North site location benefits?

[gatordog]

OK, everybody...bear with me here. The spirit of this is a good lawyer can always make arguments for either side. With grudging admiration for the BB trial lawyers, I forge on. (If it werent for them....this exercise would have been completely pointless! ). Can we offer thread dedications like songs on radio? I dedicate this thread to the skillful BB attorneys.

For thought-stimulation purposes lets consider AME site in terms of location only.
Quest: What is the real location cost compared to the BB central location?

For this exercise, lets ignore
-land cost savings (we dont know this, we dont know prices, fees, etc)
-potential site hazards (elect, RR. considered elswhere)

Things I will assume negligible, or not the district direct concern:
-HS driver gas cost due to milage differential (this cost pales in comparison to car ownership costs, insurance costs)
-possible lengthened rush hour commute time home increase due to participation in extra curricullars. First, the added time (even if drive doubles) pales in comparison to time spent in the activity itself. Its another small cost to a students participation, and well worth it surely most (all) would agree. (EX: Nobody will say I will not be in marching band because my drive home takes 15 minutes as opposed to 10 if a left right after school). Secondly, a commute time could actually decrease if you go to a HS early, non rush hour, for extracurricular. Therefore, I deem this negligable cost.

Lets assume the boundary solution with Watts, Cowl at MV. Just for arguments sake.

Lets measure location cost in terms of commute TIME. Strictly speaking, I am thinking ontime morning commute time (rush hour) and the on-time dismissmal commute (not yet rush hour).

Location COSTS:
1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
3. White Eagle adds <5 min to expected commute
4. Gombert East (~20%) adds <5 min to expected commute
5. North part of Mccarty (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
6. North part of Steck (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
7. Split ES's increase from 2 with BB to 4. (Possibly mitigated by ES boundary adjusting.)
(I will assume Fry time going to BB or WV is equal...must be within couple minutes)

Location BENEFITS:
1. Shorter commute times for Brooks
2. Young
3. Longwood
4. Brookdale
5. Owen east (50%)... goes to NV.

Note: in terms of overall bus mile cost...I will assume the shorter commutes balance out the longer commutes.

Other General Location BENEFITS
6.. First and foremost, everybody attends school within capacity. (the prime benefit!)
7. Virtually all those who voted expecting to attend a 3000 seat school will. I believe Owen East is the only exception. (To me personally, this is significant benefit)
8. If one acknowledges that Brookdale had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
9. If one acknowledges that Peterson/Ashwood, current and future residents, had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
10. No further "islands" created, I believe.

I look forward to everybodies comments and thoughts on this. If it provokes consternation I can only blame myself....after all I did dedicate this to the BB trial attorneys!

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

OK, everybody...bear with me here. The spirit of this is a good lawyer can always make arguments for either side. With grudging admiration for the BB trial lawyers, I forge on. (If it werent for them....this exercise would have been completely pointless! ). Can we offer thread dedications like songs on radio? I dedicate this thread to the skillful BB attorneys.

For thought-stimulation purposes lets consider AME site in terms of location only.
Quest: What is the real location cost compared to the BB central location?

For this exercise, lets ignore
-land cost savings (we dont know this, we dont know prices, fees, etc)
-potential site hazards (elect, RR. considered elswhere)

Things I will assume negligible, or not the district direct concern:
-HS driver gas cost due to milage differential (this cost pales in comparison to car ownership costs, insurance costs)
> fine - cut me a check for 4 years worth please - saying it's less than something else is not a good argument. I already figured 10 extra miles ( minimum) per day for 180 school day x 4 years - that is 7200 miles - current reimbursement figures for companies are approx .45 per mil - so that's $3240 more for each student driver over 4 years. Tell me again how small that cost is.-

possible lengthened rush hour commute time home increase due to participation in extra curricullars. First, the added time (even if drive doubles) pales in comparison to time spent in the activity itself. Its another small cost to a students participation, and well worth it surely most (all) would agree. (EX: Nobody will say I will not be in marching band because my drive home takes 15 minutes as opposed to 10 ( how about 40 miniutes instead of 15 ?? ) if a left right after school). Secondly, a commute time could actually decrease if you go to a HS early, non rush hour, for extracurricular. Therefore, I deem this negligable cost.

