coverage of this.
By the same notion you feel politics in Irvine is outrageous, you should feel outraged that politics is likely what prevents further coverage of this issue.  There has been active efforts to minimize the coverage of this issue.  Although this is purely speculation, I suspect this is being pushed under the rug because there is a lot of money at stake...  Unfortunately it may be at the risk of the people living in the area.  I for one do not want to be a guinea pig in their play for more money and power.  Whether you or anyone else reading the blog wish to take this risk is your decision. 
 
AW said:
Shouldn't there be checks on the city, state and federal level on the toxicity in the city since its on a former airbase.
Click to expand...

There should be.  Unfortunately we all know money and power trump "the right decision" and I have strong suspicion that in many instance, money often is the deciding factor.

Furthermore, I would argue that people need to stop seeking the government to tell us what is ok and what is not ok.  The "government" is made up of people just like you and me.  Although some may have the education to make these decisions, many do not.  Furthermore, even the most highly educated people do not have the answers.  There are many unknowns especially in regards to safety of chemicals and unfortunately there is often no consensus on how safe something is.
 
hello said:
Bullsback said:
The sad thing about Irvine politics is that I have no idea if the "toxic" soil link is even true. Has any actual news publication (other than Agran's fraud machine) published anything?  I would presume if it was "real", we'd have seen all kinds of talk about the school on a toxic site. Agran is such a slimeball.
Click to expand...
http://www.latimes.com/tn-dpt-me-0501-irvine-council-toxic-soil-20150430-story.html
http://www.irvinecommunitynewsandvi...amination-discovered-at-new-high-school-site/
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/school-659967-site-soil.html
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2015/04...site-soil-contamination-at-portola-high-site/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/more-toxic-contamination-discovered-new-irvine-high-site-abercrombie


BUllsback, let me first say that I respect most things you say on this blog.  In fact I agree with many things you say.  But this last comment I thought was quite ridiculous.
these are the first 5 links that showed up on a google search.  I only linked these because its ridiculous that people question and dismiss this issue.  Your claim that this "toxic thing" is not true because due to the lack of coverage is illogical, especially if that is the only argument.  The facts are there and rather I feel you should be appalled at the lack of coverage of this.
By the same notion you feel politics in Irvine is outrageous, you should feel outraged that politics is likely what prevents further coverage of this issue.  There has been active efforts to minimize the coverage of this issue.  Although this is purely speculation, I suspect this is being pushed under the rug because there is a lot of money at stake...  Unfortunately it may be at the risk of the people living in the area.  I for one do not want to be a guinea pig in their play for more money and power.  Whether you or anyone else reading the blog wish to take this risk is your decision.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you said. I hadn't done a google search and was relying more on what was posted here, so I might have missed some of those articles (or have a fuzzy memory).  And I do agree that potential land issues on a public school should be a big deal and everyone should be 1000% comfortable that the land a school is built on is safe and non-toxic. The fact that some soil showed up in places wasn't expected brings doubt to the general soil levels in other spots.  Also, I didn't mean to imply it wasn't true, just that my skepticism when it comes to politics now is massive (on both sides) and I agree that politics is absolutely playing into it being downplayed (since the current regime picked the proposal to place the school here). 

I think the self-interests exist in both sides (and I'd say the same thing in general when it comes to the general election...where I find almost all the candidates appalling).  In general, I am an extreme skeptic when it comes to politics and what politicians (and sales people for that matter) say. 
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Erin Brokovich 2: The Toxic Avenger
Click to expand...
If you think about it, you are building a > $100 million school. If you screw that up, that is a lot of money down the drain and that creates a ton of incentive for people to cover-up (vs. step up and say the right thing or stop a project in its tracks early).  Remember that school in the LA area that they spent all that money on that never opened (Belmont Learning Complex).  Maybe it eventually opened?  But IIRC, that was built on an old oil field and they had issues with methane release (plus I'm sure all kinds of other problems). 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top