Priestley Drive issues resurface in Reynoldsburg


Priestley Drive issues resurfaced once again at the Dec. 3 Reynoldsburg City Council meeting.  Road concerns which were first brought to the attention of council in February of this year were once again discussed.  


Councilman Brett Baxter identified Priestley Drive as a neighborhood road which is not in compliance with city code regulations.  Baxter specifically identified pavement widths as a major concern.  

Baxter stated that lack of code compliance makes Priestley Drive a dangerous street for everyone.  Baxter stated that the road which was identified as a collector street should beat least 32 feet wide and is currently only 23 feet wide.  


Neighborhood representative   BeLinda Guard requested that City Council remedy the situation by possibly closing off the street to through traffic, a move which would make the neighborhood safer.  


"I’d like us to reopen the Priestley Drive situation and come to a solution by the end of the year," said Baxter, adding that delay is a risk and liability to the city.


Although Baxter pleaded with council to reopen the Priestley Drive discussion and enforce the code in question the discussion was tabled until the new administration takes office.  


n other council news a proposed city ordinance designed to limit the number of adults allowed to live in a Reynoldsburg home was again discussed.    Since May, council has been wrestling with the issue of boarding houses for immigrant workers zoned for single-family use.

Councilman Mel Clemens, who has been working with Reynoldsburg City Attorney Jed Hood on the issue, amended the legislation to reflect suggestions brought by fellow council members and community representitives.  

The proposed ordinance would require a minimum square footage per adult occupant and specific bedroom and bathroom requirements, all features designed to tackle overcrowding issues.

Councilwoman Donna Shirey and Councilman Preston Stearns stated that they would not be voting in favor of the proposed ordinance.  Both Shirey and Stearns fear that council will be violating the civil rights of individuals if such legislation is adopted.


Clemens stated that the ordinance is a softer version of an ordinance that is being used by the city of Columbus and defended the proposed ordinance.

Previous articleThe Reel Deal: No Country for Old Men not for squeamish
Next articleCCS makes deal with Nationwide Arena


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.