Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

More talk ahead on Seventh and Pike

February 22, 2013

Some frustration was evident as members of Marietta City Council heard objections from local businessmen who believe the city should not move ahead with the proposed $3....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-23-13 8:23 AM

The condescending remarks made by these guys during the meeting prove they have no interest in listening to the city's taxpayers! Newsflash fellas: We're not too stupid or lazy to have or voice an opinion, many have done so, you've just not listened. And as Mrhomer commented earlier, many people never dreamed such a ridiculous plan would ever be approved, not even by you guys!

Particularly loved that Abicht's worried about "organized politics" being involved in the opposition to this project. If anyone has a "political" motivation for wanting to see this disaster proceed, it's him! Would be some nice feathers in his cap from his union cronies if he can shove this project through!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-23-13 3:02 AM

What idiot came up with this idea and why did the city waste $300,000 already? Maybe that money could have gone to snow removal in town. They do a horrible job of that, and that seems to me to be much more of a safety issue than the intersection they are wanting to screw up.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 11:04 PM

What if the project is scaled back to just put in a one good ADA crosswalk across 7th, across Green, across Pike, across S Seventh with appropriate signals? Not sure this would be council’s highest priority, seeing as how we have gotten along without such crosswalks for many years; but a good crosswalk seems like a worthy project.

Would that cost $900,000? If so, would Marietta be eligible for reimbursement of everything above $90,000?

But yikes, we have already spent $300,000! Sam, please write an article that demystifies this issue.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 11:01 PM

But what if the project is a net minus benefit: less safety, more inconvenience, a threat to neighborhood prosperity. What council would say to go ahead with such a seemingly attractive financial project if the project actually doesn’t benefit Marietta citizens? What could their reasons be for going ahead with such a project?

Would the reason be: they think they are doing their job? But are they?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 10:59 PM

To explore further, how does the math work? It must be very complicated. The city matches with 10%? Does that mean that, if $3.2 million is the total cost, the city can get reimbursed for all above $320,000? So, if there is $300,000 more to spend on design, we (as taxpaying Mariettans) must pay $20,000 and State of Ohio and Regional will pay $280,000 and everything beyond? If that is really the way it works, you can see why someone, not considering the benefits or risks of the project, would say, “Go ahead, we pay only $20,000 and get about 2.8 million. We brought home the bacon!”

Sam, you are doing well. Please write an article that demystifies this issue.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 10:57 PM

From a strict financial sense, forget what you have already irretrievably spent. That money is gone. It is what you might next spend that you are deciding about. What do you have left to spend and what will you get for it?

So, how does the math actually work on this project? From the article, “The city has already spent about $300,000 on preliminary designs and studies.” “"The design phase he wants to go into would cost another $300,000," “proposed $3.2 million project”.

So we are out the initial $300,000, no matter what?

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 9:18 PM

If the meetings are at 3:30 or 4 on a weekday, most citizens are working. It isn't for lack of want, we just can't attend because we are unable to take vacation time to sit in a meeting about a nonsensical issue. I have lived on 7th Street by the YMCA for many years. I travel that intersection up to 10 times a day for the last 8 years. I have not yet encountered an accident. Either I am incredibly lucky, or they aren't happening. Can the City Council produce any kind of accident records or a feasibility study showing how this plan is an improvement?

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 7:32 PM

This type of thing happens now:

You are eastbound on Pike, turning left in front of Bar-b-cutie. You watch closely for turn space to open up in the two oncoming lanes. A diesel pickup just exited Duke/ Duchess westbound and is facing you in your turn lane. He sees an opening, guns it, and zooms past on the left. You are still waiting for your opening when two cars approach from the east – they are slowing with their left blinkers on, headed for Bar-b-cutie. They aren’t sure whether to enter the turn lane in front of you or behind you; but they pull in behind, narrowly missing your back bumper. A few seconds later, space opens up and you turn across Pike into Hardwood Center Dr. You feel relieved because you didn’t get rear-ended, the typical accident on that stretch of Pike St. This type of event will repeat many more times a day if the city bans left at 7th/Greene.

Can the city produce counts which show the number of cars per day that now turn left at 7th/Greene?

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 7:31 PM

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 7:30 PM

Pike is one leg of the right triangle. Acme the other. Greene from 7th Street to Acme is the hypotenuse. Certainly you would want to save time and expense by following the shorter route, the hypotenuse.

