Boundaries with MS-North

[warriorpride]

There's been several "negatives" of AME listed over the last few days - but, other sites have these charactersitics, too.

power thingies - I though people were worried about the power LINES that run along the tracks - so it's the THINGIES? Yes, I guess comparing the readings with macom would be interesting, but Macom does have power LINES and THINGIES, too

train tracks - these are the same ones as macom - if you don't like 'em at AME, then you can't like 'em at macom

traffic - Yes, traffic on Eola stinks at rush hour, AM and PM. The AM rush hour would be compunded by HS arrivals. In the PM, HS departures would, in general be before the PM rush hour. After-school activities may run into the PM rush hour. Traffic on 59, 7th and 34 is a LOT worse for a lot longer time, so BB won't be a walk in the park. And Macom has a 2-lane road running along side of it - how will traffic in that area be, with ~800 jrs and srs driving in, while the buses are arriving?

Gas lines - Huh? Every building around here has gas lines going into them. Oh, and don't forget, all those huge metal rectangles filled with gallons & gallons of GASOLINE (that could explode at any moment!) that that transport the students! Oh, and because it's farther north, it'll be colder up there, so there'll be more of a chance of ice, so more kids might slip and fall. Oh, the horrors.

Look, I want BB, even if it costs $10M more AND it's short some amenties or it can only hold 2500. But, the SD haas painted itself into a corner, and they may not be willing to go over budget. Honestly, every site sucks - we knew that when they did the site evaluation - BB was INTITALLY flagged as expensive, when they ASSumed they'd get for 250/acre.

If we don't support the school wherever it's built AND the operating ref, then what would the future look like in 204?

[harry]

rew said:

The SB has to buy a site ready to build on "as is". They have proven themselves incompetent at negotiating, managing or thinking past the end of their nose.

REW You are so kind.

Let's see, the SB thought it could steal a toy in the sandbox from a teenager (BB)

When the SB was offered another toy (Macom) it said it is not worthy of looking at.

Macy might be right for all of the above mistakes.

Doo-thingy Valley High School here we come!!!!

If/When the SB makes this decision and BEFORE they
re-boundary, they need to request a new 'head count' from every school in order to have as accurate a picture as necessary when playing chess with neighborhoods.

[momto4]

eagledad said:

momto4 said:

I'm hoping that *if* the school goes there they find a way to make an access road to Diehl and possibly another through the neighborhood to the south (where they are just now adding a light at North Aurora Rd.).

That would be good, because we know that Diehl is a nice, bucholic, leisurely drive, and not an East-West drag-strip through industrial/office parks.

I drive on Diehl Rd. at least 10x a week and it's fine. I would feel very comfortable having my kids drive there as soon as they have their license. The road is straight, has four lanes most of the way, and is frequently patrolled for speeders. The traffic tends not to be horrendous except there is the issue of trains if the EJ&E is sold.

[momto4]

wvhsparent said:

momto4 said:

I'm hoping that *if* the school goes there they find a way to make an access road to Diehl and possibly another through the neighborhood to the south (where they are just now adding a light at North Aurora Rd.).

There is a street in the residential neighborhood that ends at the field now. Could be another entrance to a school there.
But never mind, I know you don't like AME and nothing will change that, and I am not planning on trying, and on the same token, I do like it and nothing will change that.
I'll just accept the fact that your priorities/desires are different than mine.
I will however support the school wherever it gets built. I may not like it, but I will support it.
The SB members may not fare so well come re-election time however. And that also is regardless of the site chosen.

Are you addressing eagledad here? I don't think AME is best for the district, and I think the horrible traffic on Eola Rd. would only get worse, but I don't think it's a bad site for those of us at Brooks, Young, Longwood, and Brookdale.

[momto4]

rew said:

The SB has to buy a site ready to build on "as is". They have proven themselves incompetent at negotiating, managing or thinking past the end of their nose.

I thought the administration was doing the negotiating and coming back to the SB with status.

[rew]

This is part of the Sb doublespeak IMO. If it is the SD reporting to the SB, then why is MM the mouthpiece. I have heard both sides...it's the SD, it's the SB. The buck is passed back and forth, makes it convenient.

[rew]

With regards to boundaries, again, I ask, what happens if in twenty years enrollment drops ten percent...how will we fill a north school?

[doctorwho]

momto4 said:

wvhsparent said:

There is a street in the residential neighborhood that ends at the field now. Could be another entrance to a school there.
But never mind, I know you don't like AME and nothing will change that, and I am not planning on trying, and on the same token, I do like it and nothing will change that.
I'll just accept the fact that your priorities/desires are different than mine.
I will however support the school wherever it gets built. I may not like it, but I will support it.
The SB members may not fare so well come re-election time however. And that also is regardless of the site chosen.

Are you addressing eagledad here? I don't think AME is best for the district, and I think the horrible traffic on Eola Rd. would only get worse, but I don't think it's a bad site for those of us at Brooks, Young, Longwood, and Brookdale.

