1 1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY 2 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 3 STATE PLANNING COMMISSION 4 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 In the matter of: Transcript of 7 STATE PLANNING COMMISSION Proceedings 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 10 Computer-aided transcript of meeting was 11 taken stenographically in the above-entitled 12 matter before CINDY M. MAINS, a Certified 13 Shorthand Reporter (License No. XI02093) and 14 Notary Public of the State of New Jersey, at 15 Thomas Edison College, Prudence Hall, 101 West 16 State Street, Trenton, New Jersey on Wednesday, 17 July 16, 2003, commencing at 9:45 a.m. 18 19 20 21 22 GUY J. RENZI & ASSOCIATES 23 824 West State Street 24 Trenton, New Jersey 08618 25 609-989-9199 or 800-368-7652 (TOLL FREE) 2 1 A P P E A R A N C E S: 2 COMMITTEE MEMBERS: 3 PETER LAZAROPOULOS 4 EDWARD MCKENNA 5 MONIQUE PURCELL 6 MARILYN LENNON 7 CURTIS FISHER 8 MARGE DELLA VECCHIA 9 ADAM ZELLNER 10 TIM TOUHEY 11 MICHELE BYERS 12 JOANNA DUNN SAMSON 13 JOHN ESKILSON 14 DANIEL LEVINE 15 GEORGE PRUITT 16 BRENT BARNES 17 PATRICIA STERN, D.A.G. 18 WENDY McVICKER, OFFICE OF SMART GROWTH 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 AGENDA 2 PAGE 3 CALL TO ORDER 5 4 OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT 5 5 ROLL CALL 5 6 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 6 7 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES 8 -State Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from 9 June 18, 2003 6 10 CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS 11 -Timothy J. Touhey, Chairman 7 12 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 13 -Adam Zellner, Executive Director 8 14 COMMITTEE REPORTS 15 -Plan Implementation Committee, Michele Byers, 16 Chair 10 17 -Resolution No. 2003-08 Designating the Sparta 18 Town Center in Sparta Township, Sussex County 11 19 -Resolution No. 2003-09 Designating the Vernon 20 Town Center in Vernon Township, Sussex County 53 21 -Resolution No. 2003-10 Designating The Seaside 22 Heights Town Center in Seaside Heights Borough, 23 Ocean County 118 24 25 4 1 2 AGENDA CONT'D 3 -Resolution No. 2003-11 Proposed Amendments to 4 the State Planning Rules for Publication in the 5 New Jersey Register 122 6 COMMISSIONER REPORTS 133 7 PUBLIC COMMENTS 137 8 ADJOURNMENT 143 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Good morning, 2 everyone. Patricia, can you please read the open 3 public meetings act? 4 MS. STERN: Notice of the date, the 5 time and the place of this meeting has been given 6 pursuant to New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Roll 8 call. 9 MS. McVICKER: Michelle Byers? 10 MS. BYERS: Yes. 11 MS. McVICKER: Bradley Campbell. 12 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Joanna Dunn Samson 13 she is here for Bradley Campbell. 14 MS. McVICKER: Thank you. John 15 Eskilson? 16 MR. ESKILSON: Here. 17 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher? 18 MR. CURTIS FISHER: Here. 19 MS. McVICKER: David Fisher? 20 Charles Kuperus? 21 MS. PURCELL: Monique Purcell for -- 22 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos? 23 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Here. 24 MS. McVICKER: Marilyn Lennon? 25 MS. LENNON: Here. 6 1 MS. McVICKER: John Lettiere? 2 MR. BARNES: Brent Barnes 3 representing. 4 MS. McVICKER: Susan Bass-Levin? 5 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Marge Della 6 Vecchia for Ms. Levin. 7 MS. McVICKER: John McCormick? 8 MR. LEVINE: Dan Levine for John 9 McCormick. 10 MS. McVICKER: Edward McKenna? 11 Gary Paparozzi? Donna Pearson? George Pruitt? 12 MR. PRUITT: Here. 13 MS. McVICKER: William Watley? 14 Timothy Touhey? 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Here. 16 Pledge of allegiance. 17 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay. I need a 18 motion on the approval of the last minutes for 19 the June 18th Planning Commission meeting. 20 MR. PRUITT: Move it. 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Need a second. 22 MR. ESKILSON: Second. 23 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Roll call. 24 MS. McVICKER: Michelle Byers? 25 MS. BYERS: Yes. 7 1 MS. McVICKER: Joanna Samson? John 2 Eskilson? 3 MR. ESKILSON: Yes. 4 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher? 5 MR. CURTIS FISHER: Yes. 6 MS. McVICKER: Monique Purcell? 7 MS. PURCELL: Yes. 8 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos? 9 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Yes. 10 MS. McVICKER: Marilyn Lennon? 11 MS. LENNON: Yes. 12 MS. McVICKER: Brent Barnes? 13 MR. BARNES: Yes. 14 MS. McVICKER: Marge Della Vecchia? 15 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Yes. 16 MS. McVICKER: Daniel Levine? 17 MR. LEVINE: Yes. 18 MS. McVICKER: George Pruitt? 19 MR. PRUITT: Yes. 20 MS. McVICKER: Timothy Touhey? 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. Just real 22 quick from the chairman's perspective I want to 23 welcome the Mayor from Sparta as well as the 24 committee -- mayor from Vernon -- John Logan 25 here? Not yet -- welcome to the Commission 8 1 meeting. 2 I know that, you know, yesterday I 3 received a tremendous amount of e-mail and faxes 4 regarding the Center and I welcome all of the 5 comments. I'm going to say this, we need all 6 parties who are interested, have a stake in 7 New Jersey, care about where the State Plan is 8 going, care about, you know, which way we're 9 going to grow and we are going to grow. So I do 10 welcome those comments. I do welcome the 11 participation. 