General
1) Yes for #1 and #3. Location stay as is! – buildings, parking & fields stay as is! Please!!! Thank you
2) Yes for #1 and #3. I think that if we are in a budget we should try to stay in the same location.
3) Yes for #1 and #3. Have private industry pay for space – name the schools corporate names & give the taxpayers a break. (i.e., CSC Middle School could be funded by CSC)
4) Yes for #1 and #3. Leave the schools in the same location. Why do they have to spend so much money on an elementary school like they did on Anza? They don't need to look like an Art Museum.
5) Yes for #1 and #3. Please keep schools as they are same location.
6) Yes for options #2 and #4. Please be sure folks know that it will cost an additional $1.5 M for Cabrillo option 1 with no benefit for the schools.
7) Yes for options #1 and #3. The purpose of construction is update & enlargement, not relocate & reinvent (which is costlier!). If it ain't totally broke, don't fix but the broken part!
8) Yes for options #1 and #4. Dana fields next to busy Aviation Blvd. is an extreme danger! Dana M.S. is the cornerstone to Wiseburn SD and has a long & lengthy history & memories for many. Save money on relocating students to portables and Cabrillo by staging building Dana first then Cabrillo second (students switch to Dana). This protects unfinished projects from cost over runs.
9) Yes for options #1 and #3. Hope the mosaic mural at Dana can be incorporated at the new facility.
10) Yes for options #2 and #3. I've lived and raised my son here for 34 yrs. Now I'm seeing my grandchildren going to our schools. Mayor Guidi states he has a $20 million dollar reserve – why are there no crossing guards for our children – we did years ago and that intersection is an accident waiting to happen!
11) Yes for options #1 and #3. Please budget whatever it takes to do the best project possible now rather than do fixes later. This is a project for the next 50 years. Don't shortchange it now.
12) Yes for #1 and #3. Where is the environmental impact report for the residents on 134th, Isis & Glasgow?
13) Yes for #1 and #3. I believe extra cost will be paid back in maintaining neighborhood values; that would drop in areas of increased traffic & noise from changes.
14) Yes for options #1 and #3. Dana and Cabrillo school's current location / orientation is the most compatible (has the least impact on) the surrounding community, and has worked well for over 50 years. Since the community will be living with the new schools for the next 50+ years, it is worth a reasonable additional cost to build the schools in the optimum location that will create the least impacts.
Negative impacts of relocating the schools and entrances:
1) Building Dana next to Isis would result in traffic congestion on 135th and Isis and hinder resident's ability to travel through the center of the neighborhood. It would also bring the schools too close together.
2) Relocating Cabrillo's entrance to 134th Street would significantly increase traffic on narrow residential streets (creating a dangerous situation), and negatively impact neighbor's quality of life and safety.
The school bond money is the community's money – the District needs to be considerate and locate the schools so they are the most compatible with the surrounding community.
15) Yes for options #1 and #3. As a resident in the northside of Hollyglen for 6 years now, I feel confident to comment and recommend the following: keep both Dana and Cabrillo schools close to its current locations using option #1 for each.
Here are a list of negative issues created by Option #2, specifically by Cabrillo.
1) The absence of a school frontage on 135th Street will encourage traffic to speed. The presence of school activity and children on 135th Street is currently a deterrent for speeders. If the frontage for Cabrillo moves to 134th Street, more unrelated school traffic will pass thru Hollyglen. More drivers outside the Hollyglen neighborhood will use 135th to save time accessing Aviation, avoiding El Segundo & Rosecrans.
2) Parents must drive further into the residential tract in the northside of Hollyglen to pick-up and drop-off their children on 134th Street. Homes on Glasgow, Isis and 134th Street will see increased traffic. Impatient parents late for school may speed thru the residential tract. Increased traffic devalues property value and the quality of life for a quiet residential tract.
3) Option #2 exchanges the current greenbelt view of the playfields with a parking lot and buildings. Increased noise pollution from the new traffic pattern plus parent / teacher conversations outside the school are now part of the school frontage for 134th St.
