1) I read the Chase column regarding mussels (Thanks for linking to it, bad PTC) and, if Dennis is only saying Lake McIntosh might have to "jump through more hoops", then I don't see the lake having to be relocated.

Hoops, as in designing the lake in a way that will not impact the mussels. Or get the Feds to allow them to impact the mussels.

Good luck. Odds are very low of success.

Could happen, but not likely.

Reading it to mean they just have to refine the proposal a bit is not what is being said. Been there on the mussel issue. The mussels won.

2) The water restrictions we are currently under are state mandated -- I have seen nothing on the County saying we're running short right now.

Look at Lake Kedron and visualize it with thousands of more homes drawing on it. Add some more big boxes.

3) Spin - PTC Guy, you went from saying 5,000 homes/10,000 residents as a "high end estimate" to using these numbers as fact. With 1200 homes being requested, that would be more than 8 people per home - not gonna happen. We're looking at under 4,000 for the current request, which will be cut if it happens.

Which drops the numbers to at least 7,000 new residents, which adds at least 318,000 gal/day demand. Still bye bye Photocircuits use.

Plus, you forget, Photocircuits was not using anywhere close to 325,000 gal/day in the last days of operation. They had slashed hundreds of positions before applying for bankrupcy.

From the time they began cutting production to closing do you think construction ended?

Hundreds of homes have been built. The idea that water resources have been setting there unclaimed, over time, is false.

Yes, the one plant is not working at capacity. But no, the demand on water has not been static.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

From the county.

With the loss of Lake McIntosh, what is the new, final, realistic build out number we can actually handle on the issue of water?

The other aspects are more flexible.

Or, is there an alternative site for a resevoire lake?

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

We did not spend a bunch of money on our home to say let the plants die.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

If these developers are so benevolent and wise, as some contend, why haven't they addressed the problem?

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

In other business, Turner pointed out the dramatic decrease in industrial water consumption when comparing November of this year to November of last year, when industrial customers accounted for 14.6 million gallons of usage.
This November, with the shuttering of printed circuit boards manufacturer Photocircuits, the industrial usage is down to 3.178 million gallons. Photocircuits had permits to use up to 325,000 gallons of water a day and now WASA is without that revenue.

That’s a 21% drop in usage.
Citizen Online Article

http://www.thecitizen.com/node/2795

“At home during the summer, a person who uses between 65 and 80 gallons per day is using water wisely and efficiently. That figure drops to 50 to 65 gallons per person per day in the winter.”
How Water Wise if Your Home

http://www.thecitizen.com/node/7191

For round numbers let us assume that an average PTC household uses 10,000 gallons of water a month.

“Photocircuits had permits to use up to 325,000 gallons of water a day”.

I don’t see where household water consumption is going to be a issue.

First of all, quote the article correctly and stop trying to spin facts.

The average number of gallons of water used in metro Atlanta per person per day is 91 in the summer and 70 in the winter. Anyone who uses more than 100 gallons of water per person per day in the summer or 70 gallons per person in the winter wastes water.

There is no allowance for outside watering in your numbers.

Now, 5,000 new homes time 91 gal/day is 455,000 gallons.

Photocircuits had a permit for up to, meaning they used less, than 325,000 gal/day.

That issue, just looking at the new homes, is an increase in usage of 140% over the max allowance Photocircuits had. Meaning they will exceed Photocircuits limit by 130,000 gallons a day.

So much for that argument.

Next, Photocircuits closed last year. The whole Target area, Best Buy and other such have opened since then. How much more consumption is there?

How about all the new homes across from the hospital, down Gingercake and so on?

You want the development and do not want to see the issues.

As said before, if you want a Lenox Mall type area, move there. We don't want them. And cannot handle them.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

I do numbers very well thank you.

What I showed you were the water consumption figures for just one customer.

Now if you would like to go here and read.

Start on page 110.

http://www.peachtree-city.org/finance/cafr/2005cafr.pdf

You showed number that you wanted to present as reality, ideals. I dealt with real numbers.

