PATA History Pages

Former Local Officials Continue to Push Development Outside City

Former Councilman Monebrake is Part of Roshon Development Co.

THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOU "MISINFORMED TROUBLEMAKES" * WHO CONTINUE TO FIGHT THIS SPRAWL. IF THEY CAN'T HAVE IT THEIR WAY IN THEIR OWN BACKYARD ANYMORE, THEY WILL MOVE TO YOURS AND MAYBE TRY TO INFLUENCE YOUR OFFICIALS JUST LIKE THE SCHENANIGANS THEY PULLED OFF FOR YEARS IN PICKERINGTON...PATA

*(FORMER PICKERINGTON ADMINISTRATION QUOTE CHARACTERIZING THOSE WHO FOUGHT THE DEVELOPERS IN PICKERINGTON IN THE LATE 1990'S AND EARLY 2000'S)

From the Columbus Dispatch

LOTS OF CONTENTION
Rural residents strive to control spread of housing
Published: Sunday, April 17, 2005
NEWS - INSIGHT 01C
By Mary Beth Lane
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
BALTIMORE, Ohio -- Nancy Montell's home was surrounded by cornfields when she moved to northern Fairfield County 25 years ago.

Nowadays, the view is disappearing to development.


''It is our desire to keep it as rural as possible without hindering development,'' said Montell, who leads a citizens group that is fighting two proposed housing subdivisions.

Nearby, retired farmers Richard and Dorothy Roshon plan to sell their land to a developer. The land is their nest egg for retirement, and they are frustrated that their neighbors are meddling.

''We can't take a basket of dirt in and pay for medicine,'' the couple said.

This debate is gusting across farm fields here and elsewhere in central Ohio as rural acreage is replaced by homes.

Near fast-growing Johnstown in Licking County, resident Mike Rush is leading his neighbors in an effort to scale back a housing developer's plans.

''We are not against new people coming to Johnstown,'' he said. ''We love our community and don't want to put a fence around it. But when we grow, we are concerned about how we grow.''

Similar messages come from other volunteer groups, such as Friends of Delaware County and Knox (County) Citizens for Smart Growth -- both dedicated to fighting what they term sprawl and ''reckless'' rural development.

The debate underlines a clash of competing interests.

Farmers often view land as a 401(k) plan and insist on their right to cash in.

Nearby residents say they have rights, too. They fear a development surge will increase taxes for schools, roads, police and fire protection and other government services.

Development lawyers argue that a free market means people have the right to live where they wish.

The debate is heard more frequently as the boundaries of greater Columbus reach ever farther into what used to be the hinterlands.

Closing the gate

Residents of Liberty Township near the village of Baltimore organized and fended off an electric-power plant several years ago. The group lived on as Ohioans for Responsible Rural Development, which meets monthly at a local church and raises money for legal bills by selling candles and grass-green T-shirts lettered with ORRD.org, its Web address.

The group has gone to Fairfield County Common Pleas Court to stop the development of the Roshons' land. It also has a referendum on the November ballot challenging the development of nearby land owned by John Nicodemus.

Critics of the developments say they would cram too many houses on too little land.

''We expected development to come in,'' said Montell, who lives on a 3-acre spread, ''but we want responsible development because we have seen some of the surrounding areas like Pickerington.

''The schools can't keep up with the children.''

''If we have to pay for it, we have a say in it,'' said Dempsey Ohlinger, who is active in the group. ''This is what democracy is supposed to be about.''

Ohlinger and his wife, Karen, moved here from Grandview Heights in 1988, settling on 2 acres, where they garden and spot peregrine falcons, owls and red-tailed hawks.

''The agricultural setting is what we all love. All of that goes away when you have jam-packed development,'' Ohlinger said.

The Roshons disagree.

The couple, who have lived on their farm for more than 60 years, answered questions with a handwritten response they delivered via their lawyers.

''Those who have moved in around here over the years were welcomed even though they changed the 'character' of the area. We felt, and still feel, that they had a right to move in but we are having trouble understanding why these same people can't comprehend why we need to sell our farm, now that we are no longer able to continue farming and we need to be able to sell our farm for our retirement.

''We have large medical bills and by us being self-employed, we don't have a company paying our insurance.''

Nicodemus did not return telephone messages, but he and his sister, Mary, said in an e-mail that they might operate a hog farm on the property if the development plan fails.

In 2001, Licking County farmer Howard Emswiler announced plans for a hog farm after Pataskala residents voted down a rezoning for property he wanted to develop. Opposition to his plans softened, and Emswiler modified his development proposal.

''We are receptive to responsible development, hence the name,'' said ORRD's Ohlinger.

He and Montell define that as no more than one house per acre, a lower density that is more compatible with current lot sizes in the area. They fear that one higher-density development would set the trend for others to come in as cookie-cutter subdivisions.

The Roshon proposal calls for 134 homes and 84 condominiums on 100 acres. The Nicodemus proposal calls for 141 homes on 76 acres.

Lancaster lawyer Steven A. Davis, who represents the Roshons, thinks Ohioans for Responsible Development is bent on subverting private-property rights.

''Doing what you want with your property is as American as Mom and apple pie,'' Davis said.

''Where do they want these people to live?'' Davis wondered. ''Apparently somewhere else. We've all agreed that someone is going to live somewhere. It's just not going to be in their back yard.''

''The density thing is a ruse.''

A new way

The Fairfield County Regional Planning Commission recommended the rezoning of the Roshon and Nicodemus land for planned unit development, judging it compatible with the county's land-use plan. Both farms already are surrounded by developments, and on a map resemble islands in a sea of homes.

''It's not like we're saying develop the whole county,'' said commission Executive Director R. Brooks Davis.

In fact, more open fields will be preserved under a new zoning category the commission is considering. ''Conservation development'' would cluster homes and leave 50 percent of the land undeveloped.

''The main aim is to preserve rural character,'' Davis said. ''It is aimed at preserving significant natural features like streams, woods and meadows, and perhaps farmland, and not developing it in the typical cookie-cutter approach that you see in the typical subdivision.''

This approach meets approval from Greater Ohio, an anti-sprawl group campaigning for better land-use policies statewide.

''The system is failing all over Ohio,'' said Gene Krebs, the group's director. ''When our planning and zoning laws were written at the state level, we had not invented an interstate interchange, much less a big-box store.''

Building moratoriums imposed in Pickerington and other communities demonstrate the growth mess, said Krebs, a former state representative from Preble County in western Ohio. He has urged Gov. Bob Taft to appoint a task force to examine and recommend improvements to land-use laws.

Taft wants the legislature to propose a reasonable solution, said spokesman Mark Rickel.

Last year, Taft signed into law a bill that gave counties and townships new authority to regulate growth and density. The Ohio Home Builders Association didn't like it. In December, the legislature eliminated the new zoning powers by amending an unrelated bill.

Taft didn't like the move, Rickel said, but allowed the bill to become law without his signature.

For now, some residents living in the rapidly changing counties ringing Columbus will continue fighting what they consider high-density development.

Mike Rush said he tries to be reasonable in debating Beazer Homes over plans to build 330 homes in the proposed Village at Duncan Plains near Johnstown. He knows other developers are on the way.

''I compare it to a hurricane. It's bearing down on us. There's no avoiding it, so let's have a conversation about how we're going to handle it.''

mlane@dispatch.com

sprawl threatens wide area, citizens groups continue to fight

The Columbus Dispatch