Boundaries with MS-North

[harry]

rew said:

harry said:

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.

Depending on how far the drop and the timing, I am sure that the SB would consider selling NV or WV to be more cost efficient and then yes, commutes will probably be longer for the 4 years of hs

[bob]

harry said:

rew said:

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.

Depending on how far the drop and the timing, I am sure that the SB would consider selling NV or WV to be more cost efficient and then yes, commutes will probably be longer for the 4 years of hs

Why would they sell HS when the plan presented would be 3 3000 HS, turn the Frosh campus to a MS and possibly selling off a MS?

With 8100 HS enrollment, 3 HS with 90% capacity. The building with the most potential to sell would be the WV frosh center.

[EagleDad]

warriorpride said:

traffic - Yes, traffic on Eola stinks at rush hour, AM and PM. .. 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.

I respecfully disagree. I contend that traffic from Ogden to 95th on Rt 59 is less, with planned cuts, better light timing, and better flowing than that of Eola from Diehl to New York. Time will tell because as soon as the Rt 59 widening begins next year, Eola, I predict, will start to see the kind of traffic it will face when the Rt 88 interchange is in place, as drivers who normally exit Rt 59 and head south, but would naturally use Eola will begin to do so by using Diehl to avoid the Rt 59 construction.

[momto4]

eagledad said:

warriorpride said:

traffic - Yes, traffic on Eola stinks at rush hour, AM and PM. .. 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.

I respecfully disagree. I contend that traffic from Ogden to 95th on Rt 59 is less, with planned cuts, better light timing, and better flowing than that of Eola from Diehl to New York. Time will tell because as soon as the Rt 59 widening begins next year, Eola, I predict, will start to see the kind of traffic it will face when the Rt 88 interchange is in place, as drivers who normally exit Rt 59 and head south, but would naturally use Eola will begin to do so by using Diehl to avoid the Rt 59 construction.

FYI - here is an e-mail I received from Chuck Tokarski (DuPage County Department of Transportation) in Sept. 2005.
-------
Thank you for taking the time to e-mail our office and express your concerns
about traffic congestion on Eola Road and possible increases in traffic
after the Eola Road interchange with I-88 is constructed. First, I think it
is important to note that it is not a certainty that the interchange will be
constructed. The City of Aurora must acquire a number of parcels of
property before this project can become a reality. It was originally
anticipated that Aurora would have acquired the property by this point in
time. With the costs of construction continuing to escalate rapidly, there
is some question if DuPage County will have the funds to pay for our share
of the interchange if the property is not obtained in a timely manner.
Second, we do not foresee a large increase in the volume of traffic on Eola
Road south of Diehl Road even if the interchange is constructed. The reason
for this statement is because much of the traffic that gains access to I-88
from the south travels north on Eola Road to Diehl Road then to the
interchange with I-88 at IL 59. The only change in traffic pattern will be
that vehicles will no longer have to travel east on Diehl Road to IL 59 but
will be able to access I-88 directly from Eola Road.

[wvhsparent]

momto4 said:

eagledad said:

I respecfully disagree. I contend that traffic from Ogden to 95th on Rt 59 is less, with planned cuts, better light timing, and better flowing than that of Eola from Diehl to New York. Time will tell because as soon as the Rt 59 widening begins next year, Eola, I predict, will start to see the kind of traffic it will face when the Rt 88 interchange is in place, as drivers who normally exit Rt 59 and head south, but would naturally use Eola will begin to do so by using Diehl to avoid the Rt 59 construction.

FYI - here is an e-mail I received from Chuck Tokarski (DuPage County Department of Transportation) in Sept. 2005.
-------
Thank you for taking the time to e-mail our office and express your concerns
about traffic congestion on Eola Road and possible increases in traffic
after the Eola Road interchange with I-88 is constructed. First, I think it
is important to note that it is not a certainty that the interchange will be
constructed. The City of Aurora must acquire a number of parcels of
property before this project can become a reality. It was originally
anticipated that Aurora would have acquired the property by this point in
time. With the costs of construction continuing to escalate rapidly, there
is some question if DuPage County will have the funds to pay for our share
of the interchange if the property is not obtained in a timely manner.
Second, we do not foresee a large increase in the volume of traffic on Eola
Road south of Diehl Road even if the interchange is constructed. The reason
for this statement is because much of the traffic that gains access to I-88
from the south travels north on Eola Road to Diehl Road then to the
interchange with I-88 at IL 59. The only change in traffic pattern will be
that vehicles will no longer have to travel east on Diehl Road to IL 59 but
will be able to access I-88 directly from Eola Road.

