[Masthead] Overcast ~ 61°F  
High: 66°F ~ Low: 50°F
Friday, Apr. 29, 2016

School district, city officials pledge to address traffic at site of new school

Thursday, October 29, 2009

(Photo)
The most recent drawing of the proposed new elementary school includes this site layout showing two entrances to the campus from South Odell Avenue, an attempt by the project planners to reduce the possibility of traffic congestion in the area.
(Contributed image)
Twice each day, vehicle traffic clogs the streets at all four Marshall elementary schools as parents pick up or drop off their children, and one goal of school district officials in proposing a new elementary school was to help alleviate that problem.

Voters will have an opportunity Tuesday, Nov. 3, to consider granting the district permission to borrow $20.3 million to build a new three-grade elementary school on the east side of South Odell Avenue.

If the project is approved, traffic congestion will certainly be solved at one location -- whichever existing elementary school the district decides to abandon -- and likely will be reduced at Bueker Middle School, which will lose about 200 students as its fifth grade classes move to the new building.

But it remains to be seen whether traffic congestion at the new school will be as big a problem as it is at existing schools now.

Efforts to address traffic concerns were included in the original site design, which included separation of bus and car traffic once vehicles had entered the campus.

Unlike the current situation, traffic concentrations at the new school will not be in residential neighborhoods.

At public meetings in September, community members expressed concern that a single driveway near the north property line would not be enough to handle the traffic and would result in a bottleneck on South Odell Avenue, so district officials asked the architect to add a second driveway near the south property line.

Wayne Crawford, co-chairman of Citizens for the School Bond Committee, noted at public presentations about the issue that district officials have consulted with the city of Marshall about the possibility of making improvements to South Odell Avenue if traffic congestion proves to be a problem.

Marshall Mayor Connie Latimer said although no specific plans are in place, there are steps the city would consider taking, such as adding turn lanes on the street if necessary.

The city will not make improvements to the driveway itself, which would be built with bond money and would be the school district's responsibility.

She noted that the city recently completed the South Odell sewer project in hopes that more development would occur in that area.

A related problem in that area is the tendency for water to cover the roadway just south of Drake Road during heavy rains.

Marshall Municipal Services Director Bill Anderson said the problem is less severe than it used to be.

When the Missouri Department of Transportation added curbing several years ago, the ditches were widened and deepened, he said, so water covers the road less frequently than it once did.

But if the area gets a couple of inches of rain in a short amount of time, the roadway can still be covered in water temporarily, and though it is not a dangerous depth and doesn't run swiftly, he does not recommend motorists drive through it.

Contact Eric Crump at marshalleditor@socket.net

Related stories:
www.marshallnews.com/topic/mpsdbond09
www.marshallnews.com/story/1567762.html

Blog:
New School?
www.marshallnews.com/blogs/1464/

On the Net:
www.yes4schools.info


Comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on marshallnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

If the bond does not pass, I will try my hardest to get a job somewhere else. I want my children to go to a place where education is valued and they have will have a school in which they can take pride. I don't want them in trailers and places with old toxins, leaks and growing mushrooms.

My leaving may not affect everyone, but I do try to go to local businesses and show my support here. Companies quite often look to places where the residents make commitments to educate their future workers.

I don't let my children walk or ride their bikes to school because there are no sidewalks for them in most places in town! At least, not where I live. I don't see how it would be much different in the new location.

I want you to look at the next child you see and look them in the eye and tell them that they are just not worth it. Go ahead - look at your grandchild, niece, nephew, son or daughter and tell them that they are not worth it.

-- Posted by JustMe100 on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 2:03 PM

JOwnby,

The older buildings on college campuses have much more access to different funding to keep their buildings modern -- primarily through tuition increases and foundation funds.

Our public schools are provided without basic tuition costs. And the ones in our community are past spending more money on in a fiscally responsible manner.

We need this school. Vote yes for the kids!