How would the commute time decrease for my area - instead of 4 or 5 miles each way it will be 10 maybe 12 - so you propose my kids get up before rush hour so beat the traffoic and get to school at 6 AM - no thanks-- you may be OK with that - I am not

And again - the extra time and the time spent are totally different deals - this is a bad comparison. I spent 8-9 hours a day at work - my commute to OakBrook is small in comparison - but the savings when I work from home are tremendous

Lets assume the boundary solution with Watts, Cowl at MV. Just for arguments sake.

Lets measure location cost in terms of commute TIME. Strictly speaking, I am thinking ontime morning commute time (rush hour) and the on-time dismissmal commute (not yet rush hour).

Location COSTS:
1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
> see below - this is not flight time in a plane - this is commute time in a car - bus
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
How on earth did you figure this ? 5minutes from WV to MV northern location. What at 3 AM ? This is very erroneous.
3. White Eagle adds <5 min to expected commute
4. Gombert East (~20%) adds <5 min to expected commute
5. North part of Mccarty (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
6. North part of Steck (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
7. Split ES's increase from 2 with BB to 4. (Possibly mitigated by ES boundary adjusting.)
(I will assume Fry time going to BB or WV is equal...must be within couple minutes)

Location BENEFITS:
1. Shorter commute times for Brooks
2. Young
3. Longwood
4. Brookdale
5. Owen east (50%)... goes to NV.

Note: in terms of overall bus mile cost...I will assume the shorter commutes balance out the longer commutes.

( I believe that would be a bad assumption - LW one of the smallest schools and BD also smaller than either COWL or MW )

Other General Location BENEFITS
6.. First and foremost, everybody attends school within capacity. (the prime benefit!)
( same as any other site until we hear different - you are assuming there will be monmey savings at the new site - show me where )
7. Virtually all those who voted expecting to attend a 3000 seat school will. I believe Owen East is the only exception. (To me personally, this is significant benefit)
Not if we only need room for 2500 and also same answer as above- no one is proposing any differnent for any other site - and there is NO guarantee of ANY cost savings at a northern site

8. If one acknowledges that Brookdale had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
at the cost of throwing 3 ES areas totally out of kilter- maybe more. Can solve Brookdale with the reboundary of Hill MS - btw - although I understand to a point- their commute does not change from what they had when they moved in. It doesnt double.

also it would be solved if a southern site is chosen because likely LW gets reassigned so as not to travel to the furthest school


9. If one acknowledges that Peterson/Ashwood, current and future residents, had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
( also solved by every other location chosen )
10. No further "islands" created, I believe.
No - we move to another continent - we have NO community to our north - it is 203 all the way to past Ogden Ave - the community to our south will go to either NV or WV - same for the communities to the west of Cowlishaw --

I look forward to everybodies comments and thoughts on this. If it provokes consternation I can only blame myself....after all I did dedicate this to the BB trial attorneys!

[doctorwho]

doctorwho said:

gatordog said:

OK, everybody...bear with me here. The spirit of this is a good lawyer can always make arguments for either side. With grudging admiration for the BB trial lawyers, I forge on. (If it werent for them....this exercise would have been completely pointless! ). Can we offer thread dedications like songs on radio? I dedicate this thread to the skillful BB attorneys.

For thought-stimulation purposes lets consider AME site in terms of location only.
Quest: What is the real location cost compared to the BB central location?

