Land Options Open to 204

[gatordog]

Concerning northern site - St John's and issue of it being away from student population center... (First as a disclaimer, I am not in attendance area of any ES mentioned here...so I feel I am being as objective as possible)

Consider the nearby ES's-- obvious choices for going into a northern MVHS (Brookdale, Longwd, Brooks, Young).

Taking full-capacity numbers: these feed 1633 HS students.
Taking current enrollment (2006 report card): 1585 students

There still would be LOTS of HS students to make up to fill MVHS. These would have to come from probably:
Cowl Watts and Owen,

For these areas....St John's site is decidedly WORSE site for HS. And this would be very large fraction of the MVHS student body.

Furthermore, and this is important to consider...The three schools Cowl Watts and Owen are the same ones that have the disadvantage of not being near to a MS. I understand given the sites (and proposed BB site) for our HS, Brookdale, Longwood, and Brooks have distance to travel for HS. But these same communities have ADVANTAGE of nearby MS.

So for me a northern site is less than optimal because:
-it will be difficult to fill it up without long travel for large number of students. "travel cost factors" favor BB.
-Even though far north students have distance to travel for HS, its balanced in that they are well served with local MSs. "Fairness factor" favors BB.

So by my figuring BB site is optimal of the three we are discussing here. I know my conclusions can be debated (and probably will) but this is "where I am at". The important thing to me is with BB being optimal location it is worth it to pay a premium (how much more...I cant say. That would be a harder thing to put a price on.)

[harry]

dpc said:

archwinsome said:

Absent a workable better idea that has some solidification to it, people stick with the original. So, don't be surprised if it works out that way.

I won't be surprised at all as I have very little faith that anything has changed. It will be business as usual with MM running the show, JC throwing her emotional temper tantrums, AT, CB and JS going along with whatever MM wants. None of those members would ever admit that they may have made a mistake in pursuing BB at all costs so they will justify the purchase without ever seriously evaluating a different solution.

Agreed DPC

I also think that it will be hard to keep their 'promise'. The SB put the cart before the horse on that one.....AGAIN

[justme]

lacy said:

archwinsome said:

Actually, they can simply cross it too without traveling on it. Just as you point out people cut through neighborhoods, traveling from 95th to BB is as easy as taking Skylane to 83rd, heading west ACROSS rt 59, then cutting back north to the school through the neighborhood. They can avoid WE entirely.

Thanks for suggesting the neighborhood cut through. That works perfectly to overcome your concern about traveling down or up Rt 59 to BB property.

Name any other areas, and I'll plot you a similar non-rt 59 traveling course that only involves CROSSING it.

So people living west of 59 cross over and go up Skylane and then cross back over 59 again. Perhaps they could keep zigzagging back and forth all day just for fun.

Seems pretty convoluted to me. Maybe you should run for the SB.

If it ends up being the WAY TOO EXPENSIVE BB site (which it probably will), I will drive through the WE subdivision to get to MV. I will also make the stipulation to my children that the ONLY way I will allow them to drive to school is by way of WE. Rush hour and Rt. 59 don't mix. Thankfully, WE currently avoids 59 by driving through TG to get to Scullen so I am sure they will totally understand when the roles are reversed.

It continues to astound and disappoint me that once again the tax payers are left holding the bag for the SB's arrogance. How about accountability? Once again we get the cryptic message from M2 that basically says nothing new, it's been BB all along regardless of cost. Everyday I am reminded why he got re-elected.

[momto4]

gatormom said:

As far as the Rt 59 concern, you can check in with Brookdale and the Granger neighborhoods, I think Eola is pretty darn close to Rt. 59 safety wise. The high schoolers from those neighborhoods do drive 59 and Eola to get to school.

This is a point I'd been meaning to make this morning. Almost everyone who goes to WV has to travel on Eola or Ogden to get there and these don't seem safer for buses or teen drivers than 59. There are no back roads to travel to get from areas north of WV to WV, we are stuck with Eola Rd. I don't think proximity to 59 is an issue for BB as it isn't for NV and it certainly isn't an issue that WV sits directly at an intersection of busy roads.

I agree with Gatordog's assessment of a northern MV site even though it would be beneficial to my family and my neighborhood (other than the traffic issue, which I think should be a major consideration here).

