Thursday, March 23, 2006

By PHIL BORGER
ThisWeek Staff Writer

A crowd of mostly landowners filled a banquet room at the Darby House, just outside of Galloway, Thursday night to listen to a panel of experts, including land developers, discuss continuing concerns surrounding the Big Darby Accord.

The crowd was much more receptive to Thursday's panel than it was to a panel at a meeting in late February. That panel did not contain any representatives of landowner interests, and it did not go unnoticed. Not only were lawyers and developers representing landowners present at last week's meeting, they did most of the talking, as well.

While Thursday's crowd was pleased to get a new perspective on the Big Darby Accord, they were not as pleased to hear at least one of the overall themes from the night, which came from landowner, developer and lawyer Ben Hale Jr.

That message was a simple one: Columbus can do what Columbus wants to do.

Condensed development in the watershed cannot occur without a sewer extension from the city of Columbus. And as Hale said, if Columbus does not want to extend its sewer to an area, it does not have to.

"When Columbus does these water and sewer contracts (with surrounding suburbs), there are always winners and losers," Hale said, adding that oftentimes, such as in Dublin, landowners on one side of a road may get sewer and the development that comes with it, while landowners on the other side of the road may get nothing. "Lots of people have challenged Columbus on where they are going to draw that line. For 50 years the courts have said Columbus has the right to serve and decide who gets sewer and water and who doesn't."

Hale, who was unabashedly sympathetic to the landowners in attendance, said that when he bought land in areas surrounding Columbus he always did so with an understanding that it may never receive necessary infrastructure from the city, though at the time that was not the trend.

"When I bought land, I always knew there was an expectation that it may never receive water and sewer," Hale said. "This may not end up being the bonanza (landowners) thought they were going to have."

Hale gave credit to the municipalities involved in the accord for not altering current zoning to get what they want, a legal maneuver that Hale believes essentially amounts to the taking away of landowners' rights.

Chris Hermann, an associate with MSI, a sub-consultant group hired by EDAW, the lead consultant firm on the project, said accord members are working to make sure current development rights remain in tact.

"You have, as a landowner, a right to develop your land to current zoning standards," Hermann said. "Anything beyond that is just speculation."

The purpose of Big Darby Accord is to provide a development plan that can accommodate a growing Franklin County population while taking into account the environmental sensitivity of the Big Darby Creek watershed area. The accord is supposed to replace development moratoriums by Columbus and Franklin County. The city's moratorium is set to expire June 31 and the county's March 31, though the option of extending it to June 31 is on the table.

Current zoning in the 56,000 acres of the watershed that fall within Franklin County would allow for the development of 20,200 units.

The consultants would like a plan that clusters these units into areas that are less environmentally sensitive, and into areas that make the most sense in terms of traffic and sewage capacity. These clusters would move lots away from more environmentally sensitive areas to allow for more environmentally friendly open spaces.

Mechanisms for making such a plan happen are still being discussed.

The idea of Transfer of Development Rights is all but dead, according to Hermann. Designation fees collected from developers in the watershed and open-space levies are a few ways Metro Parks or other government entities can create a fund that can be used to purchase land or development rights in order to protect open spaces.

Currently, Metro Parks own 7,000 acres of land in the Franklin County portion of the watershed area. Initial EDAW plans called for an additional 17,800 acres of open space, though Hermann said that number would likely drop.

How much that land will cost depends on the market and that could be an issue.

"We're concerned about the affordability of it," said John O'Meara, executive director of Metro Parks.

However, at least some landowners believe that if the land is as important as they are being told it is, then it should be on the municipalities and environmental groups involved to figure out a way to finance such purchases.

"If the county sees the Big Darby as the crown jewel, then they should be willing to buy the land around it," said Lee Edwards, a landowner in Brown Township, to applause.

The next open meeting discussing the Big Darby Accord will be held at 7 p.m. April 4 at Westland High School.

/home/httpd/html/thisweeknews/032306/Hilliard/News/032306-News-118494.html