For this exercise, lets ignore
-land cost savings (we dont know this, we dont know prices, fees, etc)
-potential site hazards (elect, RR. considered elswhere)

Things I will assume negligible, or not the district direct concern:
-HS driver gas cost due to milage differential (this cost pales in comparison to car ownership costs, insurance costs)
> fine - cut me a check for 4 years worth please - saying it's less than something else is not a good argument. I already figured 10 extra miles ( minimum) per day for 180 school day x 4 years - that is 7200 miles - current reimbursement figures for companies are approx .45 per mil - so that's $3240 more for each student driver over 4 years. Tell me again how small that cost is.-

possible lengthened rush hour commute time home increase due to participation in extra curricullars. First, the added time (even if drive doubles) pales in comparison to time spent in the activity itself. Its another small cost to a students participation, and well worth it surely most (all) would agree. (EX: Nobody will say I will not be in marching band because my drive home takes 15 minutes as opposed to 10 ( how about 40 miniutes instead of 15 ?? ) if a left right after school). Secondly, a commute time could actually decrease if you go to a HS early, non rush hour, for extracurricular. Therefore, I deem this negligable cost.

How would the commute time decrease for my area - instead of 4 or 5 miles each way it will be 10 maybe 12 - so you propose my kids get up before rush hour so beat the traffoic and get to school at 6 AM - no thanks-- you may be OK with that - I am not

And again - the extra time and the time spent are totally different deals - this is a bad comparison. I spent 8-9 hours a day at work - my commute to OakBrook is small in comparison - but the savings when I work from home are tremendous

Lets assume the boundary solution with Watts, Cowl at MV. Just for arguments sake.

Lets measure location cost in terms of commute TIME. Strictly speaking, I am thinking ontime morning commute time (rush hour) and the on-time dismissmal commute (not yet rush hour).

Location COSTS:
1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
> see below - this is not flight time in a plane - this is commute time in a car - bus
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
How on earth did you figure this ? 5minutes from WV to MV northern location. What at 3 AM ? This is very erroneous.
3. White Eagle adds <5 min to expected commute
4. Gombert East (~20%) adds <5 min to expected commute
5. North part of Mccarty (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
6. North part of Steck (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
7. Split ES's increase from 2 with BB to 4. (Possibly mitigated by ES boundary adjusting.)
(I will assume Fry time going to BB or WV is equal...must be within couple minutes)

Location BENEFITS:
1. Shorter commute times for Brooks
2. Young
3. Longwood
4. Brookdale
5. Owen east (50%)... goes to NV.

Note: in terms of overall bus mile cost...I will assume the shorter commutes balance out the longer commutes.

( I believe that would be a bad assumption - LW one of the smallest schools and BD also smaller than either COWL or MW )

Other General Location BENEFITS
6.. First and foremost, everybody attends school within capacity. (the prime benefit!)
( same as any other site until we hear different - you are assuming there will be monmey savings at the new site - show me where )
7. Virtually all those who voted expecting to attend a 3000 seat school will. I believe Owen East is the only exception. (To me personally, this is significant benefit)
Not if we only need room for 2500 and also same answer as above- no one is proposing any differnent for any other site - and there is NO guarantee of ANY cost savings at a northern site

8. If one acknowledges that Brookdale had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
at the cost of throwing 3 ES areas totally out of kilter- maybe more. Can solve Brookdale with the reboundary of Hill MS - btw - although I understand to a point- their commute does not change from what they had when they moved in. It doesnt double.

also it would be solved if a southern site is chosen because likely LW gets reassigned so as not to travel to the furthest school


9. If one acknowledges that Peterson/Ashwood, current and future residents, had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
( also solved by every other location chosen )
10. No further "islands" created, I believe.
No - we move to another continent - we have NO community to our north - it is 203 all the way to past Ogden Ave - the community to our south will go to either NV or WV - same for the communities to the west of Cowlishaw --

I look forward to everybodies comments and thoughts on this. If it provokes consternation I can only blame myself....after all I did dedicate this to the BB trial attorneys!

btw Gatordog -- Tuesday night I had to drive to IBA facility on Indistrial Drive off of North Aurora Ave - closer than AME would be - if was snowing - it took 36 minutes door to door via Rt 59, granted bad conditions - but don't our kids go to school in winter also ? Didn't take Ogden as it was far less salted/plowed - as i would expect my kids to do also.