Now tell me what tax and income projections have to do with water supply?

Hello! Money is important but what does it mean if we don't have WATER?

We can discuss that when you tell us where the water is coming from.

You need to get your priorities in order.
-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

What I was showing you is that out of the top 10 consumers of fresh water in the system, Photocircuits alone accounted for some 47% of the consumption.

Just the monthly water consumption of Photocircuits could easily account for nearly 1,000 new homes and place NO increase in water consumption over what we already have. (page number 110 of the document)

Look, I’m not saying develop because we can, on the contrary, I’m actually leaning towards Spear Road Guy’s post of one to two homes per acre.

The only problem is, I posted this question earlier, will the city get a bridge if the density is lowered? I would almost bet that the developer increased the number of units and added the idea of the bridge so that the city could negotiate them down on the number of units and use the bridge as a stick. As you know all to well, this isn’t their first rodeo.

Note:

See page four title block of Lake McIntosh. The article has no date.

Lake McIntosh

http://www.admin.co.fayette.ga.us/planning/compplan/STWP2006-2010.pdf#search=%22%22Lake%20McIntosh%22%20%2B%22Fayette%20County%22%22 Lake McIntosh

You’ve stated, somewhere on here, that lake McIntosh will NOT be built. The only article I could find, listed in part below, does not say that.

I have tried to navigate the Federal Register to find the exact reference but their site is having problems.

I also found the article from the Citizen.

Fayette waterways affected by habitat ruling on mussels
http://www.thecitizen.com/node/7396

At this point, it is hard to tell if Lake McIntosh will have to jump through another hoop on this issue. That portion of Line Creek listed as critical is a couple of miles downstream from GA Hwy 85, making it almost 10 stream miles (estimate) above the designated area. However, the Fish and Wildlife Service has been known to make more distant connections so we will have to wait and see on this issue.

Please post whatever information you have access to that says that the lake will not be built.

What I was showing you is that out of the top 10 consumers of fresh water in the system, Photocircuits alone accounted for some 47% of the consumption.

Just the monthly water consumption of Photocircuits could easily account for nearly 1,000 new homes and place NO increase in water consumption over what we already have. (page number 110 of the document)

But that will be absorded and surpassed by West Village. Not to mention all the other development I indicated.

Even without it we have water problems, now.

Look, I’m not saying develop because we can, on the contrary, I’m actually leaning towards Spear Road Guy’s post of one to two homes per acre.

The only problem is, I posted this question earlier, will the city get a bridge if the density is lowered? I would almost bet that the developer increased the number of units and added the idea of the bridge so that the city could negotiate them down on the number of units and use the bridge as a stick. As you know all to well, this isn’t their first rodeo.

The original plans were based on two grade level crossings. Those are gone.

Without the addition density they are not going to lay out that kind of money on a bridge.

Note:

http://www.admin.co.fayette.ga.us/planning/compplan/STWP2006-2010.pdf#search=%22%22Lake%20McIntosh%22%20%2B%22Fayette%20County%22%22 Lake McIntosh

Lake McIntosh has been in planning since 1978. It is the last planned lake.

The permit to the State was done in Feb. 2006

That resulted in the mussel finding.

You’ve stated, somewhere on here, that lake McIntosh will NOT be built. The only article I could find, listed in part below, does not say that.

Please post whatever information you have access to that says that the lake will not be built.

Since the good professor is on a commission, he is not going to be dogmantic.

What he is saying, if you read closely, is that unless the County can find a way to circumvent the mussel issue, it will not be built.

Any thing they attempt will alter the ecology of the creek, so it will not be permitted.

In a past issue I asked the County a question, on forum. Pheifer stated developing would not be a problem because Lake McIntosh would take care of the issue.

But in the current letter to PTC, after the mussel finding, he now says building the development would over burden the water supply.

My experience, and reading, is that once a mussel bed is found, you do not touch it in any way.

That will require water and sewage lines.

Which gets back to the issue or water sourcing.

From all I am hearing, there does not seem to be another feasible site, for a lake, at this time.