-- Posted by hat full of sky on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 12:48 PM

wtf,

Yes, it is for the kids. They deserve a quality education.

-- Posted by hat full of sky on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 12:43 PM

Vote YES for the "kids".

Really? Is it really for the "kids"?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 12:31 PM

Scarpetta, I'm confused by your comment that this bond issue was thrown together. The building plans are basically the same ones the architects drew up years ago. The reason they are doing this now is because of the bargain we are getting on financing it. Thank goodness all of these things were in place so we could take advantage of this opportunity. The bottom line is, if we had done this when we had the chance before, we would have had two elementary buildings for less than one is going to cost us now because of inflation. We would also be well on the way to being able to use our bond capacity to replace Bueker. Shame on us. We have the opportunity today to at least get started on fixing a problem we should have taken care of a long time ago.

For those of you who haven't already, please vote YES for kids!

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 12:18 PM

TODAY'S THE DAY! VOTE YES FOR THE KIDS.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 11:44 AM

I do believe your voting location does not change. I always go to the same place. If your in the wrong place they will tell you.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 8:47 AM

Me thinks the man doth protest too much.

-- Posted by hat full of sky on Mon, Nov 2, 2009, at 11:18 AM

"What you're really saying is that you have some beef with either the school administration or the school board."

Really? And you concluded this how? Assumptions are not becoming of you. I could throw around my own assumptions but I'm sure it would get my post removed. I'm not hiding behind anything, I'm simply stating a legit concern of mine for the safety of the children.

Now maybe you don't have kids. Or maybe you don't care if a child gets hit by a speeding car. That's your opinion and I won't post assumptions based on that fact, not do I really give two cents.

Maybe it's you with the issues, since this is the second time you have thrown out garbage like this.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Mon, Nov 2, 2009, at 8:47 AM

I am so sick of those who want to hide behind "I'm in support of the children but I don't like the way this is being done."

What you're really saying is that you have some beef with either the school administration or the school board.

The sad thing is that you are willing to punish the children (and future children) in order to get your revenge.

Pathetic.

-- Posted by hat full of sky on Mon, Nov 2, 2009, at 6:41 AM

Oh and hat full, I have stated before in other posts that I do think the school is needed. Just not thrown together in a hap hazard fashion. Oh and as a tax payer, they are running it past me..and you and any other reader.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 9:46 PM

hat full,

The paper posted that the city and the school would work together. Such as ""Marshall Mayor Connie Latimer said although no specific plans are in place, there are steps the city would consider taking, such as adding turn lanes on the street if necessary." and "The City and the School Board have agreed to work together on any issues that may occur."

A super highway? No not in the slightest. However I do think that planning for getting children safely to and from the school should be a very important issue. Children who walk or ride their bikes to this new school will be forced to walk in yards of homeowners or in the street (business 65). Dealing with this stretch of land daily, the cars, trucks and semi traffic can't read a speed limit sign. They speed up and down the road. The intersection at Morrow and Odell is awful, and floods if it rains too hard. I don't see these as a "a bogus issue" but rather one that takes the safety of everyone and most importantly our children into consideration.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 9:41 PM

Eric,

Thank you for the clarification. I don't want to be spreading misinformation.

That said, scarpetta is still demanding that the school district take on responsibility for the road. The school district is not responsible for making Odell a super highway so that scarpetta doesn't have to wait in line like everyone else. Is he too good to wait?

-- Posted by hat full of sky on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 7:35 PM

scarpetta,

Let me get this straight. Now the school district is responsible for make Odell Street (NOT 65, where the school is) meet your standards of traffic flow in order to get your vote?

You are just grasping at any straw to keep from admitting that this school in necessary, that the plan was well developed (except that they didn't run it personally by you first).

If you don't want to vote for the school bond, DON'T!! But don't spread misinformation. It's beneath you.

-- Posted by hat full of sky on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 7:13 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The proposed school site is on Business 65/South Odell Avenue, not U.S. 65.