[momto4]

doctorwho said:

gatordog said:

Things I will assume negligible, or not the district direct concern:
-HS driver gas cost due to milage differential (this cost pales in comparison to car ownership costs, insurance costs)
> fine - cut me a check for 4 years worth please - saying it's less than something else is not a good argument. I already figured 10 extra miles ( minimum) per day for 180 school day x 4 years - that is 7200 miles - current reimbursement figures for companies are approx .45 per mil - so that's $3240 more for each student driver over 4 years. Tell me again how small that cost is.-Show me the HS student who drives to/from school every day for 4 years? Most are 1 or 2 years IME. Is your RT to AME 10 miles more than to WV?

possible lengthened rush hour commute time home increase due to participation in extra curricullars. First, the added time (even if drive doubles) pales in comparison to time spent in the activity itself. Its another small cost to a students participation, and well worth it surely most (all) would agree. (EX: Nobody will say I will not be in marching band because my drive home takes 15 minutes as opposed to 10 ( how about 40 miniutes instead of 15 ?? ) if a left right after school). Secondly, a commute time could actually decrease if you go to a HS early, non rush hour, for extracurricular. Therefore, I deem this negligable cost.I don't think it takes 40 minutes to get from Eola/Molitor to anywhere north of 95th St even in the worst of traffic. In the worst of traffic it takes about 30 minutes from there to NV. In both morning and evening rush hour you have only part of the trip with the bulk of traffic. Morning traffic heading west should be relatively light, afternoon/evening heading east should light.

How would the commute time decrease for my area - instead of 4 or 5 miles each way it will be 10 maybe 12 - so you propose my kids get up before rush hour so beat the traffoic and get to school at 6 AM - no thanks-- you may be OK with that - I am notDid he say it would decrease for your area? I didn't think so. Nor propose leaving early, just that when there are before school extra-curriculars it won't take long to get there. I think there are important differences between a student driver (driving only one way of the extra-curriculars) and the parent dropping off or picking up (driving both ways and therefore if one direction of traffic is bad, they will have to deal with it whichever way that is). For example, if I need to drop off one of my kids at WV at 6:30am, the drive there is very quick, the drive back home not so much. For a student driver they don't have the drive back home at that time.

And again - the extra time and the time spent are totally different deals - this is a bad comparison. I spent 8-9 hours a day at work - my commute to OakBrook is small in comparison - but the savings when I work from home are tremendous

Lets assume the boundary solution with Watts, Cowl at MV. Just for arguments sake.

Lets measure location cost in terms of commute TIME. Strictly speaking, I am thinking ontime morning commute time (rush hour) and the on-time dismissmal commute (not yet rush hour).

Location COSTS:
1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
> see below - this is not flight time in a plane - this is commute time in a car - bus
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
How on earth did you figure this ? 5minutes from WV to MV northern location. What at 3 AM ? This is very erroneous.
Watts wouldn't drive to WV on their way to MV. Isn't this time using gatordog's timing from this morning?
3. White Eagle adds <5 min to expected commute
4. Gombert East (~20%) adds <5 min to expected commute
5. North part of Mccarty (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
6. North part of Steck (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
7. Split ES's increase from 2 with BB to 4. (Possibly mitigated by ES boundary adjusting.)
(I will assume Fry time going to BB or WV is equal...must be within couple minutes)

Location BENEFITS:
1. Shorter commute times for Brooks
2. Young
3. Longwood
4. Brookdale
5. Owen east (50%)... goes to NV.

Note: in terms of overall bus mile cost...I will assume the shorter commutes balance out the longer commutes.