And the planned access points are going to be on Diehl Rd w/o eola(for east bound) and Bilter w/o Eola Rd for Westbound. Kinda like how they are redoing the Naperville Rd exchange.
And IIRC there will be toll collection at this point.

[rew]

bob said:

Why would they sell HS when the plan presented would be 3 3000 HS, turn the Frosh campus to a MS and possibly selling off a MS?

With 8100 HS enrollment, 3 HS with 90% capacity. The building with the most potential to sell would be the WV frosh center.

I agree Bob, that requires shifting boundaries and now you face sending Welch to a north MV or letting a north MV sit with 2000 students and leave WV and NV at 2500 and 4000. No ability for NV to spin off the frosh center because there are too many kids south.

Again, no flexibility for the future. Whereas, if the school is at BB then you could justify sending BD there, Welch there, Wheatland there SB there, Clow...etc because even though it's not their closest HS it is their second closest..

[warriorpride]

eagledad said:

warriorpride said:

traffic - Yes, traffic on Eola stinks at rush hour, AM and PM. .. 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.

I respecfully disagree. I contend that traffic from Ogden to 95th on Rt 59 is less, with planned cuts, better light timing, and better flowing than that of Eola from Diehl to New York. Time will tell because as soon as the Rt 59 widening begins next year, Eola, I predict, will start to see the kind of traffic it will face when the Rt 88 interchange is in place, as drivers who normally exit Rt 59 and head south, but would naturally use Eola will begin to do so by using Diehl to avoid the Rt 59 construction.

All I know is that when I need to go south in the late PM (soccer practices @ Frontier), my experience is that avoiding 59 at all costs usually gets me there faster.

I agree that if/when 59 is widened, Eola will be from hell - i really wish they would widen Eola from Diehl to New York in preparation for that, but I know it'll never happen.

Thousands of people already cut over to Eola via Diehl, so I don't think the traffic on Eola will be impacted in a major way - but, yes, it will be impacted - by the Eola/88 interchange. FYI, when they were last planning that interchange, it wasn't going to be right at the intersection of 88 & Eola (like 59 is, for example). They were talking about putting the interchange west of the interestion - so, it sounded like you'd need to go thru the office park to get on/off 88 - this might make the interchance less popular that if it was right @ the intersection. Things may change, though, if/when they ever get it built.

[proschool]

momto4 said:

eagledad said:

I respecfully disagree. I contend that traffic from Ogden to 95th on Rt 59 is less, with planned cuts, better light timing, and better flowing than that of Eola from Diehl to New York. Time will tell because as soon as the Rt 59 widening begins next year, Eola, I predict, will start to see the kind of traffic it will face when the Rt 88 interchange is in place, as drivers who normally exit Rt 59 and head south, but would naturally use Eola will begin to do so by using Diehl to avoid the Rt 59 construction.

FYI - here is an e-mail I received from Chuck Tokarski (DuPage County Department of Transportation) in Sept. 2005.
-------
Thank you for taking the time to e-mail our office and express your concerns
about traffic congestion on Eola Road and possible increases in traffic
after the Eola Road interchange with I-88 is constructed. First, I think it
is important to note that it is not a certainty that the interchange will be
constructed. The City of Aurora must acquire a number of parcels of
property before this project can become a reality. It was originally
anticipated that Aurora would have acquired the property by this point in
time. With the costs of construction continuing to escalate rapidly, there
is some question if DuPage County will have the funds to pay for our share
of the interchange if the property is not obtained in a timely manner.
Second, we do not foresee a large increase in the volume of traffic on Eola
Road south of Diehl Road even if the interchange is constructed. The reason
for this statement is because much of the traffic that gains access to I-88
from the south travels north on Eola Road to Diehl Road then to the
interchange with I-88 at IL 59. The only change in traffic pattern will be
that vehicles will no longer have to travel east on Diehl Road to IL 59 but
will be able to access I-88 directly from Eola Road.

