Landowners, home builders bemoan longer Darby ban
Careful planning would be better option for watershed, they say
Sunday, June 20, 2004
Mark Ferenchik
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Before Dottie Richeson retires as a nursing consultant, she hopes to sell her family?’s 80-acre farm in Brown Township to raise money she and her husband, Cal, can enjoy after years of work.
When she heard about Columbus?’ proposal to ban development in the Big Darby Creek watershed through the end of 2005, she was flabbergasted.
''Dominion Homes approached us, but they will not buy until we have sewer and water,'' said Richeson, a resident of Shawnee Hills in Delaware County.
She?’s not the only one eyeing the untapped opportunities near the Big Darby, a state and national scenic river.
Robert H. Schottenstein, chief executive of M/I Homes Inc., said Columbus?’ existing two-year moratorium on extending water and sewer lines is beginning to affect economic growth because 20 percent of the developable land in central Ohio is in the watershed.
''We need a responsible plan, but a responsible plan should allow for orderly growth in the area,'' said Schottenstein, whose company owns property there.
''Quit talking about moratoriums. Start talking about responsible planning.''
The moratorium expires at the end of this year. But Columbus?’ plan would ban all commercial and residential development in western Franklin County west of a line running roughly between Hilliard-Rome and Alton & Darby Creek roads.
When development would stop and how that would affect those already in the pipeline, such as someone with plans to build on a 5-acre lot, have yet to be determined.
''We understand these are the types of details we have to work through,'' said Steve Campbell, Mayor Michael B. Coleman?’s deputy chief of staff for policy.
Mr. Richeson sees the proposed development as prohibiting the right to use his property as he wishes.
''Our attitude in general,'' he said, ''is, if they want to tell me what to do with our land, buy it.''
In a letter to local officials on Tuesday, Coleman and City Council President Matt Habash said that in addition to the 2005 moratorium, they are willing to discuss extending sewer and water lines in the watershed without requiring annexation. That?’s likely to attract the interest of township officials who have resented the city?’s aggressive annexation policy for years.
''At least on its surface, it appears to be something the townships have been advocating for years,'' said Don Brosius, a lawyer who represents townships in zoning and other matters.
If builders can develop land without annexation, which means it would not become part of the Columbus Public Schools district, ''land prices would probably double,'' said Councilman Richard W. Sensenbrenner, a past chairman of the council?’s development committee.
He said city officials have to be careful when discussing the extension of water and sewer lines without annexation. The policy of using those utilities to drive growth has led to ''50 years of unquestioned success,'' he said.
Sensenbrenner has asked city Development Director Mark Barbash to propose extending the moratorium to Dec. 31, 2006.
Phil Harmon, chairman of the citizens group Progress with Economic and Environmental Responsibility, also wants to extend the moratorium until the end of December 2006.
If officials agree to put that proposal to a City Council vote before Sept. 30, he will propose that his group not file petitions on July 1 to get on the November ballot so that the group could try to persuade Columbus voters to extend the ban on water- and sewer-line extensions through 2009.
The citizens group plans to discuss the proposal today.
By Waiting Crane
Careful planning would be better option for watershed, they say
Sunday, June 20, 2004
Mark Ferenchik
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Before Dottie Richeson retires as a nursing consultant, she hopes to sell her family?’s 80-acre farm in Brown Township to raise money she and her husband, Cal, can enjoy after years of work.
When she heard about Columbus?’ proposal to ban development in the Big Darby Creek watershed through the end of 2005, she was flabbergasted.
''Dominion Homes approached us, but they will not buy until we have sewer and water,'' said Richeson, a resident of Shawnee Hills in Delaware County.
She?’s not the only one eyeing the untapped opportunities near the Big Darby, a state and national scenic river.
Robert H. Schottenstein, chief executive of M/I Homes Inc., said Columbus?’ existing two-year moratorium on extending water and sewer lines is beginning to affect economic growth because 20 percent of the developable land in central Ohio is in the watershed.
''We need a responsible plan, but a responsible plan should allow for orderly growth in the area,'' said Schottenstein, whose company owns property there.
''Quit talking about moratoriums. Start talking about responsible planning.''
The moratorium expires at the end of this year. But Columbus?’ plan would ban all commercial and residential development in western Franklin County west of a line running roughly between Hilliard-Rome and Alton & Darby Creek roads.
When development would stop and how that would affect those already in the pipeline, such as someone with plans to build on a 5-acre lot, have yet to be determined.
''We understand these are the types of details we have to work through,'' said Steve Campbell, Mayor Michael B. Coleman?’s deputy chief of staff for policy.
Mr. Richeson sees the proposed development as prohibiting the right to use his property as he wishes.
''Our attitude in general,'' he said, ''is, if they want to tell me what to do with our land, buy it.''
In a letter to local officials on Tuesday, Coleman and City Council President Matt Habash said that in addition to the 2005 moratorium, they are willing to discuss extending sewer and water lines in the watershed without requiring annexation. That?’s likely to attract the interest of township officials who have resented the city?’s aggressive annexation policy for years.
''At least on its surface, it appears to be something the townships have been advocating for years,'' said Don Brosius, a lawyer who represents townships in zoning and other matters.
If builders can develop land without annexation, which means it would not become part of the Columbus Public Schools district, ''land prices would probably double,'' said Councilman Richard W. Sensenbrenner, a past chairman of the council?’s development committee.
He said city officials have to be careful when discussing the extension of water and sewer lines without annexation. The policy of using those utilities to drive growth has led to ''50 years of unquestioned success,'' he said.
Sensenbrenner has asked city Development Director Mark Barbash to propose extending the moratorium to Dec. 31, 2006.
Phil Harmon, chairman of the citizens group Progress with Economic and Environmental Responsibility, also wants to extend the moratorium until the end of December 2006.
If officials agree to put that proposal to a City Council vote before Sept. 30, he will propose that his group not file petitions on July 1 to get on the November ballot so that the group could try to persuade Columbus voters to extend the ban on water- and sewer-line extensions through 2009.
The citizens group plans to discuss the proposal today.
By Waiting Crane