( I believe that would be a bad assumption - LW one of the smallest schools and BD also smaller than either COWL or MW )

Other General Location BENEFITS
6.. First and foremost, everybody attends school within capacity. (the prime benefit!)
( same as any other site until we hear different - you are assuming there will be monmey savings at the new site - show me where )I don't think there was an ssumption there would be money savings at the new site. Did I miss that? I'm not sure whether you mean money savings to build the school or in transportation and other costs once it's built. I'd thought BB would result in shorter commutes for several areas and thereby be a time and money saver, which a northern MV would not.
7. Virtually all those who voted expecting to attend a 3000 seat school will. I believe Owen East is the only exception. (To me personally, this is significant benefit)
Not if we only need room for 2500 and also same answer as above- no one is proposing any differnent for any other site - and there is NO guarantee of ANY cost savings at a northern site

8. If one acknowledges that Brookdale had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
at the cost of throwing 3 ES areas totally out of kilter- maybe more. Can solve Brookdale with the reboundary of Hill MS - btw - although I understand to a point- their commute does not change from what they had when they moved in. It doesnt double.

also it would be solved if a southern site is chosen because likely LW gets reassigned so as not to travel to the furthest school


9. If one acknowledges that Peterson/Ashwood, current and future residents, had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
( also solved by every other location chosen )
10. No further "islands" created, I believe.
No - we move to another continent - we have NO community to our north - it is 203 all the way to past Ogden Ave - the community to our south will go to either NV or WV - same for the communities to the west of Cowlishaw --

Comments added in blue above. Thanks gatordog for taking on this experiment. I don't think at all that gatordog is trying to sell this site so much as to make sense of it.

[gatordog]

doctorwho said:

1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
> see below - this is not flight time in a plane - this is commute time in a car - bus
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
How on earth did you figure this ? 5minutes from WV to MV northern location. What at 3 AM ? This is very erroneous.

[/quote]

I certainly see many of your points, not doubt. I am truly trying to frame things as best I can. To be honest, in an indirect way I am personally trying to quantify my own opinion on "how much of a premium I feel we should pay for BB". I understand some would not pay $1 more, while others would pay the full $15 million more.

I will specifically address the one issue. As I posted in another thread, I drove today at 7 am from Watts to St John's in 11 minutes. Comparing that to Watts mapquest time to WV of 8 min, that's where the "about 5 minutes more than current commute time". For me today, the increase was 3 min.

I will do the rush hour St Johns-to-Watts experiment sometime (most likely not today). edit: like momto4, my rush hour traffic experience on Eola says this will be < 40 minutes. (I will not make a prediction because a good scientist doesnt want to influence his results! )

[doctorwho]

momto4 said:

doctorwho said:

Comments added in blue above. Thanks gatordog for taking on this experiment. I don't think at all that gatordog is trying to sell this site so much as to make sense of it.

Things I will assume negligible, or not the district direct concern:
-HS driver gas cost due to milage differential (this cost pales in comparison to car ownership costs, insurance costs)
> fine - cut me a check for 4 years worth please - saying it's less than something else is not a good argument. I already figured 10 extra miles ( minimum) per day for 180 school day x 4 years - that is 7200 miles - current reimbursement figures for companies are approx .45 per mil - so that's $3240 more for each student driver over 4 years. Tell me again how small that cost is.-Show me the HS student who drives to/from school every day for 4 years? Most are 1 or 2 years IME. Is your RT to AME 10 miles more than to WV?

Show me the parent that doesn;t drive this many times before the student does - to get them there before buses for activities and practices. Show me the student that doesn't drive home and sometimes have to drive back another time in the same day - I didn;t count there- so if we want to nitpick we can....
Or else cut me a check for half then $1620 -- but it will be more

possible lengthened rush hour commute time home increase due to participation in extra curricullars. First, the added time (even if drive doubles) pales in comparison to time spent in the activity itself. Its another small cost to a students participation, and well worth it surely most (all) would agree. (EX: Nobody will say I will not be in marching band because my drive home takes 15 minutes as opposed to 10 ( how about 40 miniutes instead of 15 ?? ) if a left right after school). Secondly, a commute time could actually decrease if you go to a HS early, non rush hour, for extracurricular. Therefore, I deem this negligable cost.I don't think it takes 40 minutes to get from Eola/Molitor to anywhere north of 95th St even in the worst of traffic. In the worst of traffic it takes about 30 minutes from there to NV. In both morning and evening rush hour you have only part of the trip with the bulk of traffic. Morning traffic heading west should be relatively light, afternoon/evening heading east should light.