So there may or may not be toll road access at Eola Road. We can't deny that it is a significant risk that the SD may have to deal with in the future.

I have the same issue with the power lines. Whether or not Comm Ed is housing any big power doohickeys next to the right now they may be planning to do so in the future.

[concerned]

Where is this rumor of a Nothern site coming from? I am a little lost.

[Arch]

concerned said:

Where is this rumor of a Nothern site coming from? I am a little lost.

Welcome to the state of bliss. Population: Us.

[EagleDad]

Concerned, it's a major rumor - it's sounding like it's a done deal and the rumor is some board members have already given it the rubber stamp.

Another rumor is that the school board is not taking or returning calls from Macom on the southern site and that they are not pursuing any negotiations there. From these combined rumors it would seem that they've made up their mind and are not pursuing the other options.

I hope I'm proven to be wrong, I'm just passing on rumors. I'd love to pass on fact, but they haven't told us nada.

[yeson321]

eagledad said:

Concerned, it's a major rumor - it's sounding like it's a done deal and the rumor is some board members have already given it the rubber stamp.

Another rumor is that the school board is not taking or returning calls from Macom on the southern site and that they are not pursuing any negotiations there. From these combined rumors it would seem that they've made up their mind and are not pursuing the other options.

I hope I'm proven to be wrong, I'm just passing on rumors. I'd love to pass on fact, but they haven't told us nada.

I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly did not vote in the school board members to hold grudges over Macom. Regardless of Macom's motives, the school board should give them a fair draw in the negotiations, and ultimately select that site if it is the best long-term solution for the district.

[momof3]

eagledad said:

wvhsparent said:

The further south "power thingy" are old mothballed peaker generators. Those Manufacturing Dohickies are on the other side of the EJ&E tracks.

Otherwise known as jet fuel generators - high explosives.

Thanks for reminding us of the EJ&E tracks which are looking at a quadrupling of freight trains PLUS the star line.

Yeah, this place rocks!

Don't forget the increase in hazardous materials loads proposed for EJ&E. That worries me more than the extra trains.

[bob]

yeson321 said:

eagledad said:

Concerned, it's a major rumor - it's sounding like it's a done deal and the rumor is some board members have already given it the rubber stamp.

Another rumor is that the school board is not taking or returning calls from Macom on the southern site and that they are not pursuing any negotiations there. From these combined rumors it would seem that they've made up their mind and are not pursuing the other options.

I hope I'm proven to be wrong, I'm just passing on rumors. I'd love to pass on fact, but they haven't told us nada.

I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly did not vote in the school board members to hold grudges over Macom. Regardless of Macom's motives, the school board should give them a fair draw in the negotiations, and ultimately select that site if it is the best long-term solution for the district.

And there is no actual proof that they haven't.

If Macom really wanted to sell, they would have negotiated the land swap with the Naperville Park District by now. Also would have taken care of the elderly couple's house.

I am not saying I prefer AME over Macom.

What I am worried about is that Macom is willing to sell but the SD has to do the work of dealing with the Wolfs Crossing movement, the elderly couple and the land swap. Three big details in my book.

[momof3]

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.

GD - appreciate the analysis, but how many lights did you have to sit through at New York and 59? By your own analysis there was no traffic. If there was never any traffic in the district on Eola or Ogden or Aurora/NY or Rt. 59 then why would anyone, even say Kendall, have a problem going to the AME site

Coming home in the afternoon, you will sit through several lights just to get through the Rt. 59/Aurora intersection in both directions.

How would Cowlishaw go? Take RT 59 from 75th to Diehl?

eta - And if going over 6 miles to HS is no big deal, why did 80% of Brookdale vote NO on the referendum?