In conclusion, the penalty for the homeowners on Glasgow, Isis and 134th far outweighs any possible benefits. As a parent, I see no major improvement in safety for the community or for the children of Cabrillo.
I understand about 1 million dollars in construction costs will be saved by Option #2. Unfortunately, about 100+ homes will experience the offset of traffic, noise and a reduced quality of life in a quiet residential tract, thereby devaluing property values.
16) Yes for #1 and #3. For Dana this is the original site, and it should stay there. My husband went there, walked from 118th St. when it was first built = 1944.
17) Yes for #1 and #3. Leave everything the way it is.
18) Yes for #2 and #3. We went through this process last year or this spring! Is the Board and architect ignoring the community input? My caution was and is – don't allow an open space to appear which will look attractive to a developer.
19) Yes for #1 and #3. The housing of students for construction is worth the long term benefit of keeping the schools as is. Thank you.
20) Yes for #1 and #3. I think the entrance for Cabrillo should remain on 135th but the building location doesn't necessarily have to stay in the same place.
21) Yes for #1 and #3. The alternative sites just don't make any sense. Aviation is too busy a street to be next to the fields. Likewise, 134th street is a narrow residential street as opposed to the four lane street that is currently used for pickup / drop-off at Cabrillo. Please leave as is!
22) Yes for #1 and #3. Cabrillo – locate new building on N. side of property but keep it facing south with traffic entrance & exit on 135th. Create long “horseshoe” drive in front of school for drop-off on property off the busy street.
23) Yes for #1 and #3. Congestion, traffic, safety & keeping all the Aviation “viewers” from watching our children on the fields warrant any added costs to this rebuilding program.
24) Yes for #1 and #3. It's very important to take into consideration the serious impacts to the residents & the community. Cabrillo school needs to remain in its current location with pickup on 135th St.
25) Yes for #1 and #3. The old saying – if is not broken don't fix it. Leave everything the way it is.
26) Yes for #1 and #3. We are vehemently opposed to the front of Cabrillo School being changed to face 134th street. We purchased our home 30 years ago with a view of green playgrounds and the din of children at play. On the other hand, residents of 135th street bought on a busy street at the front of the school. The traffic on 135th street will always be there. Turning 134th street into another street with unrestricted traffic is unnecessary and foolhardy.
Safety
1) Yes for #1 and #4. 134th St. pickup seems safer because it is a less busy street. Leaving Dana where it is, is better for the long-term.
2) Yes for #2 and #4. I think moving the 2 schools location would make it a safer environment for our children. Remember it is the childrens safety we are concerned with not what is an easier plan for the Board & Developers.
3) Yes for #2 and #4. We have a child in Cabrillo and one in Burnett School. We believe it's in the best interest of the community to choose Options 2 and 4. The reasons for this are twofold. First, the safety of the children in the Wiseburn School District schools is paramount. I drop off my children at Rainbow River every morning and cars speed down 135th street. People don't seem to pay attention to the 25 MPH sign. (Maybe we need to have the city post more signs.) These include people cutting through the neighborhood to avoid Rosecrans and El Segundo to get to work in the morning. I heard that a girl recently lost part of her leg due to being dragged under a car as she was crossing 135th Street. I don't know the circumstances of this but it leads me to believe that we as a community need to do more to ensure the safety of our children. I like the way Anza school's drop off and pick up works. That is an excellent model to follow for Cabrillo and (Dana). Second to safety is cost. You've stated that options 1 and 3 may cost more than options 2 and 4. We need to be mindful of costs and do what fits in our budget. We don't need to incur unnecessary costs by choosing options that raise expenses and aren't in favor of the safety of “our children”. We encourage you to support Options 2 and 4 for the safety of the children attending schools in Wiseburn and to help keep expenses within budget.
4) Yes for #1 and #3. I am concerned about Dana children with primary and elementary. Also fields unsafe on Aviation.