As I have mentioned on other blogs this is an impulsive decision and not well thought out. AND PLEASE do not lay the guilt trip on us about the children! Plan, get your ducks in a straight row, and then maybe a YES vote will be cast at a later date not this November.

We need straight answers to traffic flow, K-2 buildings, what building(s) will be retired, and what other expenses will be added to this project for exsisting building's needs......

Look at neighboring district's and the money problems they face for overspending and impulsive spending! News flash..... Santa Fe R-X (Alma, Blackburn, Waverly, Grand Pass) is broke a friend just received the letter in the mail!!!! Times are TOUGH!!!!!

Ask Mr. Russell Asst Supt Marshall schools he should of received one also in his mailbox!

-- Posted by Tito on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 2:50 PM

Out of everyone here, Scarpetta, you are one smart cookie.

A bogus issue, you must not get out much.

Also, if you build now, it will fall apart like the others.

Why not add onto the high school??

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 2:36 PM

Once again the person responding is not removing the blinders and looking at the issue as a whole. They are only addressing the problem AT the school. They are not looking at the REST of the road. The way I'm reading it...superglue and I are talking about congestion and problems on ODELL STREET!! Yes great they added another drive to accomidate AT the school. What about getting TO the school.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 1:57 PM

Traffic is a bogus issue. Don't we all know when and where there is traffic in Marshall? Avoid the Square when there are parades...Morrow Street when there are MVC football games...Miami Street when the HS has graduation...Vest and Hwy 65... Traffic anywhere in town----businesses, churches, schools never lasts longer than 20 minutes. This is an investment. 100 years ago Marshall built Bueker, Eastwood, Southeast, Benton. We need to build now. Those that say this is the "rich area." Look at the people who live in this area---they are hard-working self employed people. They invest in this town, work every day and pay more taxes than most. If you are bitter or angry about something--now is not the time to hurt kids by thinking a no vote will make you feel better.

-- Posted by mu-grad on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 1:52 PM

Why didn't you say that when I asked days ago? There will be more traffic than they expect. I still say. NO.

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 11:56 AM

superglue,

The district has been well aware of the concerns about the traffic flow.

They have responded by changing the initial plan so that there are two entrances (both 2-lane) to the school. It is completely possible that those entrances will accommodate the traffic quite nicely and no other work will be required.

A reasonable amount of planning is taking place. It is not fiscally responsible to spend money addressing a problem that may not come to be.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 10:58 AM

Well, I must say this.

VOTE NO NOV. 3rd.

We don't know all the facts and they don't know all the facts. As you can see, "Citizens for the School Bond said, Good suggestions. The school district and the City will be discussing just such ideas once the building is in place."

Which means, they won't work on my suggestion or anyone else's until they BUILD the new school. Very poor choice. They are not for the kids on this one. This is about them.

I urge all voters to vote NO Nov. 3rd, because they(school board & disrtic) don't have anything set into place to help the flow of traffic.

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 9:31 AM

superglue,

Good suggestions. The school district and the City will be discussing just such ideas once the building is in place.

We all value keeping the children safe and it will be done.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 8:35 AM

Stop feeding us full of stuff. Read carefully.

There will be traffic and congestion problems. How will you fix the problems.

Here's one idea, about the best idea:

Traffic light with turn lanes. A North and South turn lane that will allow traffic to flow. (See College and Highway 65)

And make it a 4 lane. So, traffic can use the inside lane coming into town. Allowing the bus, parent, and teacher traffic to have their own lane. On down the road, say at Edison & Ussery allow traffic to go back to 2 lane. Keeping a turn lane for Edison.

Without addressing and admitting there will be problems, you will not have much support.

"Let's build a new school!" You say. I say that's fine.

"To offer a solution for a problem that MAY arise has the potential to make the problem worse rather than better. That's why there have been no concrete plans listed at this point." Not fine.

We want answers, so we know what to expect, and to know our kids will be safe.