We either need another lake or no big developements. We are in a bind now.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

PTC Guy, would you please learn how to post a link without just using copy and paste?

Whenever you paste a looooong link like the one above it widens the entire column and makes the entire blog difficult to read without a 4 gazillion inch monitor.

Thanks!

Good grief! I was the one who showed a lot of the folk here how to do links. So I most assuredly know how already.

In fact, I use an open in new link format, not the open in same as offered here.

That link was from bad_ptc in a quote. You do not alter what the other person says when you quote them. Which changing that to word link would be doing.

Look above my post. That link was already there and already widened the column.

Thanks!

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

There is a big distinction between water processing capacity and water supply.

Fayette County built with projections in mind that included Lake McIntosh.

Now no Lake McIntosh. So less water supply to process as consumption demands continue to rise.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

Well PTC Guy and Bad_ptc have done it, I'm now thinking throughout the day about how I'm going to flush my toilet 10-years from now.

I know it's easy to say Photocircuits is gone and that leaves a substantial balance of unused water. However, what if another heavy water user moves into the old Photocircuits site on Dividend or somewhere else in the city/county?

As far as I know, we currently have no way of stopping a heavy water user from entering the industrial area. I think the only weapon we have is limiting residential density or passing an ordinance forbidding water intensive industries.

Look, I still believe that large lot, high end housing will get us the bridge. Wieland's building just what I'm talking about on Highway 74 - selling like hotcakes. The problem is that Mayor Logsdon is married to the developers and won't consider even investigating the alternative. And while they're at it, they need to get the developer amenities back in the deal. The plan as it currently stands is highway robbery (excuse the pun).

Vote Republican

The last user of heavy water was Germany and I’m sure that problem has been taken care of. Iran doesn’t count.

To your point, a moratorium on large fresh water use may not be a bad idea.

We have several fronts on which to fight this battle and adding restrictions now to the use of fresh water may not be such a bad idea.

The city could use it as a means of denying building permits to “Big Box” and/or industrial establishments as well as future annexation efforts. It depends on which side of the fence you’re on.

I can argue either side of an issue. To me it’s just fun to debate/argue. I never take anything on here personally. That’s why I beat PTC Guy all the time.

I see no reason not to look at it closely. I think it would prove to be a hard argument against some development types.

That does calculate in, for sure.

And beat me all the time? In which alternate reality?

As far as selling like hotcakes, I hope Spear Guy is aware it is impacting resells in older communities. Such as Smoker Rise, I know of one older $500,000 plus home that is not selling. And there are more For Sale signs still standing in other areas than there use to be.

When you drive around McDuff, there are already a number of homes for resell.

PTC has reached another intersection in its growth. I hope we choose the right road to continue on.

I do not believe $500,000 home communities are the answer. There is a known cap of sales in that range. We don't need to exceed it.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

worth $500,000? Who knows, they might have Mudcat as a pet and they can't get the urine smell out.

The new high-end subdivisions in Peachtree City, Tyrone and Fayette County are having no problems selling the homes. The $750,000-plus market never existed before on a larger scale. We had too many developers obsessed with selling hundreds of $180,000 to $350,000 homes. They couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Vote Republican

And do some checking. $500,000 is like a ceiling where sales plunge.

There is a limited market for that level.

As I said. Last I heard there are 11 homes in the Penisula area for $1 Mill plus. That from a real estate gal.

Go for a ride out 54 toward Fayetteville and around. There are a LOT of homes for sale.

Go through Centential. There are homes for resale right next to ones being constructed.

I would not be too cockly about high priced homes.

There are constantly people coming through my community looking for homes for sale. It is one the most desired in PTC.

Homes are up to around $185,000 now, from a starter of $82,000 in the late 80s.

With our addition, onto the largest built, we are well above that. But get offers every year, unsolicited.

And we are NOT anywhere near the figures you are talking about.

They build too many high enders and you are going to see what is common with them. Walk aways from mortgates, no interest mortgages and such. People risking and speculating.

Take care of what you want, here. It can hurt us all.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.