5) Yes for #1 and #4. I think 134th St. would be a safer place for drop off / pick up as its not as busy a street.
Traffic
1) Yes for #1 and #3. We are deeply concerned about the terrific traffic jam it will cause on the streets behind Cabrillo if it is changed. We are already limited on our exit out of this portion of Hollyglen. We believe it would be a MAJOR MISTAKE to make the entrance and exit on 134th Street. We cannot let those who have nothing to lose make the decision to change it from where it is.
2) Yes for #1 and #3. The added expense will be worth it long term. Given increasing traffic volume it's important to separate the drop off areas as much as possible.
3) Yes for #1 and #3. Relocating the school buildings at both school sites (even just one school site) would result in too much bothersome traffic congestion in our Hollyglen neighborhood.
4) Yes for #1 and #3. School drop-offs and pick-ups should stay on the larger streets for ease of traffic movement, not the smaller residential (134th) street.
5) Yes for #1 and #3. I live on the corner and observe what goes on when parents pick their kids up. Its chaotic! All kids should be picked up and dropped off on 135th St. Please notify the Principal.
6) Yes for #1 and #3. Putting schools further into neighborhood with pick up points inside will totally block the residents from getting around during the pick up times. Drop off areas in several locations will reduce congestion no matter what the footprint ultimately is.
7) Yes for #1 and #3. 135th Street is better able to accommodate the flow of traffic and pedestrians while keeping Cabrillo accessible to the public without being invasive and detrimental to the quality of life in the neighborhood housing tract.
8) Yes for #1 and #3. The congestion is bad enough as schools are – when 134th is being used for pick up now – cars literally block the street, kids run between cars, traffic jam is impossible. I think we need to have valet drop off & pick up – the parents are worse offenders than the children.
9) Yes for #1 and #3. I do not want the Cabrillo school drop off or pick up on 134th St. The other day when people were picking up children I could hardly get out with all the cars parked along 134th St. and also side streets.
10) Yes for #3. 134th is a 2 lane street, and with cars parked on either side of the street, that only leaves 1 lane for traffic. This creates a traffic jam during pickup times and residents cannot get in or out on 134th.
11) Yes for #1 and #3. Even now, with only a couple of classes dismissed to the north side, the traffic and closeness of cars is too dangerous, because 134th is so narrow.
12) Yes for #1 and #3. We feel option 4 is a bad idea. Traffic is already congested on 134th now. Making this the drop off / pick up area, would make an already unsafe condition worse. To our knowledge, there has been at least two accidents since school started in September.
13) Yes for #3. 134th is too narrow & gets too crowded as it is with the current pick-up situation. Traffic flow is much smoother on 135th. Any traffic & environmental consultant will support this statement.
14) Yes for #1 and #3. Opening of Cabrillo on 134th Street is unacceptable due to traffic impacts.
15) Yes for #1 and #3. Classes or parent-student meetings regarding correct street manners (i.e. cross with light, do not cross street in middle of street, no u-turns, no stopping in traffic lanes). Parents are in need of this info also. After all, they are supposed to teach & set examples.
16) Yes for #2 and #3. Must have better parking for athletic fields.
17) Yes for #2 and #3, however noted for #4 “get parking & pickup change & I'd vote for it”. Comment: “Only reason I mark this one is to have 134th St. drop off / pick-up on 134th St. Not only children but the parents darting out in front of my car. Traffic terrible (dangerous). Otherwise I like school being on the 134th side.”
18) Yes for #1 and #3. We on the north side of 135th St. would have a hard time to get in and out, if drop-off and pick-up is moved to 134th St.
19) Yes for #1 and #3. Too much traffic now with “out of district” students.
20) Yes for #1 and #3, No on option #2 because car exhaust from Aviation will be worse when Aviation is widened. No on option #4 because parents block 134th St. & double park. No room unless parking pick-up is on campus, not on street. 134 Street is a narrow street. We have already experienced a mess when parents use 134th.