12 What I want to make clear is that, 13 you know, this is a Commission that really wants 14 to work hard and make decisions to move forward, 15 and I think that's what we're trying to do, so we 16 do appreciate the participation and interest, so 17 with that, Adam, I'll turn it over to you for 18 your comments. 19 MR. ZELLNER: Thank you. Good 20 morning, everyone. Just some housekeeping 21 business. 22 First and foremost, I would like to 23 welcome some new staff. The office of Smart 24 Growth has hired three additional planners so 25 we're getting staffed up. There's one coming out 9 1 right now, Chuck Latini, who we stole from the 2 Town of Ewing, excellent planner, very well 3 informed. Megan Lange, who I think is somewhere 4 back here and Carol Ford. So we have three new 5 staff members plus Mark the intern, who I'm sure 6 his last is not intern, but we'll figure that out 7 later. 8 I did want to let everybody know for 9 those who may have missed it that there was some 10 language in the budget that recently passed. 11 We've extended the grandfathered center 12 applications that the commissioner was still 13 reviewing and were actually set to Sunset in two 14 weeks for another year. So it's approximately 14 15 of those centers, those folks have gotten letters 16 informing them of the change. The office of 17 Smart Growth and the State Planning Commission 18 will be looking at scheduling them and will be 19 issuing public scheduling at some point in the 20 near future. 21 On that note, I also wanted to let 22 everybody know this does not change our plan 23 endorsement document. We are still moving 24 forward, we are planning unleashing those 25 guidelines some time in the very near future, we 10 1 are still moving to encourage towns into plan 2 endorsement because of issues of a more regional 3 bases, and at the same time we are producing our 4 cross acceptance manuals. It's my hope by the 5 end of August we will be ready and set to go and 6 then we will be sending out copies to everybody, 7 so you'll get a copy. That's it from my report. 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 9 Michelle, we'll go into the Planning Limitation 10 Committee report. 11 MR. ESKILSON: Mr. Chairman, before 12 we start with those, I would just like to 13 announce that I'll be stepping down on the Sparta 14 Growth petition based on the advice of the D.A.G. 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay, Michele. 16 MS. BYERS: The Planning Limitation 17 committee has been reviewing some of the last 18 Center designations that have come forward as 19 Adam just mentioned. We have a number of 20 resolutions today. We have Sparta Town Center, 21 Bergen Town Center and Seaside Heights Town 22 Center. 23 In addition to that, the Committee 24 is also proposing to the members to the State 25 planning roles that will be put into the 11 1 New Jersey Register for public comment and those 2 will deal primarily with plan endorsement and how 3 the process is going to go forward from here as 4 we go towards a more regional planning approach. 5 The first resolution I will go ahead 6 and make a motion as ask for a second to get it 7 on the table and that is resolution 2003-08 8 designating the Sparta Town Center in Sparta 9 Township, Sussex County. Mayor may have so -- 10 BOARD MEMBER: Second. 11 BOARD MEMBER: Second. 12 MS. BYERS: Second. Okay. What I 13 want to do in terms of format is first of all ask 14 members of the Commission if they have any 15 questions and have some discussions and then I 16 would like to ask if there are representatives 17 from Sparta who would like to speak and give 18 comments and then to go to the rest of the public 19 for comments and then come back to the Committee 20 and approach the Commission and then we will 21 vote. So if that's okay with everybody, we'll 22 start with the Commission questions. Comments? 23 Okay. Sparta, welcome. 24 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I just want to 25 welcome Secretary -- 12 1 MR. HENDERSON: Mayor Henderson, 2 welcome. I want to thank everyone for the 3 opportunity to be here. After five years of 4 cooperation on our part and multiple changes, we 5 hope that this is the culmination in a positive 6 sense in our application. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 8 MR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman and Board 9 Members, my name is Thomas Collins, Jr. with the 10 firm of Vogel, Chait, Collins & Schneider. I'm 11 an attorney and professional planner for the 12 Masters and City and Original Planning. 13 MS. McVICKER: Could you speak into 14 the mic? 15 MR. COLLINS: Sure. 16 MR. TOUHEY: Actually, if you guys 17 have business cards, give them to the court 18 reporter and speak into the mic. 19 MR. COLLINS: I have given my card 20 to the stenographer so actually she has that, and 21 as I said before, my name is Tom Collins believe 22 it or not and I'm an attorney and professional 23 planner, I think, and I have a masters in City 24 regional planning from Rutgers and a lot of 25 people there. I represent the Sparta Township 13 1 Planning Board, I have done so since 1976. Dave 2 Troast is here with us today, he's our 3 professional planner staff in-house planner for 4 Sparta Township. Mayor Henderson, who just 5 spoke, is here with us -- Jim Henderson. Also, 6 William Hookway, our Sparta Planning Board 7 Chairman and William Kozar (phonetic) our 8 Planning Board member and Henry Underhill our 9 township manager are all present today. 10 We pretty much will be available to 11 answer any questions you might have. We support 12 the State Plan efforts and we respectfully urge 13 the Commission to improve the Sparta Township 14 Town Center designation. 