Yes they have the leadership with no tax increase this year they are fantastic. The third street bridge will be resolved in the best interest of the residents of Media.
Do you really think there will be no tax increase for 2014 with this council? They are smart enough not to pass the fees they are racking up from this mess they made onto us just yet. But be sure, we will pay for it soon enough. This current council is full of arrogant men who are just insistent on getting their way to benefit themselves (ahem, kent Davidson) I watch those council meetings every month, and the way they talk to the two women on council who actually think for themselves and what is best for Media is disgraceful.
They're holding tax increases this year so they have a talking point for the next election. The Tax increases in the November 2013 session's going to be ugly. I would recommend getting popcorn ready for it, but we may not be able to afford it by then.
Do you have any facts to back up this claim?
#1 Have you lived in a bubble in this town? Go back and check the patterns.#2 The legal bills will speak for themselves.
Ok Steve, we'll see what happens with tax bills, legal bills, and the next election.
Take your check back, Senator Pileggi. Take the 3rd Street Bridge project out of the hands of the Media Borough Council. Tell Gov Corbett to use his emergencey powers to built this necessary project.
Pileggi hasn't taken the money back already? I have NEVER seen a more arrogant bunch than what is comprised and representing this town. They have no gratitude, shame or class.
BLCC is the arrogant party here, and the ones who filed the contempt of court to hold this whole process up so they can keep their private lake!! talk about having no gratitude, shame or class...they are the epitome of exclusive and classless!
BLCC isn't arrogant at all, they're just self-interested. They have the most to gain by having two way bridge traffic because many of them would use the bridge in both directions. Most Media residents would not. There is minimal need to head back out of Media via 3rd street unless you're paying a house call to the neighborhood around Kirk, etc.
Kent Davidson also has the most to gain don't you thnk, seeing as he lives right there as well. Talk about arrogance! He should have had the common decency to recuse himself from voting, but he didn't....so who has the most to gain here? Unless he is paying medias legal fees, you can be sure our taxes will be going up in 2014.
I support our council on this move. I want the final result to have the smallest level of traffic and incursion on the park as possible. I'll also make sure I vote for the Democratic incumbents on council while also making a donation to that effort.
Clearly you part of the problem.
Steve, I've yet to see any hard data proving that the one way plan, let alone 16 years of not having a bridge at all, has been a real problem for anybody other than a very vocal minority. There has been complaining by some and anecdotal "evidence" by others, but nothing legitimate to prove the need for a two lane / two way bridge and park destroying dam. So if wanting proof is a "problem", I'm happy to be a problem for you.
Media Dems have been a problem for 30+ years but that's another story. I used that bridge daily before 1996 and I'm not alone. It served the community for a century as a gateway in and out of the borough. It pre-dates tge park, and for the minimal amount of area to be affected (and repaired), its worth it. Besides, more focus should be exerted on the many fallen trees in the park that have never been removed and are crumbling away - when will someone stand on one and take a fall when one fails? This is a total play by homeowners around the bridge who have seen their area benefit with less traffic and higher house values, defending their overentitled values have been their central goal at the expense of the rest of the general community.
You make a many good points, Steve. I couldn't agree more. I'm new to the borough and live in an apartment. I want to see better traffic flow. That was one reason I moved from center city Philadelphia. Traffic cloging every street 24/7.
Judge Proud is is also encouraging BLCC to show some flexibilty. This was not a hearing or a ruling as ATM blog headlines suggest. The County appears to have no public position.
"Fool me once, shame on you/Fool me twice, shame on me." So it goes.Judge Proud isn't going to be fooled twice by the parsing of "re-establish." The ruling is going to be "2-Way" in black and white.
RTM school district may be the tipping point for a two way design That's going to have an impact on the decision.
If RTM school district wants to run double bus trips on Media's side streets to save on gas money, I want that money back dollar for dollar in a reduction in the tax bill paid by Media residents. If we're to deal with a reduced quality of life in our town, I want a reduced tax bill.