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sun, Nov 1, 2009, at 5:47 AM

We the voters want answers. We don't want a 'we will deal with it then' answer. I think we can all respect no concrete plans being in place. I don't think we are out of line wanting to know what plans are in place, even if not an absolute plan. Failure to plan will make this fail again. The traffic will be awful not to mention making an already crazy intersection more dangerous. What are the plans to keep our children alive? We r the ones paying for this, we want answers.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 9:36 PM

I recall when the YMCA was being discussed - prior to it being built. There was an absolute uproar about the traffic and congestion that the new facility would create. And the lights!! OMG it will ruin that entire part of town. Get a grip people.

-- Posted by broke-n-busted on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 4:26 PM

No concrete plans listed at this point on traffic flow. Not sure about putting other buildings back to K-2. Not sure which building we are eliminating.

I am thinking we are not ready. I don't disagree with a new building but I would like to be sure all aspects of building a new building and district configuration have been throughly investigated and a concrete plan is in place. I know changes may have to be made as we procede but we should begin with a solid plan.

-- Posted by peopleamazeme on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 3:51 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The school board asked Titan Construction representatives to inspect Southeast and Eastwood schools (the ones deemed mostly likely to be expendible) and make a recommendation about which should be kept and which should be retired. It may take a few months for them to make their study and provide a recommendation.

superglue,

Any time that there is a change in traffic flow on a road, whether owned by a city or by the state, time is taken to evaluate the traffic flow and come up with the best solutions.

The City and the School District will do this once the bond is passed and the building is actually in place.

To offer a solution for a problem that MAY arise has the potential to make the problem worse rather than better. That's why there have been no concrete plans listed at this point.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 3:04 PM

Citizens,

Swing and miss. Care to try it again? Or, do you need the board to vote on your answers, and "will have to get back to me on that." ???

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 2:17 PM

"Any speculation about the traffic flow is just that at this point -- speculation. The City and the School Board have agreed to work together on any issues that may occur.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 8:56 PM"

Speculation my rear. Give us answers. What will be done to help traffic flow.

*THERE WILL BE TRAFFIC, CONGESTION, AND PROBLEMS

How will you help so there are no problems?

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 2:15 PM

superglue,

Thank you for pointing out that the new building lasting 100 years is great investment -- especially because it will be paid off well before that time.

Vote yes for the kids!

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 9:59 AM

peopleamazeme,

Turning the remaining three schools into K-2 is definitely on the table. The school board has declared that they will consider it, based on the feedback they have received.

The school board isn't making a decision until Dr. Noah reports back on the impact of changing to K-2 schools. He will present that report in March.

A vote for the school bond will ensure that at least part of the system goes to a multi-grade building as the new school will be for grades 3-5.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 9:56 AM

Why vote yes? In less than 100 years from now, this new building will be as bad as the old ones it is replacing.

I vote to upgrade the old schools and fire all maintanece people. Hire new ones that can and will work to keep these buildings going.

Marshall needs to stop being like other places and building stuff they don't need. While we are at it, how about a new police and fire department building?

Nah, let the CITY rebuild everything in Marshall, and pay for it out of thir pocket. WITHOUT raising any taxes. Call Obama for a bailout.

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 9:51 AM

I would like to see the school district commit to turning the other 3 elementary buildings back to K-2 buildings before I vote yes.

-- Posted by peopleamazeme on Sat, Oct 31, 2009, at 9:18 AM

Those of you expressing concern for only some of the grades getting a new building: Remember, Rome was not built in a day. It's going to take time to replace the aging buildings. I reckon that the school district will not continue to use them because they want to, but because they have no choice. The current bond issue is asking the community to take that first essential step.