15 As Jim explained, we've been very 16 supportive of the State Plan and we have worked 17 very diligently on this Center designation 18 request. The Planing Board started over ten 19 years ago and the request started at least five 20 years ago. 21 The Town Center includes the Lake 22 Mohawk boardwalk area, White Deer Plaza, the 23 commercial section and Sparta section of the 24 town, also the Main Street and Sparta Avenue 25 Section It's a concentrated sit-down Center. 14 1 It has in it some very creative tools and 2 techniques, and we urge you to approve them, one 3 of them is the requirement of residential 4 appearance in a commercial architecture within 5 the Town Center, and another one is very creative 6 technique what we call impervious surface 7 incentive zoning which basically encourages and 8 mandates a town green of a significant acreage as 9 well as environment areas being green in exchange 10 for limited impervious surface in portions of 11 commercial town Center commercial zones. We 12 think this is a model. Dave and I worked on the 13 Planning Board and counsel have the wisdom to 14 adopt it. We think it's a model for doing things 15 that encourage preservation of the green space 16 both in and outside of the Center. 17 Almost as a transfer development for 18 that type of arrangement even though a transfer 19 development are not specifically authorized. One 20 of the great things about this technique is that 21 it actually results in dedication of public open 22 space, not just private open space, but public 23 open space. So we urge your approval and I turn 24 it to Dave if you have any further comments. 25 MR. TROAST: Well, the only thing I 15 1 would like to add -- this is David Troast 2 township planner for Sparta for the record. The 3 last couple of weeks have been exciting, 4 frustrating and then exciting again. There has 5 been a lot of behind the scenes meetings before 6 this meeting. We met with staff from DEP and 7 from the office of Smart Growth and at the end of 8 the day, we looked at each other and said we've 9 been on the same page for a long time. Were 10 there some details that haven't been worked out? 11 Yes, and due to the efforts of a lot of people, 12 the staff at DEP, the office of Smart Growth, I 13 believe we now have a Center that has been built 14 on, at least from the professionals at this 15 point, a consensus process. The public has been 16 involved in the process way prior and continues 17 to be in that process. And the unique thing 18 about what we do is that planning is a dynamic 19 process that when this plan is approved, the plan 20 continues to be evaluated and looked at and 21 hopefully improved upon so that is always been 22 our goal in Sparta, and we have improved on that 23 plan since we first submitted the application and 24 we look to be continuing that process, so again, 25 we look for you for a favorable consideration of 16 1 this petition. It meets the criteria under the 2 planning act, that's my testimony as a licensed 3 professional planner. It meets your criteria and 4 substantially meets the intent and purposes of 5 the municipal land use law and of the State 6 Planning Act and of the Docket State Plan. Thank 7 you. 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I just have one 9 question. Talked to me about -- I heard a lot -- 10 just recognized Senator Littell, welcome to the 11 meeting -- talk to me about because I got of 12 e-mail yesterday that talked about the process. 13 Talk to me a little bit about how 14 long you've engaged the State, where you've 15 engaged the State and over that period of time 16 based on your last meeting which was very 17 frustrating. Just give me a sense of history to 18 this point. 19 MR. TROAST: I was hired in 1976 20 back -- '96. I was hired in 1996. As a result 21 of the developer coming in and the typical style 22 of trying to jam ten pounds of sugar in a five 23 pound sack, it resulted in public hearings that 24 resulted in -- police had to be called in to 25 break up fist fights in the parking lot. 17 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: We haven't had 2 that yet here but -- 3 MR. TROAST: We went through a 4 public process bringing the developer, the 5 public, special interest groups. We went through 6 a very long, tedious process of hearings, in 7 fact, every month for three years there was a 8 meeting on the Center. 9 At that time I had knew Mr. Simmons 10 who was the former executive director of the 11 Office of State Planning. We initiated 12 conversation as soon as I started in Sparta and 13 had worked with him and Tom Delisio on the 14 Randolph plan endorsement plan, that was the 15 first plan that was approved under that statute 16 under the State Planning Statute. We included 17 them early on in the process and then in 1998 18 after hearings the master plan obviously was 19 adopted prior to and then went to cross 20 acceptance. We were present at all of those 21 meetings. 