I don't think St. John's or Macom are viable locations because they are bad locations, and of course there are so many other issues with both of them as well.

I have thought all along and still think that BB is the best location for this school and that the school is needed and the sooner the better.

[doctorwho]

lacy said:

eagledad said:

Let's see, WE and TG both cross 59 to go to NV today, but would not need to to attend MV (either at BB or Macom). So for all kids moving out of NV, this is better (and those 2 dubdivisions are a very large number of kids).

Who are the kids that would attend MV on BB that would need to cross 59, but don't do so today Lacy?

Crossing 59 and traveling on it are two different things. I can't think of a single area that currently attends NVHS that has to do much more than this (cross it). WE can cross 59 at 87th or come south in the neighborhood to 95th (which is how most come to Scullen since someone raised this quesiton). TG crosses at 95th. Tamarack can use 103rd. Book Rd. is an option, etc.

But locating the school at BB would require some people to travel on 59 from 95th to 75th. For a 16 year old, this is pretty frightening. The only viable option is to wind through WE (I'll be sure to have my kid drive by your house and honk loudly each morning, ED!)

but it's OK for the Owen / Watts / Cowlishaw kids to have to do this to get to Macom ? Again you don't seem to account for this....

I don't doubt that some from your area will want to use 59 - but what about these 3 areas -- why do they not merit the same consideration ?

Your kids will have the option to not cross 59 - we're not so lucky.

[Arch]

doctorwho said:

lacy said:

Crossing 59 and traveling on it are two different things. I can't think of a single area that currently attends NVHS that has to do much more than this (cross it). WE can cross 59 at 87th or come south in the neighborhood to 95th (which is how most come to Scullen since someone raised this quesiton). TG crosses at 95th. Tamarack can use 103rd. Book Rd. is an option, etc.

But locating the school at BB would require some people to travel on 59 from 95th to 75th. For a 16 year old, this is pretty frightening. The only viable option is to wind through WE (I'll be sure to have my kid drive by your house and honk loudly each morning, ED!)

but it's OK for the Owen / Watts / Coulishaw kids to have to do this to get to Macom ? Got it.

C'mon Dr. Who, you know Book Road has ample capacity. Ever since that stop sign turned stoplight at 83rd, it just doesn't seem like an undivided 2 lane road anymore. That's much safer than actually having a MEDIAN between you and oncoming traffic like that horrid and big scary Rt. 59 does.

[momof3]

doctorwho said:

lacy said:

Crossing 59 and traveling on it are two different things. I can't think of a single area that currently attends NVHS that has to do much more than this (cross it). WE can cross 59 at 87th or come south in the neighborhood to 95th (which is how most come to Scullen since someone raised this quesiton). TG crosses at 95th. Tamarack can use 103rd. Book Rd. is an option, etc.

But locating the school at BB would require some people to travel on 59 from 95th to 75th. For a 16 year old, this is pretty frightening. The only viable option is to wind through WE (I'll be sure to have my kid drive by your house and honk loudly each morning, ED!)

but it's OK for the Owen / Watts / Coulishaw kids to have to do this to get to Macom ? Got it.

Realistically, a good portion of the attandance area for those 3 schools would drive past NV to get to Macom - that's why the current boundaries make no sense for Macom. I'm all for exploring the Macom option, just be honest that it will require starting from scratch on the boundaries.

[Arch]

momof3 said:

doctorwho said:

but it's OK for the Owen / Watts / Coulishaw kids to have to do this to get to Macom ? Got it.

No, those 3 schools would drive past NV to get to Macom - that's why the current boundaries make no sense for Macom. I'm all for exploring the Macom option, just be honest that it will require starting from scratch on the boundaries.

It would make more sense to pull Watts straight down book or Naper/Plainfield to 95th and NV at that point.

[doctorwho]

archwinsome said:

doctorwho said:

but it's OK for the Owen / Watts / Coulishaw kids to have to do this to get to Macom ? Got it.

C'mon Dr. Who, you know Book Road has ample capacity. Ever since that stop sign turned stoplight at 83rd, it just doesn't seem like an undivided 2 lane road anymore. That's much safer than actually having a MEDIAN between you and oncoming traffic like that horrid and big scary Rt. 59 does.

plus then we can drive right past NV on our way to our New school. Maybe those boundary redraws should put the 3 schools mentioned there and move some others ? Not something I want - just making a point.

