YellowFever
New member
.
.
- Thread starter YellowFever
- Start date
YellowFever
New member
.
YellowFever
New member
.
The amount of substations in Irvine is nothing compared to surrounding cities.
Just take a look at this map:http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/infrastructure/3P_Enlg.pdf
Check out Long Beach and Hawthorne. These guys are done for.
Just take a look at this map:http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/infrastructure/3P_Enlg.pdf
Check out Long Beach and Hawthorne. These guys are done for.
Attachments
haha, yeah, there's a ton of info on the map, you have to subscribe or whatever (use throwaway email) to filter stuff out (like petty theft, oooh, someone stole my starbucks order...) and select date range
but since it's friday downtime, there's already a study done pretty much what you're intending to do here:https://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=4560cfbce7c745c299b2d0cbb07044f5
and their methodology is pretty comprehensive:https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calenviroscreen/report/042313calenviroscreen1.pdf
when comparing to the rest of the other areas, irvine is paradise
(I know what stands out is that CVE/BP/Parasol/GP section, that's only because the population isn't there, but if you click on it, it indicates the various stats for Ozone, PM, Diesel, etc etc, even has traffic, ashtma and low birth rate ratings)
but what you're going to like is what you were asking for in terms of demographics, there is a pie chart at the bottom when you mouse over a section, not sure how you're going to rank that, lol
but since it's friday downtime, there's already a study done pretty much what you're intending to do here:https://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=4560cfbce7c745c299b2d0cbb07044f5
and their methodology is pretty comprehensive:https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calenviroscreen/report/042313calenviroscreen1.pdf
when comparing to the rest of the other areas, irvine is paradise
(I know what stands out is that CVE/BP/Parasol/GP section, that's only because the population isn't there, but if you click on it, it indicates the various stats for Ozone, PM, Diesel, etc etc, even has traffic, ashtma and low birth rate ratings)
but what you're going to like is what you were asking for in terms of demographics, there is a pie chart at the bottom when you mouse over a section, not sure how you're going to rank that, lol
YellowFever said:I already checked spot crime map. It's all over the freakin' place. No neighborhood is particularly any safer than others. So it won't do anything other than move the numbers up for each neighborhood relative to each other.
At least that hazard is preventable and controllable! Buy a gun!
I'll add the flood one later on..
I wish we had data on for example, neighborhoods by ethnicity/race. Using data from California statistics, blacks and hispanics are more likely to commit crimes followed by whites. And then Asians, pacific islanders, indians are least likely. If I had a census data for each neighborhood, that would be awesome!
With that data, I could make a claim that "The Groves" has a statistically higher risk of crime among the neighbors than say.....Cypress Village where there's more oriental Asians? (oh shoot, I got my flame suit on now!)
YellowFever
New member
.
Irvine does have an abnormally high number of kids with brain cancer, I believe.
http://www.ocweekly.com/news/how-irvine-became-socals-first-non-toxic-city-7317638
That's like 90 Times higher than normal. 900%
http://www.ocweekly.com/news/how-irvine-became-socals-first-non-toxic-city-7317638
That's like 90 Times higher than normal. 900%
I appreciate Yellow trying to educate potential buyers, and I think he is doing a good job deterring potential buyers from buying in Irvine. I think people coming here on this site will believe the list as accurate and think that Irvine has too many problems they never thought of.
Also, by his own admission, the list is malleable. This list is updated according to our inputs and the more a certain community owner provides feedback, the better the community may do on the list. I think that the owners who are not participating in the feedback because they are not on the forum will have no idea why people have stopped buying in their community and thereby why the value of their hard earned cash is going down.
Some may proactively seek negatives for other communities not their own and provide them to Yellow which may boost their communities standing on the list. But the problem is, if the value of other communities go down, so shall the value of all communities in Irvine as a whole eventually. When all communities are doing well in home prices, it just brings up the prices of all the communities in a city. There is a cascading effect long term with potential lowering enrollment, lowering home prices that will affect not only the lower standing communities on the list but will eventually affect the others on the list.
There are many more factors good and bad that are not factored into the list and as some already voiced here, Yellow's judgement on many of the communities is not quite accurate and for many not quite fair.
I am not knocking him for trying to help potential buyers, but unless he is an expert in logistics (and I know someone who actually does this type of thing for a profession), I think with his eagerness to help some, he is hurting a lot of people and steering away many from Irvine.
Also, by his own admission, the list is malleable. This list is updated according to our inputs and the more a certain community owner provides feedback, the better the community may do on the list. I think that the owners who are not participating in the feedback because they are not on the forum will have no idea why people have stopped buying in their community and thereby why the value of their hard earned cash is going down.
