Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

So many of the PATA followers/members started with an affiliation over the possible location of industry in a Licking County portion of Wagram Rd./I-70/Etna. These are the very same people I also hear now wanting commercial/industrial and ranting at certain entities over ?“imaginary industrial parks?”.

Whether you want to admit it or not, such development is best when located around interstate roadways. In our area we have I-70 and 33. Some are unable to see the whole picture when they are trying to force City boundaries to follow school district boundaries. The boundary lines are not straight, but they are what we have to deal with. There is no such law on the books to make any such alignment of boundary lines.

Unfortunately, along the 33 Corridor there is a limited amount of land now available for development in the Pickerington Local School District. Most of the land has been spot developed with residential properties in this portion of Violet Township. Then any large open areas are close to a neighboring school district. Our I-70 area is even worse. Residential development has been taking place for decades in our own Violet Township. I do not believe that anyone can correctly blame any City for that one.

Your inconsistencies continue to be blaring. You want commercial/industrial development unless?….it is in your own back yard. Quit looking for excuses to complain. We need to make it happen.

Oh, by the way?…?….just because you do not see me speak at a meeting does not mean my words are not heard. I do not have any problem in making my beliefs known to the appropriate sources. Do you think you corner the market on complaining? Think again. We do not all operate the same. That is a good thing!

GUMBY

It seems you are starting to see the light! Welcome! I?’m sure I can get some PATA membership information out to you soon.

True commercial development doesn?’t have to be located ON interstate roadways and I think that is what you are trying to point out here. It?’s only a mile and a half or so to the area behind Kroger?’s, right? And you have pointed out that the amazing SR256 improvements are our community?’s crowning achievement. Well, put two and two together. If they make Diley 5 lanes as they say, you will have suitable access for real commercial development all the way from I-70 to SR33. Take out a few of Daryl?’s traffic lights and you open up numerous possibilities for real commercial development on the whole west side of 256/Diley for miles. Also, couldn?’t Daryl purchase some suitable commercially developable land a little further out SR204? Then he could have the city pay to make it 5 lanes all the way out to there and we could do some real commercial development out there, too. While we?’re talking about that area, what about the land across from the amazing new police station? Couldn?’t Daryl have the City widen Refugee all the way to Brice and make that commercially appealing development area, too? Then we could have those big old nasty trucks going that way and not bothering us.

As far as the 33 corridor, how about those gentlemen you so admire in Council admit they were 100% wrong about rezoning the area down there R-4 and change it. It?’s not too late until the houses are built. Sure they might get sued by the developer, but hey, what?’s another lawsuit. Just put it in line with the others and more will follow.

Oh, by the way?…?…you need to start aligning yourself with better ?“appropriate sources?” than Mark Uher. Other than the Board you are thankfully leaving behind, when they probably need you the most, none of the other offices have females running. You might stand a chance of garnering at least 120 votes like your pals running for the Board are.


By v

GUMBY

It seems you are starting to see the light! Welcome! I?’m sure I can get some PATA membership information out to you soon.

True commercial development doesn?’t have to be located ON interstate roadways and I think that is what you are trying to point out here. It?’s only a mile and a half or so to the area behind Kroger?’s, right? And you have pointed out that the amazing SR256 improvements are our community?’s crowning achievement. Well, put two and two together. If they make Diley 5 lanes as they say, you will have suitable access for real commercial development all the way from I-70 to SR33. Take out a few of Daryl?’s traffic lights and you open up numerous possibilities for real commercial development on the whole west side of 256/Diley for miles. Also, couldn?’t Daryl purchase some suitable commercially developable land a little further out SR204? Then he could have the city pay to make it 5 lanes all the way out to there and we could do some real commercial development out there, too. While we?’re talking about that area, what about the land across from the amazing new police station? Couldn?’t Daryl have the City widen Refugee all the way to Brice and make that commercially appealing development area, too? Then we could have those big old nasty trucks going that way and not bothering us.

As far as the 33 corridor, how about those gentlemen you so admire in Council admit they were 100% wrong about rezoning the area down there R-4 and change it. It?’s not too late until the houses are built. Sure they might get sued by the developer, but hey, what?’s another lawsuit. Just put it in line with the others and more will follow.

Oh, by the way?…?…you need to start aligning yourself with better ?“appropriate sources?” than Mark Uher. Other than the Board you are thankfully leaving behind, when they probably need you the most, none of the other offices have females running. You might stand a chance of garnering at least 120 votes like your pals running for the Board are.


By Voter

Coming to your backyard

11-6-2001
Looks like your buddy Mr. Berry is marketing his land next to the new police station stating it has R10 zoning for apartments, Please see the PATA newsletter for copies of the advertisements for the land. (and soon near the New high School both on Refugee Road he will be seeking R-10 for the same purpose.)

I remember Mr. Yocum speaking at the Columbus development Commission about high density zoning for apartments farther West on Refugee, opposing it because of the impact on the schools of such a small amount of acreage creating so many residences. Other city residents voiced complaints about the traffic such apartments would bring. Well, where is Mr. Yocum on this issue now and since this development is in the city should that make it OK with school officials?

You wonder why people state that you and Mark act like puppets on some issues....... here it is plain as day when the person who leads the Group you embrace, Citizens for a Strong Violet Township/Pickerington is going behind your back and attempting to build high density apartments, which you oppose, right in your backyard.

-By Lisa Ross