Depending on traffic, you’ll spend 1 - 3 minutes more if you drive the proposed loop (onto Pike, left after Pizza building, reenter Greene behind Captain D’s), about the same 1 - 3 if you wait and turn left off of Pike at N. Hart, and about 5 - 10 minutes on the Pike/Acme route. Time is important; but more so is safety. Drivers will be forced to give up the relative safety of the left turn at 7th and Greene for the sometimes hair-raising left turn off Pike after the Pizza building. Or, the city suggests, you may travel Pike/Acme. Either of these two routes is much riskier than the existing path up Greene including the left turn from 7th. Can the council produce city police accident records which disprove this description of comparative riskiness?

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 2:51 PM

Begame--I did register my opinion with the online comment platform several months ago.

Maybe it just seems like we're now jumping on the bandwagon because our input, while not as loud and vocal as it is now, was ignored.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 2:29 PM

VOTE out the incumbents. Why we keep choosing to keep the same people in place and expecting different results. Sounds like the definition of insanity!

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 2:29 PM

I drove through this intersection twice already today. Timing of the lights was still sub-optimal, not a police officer in sight--and yet traffic flow was moving along.

Just think what would happen if the lights were timed appropriately and there was police presence to nab those Speedway shortcutters.

This project is needed like a 50-foot flood in Marietta--it's NOT!

Oh, yes--and speaking of floods, won't THAT be interesting when Pike Street floods and you can't make a left turn from 7th onto Greene? Will Council arrange a vehicle ferry to get people out Pike Street?

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 2:27 PM

"Greene Street is one of the only areas of business growth in Marietta, and any inconvenience or delay would be an impediment to our business." Yes, Mr. Frye is right!!

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 11:39 AM

People don't come to meetings because they feel they won't be heard and taken seriously. They don't like it when the administration "peanut gallery" makes snide comments.

This situation is more about the current administration and the engineers office. It's also about one council member who was mayor at the time this project came into being, he knows who he is. And it's about two council members who are weak, and who have caved to the city administration rather than stand their ground for the citizens of this city. They know who they are too.

If Mr. Abecht and the others haven't heard objections it's because they haven't been listening.

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 11:20 AM

This project has been in the works for a very long time. There have been meetings and surveys with little response. Why is it that citizens wait until it's ready to be finalized before they have an opinion? Council needs input from the outset of any new project to know what direction the citizens want them to take.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 10:47 AM

You "politicians" wanted the job to represent the best interests of the citizens and the city in general. Now it is time for the chickens to roost. Since most of you belong to the club known as one of "them", your tighty-whities are getting pinched. Just ask your respective "party boss" how he/she wants you to vote.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 10:03 AM

well we see this counci needs to be replaced if they cant do whats good for our town its time to get some new faces in office they seem to do all the projects that our not in our citys best interest just like the run down property and trash around town when i was growing up we had SPRING ClEAN UP every body coud get rid of the trash but they got rid of that to WE NEED NEW COUNCIL PEOPlE BETTER WAKE UP BEFORE OUR TOWN GETS TURNED UPSIDE DOWN fROM THESE JOKERS

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 9:31 AM

www . pikegreene7th . com

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 9:06 AM

What happens when Pike Street floods, It doesn't take alot of flood water to close Pike Street.If the city council doesn't understand what the people want and the business that will be effectied by no left turns. When election time comes they can be voted out of office.I would like to know the number of accidents that happen in that intersection, not the number that happen within a mile of the intersection. What about it council, do you have a number?

12 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 6:45 AM

Is this the twilight zone did the we citizens somehow die and elect this council as our Gods ?

13 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 6:39 AM

This council just doesn't get it. Stop the waste of our money on this bad idea. Seem that they all have selective hearing disorder. Joe Tucker doesn't get it either it's not he doesn't want to move forward without citizens and councils approval. He should have said without the citizens approval and no this one the greater of us don't. Council doesn't understand they work for us and most everyone says no so their vote should be no. this should have been dead in the water long ago. But with this council it doesn't work that way. It's time to get rid of the few that we can this time around .

15 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-22-13 5:31 AM

It's not that the public didn't catch on or know what was going on until recently...they are just amazed that such a stupid plan was approved.

17 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 23 of 23 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web