Lots of luck, MediaMike, getting a reduction on your tax bill. You do live in a bubble. Move to Delaware if your concerned about taxes.
Park traffic incursion? Bromalls open 3 months a year.It was used and should continue to be used as a road for all citizens.No doubt the writer opposed is only interested in their own private property all else be dammned(no pun).Private lake? Big deal I! do not belong to BLCC and still want road open Sick of burning extra gas going around adding Carbon ..Proximity to Third st.should be included with opinion I work in Media live in Aston.
If you work in Media Borough and live in Aston, why would you need to go over the 3rd Street Bridge? Seems like you'd be burning more gas taking a 3rd street to Kirk to Ridley Creek to Baltimore Pike route than simply staying on Baltimore Pike.
BLCC is like a terrorist organization they want it all. A new lake dredged on taxpayer's dime and a new dam also paid for by the taxpayers. They now have the gall/hubris to demand a road be two way because they want it that way. Talk about greedy self centered entitled people.
Giving the BLCC folks a label like "terrorist" isn't going to be helpful. Self-interested, sure, but not "terrorist." I totally respect the fact that some members of BLCC live on the Upper Prov side of the 3rd Street Bridge and would like a shorter trip to their club. I just don't think that should trump the traffic concerns and damage to the park that will be caused by an overly large bridge / dam project.
It ain't about BLCC. It is about the whole region. A vital roadway that has been closed too long.
I've yet to see how that roadway is "vital" to the point of adding traffic to the borough's side streets and destroying a portion of the park.
Media Mike, you sound like the UPS guy. Build it and the side streets wont be so crowded.
Lets see someone is catering an event at BLCC leave hall to get something at deals say.need to get back to hall? Down third back to boat house via 3rd St....no wait..leave town go down Balt back to Ridley back to Kirk cause Davison and the Parks edge.NIMBYs dont want you driving near their house for their semi gated community..talk about arrogant.Again Media Mike how close do you live near 3rd St?Self interes,t pure and simple just use Orange just use Prov.ard but stay away from MY HOUSE...was two way before and worked great but NIMBYS are ones who cry park damage when they are doing more damage to park then anyone.
To head out from BLCC to get some supplies at Deals..................- exit parking lot at 3rd & West- wave hi to Kent Davidson. Use 5 fingers if against two way traffic on bridge, use 1 finger if in favor of two way bridge- turn left on 3rd, right on Lemon, left on State- park at Deals, buy supplies, feel good about supporting local business- drive back to BLCC, have a nice day
And don't you think the folks on Orange have seen major traffic increases over the last 16 years????? Just any one who lives there It's the lesser of 2 evils / into town via Orange or make a left off of Ridley Creek and onto Baltimore Pike ~ I read a letter at a council meeting so long ago I forget the month from Mr Walt Omler, Jr whose family has lived in the area longer than any of us. You might wanna get his take on traffic flow. ps although he is a UP resident he owns property on W Third!!
So Media Mike put your home location where your mouth is.Are you a NIMBY ?Were you around when street was open two lanes?Lets talk self interest.
@ Anonymous:1) I live on Monroe. I do not live on Monroe and 3rd. The 3rd Street Bridge is not in my back yard. I'm on the East side of town. So you can call me a NIMNBY (Not in my neighbor's back yard) if you'd like. 2) I've been in Media for 5 years. I feel no lack of quality of life from that bridge being out. I'd feel a loss of quality of life if part of the park was destroyed. 3) Feel free to not be Anonymous at any time if you'd like to extend us the courtesy of self-identification you demanded from me.
The park is not being "destroyed''and good for you that you do not feel a loss of quality of life with the bridge being closed but others would like it open since it is a road that has been around for a lot longer than it has not. If you don't want it fixed with the money already in place is it safe to say you want the dam removed and no access to and from UP? What other option do we have besides removal and altering the park as we know it today or putting a better dam in road in place ? What is your desired outcome of the whole situation?
