Mills aside for now, what were they thinking in putting those few Small kids at SWES and those very few O'Henry/Austin High kids at Sunset Valley? I assume Oak Hill is going to try to fix that. - Hank
The parents who live out 290 actually want to go to the new SWES, even though it violates tracking. According to Oak Hill, they would rather cross tracking than go through the traffic at the 'Y'.
I don't know about that piece that is moved to Sunset Valley - we'll see.
OakHill mentioned that the Mopac frontage folks don't want to go through Walmart traffic, indicating they will try to keep this neighborhood (opposite problem as West290). But the # of kids is small, so it wont matter much. Kudos to the task force for listening to the traffic concerns of parents. While its not one of the criteria, it does deserve some consideration. Mike
I'm very happy with Plan '0!' I am glad that our kids are going to get to stay at Mills with their other Villages at Western Oak friends with whom they play and participate in extracurricular activities together.
While I understand and appreciate the need to manage student load at Mills, I'm quite disappointed that you all have chosen to back the plan put forward by Devlin @ Clayton. Under his proposal, students from the NW side of the Mills boundary (Heights of Loma Vista and other areas) would be forced into a situation where they have to travel quite a distance - further than it would be to Mills, Kiker, or Clayton in order to attend the new elementary school. For some of these students, Mills is (literally) visible from their backyard.
To be forced into a situation where they have to travel several miles to school when there is a school in their backyard and two close alternatives really does not make much sense.
The new elementary school is closer to both Clayton and Kiker. Why not shift some of those students into the new school and allow a small set of Mills students to attend one of those schools? Surely it's possible to shift students around in such a manner that they can continue to attend a *nearby* neighborhood school while alleviating overcrowding and maintaining tracking.
Please reconsider your support for Devlin's plan and consider alternatives that meet the objectives while absolutely minimizing the impact on students currently tracking to Mills.
@Michelle: Sorry. If you note the timestamp, you'll see that I posted this before the other one...but moved it to the other comment section once I noticed your posted.
Mills aside for now, what were they thinking in putting those few Small kids at SWES and those very few O'Henry/Austin High kids at Sunset Valley? I assume Oak Hill is going to try to fix that. - Hank
ReplyDeleteHank,
ReplyDeleteThe parents who live out 290 actually want to go to the new SWES, even though it violates tracking. According to Oak Hill, they would rather cross tracking than go through the traffic at the 'Y'.
I don't know about that piece that is moved to Sunset Valley - we'll see.
Having been through that traffic many times, I can understand that.
ReplyDeleteOakHill mentioned that the Mopac frontage folks don't want to go through Walmart traffic, indicating they will try to keep this neighborhood (opposite problem as West290). But the # of kids is small, so it wont matter much.
ReplyDeleteKudos to the task force for listening to the traffic concerns of parents. While its not one of the criteria, it does deserve some consideration.
Mike
I'm very happy with Plan '0!' I am glad that our kids are going to get to stay at Mills with their other Villages at Western Oak friends with whom they play and participate in extracurricular activities together.
ReplyDeleteMichelle and Lisa,
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand and appreciate the need to manage student load at Mills, I'm quite disappointed that you all have chosen to back the plan put forward by Devlin @ Clayton. Under his proposal, students from the NW side of the Mills boundary (Heights of Loma Vista and other areas) would be forced into a situation where they have to travel quite a distance - further than it would be to Mills, Kiker, or Clayton in order to attend the new elementary school. For some of these students, Mills is (literally) visible from their backyard.
To be forced into a situation where they have to travel several miles to school when there is a school in their backyard and two close alternatives really does not make much sense.
The new elementary school is closer to both Clayton and Kiker. Why not shift some of those students into the new school and allow a small set of Mills students to attend one of those schools? Surely it's possible to shift students around in such a manner that they can continue to attend a *nearby* neighborhood school while alleviating overcrowding and maintaining tracking.
Please reconsider your support for Devlin's plan and consider alternatives that meet the objectives while absolutely minimizing the impact on students currently tracking to Mills.
Randy,
ReplyDeleteI answered this question on another thread - no need to post it twice.
@Michelle: Sorry. If you note the timestamp, you'll see that I posted this before the other one...but moved it to the other comment section once I noticed your posted.
ReplyDelete