|
Post by gatordog on Sept 1, 2009 12:42:04 GMT -5
Using the given 2009-10 all grade level enrollments, I feed them forward into their respective HSs. For the split ESs I divide them like this: Owen 70% MV, 30% WV Gombert 80% WV, 20% MV Peterson 85% NV, 15% WV. I am fairly confident of the first two, less so for Peterson. For those currently in MS, I divide them like this: Scullen 50% WV, 50% NV. Still 75% WV, 25% MV On the time scales i am looking at, these move in and out of HS relatively quickly. Note: I completely gave up on figuring a split for today's 8th graders (the class of '14). I understand some had choice to stay at current MS or go to the new one, if applicable. Therefore, I approximate the Class of 14 numbers and distribution as equal to the Class of '13. For the really young kids, once I could no long use groups of 4 years for HS entrollment (today's 2nd graders), I simply take the senior class size and multiply it by 4. Numbers in italics have an assumption in them. Regular numbers are simply moving forward grade level enrollments, with the above split percentages. Here is the enrollments, and the distribution between HSs given the current boundaries and enrollments. sch yr 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
| MV 2568
2748
2870 2856 2834 2875 2778 2878
| WV 2731
2816
2679 2637 2539 2555 2558 2445
| NV 3920
3670
3489 3331 3099 3118 2936 2806
| TOT 9218 9226 9234 9136 9038 8823 8472 8548 8272 8128
|
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Sept 1, 2009 14:45:59 GMT -5
So should we start planning the addition to MVHS now?
|
|
|
Post by WeNeed3 on Sept 2, 2009 8:35:52 GMT -5
Using the given 2009-10 all grade level enrollments, I feed them forward into their respective HSs. For the split ESs I divide them like this: Owen 70% MV, 30% WV Gombert 80% WV, 20% MV Peterson 85% NV, 15% WV. I am fairly confident of the first two, less so for Peterson. For those currently in MS, I divide them like this: Scullen 50% WV, 50% NV. Still 75% WV, 25% WV On the time scales i am looking at, these move in and out of HS relatively quickly. Note: I completely gave up on figuring a split for today's 8th graders (the class of '14). I understand some had choice to stay at current MS or go to the new one, if applicable. Therefore, I approximate the Class of 14 numbers and distribution as equal to the Class of '13. For the really young kids, once I could no long use groups of 4 years for HS entrollment (today's 2nd graders), I simply take the senior class size and multiply it by 4. Numbers in italics have an assumption in them. Regular numbers are simply moving forward grade level enrollments, with the above split percentages. Here is the enrollments, and the distribution between HSs given the current boundaries and enrollments. sch yr 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
| MV 2568
2748
2870 2856 2834 2875 2778 2878
| WV 2731
2816
2679 2637 2539 2555 2558 2445
| NV 3920
3670
3489 3331 3099 3118 2936 2806
| TOT 9218 9226 9234 9136 9038 8823 8472 8548 8272 8128
|
|
Very interesting GD. This does seem to coincide with the ES enrollment number trends that were last published. I was surprised to learn that almost all of the sparsely filled ES's are south of 75th Street.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Sept 2, 2009 8:57:37 GMT -5
I was surprised to learn that almost all of the sparsely filled ES's are south of 75th Street. So the next long-term step (in a dozen yrs?) could be closing the NV Gold. Possibly it would go back to a MS, and maybe a diff MS closed (Gregory?...we would have to look. this is just me guessing) One interesting thing to me: This long term trend suggests to me that adding an addition on to NV was not the best solution to address the HS overcrowding. It would have left us with little flexiblity. With the chosen way, if enrollment (particulary in south) levels or flattens, closing NV Gold is the way out. However, if enrollments and developments pick back up, we are still OK because then keep NV Gold open. (this latter scenario, with some growth resuming in the next decade into NV attendance area, is what I think will happen). To me this is encouraging: there is no evidence showing long-term boundary adjustments would be required. We all agree, and know first hand, boundary adjustments are painful and have a cost to students and families. We sure want to avoid them if possible.
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Sept 2, 2009 21:51:48 GMT -5
G-dog, Have you left any room for the eventual build-out of the 100's of acres in Bolingbrook that are in the 204 attendance area. It seems hard to fathom there being any serious building for years to come, but who knows?
Also take into account the fact that many empty nesters will be leaving the larger 4 bedroom homes and I suspect the new residents will have younger children. We are seeing a real graying of our subdivisions population, long term us (old farts) will be replaced by a younger group.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Sept 2, 2009 22:39:01 GMT -5
G-dog, Have you left any room for the eventual build-out of the 100's of acres in Bolingbrook that are in the 204 attendance area. It seems hard to fathom there being any serious building for years to come, but who knows? Also take into account the fact that many empty nesters will be leaving the larger 4 bedroom homes and I suspect the new residents will have younger children. We are seeing a real graying of our subdivisions population, long term us (old farts) will be replaced by a younger group. Thanks for pointing out some significant, specific open land in the NV attendance area. I am less familiar with that neck of the woods. I agree that the aging demographics will kick in, and assuming some continous decline in school age population beyond the next dozen years seems unlikely. People will retire, move away, and younger families will move in to these family-sized houses.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Sept 3, 2009 7:24:50 GMT -5
G-dog, Have you left any room for the eventual build-out of the 100's of acres in Bolingbrook that are in the 204 attendance area. It seems hard to fathom there being any serious building for years to come, but who knows? Also take into account the fact that many empty nesters will be leaving the larger 4 bedroom homes and I suspect the new residents will have younger children. We are seeing a real graying of our subdivisions population, long term us (old farts) will be replaced by a younger group. How are the district boundaries determined? I did not know there are "100s of acres" in Bolingbrook available for development. Can D204 reject those boundaries prior to any development to prevent further drain in the system? (Or make sure it is zoned commercial.) Who decides?