How would the commute time decrease for my area - instead of 4 or 5 miles each way it will be 10 maybe 12 - so you propose my kids get up before rush hour so beat the traffoic and get to school at 6 AM - no thanks-- you may be OK with that - I am notDid he say it would decrease for your area? I didn't think so. ( He said the time could decrease if left earlier - yes )Nor propose leaving early, just that when there are before school extra-curriculars it won't take long to get there. I think there are important differences between a student driver (driving only one way of the extra-curriculars) and the parent dropping off or picking up (driving both ways and therefore if one direction of traffic is bad, they will have to deal with it whichever way that is). For example, if I need to drop off one of my kids at WV at 6:30am, the drive there is very quick,( THERE will be NO quick drive for me even with all my experience at AME - period. And as a parent I hjave a job also - can't be doublign - tripling time I need to be away - or leave later for the office ) ) the drive back home not so much. For a student driver they don't have the drive back home at that time. ( No they likely drive at rush hour -- or at 9 PM when they get back from an away game they play in - also nice and safe )
And again - the extra time and the time spent are totally different deals - this is a bad comparison. I spent 8-9 hours a day at work - my commute to OakBrook is small in comparison - but the savings when I work from home are tremendous

Lets assume the boundary solution with Watts, Cowl at MV. Just for arguments sake.

Lets measure location cost in terms of commute TIME. Strictly speaking, I am thinking ontime morning commute time (rush hour) and the on-time dismissmal commute (not yet rush hour).

Location COSTS:
1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
> see below - this is not flight time in a plane - this is commute time in a car - bus
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
How on earth did you figure this ? 5minutes from WV to MV northern location. What at 3 AM ? This is very erroneous.
Watts wouldn't drive to WV on their way to MV. Isn't this time using gatordog's timing from this morning? ( No driving to WV would be quicker as Ogden going west is nowhere near as busy as any of the N-S streets now is it ? - And driving to WV not exactly that far out of the way - it is West and North of me - and so is the school - so I fail to see your point here. If I drove past WV it would be a negligible add - if any on the way to MV at AME)

Also see my timing Tuesday rush hour PM

3. White Eagle adds <5 min to expected commute
4. Gombert East (~20%) adds <5 min to expected commute
5. North part of Mccarty (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
6. North part of Steck (~30%) adds ~ 5 min to expected commute
7. Split ES's increase from 2 with BB to 4. (Possibly mitigated by ES boundary adjusting.)
(I will assume Fry time going to BB or WV is equal...must be within couple minutes)

Location BENEFITS:
1. Shorter commute times for Brooks
2. Young
3. Longwood
4. Brookdale
5. Owen east (50%)... goes to NV.

Note: in terms of overall bus mile cost...I will assume the shorter commutes balance out the longer commutes.

( I believe that would be a bad assumption - LW one of the smallest schools and BD also smaller than either COWL or MW )

Other General Location BENEFITS
6.. First and foremost, everybody attends school within capacity. (the prime benefit!)
( same as any other site until we hear different - you are assuming there will be monmey savings at the new site - show me where )I don't think there was an ssumption there would be money savings at the new site. Did I miss that? I'm not sure whether you mean money savings to build the school or in transportation and other costs once it's built. I'd thought BB would result in shorter commutes for several areas and thereby be a time and money saver, which a northern MV would not.
The point being - this is the same anywhere we put the school as we know it - unless someone shows me the actual savings - and we have seen nothing - to indicate the northern school would be cheaper than Wagner Farms / MACOM or any other site - this benefit applies to all sites not just AME -
7. Virtually all those who voted expecting to attend a 3000 seat school will. I believe Owen East is the only exception. (To me personally, this is significant benefit)
Not if we only need room for 2500 and also same answer as above- no one is proposing any differnent for any other site - and there is NO guarantee of ANY cost savings at a northern site

