Boundaries with MS-North

[doctorwho]

warriorpride said:

doctorwho said:

Unless they close schools in December, this is a real scenario. And doubtful a lot of Christmas shopping being done @ 3:30 in the afternoon on a Tuesday.
So if it snows / rains should I not count those times also? This is a real world experience and not a one off trip -
Ogden Ave is jammed every night of the year from the corner of Ogden and North Aurora to Ogden and 59 - this is not unusual. And 59 is not an option. Could take River but there again another set of pesky tracks.

Not trying to be a pita, but this is what we are facing....

all I'm saying is that it's not typical, and well above the average - this is a small window of time within the school year - also, I'll bet your commute to WV or NV, or time anywhere would be potentially impacted by holiday traffic, rush hour traffic, or bad weather - I know that my work commute is

My commute to NV would be 4 miles down Book road -- 10 minutes max.

My wife just timed coming from picking up dinner -from the China Sea restaurant about 2 blocks this side of Waubonsie -- I called her to time -- 11 minutes. ( and she drives like a grandma)

Ogden to 75th to Book to Rickert to home

same day - fair comparison ?

[gatormom]

Metea Valley will be built somewhere. Boundaries will be created for whereever it is built. It could be Macom, it could be north or it could be somewhere else.

Instead of telling us all how far it is and how that is not fair or why it would never work, maybe you should be part of a constructive discussion on boundaries for a northern site.

We don't know where MV will be built. This thread is to discuss rationally possible boundary options.

[doctorwho]

gatormom said:

Metea Valley will be built somewhere. Boundaries will be created for whereever it is built. It could be Macom, it could be north or it could be somewhere else.

Instead of telling us all how far it is and how that is not fair or why it would never work, maybe you should be part of a constructive discussion on boundaries for a northern site.

We don't know where MV will be built. This thread is to discuss rationally possible boundary options.

I have done more boundary options, and achievement balancing over the last 2 years than likely anyone here.....if I had a boundary option that worked for a northern site - especially Ferry Road, I would have offered it up already.

I have spent the last 2 years being constructive - and would be again if I had the solution. I do not, and will not pretend it is not an issue.

Not sure why some can tell me it's 7 minutes from here to there at 7AM, but when I time a different time that doesn't fit that, I am not constructive.

I am very sorry I cannot say I will be happy with a 3rd HS wherever they put it and wherever I am asked to send my kids even if it is the worst possible option for our area, but I can't, so maybe it's better I don't say anything at all....

I will leave the thread to rational discussion.....

[rew]

Dr Who, I agree your commute will be unreasonable. What I am trying to point out is , at sometime in the future, that same plight could befall half the district.

Are we willing as a community to swallow that pill? At what price?

[rew]

Boundaries are never written in stone and certainly they can change at any time. But I do believe if we choose the northern site, then many in the community must face the possibility of significant distances traveled away from the closest HS to their home.

STECK, MCCARTY, GOMBERT, GEORGETOWN, OWEN, MAYWATTS, COW, WHITE EAGLE, TALLGRASS, WELCH, CLOW, SPRINGBROOK, WHEATLAND all must face and accept the possibility.

[gatormom]

doctorwho said:

gatormom said:

Metea Valley will be built somewhere. Boundaries will be created for whereever it is built. It could be Macom, it could be north or it could be somewhere else.

Instead of telling us all how far it is and how that is not fair or why it would never work, maybe you should be part of a constructive discussion on boundaries for a northern site.

We don't know where MV will be built. This thread is to discuss rationally possible boundary options.

I have done more boundary options, and achievement balancing over the last 2 years than likely anyone here.....if I had a boundary option that worked for a northern site - especially Ferry Road, I would have offered it up already.

I have spent the last 2 years being constructive - and would be again if I had the solution. I do not, and will not pretend it is not an issue.

Not sure why some can tell me it's 7 minutes from here to there at 7AM, but when I time a different time that doesn't fit that, I am not constructive.

I am very sorry I cannot say I will be happy with a 3rd HS wherever they put it and wherever I am asked to send my kids even if it is the worst possible option for our area, but I can't, so maybe it's better I don't say anything at all....

I will leave the thread to rational discussion.....