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Sept 3, 2009 7:30:22 GMT -5
G-dog, Have you left any room for the eventual build-out of the 100's of acres in Bolingbrook that are in the 204 attendance area. It seems hard to fathom there being any serious building for years to come, but who knows? Also take into account the fact that many empty nesters will be leaving the larger 4 bedroom homes and I suspect the new residents will have younger children. We are seeing a real graying of our subdivisions population, long term us (old farts) will be replaced by a younger group. How are the district boundaries determined? I did not know there are "100s of acres" in Bolingbrook available for development. Can D204 reject those boundaries prior to any development to prevent further drain in the system? (Or make sure it is zoned commercial.) Who decides? I know the district fought very hard over the years to prevent the city of Naperville's master plan from changing lots of land to residential, knowing the negative impact it would have on the school district. If I recall correctly, it was always Bill Brestal on the other side, and he always got his way. Anyone remember Sector G? We may not have needed another HS had the city of Naperville not made so many changes to its master plan for land use.
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Sept 3, 2009 12:59:54 GMT -5
G-dog, Have you left any room for the eventual build-out of the 100's of acres in Bolingbrook that are in the 204 attendance area. It seems hard to fathom there being any serious building for years to come, but who knows? Also take into account the fact that many empty nesters will be leaving the larger 4 bedroom homes and I suspect the new residents will have younger children. We are seeing a real graying of our subdivisions population, long term us (old farts) will be replaced by a younger group. How are the district boundaries determined? I did not know there are "100s of acres" in Bolingbrook available for development. Can D204 reject those boundaries prior to any development to prevent further drain in the system? (Or make sure it is zoned commercial.) Who decides? Those boundaries were configured years and years ago - probably when 204 first became its own district. My guess is that 204 can't reject those boundaries anymore than they can reject fully developed land smack dab in the middle of the district. It is what it is unfortunately. It's not zoned commercial (nor should it be where it's located) - it's land that has not yet been developed or being developed very slowly due to the economy.
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Sept 3, 2009 23:18:42 GMT -5
Empty Land will bring more residents into our district long term.
There is a tremendous amount of corn and bean fields within 204 boundaries. On the southern reaches of our district we have vacant property in Bolingbrook that could easily accommodate 1100 plus homes (a subdivision the size of Ashbury) . In Naperville's Southwest corridor AKA "Sector G", we have room for a minimum of another 750-1200 homes, one only needs to look at property south of Wolfs Crossing between 248th and the R.R. tracks.
Then take a look at subdivisions that have 4 bedroom homes that are 15-25 years old. When you see all those gray hair folks trying like hell to stay fit and trim with all those empty bedrooms, One only need to ask "how long before the old codger say's I am out of here".
We are in a cycle where parents are aging and it will only be a matter of time before these homes turnover and a younger group with school age kids come in.
Combine the exodus of the 55 and up age group with even a minor uptick in home construction and we could be looking at a freshman center on the south side for decades to come.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Sept 4, 2009 6:48:43 GMT -5
Empty Land will bring more residents into our district long term. There is a tremendous amount of corn and bean fields within 204 boundaries. On the southern reaches of our district we have vacant property in Bolingbrook that could easily accommodate 1100 plus homes (a subdivision the size of Ashbury) . In Naperville's Southwest corridor AKA "Sector G", we have room for a minimum of another 750-1200 homes, one only needs to look at property south of Wolfs Crossing between 248th and the R.R. tracks. Then take a look at subdivisions that have 4 bedroom homes that are 15-25 years old. When you see all those gray hair folks trying like hell to stay fit and trim with all those empty bedrooms, One only need to ask "how long before the old codger say's I am out of here". We are in a cycle where parents are aging and it will only be a matter of time before these homes turnover and a younger group with school age kids come in. Combine the exodus of the 55 and up age group with even a minor uptick in home construction and we could be looking at a freshman center on the south side for decades to come. I've emailed the admin a Land Use document from a few years ago when the district was looking at the potential build-out. Hopefully he can post it here.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Sept 4, 2009 10:35:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Sept 4, 2009 12:36:24 GMT -5
Thanks, Parent. Does anyone know if any of this information is out of date? I didn't really look closely at it, but I don't see a lot in the Bolingbrook corner. The Macom/Ashwood area, when built out, looks like it would produce the largest number of students (of the not-fully-built-out areas on the map).
|
|
|
Post by mov4ward on Sept 6, 2009 12:07:51 GMT -5
I've been in Naperville since 1976 when the population was less then 30,000. In the last 30+ years, there have been several recessions and periods of high inflation rates. But growth in Naperville will continue - it is still one of the best areas in the Chicago area.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Sept 7, 2009 13:12:12 GMT -5
As defined by what?
Unfortunately, I think its growth will be its downfall. (I am specifically referring to the D204 area; I think D203 is going to be fine.)
|
|