So it's a good site for a MS - size wise is what you are saying - Brooks & Young taking the place of Cowlishaw and Watts -- so there just needs to be a whole other MS worth of kids that agrees.

[doctorwho]

momto4 said:

eagledad said:

That would be good, because we know that Diehl is a nice, bucholic, leisurely drive, and not an East-West drag-strip through industrial/office parks.

I drive on Diehl Rd. at least 10x a week and it's fine. I would feel very comfortable having my kids drive there as soon as they have their license. The road is straight, has four lanes most of the way, and is frequently patrolled for speeders. The traffic tends not to be horrendous except there is the issue of trains if the EJ&E is sold.

and if I could just avoid having to drive on / cross Rt 59 , Aurora Ave , North Aurora Ave & Ogden to get to Diehl, and either the extra set of tracks by Ogden if we take River -( or else have to take 59 or Ogden ave in rush hour to avoid) - I'd likely view Diehl the same way.

[harry]

rew said:

With regards to boundaries, again, I ask, what happens if in twenty years enrollment drops ten percent...how will we fill a north school?

Well about 10 years ago boundaries changed, and in 2006 they changed so I would say there will be a boundary shift (not including the upcoming reboundary) by 2016

[gatordog]

Concerning possibility of Watts and Cowlishaw being assigned to northern MV....

I know per mapquest its 6.7 mi to Eola/Diehl and only 4.3 to WV, we have gone over that before. Mapquest also gives times as 11 min for the further site, and 8 minute to WV. (but given traffic of course we take those times with grain of salt)

Well, I did the traffic experiment today. I was at Watts at 6:57 am, and I made it to the St John's sign at 7:08. I matched the mapquest predicted time of 11 minutes.

The drive was remarkably easy. Stoplights each turn. Four lanes entire way. I went mapquest way, Sequoia to Rickert, right on Ogden. Then left on Aurora/New York Ave (I was only car turning left here). An easy shot going west down Aurora/New York Ave. (I may have been the only car at the 59 light going west). Then north on Eola. (I take Eola almost every day. Eola frees up north of New York, but really bogs down south in the mornings....so the drive from Watts misses that bottleneck).

Doctorwho and others in that area, should give the drive a try sometime.

I would be willing to bet that the morning commute from Fry ES to the BB site is longer than 11 minutes with traffic. I am rarely south of 87th st in the mornings, so this is just my bet. I also think it may takes longer to go from Watts to Hill MS.

Realistically, in all site locations and boundary scenarios, quite a few people will have somewhat longer commutes no matter what. But if its only a few minutes, I think that has to be deemed acceptable.

[rew]

harry said:

rew said:

With regards to boundaries, again, I ask, what happens if in twenty years enrollment drops ten percent...how will we fill a north school?

Well about 10 years ago boundaries changed, and in 2006 they changed so I would say there will be a boundary shift (not including the upcoming reboundary) by 2016

I am not implying boundaries cannot change, but, if enrollment drops then you are sending neighborhoods south of 75th st to the north adn probably sending the kids from 119th to WV..that is an awful lot of passing one school to get to another.

BB is the best site currently and going forward into the unknown.

[gatordog]

Quick followup to my traffic experiment...
I will have to time the following, but given Eola traffic south of New York, I am almost certain I cannot get from Gombert (or Georgetown) to the St Johns sign in 11 minutes.

[rew]

The original parent committee back in 03-04 wanted to look at southern sites for the new HS, because that's where the growth was. There were protests that it had to be more central to benefit the entire district. The discussion then was that BB was as far north as the district could manage....

wow, how times change

[harry]

gatordog said:

Concerning possibility of Watts and Cowlishaw being assigned to northern MV....

I know per mapquest its 6.7 mi to Eola/Diehl and only 4.3 to WV, we have gone over that before. Mapquest also gives times as 11 min for the further site, and 8 minute to WV. (but given traffic of course we take those times with grain of salt)

Well, I did the traffic experiment today. I was at Watts at 6:57 am, and I made it to the St John's sign at 7:08. I matched the mapquest predicted time of 11 minutes.

The drive was remarkably easy. Stoplights each turn. Four lanes entire way. I went mapquest way, Sequoia to Rickert, right on Ogden. Then left on Aurora/New York Ave (I was only car turning left here). An easy shot going west down Aurora/New York Ave. (I may have been the only car at the 59 light going west). Then north on Eola. (I take Eola almost every day. Eola frees up north of New York, but really bogs down south in the mornings....so the drive from Watts misses that bottleneck).

Doctorwho and others in that area, should give the drive a try sometime.

I would be willing to bet that the morning commute from Fry ES to the BB site is longer than 11 minutes with traffic. I am rarely south of 87th st in the mornings, so this is just my bet. I also think it may takes longer to go from Watts to Hill MS.

Realistically, in all site locations and boundary scenarios, quite a few people will have somewhat longer commutes no matter what. But if its only a few minutes, I think that has to be deemed acceptable.

Nice, informative post GatorD