I do understand Dr. Who. Boundaries for a northern site are not going to be easy and certainly not pretty.

[momto4]

gatormom said:

I do understand Dr. Who. Boundaries for a northern site are not going to be easy and certainly not pretty.

I agree and have never argued for a northern site. However, we are disregarding the fact that a northern site would be an improved commute for thousands of students over what they would have going to WV.

I wish that we could build a 2000 student school at Macom and another at AME. Maybe Dr. D can get us some corporate donations for that?

[confused]

How about if we add a Neuqua West, tear down Waubonsie, sell that prime real estate and build a school at AME - then the North and South will be happy.

[rew]

I think it much improves the commute for Brookdale and Longwood and Ginger Woods section of Young. I have never heard Brooks, or Young complain about their commute to WV? I won't argue it improves it for them, but more like from OK to great, rather than unreasonable to reasonable.

[rew]

Confused , the interesting thing is that I have always thought WV was in an odd location to the district. I'm sure it made sense at the time it was built and the 204 community looked so different.

And that is my premise here, that location can haunt you for a very long time and I wonder if in 25 yrs ppeople will be saying "what were they thinking?" they could've had Brach Brodie.

[momto4]

rew said:

I think it much improves the commute for Brookdale and Longwood and Ginger Woods section of Young. I have never heard Brooks, or Young complain about their commute to WV? I won't argue it improves it for them, but more like from OK to great, rather than unreasonable to reasonable.

Right, I don't think I suggested differently. Our commute would be 1/6 what it is now. A big section of Brooks attendance area is right next to Ginger Woods - far from WV but apparently no posters here from that area.

[yeson321]

rew said:

Confused , the interesting thing is that I have always thought WV was in an odd location to the district. I'm sure it made sense at the time it was built and the 204 community looked so different.

And that is my premise here, that location can haunt you for a very long time and I wonder if in 25 yrs ppeople will be saying "what were they thinking?" they could've had Brach Brodie.

Rew, I totally agree with you. I am worried that the SB will pick a site just to try to make the 2009 deadline (which is probably iffy anyway), just to say that they built the school "on time", rather than maybe going with a 2010 opening at the best long-term location. IMHO, many taxpayers would be willing to wait a year to have the school placed at the best site, and not have to live with a mistake forever, just to open the school a year earlier - in 10 years people won't remember that it was nice to have the school open early, just that the SB made the "wrong decision". I hope that in 10 years we are glad that the SB selected the MVHS location, rather than the opposite.

[d204mom]

yeson321 said:

rew said:

Confused , the interesting thing is that I have always thought WV was in an odd location to the district. I'm sure it made sense at the time it was built and the 204 community looked so different.

And that is my premise here, that location can haunt you for a very long time and I wonder if in 25 yrs ppeople will be saying "what were they thinking?" they could've had Brach Brodie.

Rew, I totally agree with you. I am worried that the SB will pick a site just to try to make the 2009 deadline (which is probably iffy anyway), just to say that they built the school "on time", rather than maybe going with a 2010 opening at the best long-term location. IMHO, many taxpayers would be willing to wait a year to have the school placed at the best site, and not have to live with a mistake forever, just to open the school a year earlier - in 10 years people won't remember that it was nice to have the school open early, just that the SB made the "wrong decision". I hope that in 10 years we are glad that the SB selected the MVHS location, rather than the opposite.

Too bad that the only goal Superintendent Daeschner has is to get the school opened as soon as possible, not at the best long term site possible. I don't think that as soon as possible should be the only goal.

momto4 said:

Superintendent Targets & Goals
Revised October 22, 2007
Stephen Daeschner
f. Plan, develop and implement activities to build and open Metea Valley
High School within public approved revenue and open a seventh middle
school as soon as possible, and adjust middle school boundaries.
Responsibility – Stephen Daeschner, Dave Holm, Kathy Birkett

[d204mom]

I just re-read and within public approved revenue and as soon as possible are the only criteria.

Why are these the two most important criteria?

[fence]

I don't understand why people are projecting/worrying about illogical boundaries for a northern site. Clearly boundaries would need to be re-evaluated on several levels if a northern site is chosen. Arguing about who has a longer drive to H**L isn't productive.