@ John:I stated that "part of the park" would be destroyed. There will be some impact on the park due to the scope of the bridge/dam. I'd rather not see a stand of mature trees cut down if that can be avoided. My desired outcome for this whole situation is whatever option creates the least impact on the park and the borough's streets. I stand behind the council's attempt to minimize the impact of the project.
Just a suggestion. MediaMike has so many entries here, he should have his own blog. Or else he should be posting on Kent Davidson's blog, where he would have a more sympathic audience.
@MJ:Considering that the Delco Times gives some guy named "E-Rock" his own blog, you might be onto something. On a serious note, I lack the journalistic abilities of Tedman and Kent to publish my own blog.I post on here, as well as Gil Spencer's blog, to engage in the debate on issues with those of opinions other than my own. Lurking on Fox News, Drudge Report, and Red State might be a good way of having a yeah boy party in a right wing fantasy world for people predisposed to that type of thinking, but keeping to one's own isn't going to help you learn much. I'm not going get much out of hanging on Davidson's blog. Also, I need to be on here as much as possible so the powers that be in town know that the vocal anti-council minority won't go unchallenged on-line or in Novembers.
Watch the September Council meeting on You Tube if you wanna see arrogant body language
What follows is a "conversation" between Media Mike and myself over an article on Media Patch ~ I apologize for the length and admit in my now "present controllable anger" I have only read what Michael Jordan posted ahead of me but it certainly applies to MM's postsCindy Miller8:05 am on Wednesday, November 21, 2012Regarding the last paragraph there were also residents there who were not in favor of the comprise and just as strongly favored "restablishing" the road as it was for 100+ years - 2 way 2 lane.ReplyComment_arrowMike M12:51 pm on Thursday, November 22, 2012Cindy:As was reported in the Media Patch, the residents at that meeting who were in favor of a 2 way / 2 lane road were in the minority. Steve McDonald, Tedman O'Hara, and Michael Jordan don't count as anywhere close to "strong" support for the two way / two lane option.DeleteCindy Miller12:29 pm on Saturday, November 24, 2012Back up to the September meeting where Mrs Mason spoke on the signatures she & another neighbor received in polling their neighborhoods, albeit in the 11th hour, of those in favor of 2 lane 2 way. Followed by a comment that a similar petition had taken place at some point months before which included UP and favored quite the opposite. That being said and living in UP and advocating, since the closure, a 2 way 2 lane road I NEVER saw nor did I, or any of my immediate neighbors, hear of that petition. Which would leave me to believe it was passed to ONLY those who were of like thinking. IF Steve, Tedman and Michael "don't count" where does/do the RTMSD School Board, the councils of UP Twp and Middletown Twp ( AND Edgemont Twp as they too are part of the school district and real estate taxation for RTMSD) stand???? Let me tell you ~ "They have all sent letters to this present Borough Council in support of 2 way 2 lane." Yes the RTMSD School Board includes a Media Borough resident.Cindy:- I didn't say Steve, Tedman, and Michael "don't count" I said they don't count as strong support. They're three people and only three people.- Media Borough Council is beholden to the voters of Media Borough and only Media Borough. The Republican cabal of RTMSD School Board, Upper Providence Township Council, and Middletown Township Council can howl at the moon all they'd like on the bridge, but their opinion matters zero inside of Media Borough. You're entitled to your own opinion, but ultimately it isn't your bridge if you don't live in Media.
