Technical Error Halts Brown Township Rezoning Referendum
Franklin County Board of Elections cites address error on petition; residents weigh appeal to Ohio Supreme Court
Brown Township residents who sought to reverse the rezoning of 24 acres will not get the opportunity after the Franklin County Board of Elections on Aug. 5 unanimously rejected the petition for lack of a required address on specific places on the petition.
Aaron Sellers, public information officer for Franklin County Board of Elections, confirmed Aug. 13 that the issue will not be on the Nov. 5 ballot because the “petition referendum lacked a full address causing it to be deficient.”
The referendum could appear on a ballot sometime after Nov. 5 if the petitioners choose to appeal the ruling.
“There is an option to appeal at the Ohio Supreme Court level. A decision has not been made at this time (and) anyone who would be interested in pursuing this is encouraged to attend the Brown Township meeting on Aug. 19, at 7 p.m.,” said Michelle Stayrook, a Brown Township resident who helped circulate the petition prior to its filing in March.
The trustees meet at Brown Township Hall,
Shane Ewald, an attorney representing the petitioners, acknowledged the decision of the Franklin County Board of Elections.
“I understand the board’s position,” said Ewald, adding that the petition group used language from a summary of a March 12 session of the Franklin County Commissioners where the rezoning was approved, rather than the language that was used in the authorizing resolution.
While substantively the same, the language was not identical, which was another factor- apart from the minutiae of requirements where the full address of the petitioner was required to appear- that was the determining criteria for the board of elections to reject the petition, according to Ewald.
Brown Township Trustee Pam Sayre still takes exception that the petition was rejected for technical reasons and called the decision an “injustice.”
“If the petition called for an address, parcel number and applicant name, then the petitioners would have been at fault or negligent, but what the petition called for was what the commissioners voted on (March 12), and that language was what was filed on the petition,” Sayre said.
“The attorneys for the property owners were looking for a loophole and they found one and convinced the board of elections to agree with them, it’s as simple as that, an injustice for the citizens of Brown Township,” Sayre said.
During the Aug. 5 board of elections session to consider certification of the ballot issue, each attorney argued existing case law to support their opposing positions, according to Stayrook.
McTigue & Colombo LLC, a law firm specializing in election, campaign finance, and political law, represented the developer, Horse House LLC.
Mark Denney, an architect representing the developer, said in March 2024 that he was “disappointed” in the referendum attempt, especially after the proposed developers “did all that was asked of them.”
The referendum was in response to conflicting interpretations of the PR-6 zoning that Franklin County Commissioners approved on March 12. Opponents say PR-6 zoning allows for a greater number of residences than the current developer is proposing.
Franklin County Commissioners on March 12 approved the rezoning of a 24-acre parcel on the south side of Davis Road, west of Alton Darby Creek Road, from rural residential to PR-6.
According to Denney, PR-6 zoning district is all that was available to the developers to proceed with the proposed development plan for which the Big Darby Accord Advisory Panel recommended approval, and which the Franklin County Commissioners upheld.
What's in a Name?
Only one residence currently sits on the 24-acre parcel but seven new residences would be built on the 24-acre parcel, according to Denney.
Four owners intend to build their own residences but sell the remaining lots, Denney previously said.
There is no water and sewer service to the site and the seven new residences would use a septic tank and receive well water, the same as the existing residence there, according to Denney.
To do so, according to Sayre, the applicant must next seek a lot split through Franklin County and if successful, the Franklin County Board of Health would be required to approve the septic system placement on each individual lot.
Additionally, the commissioners placed language on the rezoning when approved March 12, that the parcel could not apply for water for sewer services, according to Sayre.
That restriction is contrary to the zoning code for Franklin County, according to Sayre.
The Franklin County zoning code, applicable to unincorporated areas, are that water and sewer service is required for the PR-6 zoning classification, Sayre said.
The City of Columbus typically provides water and sewer service to municipalities after an annexation and resolutions declaring there is capacity to provide the services.
Kayla Johnson, of the Franklin County Economic Development and Planning Department, explained the exception at the March 12 Franklin County Commissioners meeting.
According to a transcript of the meeting, Johnson told the commissioners, “The PR-6 district requirement that developments be served by central water and sanitary sewer is not warranted in this instance, as the proposed density is significantly below that permitted in the PR-6 district.”
The applicant has provided soils information indicating that the proposed lots can be adequately serviced by on-site waste water treatment, according to Johnson.
Commissioners Kevin Boyce and Erica Crawley voted in favor of the rezoning; Commissioner John O’Grady was absent.
The rezoning passed with eight conditions, one of which included a requirement that the private road providing access to the houses be altered to meet the width requirement of the Norwich Township Fire Department.
UPDATE 8-23-24
Attorney Denney said Aug. 22 that construction would not occur, most likely, until next year in the late spring or early summer.
“We will be hiring a civil engineer to work on the street design,” and will need to have lot splits approved, Denney said.
“We never imagined it would take this long going forward,” he said.
After the lot splits are approved, as well as a road design completed, the developer will have an analysis for septic tanks and wells, and once approved, building permits can be applied for to begin construction, Denney said.