Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

Answers to Your Questions

Like I said, PLSD officials in the presence of City and Township elected officials and staff indicated that the commercial development in the City of Pickerington exceeded greatly the commercial development in Violet Township. They had a substantial handout. The meeting was open to the public and reported in a newspaper.

Jeff Fix has this information.

Why would I want to contact Mayor Hughes when I already have the information that I need? Feel free to contact Mr. Hughes, Jeff Fix or anyone else you want to get answers to your questions.

By Mark W. Uher

PIck info includes apartments

The schools use a different version of commercial in their calculations for their own reasons. The city is citing information that includes apartments according to the Fairfield County Auditor. Additionally, they are using the AMA RG Barry property which they annexed from the Township which has considerable commercial value. You may have noticed that they did not start using this 27-1 versus 3-1 figure until after they annexed that property.

We believe the density figures stated for the Township may be incorrect.We will confirm this on the Our pages section. Please look on the our pages section for all recent single family rezonings in the Township and except for the Sycamore Creek project, which is now in the city, all single family rezonings in the last five years are less than 2.0 per acre.

If you take the density figures given as correct, and spread the .4 difference figure out over the hundreds of acres that are slated to be developed, it adds up to hundreds of additional homes per city project versus Township projects. This difference produces an undesirable impact on our schools and this is not what we need. In this case, the apparently fractional number translates into bad news for the schools on each rezoning..... and now instead of three city projects per year approved, we are pushing ten projects per year as the uncontrolled rate.

QUESTION

THIS MAY BE CORRECT BUT I THINK THE WILLINGTON PARK WAS GREATER THAN THIS ,I BELIEVE IT HAD 248 UNITS AND 175 CONDOS., TERRY DUNLAP AND LYLE DILEY VOTED FOR THE REZONING AND GARY W. VOTED NO.
PLEASE CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG
THANKS BRUCE ROOKSTOOL

Thanks Lisa, but......



Thank you Lisa for this information. Let me try and put two and two together for my own purposes:

There was a facilities study done by and for the PLSD in 1997. The projections for new school construction are based entirely on that study. By your figures, there is the possibility of ?“up to hundreds of additional homes per city project versus Township projects?”.

Did the facilities study include this possibility?
Is there any intent to adjust the facilities study to incorporate the higher than anticipated growth?
Is there the possibility that we could already be behind the power curve even though we are in the construction phase of the two new schools?
Is there a possibility that there could be more bond issues in the near future besides the imminent one for the required elementary school to support the Villages at Sycamore Creek?
Who would be responsible for answering these types of questions? PLSD Administration, PLSD Board, Mr. Uher, if he is a representative and spokesperson for the PLSD as inferred in these postings?

Sorry if I open up a can of worms, but the questions are sitting there waiting to be asked.