-- Posted by weasel2htm on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 6:27 PM

oldschool, yes personal property taxes are what will be taxed. However what you must keep in mind is that all the business in this town sit on 'personal property' therefore someone pays tax on that land. So let's say you own a business in Marshall. Your taxes go up because of this bond issue. Who exactly will you be charging for this new increase in cost? Will you just eat it yourself and say no biggie or will you pass it onto the customer? Commercial taxes are already high leaving commercial property owners footing a large portion of the school taxes already. So unless I am mistaken, and yes I asked earlier in another story, business owners will be also effected by this increase therefore elevating cost of goods further in this town.

Traffic at the elementary schools are under much more control now than ever, based on my personal experience. I am talking with how the children are dropped off and picked up.

For clarity, I was not directing my comment about the land issue to where the school wants to sit. I was however talking about the fact that the city and the school plan to address traffic problems later. Specifically "Marshall Mayor Connie Latimer said although no specific plans are in place, there are steps the city would consider taking, such as adding turn lanes on the street if necessary."...because there is no room on Odell unless the city plans to buy residential/commercial land on either side of the road to get this done. Then you cost the city more money.

For the record I don't know if you missed another users name or if part of your comment missed it's mark, but I didn't make a sports analogy.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 4:11 PM

Scarpetta, is it me or doesn't everyone complain about the traffic now? So what's the difference? Also the price of "everything" in town will not go up. The tax is based of your personal property taxes (from what i understand anyway). So as far as i know it's not like your adding sales tax which would then effect everything.

Again with the land issue, unless you have done the research and have found a better solution than quit talking about it. If you have not asked prices, if you have not asked availability

than you have no place in saying someone else did not do their job. Again with a sports analogy, that's like saying Scott Pioli his a horrible general manager because he has not traded Larry Johnson for Tom Brady & Randy Moss.

Countryman - thank you for your honesty!! if you feel over taxed and simply don't believe you want to try to afford it than by all means that is a good excuse. I do agree that we have been over taxed in the past, i wish we had gone in a different order wth Schools first and jails later, i mean what is more important to us the comfort and setting of our kids, or the comfort and setting of the rapist, robbers and killers?? But that's already been passed so can't go back, personally i'm willing to eat the money because i want our kids to have the best, but i do understand if money from your pocket is a factor, wish everyone was as honest as you instead of all the cop out excuses i've been hearing!

-- Posted by oldschool17 on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 2:38 PM

I'm going to request to the editor that IF for some reason this does pass, I want to see stories about the mucked up traffic. How the city can't add turning lanes on Odell. The people complaining about everything in town going up price wise. How much the school will NOT save by doing this.

All the shoulda coulda and woulda...that isn't being dealt with before hand.

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 2:08 PM

Ok, I'll say it, we have taxxed the crap out of ourselves here in Marshall and Saline County in the very recent past, and I am tired of it.

I do not want to pay more taxes, and we have voted to tax oursleves for parks, courthouse renovation, amblulance taj-mahals, more jail cells, and 19 people to answer the phone for the police and fire departments. And these are the ones that I can remember off the cuff.

Sorry, Marshall Public Schools, but I'm "taxxed out". and the sad thing, I am definitely not one of those neo-con dopes that thinks all public funding is bad, I have just had enough of every darned organization in Saline County standing around with thier hand out.

I will admit, the location doesn't help convince me a bit. Too far from where most elementary kids live. Too much insider influence from the proposed sites neighbors. Plenty of support for the location from those who bought speculation property in the 'golden triangle' and have not been able to unload it yet, though. Hmmmmm...... anybody notice that Marshall is not growing to the South? Of course an nice new school might help influence that growth though.

-- Posted by countryman on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 11:49 AM

Movaldude, I imagine the concept that Malta Bend MIGHT be consolidated would be a problem with the schools we currently have. Those are fighting words to many Malta Bend residents. (By the way, if that happened (and I doubt that it would) I would think the consolidation would most likely be high school and not elementary. Many small schools are able to retain their elementary school, but not their secondary levels. That is another reason we need to have more room. As I recall, the set up of this school is such that expansion could be achieved on down the line by adding classrooms at the end of each section. What would we do if this doesn't pass? Add more trailers to our current outdated buildings?????

