I served on the Steering Committee for the 2005 Brown Township Comprehensive Plan, was a contributor to the Big Darby Accord Watershed Master Plan (Representative Property Owner), was a member of the Hilliard School Board for three terms, a member of Big Darby Accord Watershed Master Plan Advisory Panel (City of Hilliard appointee), a member of the Board of Directors of the the Sugar Farm-Renner South New Community Authority (City of Columbus appointee) and Fiscal Officer for Norwich Township. I have lived in the Hilliard community for nearly 50 years, first in a City of Columbus / Hilliard Schools parcel, then in Brown Township, and now live in the City of Hilliard proper.
I've been here through the Columbus Schools desegregation suit (Penick v Board of Education), the attempt by the Columbus School Board to gain control off all students living on parcels in suburban school districts but the City of Columbus, and the ensuing Win-Win Agreement. As a Hilliard School Board member, I got to see the end of the Win-Win Agreement and the cessation of transfers of historical Hilliard Schools parcels to Columbus Schools, which has ironically opened the flood gates of development in the Hilliard School District (e.g. Sugar Farms)
I've been in public debates with the Schonhardt administration and the Hilliard City Council about how well the City of Hilliard was honoring the principles of the Accord, in particular when it conflicted with the policies of the 2005 Brown Township Comprehensive Plan. Those disagreements were generally about the interpretation of the terns "free space" and "density."
In other words, I've been around. And my views have evolved over the years.
When I moved to Brown Township, it was to escape a dense suburban neighborhood and get back to a rural setting like the one where I grew up. I bought five acres with farm fields all around. We loved this area. My mission was to fight any development that filled up those fields with scads of houses. One of the first engagements I had with development matters was when the City of Columbus talked about building "upground reservoirs" in Brown Twp, one pretty close to the house we had just built. The people of our township put up a very vocal resistance, and Columbus decided to go elsewhere.
This is still the action many people take - to move to the farm country to enjoy the aesthetics then try to stop anyone else coming after them, ignoring the fact that they are part of the problem.
In my couple of decades in Brown Twp, I learned another perspective. That farmland is not public parkland. It's ground that is owned by someone - often a family who has owned the land for generations. I came to understand that it is not my right to tell those landowners that they may not sell their land to a developer for a life-altering amount of money. Not just because you and I want a serene rural picture out our window.
That's not to say that there isn't a place for a comprehensive plan, for zoning, and for building standards. But we have to appreciate that these are an abridgment of the rights of the property owners. Some call it "a taking" just as though the government seized the land from the owner. This is especially true when the rules change.
There's no right answer. But there has to be justice. I have increasingly come to believe that if it is determined to be in the public interest to restrict development opportunities on a parcel, that land should be purchased by a government or governments and made into a park, nature preserve or some similar designation that provides the ecological benefits, or often just aesthetics, for which all benefit. At a minimum, the parcel owner needs to be compensated for the loss of development opportunities. We can't expect private property owners to underwrite public goals.
Great comment Paul. It is important to listen and respect all positions in these situations and not just hear the loudest voice in the room. Landowners all have rights, but are also part of a community and have to be a major part in the discussion.
Very well written !
Thanks
Les
I served on the Steering Committee for the 2005 Brown Township Comprehensive Plan, was a contributor to the Big Darby Accord Watershed Master Plan (Representative Property Owner), was a member of the Hilliard School Board for three terms, a member of Big Darby Accord Watershed Master Plan Advisory Panel (City of Hilliard appointee), a member of the Board of Directors of the the Sugar Farm-Renner South New Community Authority (City of Columbus appointee) and Fiscal Officer for Norwich Township. I have lived in the Hilliard community for nearly 50 years, first in a City of Columbus / Hilliard Schools parcel, then in Brown Township, and now live in the City of Hilliard proper.
I've been here through the Columbus Schools desegregation suit (Penick v Board of Education), the attempt by the Columbus School Board to gain control off all students living on parcels in suburban school districts but the City of Columbus, and the ensuing Win-Win Agreement. As a Hilliard School Board member, I got to see the end of the Win-Win Agreement and the cessation of transfers of historical Hilliard Schools parcels to Columbus Schools, which has ironically opened the flood gates of development in the Hilliard School District (e.g. Sugar Farms)
I've been in public debates with the Schonhardt administration and the Hilliard City Council about how well the City of Hilliard was honoring the principles of the Accord, in particular when it conflicted with the policies of the 2005 Brown Township Comprehensive Plan. Those disagreements were generally about the interpretation of the terns "free space" and "density."
In other words, I've been around. And my views have evolved over the years.
When I moved to Brown Township, it was to escape a dense suburban neighborhood and get back to a rural setting like the one where I grew up. I bought five acres with farm fields all around. We loved this area. My mission was to fight any development that filled up those fields with scads of houses. One of the first engagements I had with development matters was when the City of Columbus talked about building "upground reservoirs" in Brown Twp, one pretty close to the house we had just built. The people of our township put up a very vocal resistance, and Columbus decided to go elsewhere.
This is still the action many people take - to move to the farm country to enjoy the aesthetics then try to stop anyone else coming after them, ignoring the fact that they are part of the problem.
In my couple of decades in Brown Twp, I learned another perspective. That farmland is not public parkland. It's ground that is owned by someone - often a family who has owned the land for generations. I came to understand that it is not my right to tell those landowners that they may not sell their land to a developer for a life-altering amount of money. Not just because you and I want a serene rural picture out our window.
That's not to say that there isn't a place for a comprehensive plan, for zoning, and for building standards. But we have to appreciate that these are an abridgment of the rights of the property owners. Some call it "a taking" just as though the government seized the land from the owner. This is especially true when the rules change.
There's no right answer. But there has to be justice. I have increasingly come to believe that if it is determined to be in the public interest to restrict development opportunities on a parcel, that land should be purchased by a government or governments and made into a park, nature preserve or some similar designation that provides the ecological benefits, or often just aesthetics, for which all benefit. At a minimum, the parcel owner needs to be compensated for the loss of development opportunities. We can't expect private property owners to underwrite public goals.
Great comment Paul. It is important to listen and respect all positions in these situations and not just hear the loudest voice in the room. Landowners all have rights, but are also part of a community and have to be a major part in the discussion.