8. If one acknowledges that Brookdale had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
at the cost of throwing 3 ES areas totally out of kilter- maybe more. Can solve Brookdale with the reboundary of Hill MS - btw - although I understand to a point- their commute does not change from what they had when they moved in. It doesnt double.

also it would be solved if a southern site is chosen because likely LW gets reassigned so as not to travel to the furthest school


9. If one acknowledges that Peterson/Ashwood, current and future residents, had legitimate concerns from being an "island", this problem solved.
( also solved by every other location chosen )
10. No further "islands" created, I believe.
No - we move to another continent - we have NO community to our north - it is 203 all the way to past Ogden Ave - the community to our south will go to either NV or WV - same for the communities to the west of Cowlishaw --

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

doctorwho said:

1. Cowl adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
> see below - this is not flight time in a plane - this is commute time in a car - bus
2. Watts adds <10 min to expected commute, or equivalently ~5 min to commute it currently has.
How on earth did you figure this ? 5minutes from WV to MV northern location. What at 3 AM ? This is very erroneous.

I certainly see many of your points, not doubt. I am truly trying to frame things as best I can. To be honest, in an indirect way I am personally trying to quantify my own opinion on "how much of a premium I feel we should pay for BB". I understand some would not pay $1 more, while others would pay the full $15 million more.

I will specifically address the one issue. As I posted in another thread, I drove today at 7 am from Watts to St John's in 11 minutes. Comparing that to Watts mapquest time to WV of 8 min, that's where the "about 5 minutes more than current commute time". For me today, the increase was 3 min.

I will do the rush hour St Johns-to-Watts experiment sometime (most likely not today).

[/quote]

I did it Tuesday night - see my time. I know because we were late arriving at the location and we watched the clock in the car the whole way.

How do you quantify the other costs ? We can go through all the gyrations in the world - I believe ED is correct when he assesses the % of population that will be disenfranchised from the outcome if a northern site is chosen that cannot fill the school without major disruptions to many communities.

For me that is not worth any savings.....I realize it is different for others - but no one should understimate how many people feel this way.

Again - fill the school with people who WANT to go there - and break ground tomorrow. If 50% of the populace is going there begrudgingly - I think it is a major mistake. And as has been said before, it is a mistake that cannot be corrected once undertaken.

[momto4]

doctorwho - I'm not trying to argue that AME is a good site, just that I don't think it's quite as bad as you make it out to be. I still think we should pay the $$ and get started on BB ASAP. Nor do I think AME is likely a better site location-wise for the district as a whole than a southern site.

No time for a full reply at the moment.

[gatordog]

momto4 said:

doctorwho said:

Comments added in blue above. Thanks gatordog for taking on this experiment. I don't think at all that gatordog is trying to sell this site so much as to make sense of it.

This is exactly my intent. I am not trying to sell this. As you all know, I put a good bit of effort into having us buy BB last spring.

If it matters any (I personally think it does), I perhaps have another qualification to hopefully in a fair way make this assessment:

Myself and a bunch of my neighbors voted YES ourselves. Which in fact meant we increased our HS commute ~ 5 minutes from current situation. And we also increased our one way travel distance a couple of miles.

[gatordog]

doctorwho said:

I did it Tuesday night - see my time. I know because we were late arriving at the location and we watched the clock in the car the whole way.

.

drwho, I gotta call you out on this one.....
for the record the Tues night drive you are talking about was in a SNOWSTORM. The infamous "first snowfall of the year" where everybody acts like they have never seen a snowflake before.

Commute times where naturally horrible. This data point must be ignored!

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

momto4 said:

Comments added in blue above. Thanks gatordog for taking on this experiment. I don't think at all that gatordog is trying to sell this site so much as to make sense of it.

This is exactly my intent. I am not trying to sell this. As you all know, I put a good bit of effort into having us buy BB last spring.