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 8:26 AM

The two biggest questions (not all just most frequent here) are what about the traffic? and why that land? Well at this point in the game I think those questions are being brought up by people who simply don't want to spend the money but don't have a better excuse. The traffic question is a pointless question, anytime you get hundreds of people going to the same location at the same time there WILL ALWAYS be traffic. Traffic is just going to be something you will have no matter what school plan you ever came up with & it is with what we have. The land issue is also a dead issue, everyone complains about the site but no one can come up with a logical & affordable 2nd option. It's very easy to just say "well why don't we build a spot A?" Well why don't the Chiefs trade Larry Johnson to the Patriots for Tom Brady & Randy Moss? I'm sure the school folks (if this doesn't pass) will always be open to hearing ideas. But when someone wants $30,000 per acre for land and someone else wants $5,000 well would you pay for the $30,000? What if the person that owns that land refuses to sell it to the school in the first place? These are the cases in many of the land options I've read mentioned on here.

So if you simply don't want to spend the money, that's fine just say that, it's not a horrible excuse. If you don't like the land, and may have to drive "clear across town" (a whole 2 miles) than please come up with a solution that is available and affordable. Otherwise don't complain about a problem without a decent idea. And again traffic is just a pointless issue because you will always have traffic no matter how big the shcool or where it is located!!

-- Posted by oldschool17 on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 8:12 AM

Thisguy.

I stand by my statement. This new proposal solves nothing. My point is that the old schools, which are apparently horrific and falling down around us are still good enough for the grades that won't make it to the new school. How can that be? How long after this new school will it be before we have to build new schools for the rest of the grades and the middle school? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Now, as to your comment

"and WTF....unless its legalizing the use and sale of weed we all know your vote will be no"

Ok, you wanna take a shot at me? Fine? Do you feel better now? Since you brought it up, what's wrong with legalization, decriminalization and taxation?

The funny thing is when I think of all the potential revenue we are missing out on, especially industrial hemp. That alone could probably pay for a new school.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 6:22 AM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The school board has stated it intends to replace all the old buildings as soon as possible and will attempt to build another new elementary school as soon as practical.

Hey Eric:

When can we see a photo of the land site that will enlarge so you can look at the legend and all marked streets!

You know that nobody has considered the distant future when all the K-8 schools and Maybe Malta Bend might consolidate with Marshall. You will need to enlarge this facility! How about that Mr. Noah!

-- Posted by movaldude on Fri, Oct 30, 2009, at 5:40 AM

that's all you got citizens for the school bond to a question that is very legitimate? how weak, not very convincing.

how bout that traffic congestion out there? of course there are going to be unknown circumstances, but if you don't have it planned out any better than this, how in the world can i support your cause? last thing in the world i want to do is to have to drive my child all the way across town in the morning only to find a massive traffic buildup ... been there, done that.

maybe this is why you should start this process up a little earlier than in the middle of the summer, and try to rush it to the ballot in november. you can't obama this thing through.

do i want a new school? YES. it's very needed. do i agree with how you've gone about this? NO. do i think the site is the best? NO. it caters to the rich side of town, increases the cost of busing, and screws anyone not on the south side of town. do i think we're getting the most for the money here? NO.

you have good intentions, but maybe you should go back to the drawing board and try to do this right, with a little more planning. emphasis there on MORE PLANNING.

voting NO on nov. 3!

-- Posted by aikman8 on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 11:00 PM

Any speculation about the traffic flow is just that at this point -- speculation. The City and the School Board have agreed to work together on any issues that may occur.

-- Posted by Citizens for the School Bond on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 8:56 PM

"...traffic concentrations at the new school will not be in residential neighborhoods."

"...if traffic congestion proves to be a problem."

"...no specific plans are in place."