@ Cindy: I'm not saying anything on Media Patch that I'm not saying here. Media Borough Council needs to follow the wishes of the majority of voters in Media before bringing forward a plan to work out with non-borough stakeholders. Non-turnout at council meetings (as reported by Media Patch) and 3 to 5 people making their case on various blogs doesn't translate into a majority of Media Borough being in favor of a two lane / two way road.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Not sure how my last epistle got posted twice; I apologize. Maybe Tedman will remove the duplication.Inquiring minds would like to know:1. Is there truth to the story that a huge snowfall a number of years (+/- 16) ago Media Borough didn't know what to do with the massive amount of snow cleared from the streets and dumped literally tons of snow into the dam/park area further weakening the structure2. Let's suppose in the future - near, distant, or otherwise - the then reigning Media Borough Council decides a 2 way road IS best for the borough. And let's assume that 3rd Street road/dam has been built as this council would like to do to 28 feet, let's further assume it's NOT wide enough for 2 lanes. And let's also assume this future council also has the backing of hundreds of residents and business owners complete with signed petitions. So the question is: how does this additional roadway get paid for?3. Although there was an attempt to explain it to me, I still do not see why - assuming the 28' width - traffic can not go 2 way with a yield to oncoming traffic. My husband and I have gone down both ends (Media & U P) and there does not seem to be an obstruction of view. Just recently a sign went up on Ridley Creek Rd - at an area that just must squeak in at the 28' requirement between Rose Tree & Sycamore to do just that
@ Cindy: On your points:1) If that snow dump story is indeed true and it did indeed damage the park and dam, I hope the Borough employee who made that desicion was disciplined over it. 3) I think the "yield to oncoming traffic" sign would be an excellent idea if (even though I'm not in favor of two lanes / two way traffic) a two lane / two way traffic situation in put in place. One of my two major concerns is the speed of traffic moving on 3rd. That yield would help slow traffic.
Nice idea.best of both worlds.
Do not think it is, or will ever be, considered a "vital" roadway. The most important part about it is offering safer, easier entry in to Media to avoid making that left on to Balt. Pike off of Ridley Creek Rd. Other than that there's nothing "vital" about it...it's just as quick/easy to get out of Media without using 3rd. St.And if you think it "ain't about BLCC" you're missing a TON of information!! If BLCC was a borough/county owned park/property we wouldn't be having this conversation, and this argument wouldn't be going into its 16th year. BLCC is privately owned, and the only reason there's a dam there is to create their "lake"...if they had the money to maintain the lake and the dam the county/borough would only be responsible for a road/bridge, NOT a dam, which adds many costly and complicated factors to the whole issue.BLCC is now the entity who is holding up the whole process, and in turn will be costing us taxpayers more money.
Excellent post media maven and spot on.
Who was holding up the whole process for the last 17 years?The do nothing Democratic Council and their leadership. They know who they are. Enough said.
Media Maven I think you are missing the boat that left the lake 16 years ago on the word "vital" Once again it's time to get the Webster's out for word meaning ~ Vital (as described by Webster's New World Dictionary compact school and office edition circa 1967) says: 1. of or concerned with life 2. essential to life. 3. fatal: as vital wounds. 4.a)essential; indispensable. b)of greatest importance 5. full of life; energetic n. pl 1. the vital organs, as heart, brain etc. 2. any essential partsMaybe you missed the spring council meeting in chambers when Mr Gibson spoke representing both the borough fire company and E M T's how critical time was with regards to heart and stroke emergencies. Maybe you also missed this past September's meeting in chambers when a current E M T personnel from the borough reiterated Mr Gibson's remarks. And I guess you missed my family's personal experience which I also described at a spring meeting in council chambers. And don't even get me started on the the number of volunteer fire calls my husband has been on coming from UP to the borough. IF EMT and fire response is not considered vital then I don't know what is!IF you live anywhere near the dam(n)/bridge I sincerely hope you and your neighbors never need assistance from U P.
Cindy -- everything I've seen coming out of Council regarding the bridge has stated that emergency vehicles will have access in both directions across the bridge, even with the one-lane option. I wasn't at these meetings, but are you saying that this is not satisfactory to you or the EMTs?
BLCC has wantd this road OPEN for 16 years! How can someone throw such daggers erroneously? Just because BLCC is holding the boro to task on an agreed upon solution 'it's all the club's fault'Go back to the hole you crawled out of.
Cindy - Please do list the number of emergency calls impacted by the 3rd Street closing. Where, in any pre-2011 public record or any risk management documents, is there an expression of concern by municipalities or emergency services regarding specific emergency calls?