22 We then subsequently have met 23 several times with staff. We met with the PIC 24 obviously on at least one occasion. The other 25 thing is that the Sparta Planning Board dedicates 18 1 a portion of one meeting a month to planning. We 2 talk about planning issues, we talk about future 3 issues, what we have to address, new legislation, 4 new court cases and the public is always invited 5 and we have public that does attend. We welcome 6 that and the most recent meeting with Bill Purdy 7 and Rick Brown, we met at a neutral site 8 organized by a Commission member, and we met for 9 two hours and was I frustrated when I walked in? 10 Yes, I was, but when I walked out I had a big 11 smile on my face because we sat down and we 12 worked out the minor details -- and some of the 13 details that we were talking about deal with 14 maybe a total of five acres in one area and about 15 ten in another. To be honest with you, that 16 level of detail should not be discussed at this 17 meeting here, that's why we have professional 18 staff and we worked it out. I know if Rick and 19 Bill were here they would say that they were 20 happy, I was happy and -- 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay. That helps 22 us. That's fine. The second other issue really 23 isn't pertinent, but hear from you from a 24 planning perspective, you know, there was a lot 25 of concern about any impact on region, a regional 19 1 impact as it relates to the center. How do you 2 feel about that issue from the town perspective 3 and have you worked closely with the county? 4 MR. TROAST: We work very closely 5 with the county and we are part, in fact, one of 6 the members of our Planning Board and the council 7 person serve on strategic growth committee that 8 is formally related to that plan. Mr. Kozar sits 9 on that. He's also a county Planning Board 10 member. So we work very closely with the county. 11 We believe that our Center is one of 12 the foundational pieces of the county plan. Some 13 of our zoning techniques that Mr. Collins was 14 talking about have not been contemplated anywhere 15 else as far as I know as a professional. The 16 incentive to concentrate growth in a specific 17 area on a parcel of land, and in, for instance, 18 there is approximately 150 acres owned by one 19 landowner in the Center and that's the bulk of 20 the undeveloped land in the Center. The one side 21 of the street there is a 110 acres, 80 of that is 22 projected to be open space, 30 is projected to be 23 developed. Rick and Bill asked me how are you 24 doing that? Well, first of all, we've shown it 25 with a concept site plan in the master plan, 20 1 where the development should occur, where Smart 2 Growth should occur, and where the open space 3 should occur. And the open space is the mouth. 4 The open space is the critical habitat for 5 wetlands and the development concentration is in 6 the area that is disturbed and adjacent to the 7 517 bypass which the State initiated that plan in 8 1973. Actually, the bypass has been talked about 9 since 1973 and here we are in 2003. 10 Again, in the Center portion Tom 11 talked about the town green, there's about 37 12 acres there and I believe about 17 of those acres 13 are going to be permanently preserved as open 14 space. Because the way our ordinance is crafted 15 is that if they do a public dedication, they get 16 goodies, they get carrots within that ordinance 17 and the developer want to maximize his potential, 18 he joins the game. And the beauty of it is the 19 developer has been part of that creation of that 20 ordinance as a player at the table, as a 21 stakeholder from the beginning and they are 22 committed to move forward with that, however, the 23 very interested make sure they get Center 24 designations as well. They want to see that 25 happen. 21 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Any 2 questions? Okay. You want a motion? Jeff? 3 MR. McKENNA: For the record, Edward 4 McKenna. 5 MR. TITTEL: Jeff Tittel, Director 6 of the New Jersey Sierra Club. I'm here today 7 representing our 23,000 members in the State of 8 New Jersey, and I'm going to start off I think 9 talking a little bit about an overview. 10 One of the things that has disturbed 11 me is someone who has been going to State 12 Planning Commission meetings for 15 years has 13 been the focus of this Commission almost 14 completely on rural parts of New Jersey. 15 For the last 15 years most of the 16 activity, I would say close to 90 percent focused 17 on development in rural areas. Very little has 18 focused on urban and entering suburbs where I 19 believe the focus of this State Plan is or this 20 Commission should be. 21 We are going to be designating more 22 Centers in Sussex County today than we have in 23 Bergen, Essex, Camden and Union counties 24 combined. That is unheard of in a State that's 25 supposed to be talking about Smart Growth and 22 1 urban redevelopment. 2 What we're doing is instead of 3 taking the State Plan language which talks about 4 promoting growth and growth areas, we're turning 5 the areas of planning areas four and five into 6 those growth areas. We're making them the focus 7 of development. We're going to be giving them a 8 green light or whatever color you want to call it 9 for development in these areas which means that 10 they're going to get a higher priority for 11 sewers, for water, for EDA funding, for 12 transportation improvements than many of our 13 urban areas. 14 In fact, last night I was up and I 15 heard Bruce Springsteen and, you know, he talked 16 about giving help to a food bank -- and New 17 Jersey Food Bank -- and they're in Hillside. 