Some may proactively seek negatives for other communities not their own and provide them to Yellow which may boost their communities standing on the list. But the problem is, if the value of other communities go down, so shall the value of all communities in Irvine as a whole eventually. When all communities are doing well in home prices, it just brings up the prices of all the communities in a city. There is a cascading effect long term with potential lowering enrollment, lowering home prices that will affect not only the lower standing communities on the list but will eventually affect the others on the list.
There are many more factors good and bad that are not factored into the list and as some already voiced here, Yellow's judgement on many of the communities is not quite accurate and for many not quite fair.
I am not knocking him for trying to help potential buyers, but unless he is an expert in logistics (and I know someone who actually does this type of thing for a profession), I think with his eagerness to help some, he is hurting a lot of people and steering away many from Irvine.
Paris167
New member
spootieho said:
That's crazy. Thanks for sharing that article - it's nice to see the community rally around environmental safety issues that affect all of us. I hope this organic process applies to the avocado orchards in OH. I always have this nightmare that while I sleep these low flying technologically quiet airplanes or drones spray toxic pesticides onto the acreage of avocado orchards all around our homes because what we "don't know, and don't see" can't hurt us "they say".
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
spootieho said:
How far back do those cases of Brain CA go? We had a 6 year old with brain cancer in Canyon Creek (backs to Rosegate in Northwood Pointe and Eastwood to the east) probably around 1995 or so. At the time, the land just north of Canyon Creek was all orange groves owned by the Irvine Company and Eastwood was a nursery. No idea what pesticides they used.
I'm going to chime in and say that I wholeheartedly agree with IrvineNinja's post and also read the article word-for-word.
To me, it shows that Irvine residents are proactively ensuring that we have a safe living environment for our families. Especially, since we pay a premium to live here. To see that the city was responsive and was one the first city to make these adjustments is comforting.
To me, it shows that Irvine residents are proactively ensuring that we have a safe living environment for our families. Especially, since we pay a premium to live here. To see that the city was responsive and was one the first city to make these adjustments is comforting.
eyephone said:
OCLuvr
Active member
Firstly, I admire YellowFever for all his research and attempt to put things in perspective.
I think this thread was on correct path initially, but digressed midway. Following are my objection points:
1. The discussion midway moved on "futuristic" hazards--e.g. cemetery was added which is still proposed and might not happen. If that is the case, why projection is not taken in account that there could be cell towers in every neighborhood--eventually? Or what stops "sex predators" to move from one community to another? Or with Great park completing, there would be so much traffic near cypress village which could be unbearable for lot of people?
2. As pointed out earlier, PS is huge (approximately, ~6500 residents when complete) and rest of the majority neighborhoods are pretty much 1/4th size of PS (~1500-1800 residents), but entire PS neighborhood is considered as one which gets it bad ratings, as it is considered close for all the hazards--E.g. Entire PS is shown close to proposed cemetery--even though parts of PS are equidistant to SG from cemetery. Similarly, parts of PS are far from toll road than SG, but entire PS is painted close to toll road. When aerial distance from landfill is calculated, one part of the PS is considered where as when aerial distance to cemetery was calculated, completely diagonal point from the previous data point in PS was taken.
It seemed like hazards were added to bring some neighborhoods in "safe zone" and bring some other neighborhoods lower in the list.
The reason I wanted to jolt down these points, as I want prospective buyers to make choices keeping everything in perspective and make an educated decision.
I think this thread was on correct path initially, but digressed midway. Following are my objection points:
1. The discussion midway moved on "futuristic" hazards--e.g. cemetery was added which is still proposed and might not happen. If that is the case, why projection is not taken in account that there could be cell towers in every neighborhood--eventually? Or what stops "sex predators" to move from one community to another? Or with Great park completing, there would be so much traffic near cypress village which could be unbearable for lot of people?
2. As pointed out earlier, PS is huge (approximately, ~6500 residents when complete) and rest of the majority neighborhoods are pretty much 1/4th size of PS (~1500-1800 residents), but entire PS neighborhood is considered as one which gets it bad ratings, as it is considered close for all the hazards--E.g. Entire PS is shown close to proposed cemetery--even though parts of PS are equidistant to SG from cemetery. Similarly, parts of PS are far from toll road than SG, but entire PS is painted close to toll road. When aerial distance from landfill is calculated, one part of the PS is considered where as when aerial distance to cemetery was calculated, completely diagonal point from the previous data point in PS was taken.
It seemed like hazards were added to bring some neighborhoods in "safe zone" and bring some other neighborhoods lower in the list.
The reason I wanted to jolt down these points, as I want prospective buyers to make choices keeping everything in perspective and make an educated decision.
YellowFever
New member
.