J
jmoney74
Guest
200+ low income 55+ apartments.. I can see it now. Hanging their big old underwear on a clothesline on the balcony! oh man! Hang it in your bathroom like Test does.
Irvine's 5th High School
- Thread starter akula1488
- Start date
Irvinecommuter
New member
jmoney74 said:
It also helps with the selling point for SVUSD and newer communities in FR. They can now move the kids from BR to the new HS and K-8 schools.
Obviously, we have no idea what backchannel dealing has happened but 5P is certainly not helping itself on this matter.
J
jmoney74
Guest
definitely not helping themselves to the public, that's for sure.
J
jmoney74
Guest
Test brings values up or down.. based on postings done on TI.
In case this from oc register last week wasn't linked or posted yet
"
It also wouldn?t affect many residents, only future residents, said Irvine Unified Trustee Mike Parham. He said the territory the board has suggested giving up does not include the Great Park Neighborhoods and Pavilion Park developments.
...
An Irvine Unified spokesperson said the district has no intention of breaking the mitigation agreement between FivePoint and the district.
"
"
It also wouldn?t affect many residents, only future residents, said Irvine Unified Trustee Mike Parham. He said the territory the board has suggested giving up does not include the Great Park Neighborhoods and Pavilion Park developments.
...
An Irvine Unified spokesperson said the district has no intention of breaking the mitigation agreement between FivePoint and the district.
"
J
jmoney74
Guest
notTHEoc said:
So I don't get this one.. the line drawn was for PP and the new development that will be built later. I know current students wouldn't have to go.. but future students? That's most of the families that are moving in.
Move2Irvine
New member
notTHEoc said:
I'm confused. If they are not giving up the Great Park Neighborhoods, what are they giving up then if the HS is not built on time ? Woodbury ? Portola Springs? Stonegate ? Maybe he meant we are not giving up Pavillion Park, but for future Great Park neighboorhood, its up in the air to pressure 5P to get their acts together.
GH said:
Here is a article from OC Register. It will not affect existing residents including Pavilion Park. Only future residents that are in the shaded area that is subject for border changes if it is implemented.
However, the article mentions that it will/likely adversely impact Great Park neighborhoods to the north and nearby neighborhoods (above the shaded area) by approx. $40,000 on average if proposed changes are made.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/school-606317-district-irvine.html
Attachments
Irvinecommuter
New member
I think at this point...we are just going to have wait to see what happens. Again, I think the most logical solution would be keep PP in IUSD considering it will probably be built out by 2016.
The rest of the GP development, however, is probably fair game.
The rest of the GP development, however, is probably fair game.
notTHEoc said:It seems there is deep tension right now between IUSD and TIC for TIC not having provided any land for HS#5 despite all the TIC development over the last 15 years. Originally, the last 2 GP hoods were expected to go to SVUSD, but when you look at the map now, actually all GP hoods will go to IUSD. That was a win and +ive surprise for 5P and it suggests IUSD cozying up to 5P. It makes sense there would be backchanneling now to move SG into IUSD. I think it is just a ploy though to get TIC to provide the land for HS#6, but we'll have to wait and see what happens.
There are facts in there - would this qualify as "just doing fact-based analysis?"
I could be wrong, but looking at the map that Goriot posted from OC register, the parcel of land in just below the "red zone" that is assigned to SVUSD are great park land, and if the red zone area are the one that is currently being disputed, that unfortunately includes PP.
http://irvinecommunitypoll.org/poll-results/irvines-next-high-school-final-results/Tribune said:
Don't know how many people actually voted, but according to the result, voters are favoring site B.
(I do not know whether the same person can vote multiple times or not.)
bones said:GH said:notTHEoc said:It seems there is deep tension right now between IUSD and TIC for TIC not having provided any land for HS#5 despite all the TIC development over the last 15 years. Originally, the last 2 GP hoods were expected to go to SVUSD, but when you look at the map now, actually all GP hoods will go to IUSD. That was a win and +ive surprise for 5P and it suggests IUSD cozying up to 5P. It makes sense there would be backchanneling now to move SG into IUSD. I think it is just a ploy though to get TIC to provide the land for HS#6, but we'll have to wait and see what happens.
There are facts in there - would this qualify as "just doing fact-based analysis?"
I could be wrong, but looking at the map that Goriot posted from OC register, the parcel of land in just below the "red zone" that is assigned to SVUSD are great park land, and if the red zone area are the one that is currently being disputed, that unfortunately includes PP.
actually no it doesn't. red is below irvine blvd. pull up google maps and overlay it. plus the quotes in the article say specifically pp = iusd.
you're right .. my initial impression from the map was the upper line was Portola pkwy and the lower line was Irvine Blvd.