Its great that the Media Dems have Media Mike to fight their arguements for them. You couldn't get a better puppet for them to use as I'm sure Davidson sits right next to his buddy helping him with responses. Not sure the dem apologist Media Mike is aware of this small fact but 17 yrs ago the entire Dem majority (Deb Krull, Paul Robinson included) and frank Daly as solicitor agreed to design and build the dam in exchange for 80% funding. The delay was caused by Media who disputed ownership AFTER agreeing to do the work. Great work by then overpaid solicitor Daly on advising council on the options which both Deb K and Paul R agreed to. The former council, so knocked by all, was able to secure $750,000 in new funding and structure a settlement that all on council agreed to, and even Monica Simpson hailed as a great agreement all in 9 months! Guys like Media Mike, Davidson, Terry Rumsey, the clown Indorf, and the worst of all the residents on Parks Edge have all moved into Media over the yrs and never once complained about the dam design or impact to park. Funny how the self serving interests of a few supercede the decisions made 17 yrs ago. Last thing- Media Mike, how do you justify your buddy, davidson, participating in these discussion when he is so obviously conflicted? You and your Dem friends are costing this borough a small fortune and demeaning the reputation of Media Council.
@ Anon 8:31AM: I can honestly say I've never met a single person on your list of co-conspirators and I'm working quite on my own on this. I might offer, if this comment sees the light of day, that you've projected some type of Democratic Party conspiracy when in actuality a vocal minority or Republicans in Media Borough have been trying to attack the council along partisan lines with the help of elected Republicans and Republican supporters from outside of the borough.
Cindy Miller, I agree with you. You have more guts and insight than anyone else in Upper Providence on 3rd Street Bridge project. Thank you for fighting for us, and our grandchildren.
Cindy Miller rocks! She should run for UPT council! (seriously C!)
When a former Councilman is the minority voice on council, he is commended. When MediaMike is the minority voice on this blog, he is in cahoots with the "cronies". Shine on you crazy commenters.
Media Mike,I am pro Dem but they are wrong with the one lane Bridge.have some real distrust of GOP...but if the shoe fits...two lanes now!
Tedman and Cindy, You have done more to advance this cause than all of borough council combined. I appreciate your tenacity and fight. Let's hope we get the two lanes.
Move to Media, Cindy Miller. We need you on Borough Council.
"I can see Media from my house" - does that count???????? Wait I think I heard something like that from a previous candidate running for VP. Only I really can - see Media that is!
Once upon a time in a land not so far away in a little hamlet called Media was a little tiny road with a little tiny bridge. The bridge for over a hundred years served this little hamlet and surrounding hamlets well. With folks traveling to and fro and fro and to. And then along came the Wicked Witch of the East and dumped tons of snow onto the little bridge and her dam which after so many years of uniting 2 little communities broke it. Now this little bridge did have some issues which unfortunately were not taken care of properly when first noticed thus resulting in its closure. Many years pass while The 3 Little Pigs fought over who owned the little bridge and who was going to pay to repair her. One little pig said “I don’t like the bridge, I never liked the bridge and I don’t want the bridge.” Another little pig said “not my bridge why should I pay for it”, while the 3rd little pig decided to do keep it the way it was. Then a ray of sunshine appears. The Powers to Be hold a council and decide to restore the little bridge’s thruway. YEAH!! BUT the Big Bad Wolf shows up and he has another idea! His idea was to build an even tinier bridge to only to go one way! What???? NOOOO!!! Now this twist does not make all the subjects happy. Short of a revolution the Lord High Pote-in-tate orders an edict that the Powers to Be resolve the issue for the good of all little hamlets. To be continued….
Interesting story. Perfect allegory--hopefullly with a 2-Way happy ending. The Big Bad Wolf lives on West Street. Actually there are two Big BaD Wolves on the street.
Wait why should the little pig who isn't paying a cent toward fixing the bridge get decide the details?
Without the bridge, how are the little pigs going to go to market?