18 When I grew up in Hillside there were 20,000 19 manufacturing jobs, Bristol Myers, American Can 20 and Lionel Trains, now the New Jersey Food Bank 21 is the largest employer, but yet Hillside is a 22 nothing in the State Plan. It doesn't get any 23 priority. It does not -- it's a distressed 24 community, but as far as the State Plan is 25 concerned, they're not a Center, they're not an 23 1 urban complex, they're a nothing. That is really 2 what disturbs me because as we want to have 3 New Jersey grow into the future, we need to work 4 strategically and it's the best place to put our 5 resources, our money, our planning time into 6 rural areas and promote growth there instead of 7 accommodate growth or into areas like Elizabeth, 8 Hillside and so on and that first bothered me. 9 Secondly, when looking specifically 10 at Sparta and, again, you know, I think the 11 gentlemen of Sparta are trying to do some of the 12 right things. I think it's more about what this 13 body does. 14 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: We're going to 15 talk about the body and we'll wait until the end. 16 MR. TITTEL: I'm specifically not 17 going to address this. There is no transfer into 18 the Center for developing high density along a 19 highway corridor for a good part of it. There's 20 been changes in both the State Plan boundaries 21 for the Center since the PIA without public 22 review. There have been changes to the PIA 23 itself without public review except for today. 24 When I look at the sewer service 25 plan for Sparta, originally the whole idea of 24 1 bringing sewers into Sparta was to help a school, 2 but also to deal with failing septics in Lake 3 Mohawk. Instead I see that sewer service area 4 basically for new development. I see highway 5 stripped development as part of the Center and 6 there's no protection in the environment. You 7 have a major economic area, industrial park on 8 top of an aquifer recharge area which makes no 9 sense because one you end up rotting recharge, 10 but having industrial and other uses like that on 11 top of aquifer sort of playing Russia roulette. 12 These are the kinds of concerns that 13 I just see here with this petition, and quite 14 frankly, my concern is just that this goes 15 forward that there won't be any monitoring. 16 There's been very little on state of Center. The 17 only place is where there's been anything looked 18 at is where citizens have brought complaints and 19 that's just been sort of a thrown on the shelf 20 and nothing is really happening in any of those 21 towns. 22 That's really what I see is what's 23 wrong here is that we're designating first and 24 then we're planning second. We're not looking 25 strategically. We're not protecting the 25 1 environment. We're not transferring development 2 and we're just justifying sprawl. And quite 3 frankly, I think that we're here today more 4 because of budget politics than planning, and 5 that's really my concern and my concern of the 6 Commission and this whole Sparta infrared Center. 7 I personally think that this should 8 come back with plan endorsement so we get a 9 chance to look at the environment so that we 10 actually answer your questions about water, if 11 there really is enough water and to make sure 12 that we're doing the sewers right and that we're 13 not having other impacts that are unforeseen, 14 like having to widen Route 15, which by the way, 15 I think that's a fairly new drawing, that's a 16 fairly bad project. 17 Just to go forward and say that, you 18 know, I want the State Plan to work, but as long 19 as we don't look strategically in New Jersey, the 20 State Plan is never going to work. Thank you. 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Any 22 other public comment on Sparta? Specifically to 23 Sparta. 24 MS. McINTOSH: Could comment on 25 Sparta and Vernon at the same time. 26 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Why don't we wait 2 until we get approved and then comment. 3 MS. McINTOSH: Because by then you 4 will also approve -- 5 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: How about then 6 just do Sparta and then we'll come back? 7 MS. McINTOSH: Okay, I will say -- 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay. Your name 9 and do you have a card? 10 MS. McINTOSH: Pam McIntosh for the 11 Association of New Jersey Environmental 12 Commission and we sent a letter a few days ago to 13 the Commission and I think the Highlands 14 Coalition also sent a letter the other day and 15 attached an index letter and sent that to all 16 Commission members, but just in case you haven't 17 seen it, somewhere there's a copy here. 18 First of all, I'd like to 19 acknowledge the comments that you're going to be 20 moving ahead full steam it sounds like for a 21 planning endorsement even though the Center 22 doesn't use the process has been extended for 23 another year. We are very unhappy to see this 24 happen. 25 Since it has happened though, really 27 1 feel that these Sparta -- well, the Sparta 2 petition has been pushed through without final 3 look of DEP through the water issues and that 4 it's allowing the Center designation to take 5 place before these issues have been addressed 6 which is kind of putting the cart before the 7 horse and not allowing for good planning that 8 they're allowing them to be designated as a 9 Center to increase the density in that area 10 without a confident decrease in density in the 11 environs and without knowing if there is enough 12 water and sewer issues can be addressed fully. 13 Now, that the deadline has been 14 extended for a year, we'd like to request that 15 the petition be sent back to the Planning 16 Limitation Committee and to DEP to further 17 address those issues going forward. Thank you. 18 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Senator Littell? 19 MR. LITTELL: Good morning members 20 and the public. I'm here to let you know that I 21 represent a couple hundred thousand people in the 22 24th legislative district and that includes 23 Sparta Township and Vernon Township, the two 24 municipalities as you have here before you today. 