[gatordog]

lacy said:

.... The concern I raised about 59 is echoed throughout my neighborhood. It is a risk that our students will take that they currently do not have to take. And I think it's one that any Mom could understand. ...

lacy, I have a direct question for you: are you in the Fry attendance area?

Its seems to me a lot of your push for moving MVHS to Macom could be seen as being driven by "because that location would be best for Tall Grass and Fry." I am not saying that is the case, its hard to figure out ones motives....but one could interpret things this way.

From a district wide perspective, Fry has a local ES. Fry has a local MS in Scullen. Your arguments to resite BB to Macom and also give Fry a local HS (the Triple Crown!) could be seen as motivated by self serving interests. I respect and appreciate that there are "concerns echoing through your neighborhood". But we are a common SD and while we have individual needs we want, we also have to look at big district-wide picture.

I respect your dollars-and-cents approach and desire to get the most for our tax dollar. We all want that. But when this devolves into one families "driving route on how they would get to HS" I think we risk losings site of the district-wide issue.

[bob]

This is what I am down to :

if the SD can get another site considering all costs :lawyer fees, new plans, etc.. , and save at least $5 million than BB then I am all in for leaving BB.

One of the things I haven't figured out is if we pay $4 million for lawyer fees to BB and sell the land back for , let's say, $6 million minus legal fees, is it still a net of $2 million or a loss of $4 million.

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

lacy said:

.... The concern I raised about 59 is echoed throughout my neighborhood. It is a risk that our students will take that they currently do not have to take. And I think it's one that any Mom could understand. ...

lacy, I have a direct question for you: are you in the Fry attendance area?

Its seems to me a lot of your push for moving MVHS to Macom could be seen as being driven by "because that location would be best for Tall Grass and Fry." I am not saying that is the case, its hard to figure out ones motives....but one could interpret things this way.

From a district wide perspective, Fry has a local ES. Fry has a local MS in Scullen. Your arguments to resite BB to Macom and also give Fry a local HS (the Triple Crown!) could be seen as motivated by self serving interests. I respect and appreciate that there are "concerns echoing through your neighborhood". But we are a common SD and while we have individual needs we want, we also have to look at big district-wide picture.

I respect your dollars-and-cents approach and desire to get the most for our tax dollar. We all want that. But when this devolves into one families "driving route on how they would get to HS" I think we risk losings site of the district-wide issue.

you mean as opposed to Watts who travels to the furthest HS - and possibly would do so again if MACOM is chosen - ( NV would be the closest) - and travels to the other end of the school district to go to Middle school - from 75th street to close to I88 and yet the only driving - travel concerns that seem to matter are for one attendance area.

I am NOT disparaging the concerns -- but I refuse to put one area with the best possible solution and sacrifice 3 -4 or 5 areas with much worse commutes and travel. Yet we see no comments back on how this will become an issue for Watts/Cowlishaw/Owen and Gombert. Why is that ?
Are our kids less important ? older ? better drivers ?

[Arch]

I heard there's a bus that students could take if they did not want to drive on Route 59. Actually, I heard there are severals, each with their own 'route'. I even believe it might exist today for the 2 high schools we already have.

I should ask my Junior how bad it is for him to sit in a padded seat while someone else negotiates crossing Rt. 59 and travels down Rt. 34 for several miles and even crosses railroad tracks along the way.

[proschool]

I don't see many subdivisions that can get to Macom without travelling on Route 59.

[gatordog]

bob said:

This is what I am down to :

if the SD can get another site considering all costs :lawyer fees, new plans, etc.. , and save at least $5 million than BB then I am all in for leaving BB....

It is good to throw this number out. I am not sure what my "savings threshold" is. I will say this: it very much depends on the site.

I think Macom when considering location only is almost unworkable. The savings threshold here would have to be extremely large. I think its almost insurmountable, considering PL does sound like the motivated seller I thought he might be.

Macom is a far distant third for me as far as the three sites we are discussing here.

A non-cost issue (yet one of vital importance to alot of us)... I think any economic status type balancing if Macom land is selected would be extremely difficult.