If it matters any (I personally think it does), I perhaps have another qualification to hopefully in a fair way make this assessment:

Myself and a bunch of my neighbors voted YES ourselves. Which in fact meant we increased our HS commute ~ 5 minutes from current situation. And we also increased our one way travel distance a couple of miles.

while I respect that - and I do - it was not to the furthest HS from your home, nor double your commute like it will be for some of us -- that is what I am struggling with.

everyone gave up something in the YES vote...for those of us with athletes we gave up varsity sports for our kids the first year - at least ( they will be sophomores - and yes do believe they will be varsity at that point ) - look at WVHS state champ soccer team - best players were freshman - at MV they would not have been state champs.
Others in other extracurriculars can probably explain the differences in start up with music programs instead of emmy winning programs - for those os us with 8th graders - they have to change high schools after they start - never an easy thing at that age. And many people in the MV attendance area at BB also have long traditions at WV or NV and those also go by the wayside.

Again, to comprehend the plight of Watts / Cowlishaw and maybe W/E for sure - how would you have voted if they told you YOUR school was now in Bolingbrook -- that is your new commute.

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

doctorwho said:

I did it Tuesday night - see my time. I know because we were late arriving at the location and we watched the clock in the car the whole way.

.

drwho, I gotta call you out on this one.....
for the record the Tues night drive you are talking about was in a SNOWSTORM. The infamous "first snowfall of the year" where everybody acts like they have never seen a snowflake before.

Commute times where naturally horrible. This data point must be ignored!

you can call me out but I clearly stated it was in a snowstorm - but I am an experienced driver - how many times does it snow during winter - and for kids driving there - every day is like the first snowfall skill wise is it not ?

[gatordog]

doctorwho said:

How do you quantify the other costs ? We can go through all the gyrations in the world - I believe ED is correct when he assesses the % of population that will be disenfranchised from the outcome if a northern site is chosen that cannot fill the school without major disruptions to many communities.

Again - fill the school with people who WANT to go there - and break ground tomorrow. If 50% of the populace is going there begrudgingly - I think it is a major mistake. And as has been said before, it is a mistake that cannot be corrected once undertaken.

[/color][/quote]

I am afraid this sentiment is very real. And it does concern me.

Ultimately, however, this is a political cost. and my thinking here pretty much avoids this. Intentionally!

I am not saying this is the case for you or anybody in particular. But something bugging me was, I dont want any of the logical and financial assessment about what to do next to come down to "one area gets rewarded because they heavily vote yes, while another area should not receive the 'fruits' because they voted no."

Politically, I understand this. But rationally, for the broad interests of the district, such thinking should not be allowed to enter in to this. That is the junk you expect from Springfield andWashington. Lets be better citizens than that here in 204. I hope I am expressing this thought ok...

[doctorwho]

gatordog said:

doctorwho said:

How do you quantify the other costs ? We can go through all the gyrations in the world - I believe ED is correct when he assesses the % of population that will be disenfranchised from the outcome if a northern site is chosen that cannot fill the school without major disruptions to many communities.

Again - fill the school with people who WANT to go there - and break ground tomorrow. If 50% of the populace is going there begrudgingly - I think it is a major mistake. And as has been said before, it is a mistake that cannot be corrected once undertaken.

[/color][/quote]

I am afraid this sentiment is very real. And it does concern me.

Ultimately, however, this is a political cost. and my thinking here pretty much avoids this. Intentionally!

I am not saying this is the case for you or anybody in particular. But something bugging me was, I dont want any of the logical and financial assessment about what to do next to come down to "one area gets rewarded because they heavily vote yes, while another area should not receive the 'fruits' because they voted no."

Politically, I understand this. But rationally, for the broad interests of the district, such thinking should not be allowed to enter in to this. That is the junk you expect from Springfield andWashington. Lets be better citizens than that here in 204. I hope I am expressing this thought ok...[/quote]

you mean like the better citizens in some areas that voted NO, but yet might get rewarded ?

[EagleDad]

Here's an idea - just like the contract on the acreage at Brach Brodie was contingent on the passage of the building referendum....

Make the contract on a new site contingent on the passing of a confrimation and operating funds referendum. Brinng the whol package back out:

"I approve district 204 to continue with plans to build a third highs school and issue operating bonds in the amount of $XYZ/year."