25 I believe that planning and good 28 1 planning makes a lot of sense for now and for the 2 future, but I think that planning needs to be 3 done at the local level where people know and 4 understand what's going on. I think the people 5 in Sussex County made a great deal of progress in 6 developing a plan under the contract which the 7 State of New Jersey signed with the County of 8 Sussex and their municipality. They have worked 9 hand-in-hand with the municipalities to do some 10 things that the municipalities wanted and they 11 worked hand-in-hand to do things that the State 12 has wanted. That's what the process is all 13 about. It's a collaborative process. You're 14 here to judge and see if it's been done fairly. 15 You're here to tell the whole State of New Jersey 16 whether they should have a Town Center or not. 17 I'm here to tell you that I think that they 18 deserve it, they deserve our appreciation. 19 We like the idea of being a 20 recreation and tourist of the State, it's good 21 business, but you can't have 10,000 skiers come 22 in on a weekend and not give them a place to go 23 to the bathroom. They have to have sewer 24 treatment facilities. They have to have 25 collector systems, they have to have things that 29 1 go with that kind of a process. 2 You can't just ignore the facts that 3 exist because we won't have a successful system 4 if we rely on a septic system which could fail. 5 We need a good system. Sparta Township ran a 6 trunk sewer line up to Franklin, tied it into the 7 system in Amber, which by the way, came about in 8 1963 when it started because of the State of 9 New Jersey issuing a cease and assist order to 10 the County of Sussex and in particular to 11 Franklin Borough and Hamburg and Sparta, 12 Ogdensburg and Hardyston. 13 At the end of the road the only two 14 municipalities that stuck it out and built the 15 system were Hamburg and Franklin and as a result 16 of that, we have clean towns today. Sparta just 17 completed their hookup, got rid of the system 18 that was contaminating the Wallkill river. They 19 were under a consent order to do that and they 20 did what they had to do. Getting the permits and 21 the getting the process going is what it's all 22 about. You can sit here and say that's a good 23 idea, but if nobody implements it, it's not a 24 good idea. 25 I think we have a wonderful 30 1 opportunity here to work together to make sure 2 that the environment is protected and they've 3 been great protectors of the earth and the water 4 and the sky around them. 5 So I commend Sparta and Vernon 6 Township officials for what they've done. I urge 7 you to give them fair consideration and support 8 the effort that they've made. If there's a 9 mistake someplace, we'll correct it. We don't 10 have any problems with that, but I recommend the 11 two municipalities here and we'll be back with 12 more without reservation because I think they've 13 done a wonderful job. Thank you. 14 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you, 15 Senator. Yes. 16 MR. KIRCHHOFFER: I'm Don 17 Kirchhoffer with the New Jersey Conservation 18 Foundation and I want to engage in talking about 19 the planning limitation agenda as Senator Littell 20 said, the important part of the implementation 21 and I just repeat what I said before, just the 22 cursory look at the implementation agenda which I 23 think you got for the first time today. 24 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Is this just 25 Sparta or just overall? 31 1 MR. KIRCHHOFFER: No, I'm talking 2 about as you requested only Sparta. 3 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay. Thank you. 4 MR. KIRCHHOFFER: Just a cursory 5 look at that. Modify the first thing, the second 6 thing -- 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Where are looking 8 at? 9 MR. KIRCHHOFFER: I am looking at 10 the plan implementation agenda from Adam's letter 11 dated July 16th which is today, Page 1. Town 12 wide, modify master plan to incorporate the 13 designated Center -- this is the item -- no time 14 frame. I just want to point out a couple of the 15 most obvious, some of which are good and are 16 appropriate, but some of which are -- some of 17 which are being implemented -- storm water, but I 18 think the most impelling thing and I won't go 19 over it all because on Page 8 and 12 and repeated 20 on Page 9 as well is town wide develop indicators 21 and targets to measure progress of the current 22 Center designation and to be used to evaluate an 23 application for plan endorsement -- it seems to 24 me that's what the plan endorsed, The PIA should 25 be, and that's sort of important that they repeat 32 1 it again, it's the second item on Page 9. It's 2 just more standards on what the township has to 3 do and the time schedule and for getting all the 4 broad policy issues that you're discussing about 5 this, it just seems -- this is what counts, this 6 is the PIA and it's to me doesn't do want I think 7 you want it to do. It doesn't say what I think 8 you should be saying. 9 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Paul, do you want 10 to respond to that -- the standard perspective 11 regarding Commission application time line? 12 MR. DRAKE: Yeah, if you follow 13 through on the dates themselves, some of them 14 carry down in that column -- 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Your name, Paul. 16 MR. DRAKE: Paul Drake, I'm the 17 hearing planner manager for the State planning 18 unit. 19 If you follow down with the PIA, the 20 modifications that were put in the PIA discusses 21 with the Township as well as with DEP a lot of 22 the dates. We try to be very explicit on most of 23 them, some of them we indicated, you know, our 24 ongoing activities. Some of them are sort of if 25 you read down the column where it says fall 2003, 33 1 the first page reference, it just follows the 2 number in the same column, although there is a 3 line there we could have added fall 2003, but the 4 intent was that it literally carries down, so 5 that kind of work is just continuing fall of 6 2003. 