|
Post by gatordog on Jun 16, 2008 12:49:56 GMT -5
Here is analysis to support what Laidlaw has already told us....transportation costs are the same whether MV was built at AME or at BB. At least when looking at student-miles, as I do here. Its only required to look at ES areas that changed HS location. Shown here is each areas's projected HS enrollment. For simplicity, I am judging mileage by using a compass and scale. So yes its as-the-crow-flies mileage. That was easy and straightforward way to produce mileage differences. I am lumping all student population at the ES site (as BG did, I understand). Note, this gives a systematic error in favor of BB site, since I am counting all of Brooks and Young's trip to WV as being from the school, whereas much of their population comes from much further (Ginger Woods, Butterfield, even Camden Chase). Also, I have ignored Watts and Cowl "satellite" areas and lumped them in at their respective ES address. Again, this is systematic error in favor of the BB site. But for simplicity....ignore this. One exception to the ES starting point assumption is Owen West and Gombert East....I am using Still MS as their neighborhood school starting point. Area Br Yo BD Long Wat Cowl Ow E Ow W Gom W Gom E WE Fry | Enroll 457 511 332 329 371 410 116 271 291 73 399 601 | BB dist 2.5 2 4 3.5 1.5 1 2.5 .5 2 .5 1.25 2 | AME dist 1 1.5 2 1 3.5 3 4 3 .5 3 1.25 2.5 |
|
Results: For each area, get one way "student-miles" by multiplying. Then for each site, add them up. I get for these affected areas: travel if MV at BB: 8355 student-miles travel if MV at AME: 8388 student-milesThe results are the same. I hope this further convinces people that there never were transportation savings if we sited MV at BB instead of AME.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 13:07:03 GMT -5
Do we pay by student mile or route/mile ?
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 16, 2008 13:17:16 GMT -5
Do we pay by student mile or route/mile ? OK then by route mile would be BB = 23.25 Eola = 26.25 remembering that GD's figuring favored BB, by using ES as starting points, which pretty much negates the 3 mi. difference.
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on Jun 16, 2008 13:22:22 GMT -5
Nice piece of work, gatordog! I read somewhere that we pay by the route (Naperville Potluck, perhaps?)
Thanks,
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 13:27:07 GMT -5
Nice piece of work, gatordog! I read somewhere that we pay by the route (Naperville Potluck, perhaps?) Thanks, Cheers. My guess is that routes won't be available until probably Summer of 2009.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 16, 2008 13:27:31 GMT -5
Do we pay by student mile or route/mile ? Good question...... OK then by route mile would be BB = 23.25 Eola = 26.25 remembering that GD's figuring favored BB, by using ES as starting points, which pretty much negates the 3 mi. difference.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 16, 2008 14:04:04 GMT -5
I disagree! For fixed cost, Laidlaw has every incentive in getting the most efficient routes, as they make more margin if their costs are minimal. I had a classmate who worked at the City of Chicago optimizing routes with computer models - the algorithms are pretty sophisticated and converge very quickly on the most efficient routes - variants of the Travelling Salesman Problem algorithms. So I expect that whatever Laidlaw comes up with will be the best way to transport kids. I don't think I would be able to do better unless I wrote similar models. BTW, gatordog's analysis on the other thread is pretty good, and demonstrates why teh costs are very similar even from a first principles calculation. Cheers. I think we're talking through each other. I agree with you that LL has an incentive to make the most efficient routes from area X to destination Y (that we tell them) but they do not have an incentive to tell us to move area X to area Z because our asking them to move those students to area Y will cost us more than moving them to Z. Continuing from SB Thread I think we have shown the distances are similar for either.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 14:09:35 GMT -5
I think we're talking through each other. I agree with you that LL has an incentive to make the most efficient routes from area X to destination Y (that we tell them) but they do not have an incentive to tell us to move area X to area Z because our asking them to move those students to area Y will cost us more than moving them to Z. Continuing from SB Thread I think we have shown the distances are similar for either. From the SB thread to WP, I'm only talking about AME as a 3rd HS. Within that is where areas are slated to go as their destinations (which HS of the three, NV, WV or MV@AME).. those are the Y and Z destinations I am referring to, not AME vs BB.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 16, 2008 14:19:05 GMT -5
Continuing from SB Thread I think we have shown the distances are similar for either. From the SB thread to WP, I'm only talking about AME as a 3rd HS. Within that is where areas are slated to go as their destinations (which HS of the three, NV, WV or MV@AME).. those are the Y and Z destinations I am referring to, not AME vs BB. so to clarify now....you would like to see if there can be any improvement to the routes going to MV@Eola?
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jun 16, 2008 14:25:00 GMT -5
I think we're talking through each other. I agree with you that LL has an incentive to make the most efficient routes from area X to destination Y (that we tell them) but they do not have an incentive to tell us to move area X to area Z because our asking them to move those students to area Y will cost us more than moving them to Z. Continuing from SB Thread I think we have shown the distances are similar for either. ahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!! - a whole new thread on BB? I am tempted to lock it right now (only kidding). This will (probably) be my only post in this thread. I personally satisfied that GD's quick & dirty numbers show that the any potential difference in busing costs between Eola and BB are minimal. I guess everyone probably has a different definition of minimal, huh? As I've stated a few times today, I fail to see why analysis and future scenario projections should be done based on a comparison with BB. MV isn't going to be built there. And I do realize and acknowledge that some people are unhappy about that. It seems like some people want the SB/Admin to "prove" or "disprove" something about Eola or BB - or they want to "prove" or "disprove" something about Eola or BB themselves. We're kinda past that point - MV is under construction. What would one hope to achieve from any proof or dis-proof of anything at this point?
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 14:26:18 GMT -5
From the SB thread to WP, I'm only talking about AME as a 3rd HS. Within that is where areas are slated to go as their destinations (which HS of the three, NV, WV or MV@AME).. those are the Y and Z destinations I am referring to, not AME vs BB. so to clarify now....you would like to see if there can be any improvement to the routes going to MV@Eola? That's what I said on June 14th in the elections thread.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jun 16, 2008 14:40:19 GMT -5
so to clarify now....you would like to see if there can be any improvement to the routes going to MV@Eola? That's what I said on June 14th in the elections thread. Are you talking about optimizing the bus routes or changing boundaries, or both?
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 14:52:53 GMT -5
That's what I said on June 14th in the elections thread. Are you talking about optimizing the bus routes or changing boundaries, or both? Both if something can be worked up to actually make a financial impact in the proper direction (less miles and less cost). A top down review on all 3 levels.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jun 16, 2008 14:55:19 GMT -5
Are you talking about optimizing the bus routes or changing boundaries, or both? Both if something can be worked up to actually make a financial impact in the proper direction (less miles and less cost). A top down review on all 3 levels. Don't you think that cost is only one part of the criteria that should be used to define boundaries?
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 14:56:56 GMT -5
Both if something can be worked up to actually make a financial impact in the proper direction (less miles and less cost). A top down review on all 3 levels. Don't you think that cost is only one part of the criteria that should be used to define boundaries? Yes, agreed, it is only 1 part. It's a quantifiable part too that is not open to interpretation. Numbers compare as either greater than, less than or equal to. Opinion doesn't factor in at all.
|
|