21) Yes for #1, to keep school away from residents. Yes for #3, 134th street will not handle that kind of traffic.
22) Yes for #1 and #3. I feel that Wiseburn Ave will be used to access Cabrillo due to congestion on 134th St. Wiseburn Ave will become more dangerous from the increased traffic & probably more speeders.
23) Yes for #1 and #3. Changing drop offs would cause too much traffic in the neighborhood. Also too expensive & would take too long for construction.
24) Yes for #1 and #4. Congestion at Cabrillo / library very dangerous
25) Yes for #1 and #4. 135th being a main way – too much congestion on 135th, besides it being more dangerous for all.
26) Yes for #2 and #4 (with entrance changed to 135th). Please use 135th Street for all Dana and Cabrillo entrances.
27) Yes for #1 and #3. Locations are perfect now. Lets not make more traffic on our resident's side streets. Keep Hawthorne residents happy.
28) Yes for #1 and #3. Keep the schools where they are!! Add a policeman at Peter Burnett. Drivers are rude and make illegal turns.
29) Yes for #1 and #4. Option 4 (Cabrillo change) will require a larger student pickup area to get more cars off of 134th St. Must be done to reduce the impact on 134th St.
30) Yes for #2 and #3. I am concerned that 134th is too narrow for pick-up / drop-off. However, I also realize that 135th is already very busy and if Dana pick-up / drop-off is on 135th, it will be busier still. Otherwise, I think for Cabrillo, option 2 is the better.
31) Yes for #1 and #4. Gridlock is an absolute!!
32) Yes for #2. The outside traffic is a major problem for the neighborhood. Please move the fields to the corner of Aviation & 135th St. so we can have some peace of mind on the weekends. They have no regard for Hollyglen since they do not live here.
33) Yes for #1 and #4. I feel moving playground to near Aviation would be more harmful to the health of the children with the fumes from all the cars. Also better to not have Isis & 135th more congested.
34) Yes for #1 and #3. Turning Cabrillo around would entail clogging residential streets – Glasgow, Isis & 134th plus parts of Hindry – with traffic at drop-off / dismissal times. Keep traffic on 135th with entrance remaining on 135th. 135th is wider, easier to access by car and less residential.
35) Yes for #1 and #3. My major concern would be the increased traffic on the residential streets. I prefer the majority of the traffic to remain on the 4-lane main streets of Aviation and 135th.
36) Yes for #1 and #3. 134th Street is not wide enough to handle student drop off & pick up. It's very difficult to drive on 134th during student drop off & pick up times.
37) Yes for #2 and #3. On Cabrillo site, traffic flow is already bad on 134th St. without school in session & cars parked on street. Only 1 lane & have to wait until cars pass to get through.
38) Yes for #1 and #3. 134th St. is not wide enough. When school lets out, you cannot drive safe on that street.
39) Yes for #1 and #3. 135th street as well as the surrounding streets can barely handle the traffic created for special event (e.g., Open House, sports, etc….). Please strongly consider the above recommendation to maintain Dana & Cabrillo in its current locations.
40) Yes for #1 and #3. We do not need any more traffic on Isis or on 134th St.
41) Yes for #1 and #3. I wonder if the people recommending 134th street as a drop off and pick up area have ever driven down that section of 134th. The street couldn't possibly handle that much traffic.
42) Yes for #1 and #3. It's ridiculous to think that tiny 134th can handle school traffic for drop off & pick up. This must not change.
43) Yes for #1 and #3. It is difficult to drive on 134th St. now, when some of the children are picked up on this street. What will it be like if it becomes the main pick-up point? The School Board must take this into consideration or it will be remembered when the next Bond issue is proposed.
44) Yes for #1 and #3. The current traffic in the afternoon on 134th St. is almost impassable with occasional altercations. Re-engineer the 135th entrance to allow for a more manageable entrance - at least there are 2 lanes in either direction.