Bike Racks

The following letter was written by reader, Richard Gideon and is reprinted with his permission.

27 June 2011

 

Board Members:

 

I listened to the Architect's Update of 20 June 2011 (courtesy of Elaine Gillen's “Lebo Citizens” web site) and was taken aback by the discussion concerning the role of bike racks at the proposed new high school edifice. For the record, my wife and I are avid cyclists. Cycling is great exercise and an excellent way to get around – under the proper circumstances. I understand that bike racks are a component of LEED Certification.  However, the requirements of LEED Certification aside, encouraging high school students, who are by definition (with a few exceptions) minors, to ride bicycles to the high school - during rush hour – on major traffic routes with no bike lanes – on hills with steep grades – mixing in with arriving and departing school traffic - is ill advised at best.

 

Dr. Steinhauer may cycle to school as he pleases because he is an adult, knows the risks, and accepts them. That he does so is classic individualism and I applaud it. But in tacitly agreeing with Mr. Lebowitz that other people's children should be encouraged to take the same kind of risk he is asking for a gigantic lawsuit should, God forbid, a kid be killed whilst cycling to school. 

 

Mr. Remely's observations on the subject are correct; and if I may be permitted to add, as a youngster moves through adolescence the thrill of a bicycle gives way very quickly to the anticipation of a driver's license, making the point of bike racks somewhat moot.

 

Sincerely,

 

Richard Gideon

Now is the time

As the School Board Directors stated, now is the time to step back, review, and reduce or delete some of our desires.  (Comments from Dan Remely and Dale Ostergaard from Part 2 of 4.25.11 meeting) How big will that second bond be?  The world has drastically changed since 2008.  What are we really able to afford?  Energy savings or a Leed Certificate?
John Taormina, construction manager from P.J. Dick, was asked to compare the Upper St. Clair renovation cost differential to our project.  He said that it would be comparing apples to oranges.  We offer programs that are not offered at USC.  For instance, we have two theaters, they don't. We have several gymnasiums which USC does not have.  We offer dance class.  USC does not.  As a member of the CAC whispered to me last night, maybe that is why USC is always number one in education.
It was mentioned that our project was allowed to grow from a bush into a tree and now we have to cut off limbs.  Do you think it had anything to do with the special interest groups exclaiming that we can get so much more for only $18 a month more?  The VOICE website is on the SOS signs and clearly promotes this way of thinking, to this day.  Last night, the Commission passed the sign ordinance revision for the SOS signs, in the name of freedom of speech.  This group mislead the School Board.  They mislead the community.  They were also silent at last night's meeting.
For a moment in time last night, the entire community agreed that the project needs to be scaled back.

Broken bulb? Evacuate the building according to the EPA

Got this in my mail box. 
Watch this video.   Keep in mind, these are the same energy saving bulbs that are being proposed for the high school to achieve LEED certification. 

I use these bulbs at home and dispose of them at IKEA.  Maybe we should have a recycling program for CFL bulbs here in Mt. Lebanon.