7 Our objective with regard to -- 8 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Hold on a 9 second. So I want to make sure everyone 10 understood that that when there is an empty box 11 in the right-hand column, for instance, on Page 12 1, it starts off fall 2003 that one -- an their 13 copies to include the words fall 2003. 14 MR. DRAKE: Right. So that's the 15 column -- whether -- we could have put in the 16 box, it really was intended just to follow down 17 through. 18 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. This is 19 about Sparta, yes. 20 MS. HORSFIELD: Yes. Tammie 21 Horsfield president of the Sussex County Chamber 22 of Commerce and also the Sussex County Economic 23 Development Partnership. Thank you, first of all 24 for having us today and we are proud of the fact 25 that the extension took place that our 34 1 municipalities will have the opportunity to be 2 heard just as the rest of the State of New Jersey 3 has had as well. So thank you for that 4 opportunity. 5 As far as Sparta is concerned, first 6 of all, I'd like to say that Sparta was probably 7 one of the first who jumped on board in regard to 8 support for the State plan. Going back many 9 years throughout the process where many of us 10 were struggling with the fact that we felt it was 11 a process. I'm proud of Sparta for the work that 12 they've done and their planning efforts, and by 13 the way, I speak on behalf of a membership of 14 over 600 members that represent over 20,000 15 employees in Sussex county, not just New Jersey. 16 So I wanted to make that clear that we come here 17 with a voice of a large constituency at home and 18 many of our municipalities are here today 19 representing and supporting both Sparta and 20 Vernon because they do also believe as good 21 neighbors that they should be here to support the 22 process. 23 Sparta is in the process of putting 24 together their Center designation for job 25 creation. Sussex County has the lowest number of 35 1 jobs for population ratio in the State of 2 New Jersey and maybe that's why we have a little 3 bit more to present in the way of Center 4 designations because perhaps we haven't had that 5 before. 6 This is an opportunity for us to 7 help those over 65 percent of our people who 8 commute outside the County every single day to 9 have jobs close to home with a good quality of 10 life. Quality of life right now is sitting on 11 route 80 and route 287. I don't quote quality of 12 life and that is also something that deals with 13 the environment and the State Plan is certainly 14 looking at that as well. 15 Taking a look at the big picture, 16 Sparta had done a great job in your planning. 17 You've been able to balance both preservation, 18 which by the way, that's why we moved to Sussex 19 County, many of us, is because of the quality of 20 life, because of the balance, but quite frankly, 21 balance and quality of life come together, it 22 doesn't mean sitting on the highway waiting to 23 get to your job that's over an hour away. It 24 means providing jobs for the current labor force 25 work that is there now, I'm not talking even 36 1 about future. 2 The Economic Development Partnership 3 and the chamber are working very closely to bring 4 in the constant jobs that compliment the current 5 labor force that's commuting. That is a 6 wonderful labor force, it's very talented, only 7 they don't have the opportunity to share those 8 jobs in our county. We want balance. We want 9 preservation, yes, we want it all and I think we 10 can because we have talent like Sparta who plan 11 so properly. 12 I thank you for your time, but 13 before I leave, if I may leave you each a copy in 14 case you don't know what Sussex County is all 15 about, Sussex County magazine. So, with that, I 16 thank you. 17 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I learned how to 18 swim at Lake Mohawk. 19 Anymore from the public? Yes. 20 MS. FREY: Hello, I represent the 21 Highlands Coalition. 22 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I'm sorry, your 23 name? 24 MS. FREY: Wilma Frey, F-R-E-Y. A 25 number of member organizations of the coalition 37 1 including the New Jersey State Federation of 2 Sportsmen's Club, Friends of Holland Highlands, 3 Phillips Group Riverview Organization, Pequannock 4 River Coalition, Pyramid Mountain Committee, 5 New Jersey Conservation Foundation, Skylands 6 Clean, New Jersey Environmental Federation, the 7 Hunterdon Coalition, New Jersey Autoban Society, 8 Upper Rockaway River Watershed Association, the 9 Sierra Club New Jersey Chapter and the 10 Musconetcong Mountain conservancy. 11 We are asking that given that the 12 time frame for Centers designation has been 13 extended by this amendment for one year that this 14 proposal be remanded to the plan implementation 15 committee so that the regional and issues of 16 water supply and important issues which extend 17 beyond the Centers, and which deal with the 18 impact of the Centers on these regional issues 19 and the capacity to sustain these Centers be 20 addressed. This proposal has been put on the 21 table for today because there was a desire that 22 this Center be approved and these matters have 23 not been addressed to the extent that they need 24 to be and we're asking that this be remanded so 25 that the office of Smart Growth and the DEP can 38 1 work out these very serious issues. 