All of these comments greatly increase my concerns regarding traffic in that area. Traffic will most definitely be in residential neighborhoods; the school will not only be less than a mile from a newly developed subdivision, but you have to drive by a fully developed residential and business area in order to get to it!

I honestly do not think the question is IF congestion becomes a problem but WHEN. The fact that no plans are in place to let neighbors and drivers know what will be done when the traffic does become a problem tells citizens that the city and school district have not fully planned this multi-million dollar bond issue.

-- Posted by s-ciaovostro on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 8:05 PM

why build so the city can have a bunch of empty buildings around and lets dont forget the ones that live on the north side of town

-- Posted by BMSmom on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 5:26 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The school district is planning to vacate one building currently used as a school, but the school board has pledged that it will not abandon the building to deteriorate but will sell it to someone who wishes to redevelop it or will tear it down.

still raising the stupid questions i see. i want to just clear it all up by saying that the school board and the committee have no plans, they havent asked any questions, they are probably just joking about the land.

cheese and rice got all muddy people, why is it the only time people think they could do a better job is when they dont have the chance? that location is PERFECT for a school, if they do what they want with the roads you will never know the school is there whether it be at 7am 3 pm or noon on saturday. they have covered all the bases on this, its clear and the bahhumbugs in this town are going to vote no whether its fool proof or not, they fear change, they shiver at the mere thought of it. they are, well i wont say, wanna keep this blog up, right kathy! and WTF....unless its legalizing the use and sale of weed we all know your vote will be no

-- Posted by thisguy on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 4:19 PM

As someone who sat through the planning meetings of the last round of bond issues (the three-peat failures of 2001, 2002 and 2003) I think it's important to keep several things in mind.

1. The cost to replace the buildings is only going up. When the last issue failed in 2003 the cost of the project was $11.9 million -- and that included not only the construction of a new three-grade upper elementary building, but also renovations at Bueker Middle School and an addition to Marshall High School. The cost of the project today? $20.3 million.

2. The current buildings are approaching 100 years old. They hardly met the requirements of the 20th century and are in no way the facilities needed to provide education in the 21st century. Every year we wait to do something, we fall further behind.

3. Neighborhood schools are a dead issue in Marshall. A rather vocal minority longs for the good old days where everyone went to school in the same building from kindergarten through middle school, but the logistics of administrating the system in today's world make it impractical at best.

-- Posted by Concordian Editor on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 3:59 PM

I am curious if 65 Hwy is a limited access highway? If it is I am assuming that you have talked to someone other then the Mayor such as the Highway department about putting 1 or 2 accesses on to the highway.

-- Posted by theobserver on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 2:46 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
South Odell Avenue is Business 65, not US 65. After MoDOT added curbing, it turned the street over to the city of Marshall.

Do we need new schools?

Absolutely!

Is this the best way to go about getting them?

The jury is still out.

One question - did the Public Schools get a commitment from owners of the land on South Odell for the purchase of the proerty?

Just wondering ...

cr

-- Posted by circuitrider on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 2:41 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
Superintendent Craig Noah confirms that the district has a contract for the Banks property. The school board voted to enter into a contract contingent upon the outcome of the election.

What the f..., do you not have children in school? The reason for the new school is because the old schools are in terrible condition! Have you been in any of these schools? Please take the time to look into this. Everyones vote counts and the children would learn so much better in an environment that is healthy and they don't have to worry about being too hot or too cold, etc. Any kind of new school facility in Marshall is well over due! Read information that you can about this that educators,administrators,and the public are giving out. Go to a meeting, or listen to what others have to say. I hope that others don't agree with you and that they choose to vote for this. Vote Yes For Kids!

-- Posted by karma is real on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 2:14 PM

Sorry,

I can't get on board with this project for only some of the grades. It solves nothing.

When we are ready to spend money improving what we have and going back to neighborhood schools, then you will get my vote. I won't be voting for this red herring.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Oct 29, 2009, at 1:49 PM


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: