Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate over Columbus Road shared‑use path centers on safety, connectivity and cost
Summary
Athens council members and residents debated a proposed Columbus Road shared‑use path, with supporters citing safety and gateway improvements and critics calling the $350,000 project a poor priority after a recent income tax rejection; ODOT funding and design timing were central to the discussion.
The Athens transportation committee discussed a proposed Columbus Road shared‑use path on May 12, with committee chair Member Spielnis and city staff describing the project as a gateway enhancement and residents and council members raising concerns about cost, connectivity and timing.
Committee materials and a map shown at the meeting placed the turquoise shared‑use path along Columbus Road, past Memorial Healthcare System’s new hospital and toward nearby businesses. Member Spielnis said a bid timeline requires council action soon—bids must go out May 30—and that an emergency clause and suspension of rules would be needed to meet that schedule.
Resident comments were sharply critical. Member Swank told the committee that “this is one of the reasons the income tax went down,” calling the plan “a tremendous waste of money” and noting the project’s price relative to the city’s street‑repair budget. Swank said he would “have a hard time voting on this” unless the city reconsiders priorities.
Supporters said the path will improve safety and multimodal access. The mayor called Columbus Road “one of our major gateways into the city” and said recent development makes the timing right. Committee members and residents noted heavy walking along the corridor, use by people pushing strollers and potential benefits for employees at nearby medical offices.
Funding and scope were key questions. The mayor said ODOT awarded funds underwriting about 90% of eligible construction costs “up to a cap of $1,032,881.” Committee members and staff discussed design and prior authorization: some design dollars have been spent and the service safety director previously was authorized to expend funds; discussion at the meeting referenced both $160,000 and a $350,000 figure in the project budget and design obligations.
Council members asked about crosswalks, bus service and whether an existing five‑foot sidewalk on the opposite side could be extended to improve connectivity. Member Clodfelter asked whether the Pedestrian Safety and Bicycle Accessibility Task Force had weighed in; staff said they were not aware of recent discussion on that body’s part.
No ordinance or funding appropriation was adopted at the committee meeting. The committee chair said the city will present ordinances next week to authorize a Local Public Agency (LPA) agreement with ODOT and to allow the service safety director to move forward with the bidding process.
What’s next: the council’s next regular session will include ordinances authorizing the LPA with ODOT and the contractor bidding step; the committee discussion left open questions about exact city share and final design details, which staff pledged to clarify before the vote.