2 We know there are problems in Byram 3 with water resources which are dependent on 4 things that happen in Sparta. The development of 5 the aquifer, for example, directly would impact 6 Byram. Byram has problems with water supply 7 which have to do with the Sparta water company 8 well above Lake Mohawk. There are complaints in 9 Byram about low and diminishing well yields from 10 both communities and private well owners in that 11 area and that needs to be addressed within the 12 context of the Center proposal. 13 These are very serious issues. They 14 are issues of sustained ability, of future 15 sustainability of this area. And, therefore, we 16 are requesting that this be remanded, please. 17 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 18 Joanna, do you want to respond DEP 19 -- may look at this application? 20 MS. DUNN SAMSON: The DEP agrees 21 that are there are very complex and complicated 22 set of water and wastewater sewer issues 23 associated with this region, but we're also 24 confident after extensive meetings with the 25 Townships and trying to work through a number of 39 1 these issues that they're as concerned as we are 2 and that they're willing address these in a 3 proactive way. 4 It's not a perfect process with the 5 plan. We can all agree. We're in a transition 6 period that the Township has been willing to work 7 with us and work with us literally very actively 8 and it took us a while to get there. 9 I think it's also fair to say that 10 in the past we have not done the most effective 11 job at monitoring, but this is a new day. We're 12 moving to a new day. We're moving to a new plan 13 endorsement process. We're actually grateful to 14 have the opportunity to do this on a conditional 15 basis and to work through these issues as we're 16 looking at the regional issues of the other towns 17 as they come through the process as well, and 18 they've indicated their willingness to sort of 19 wholeheartedly be behind us on those issue. 20 So we're satisfied that we have the 21 adequate protections here and we're satisfied 22 that they've agreed to do. As you can see, there 23 are a number of -- a number of pages here where 24 we've asked them to be very proactive and very 25 willing to work with us and we're confident that 40 1 they share our concerns about these issues. From 2 our view this is not a perfect environmental 3 world. We're here to balance a number of issues 4 and one of them would be environmental issues and 5 we think that balance in this case has been 6 appropriate. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Can we 8 have a motion on the table? One more comment. 9 SUSSEX FREEHOLDER: Good morning. 10 Sussex County Freehold, and I want to apologize 11 for walking in a little bit late. Traffic, that's 12 okay. First of all, I want to thank everybody 13 for allowing us the opportunity to comment on 14 these Center designation petitions. 15 First let me say these petitions 16 represent several years of planning by elected 17 officials, professionals, staff and local 18 volunteers, people who know their community and 19 care deeply about its future. Sparta Center 20 petitions were filed in the State Planning 21 Commission before plan endorsement was even a 22 concept before there was a Smart Growth planning 23 -- before there was even discussion of a 24 county-wide strategic plan. 25 The issue here before us today is 41 1 fairness. These petitions should be considered 2 under the guidelines that were in place when they 3 were filed. They should be subject to 4 consideration on their merits, not the moving 5 target of bigger and better plans at some point 6 in the future. 7 The Centers are necessary to enable 8 these communities to move forward and grow in 9 ways that protect critical and natural assets 10 while maintaining their ability to sustain 11 themselves financially. The County of Sussex is 12 working hard to complete a county-wide plan from 13 the bottom up with input from our municipal 14 governments, residents and businesses. 15 I would ask please don't penalize 16 these communities for being ahead in doing good 17 planning. I think it's important to know that 18 Sussex County works very diligently and hard each 19 and every day to protect the beautiful 20 environment that we have, both on the county 21 level and the local level. We're preserving more 22 and more farms on a daily basis, 43 farms and 23 almost 7,000 acres. Open space planning both on 24 a county and on a local municipal levels to help 25 to protect the environment. 42 1 I think it's important for everybody 2 to know that as our local and municipal officials 3 take that task each year to struggle to adopt 4 municipal budgets, something that the rest of us 5 can afford to pay and on the revenue side of that 6 budget is less and less money coming in, but the 7 expenses continue to rise and these municipal 8 officials look for other ways to have income to 9 come in to help offset those expenses allowing us 10 to grow to a point that at the same time is going 11 to protect our environment, our natural resources 12 but still giving means of additional revenue to 13 help pass on that savings to our residents of 14 these municipalities. 15 We cannot do it if these local 16 municipal officials' hands are tied. We need to 17 have the ability to grow and I think it's 18 important to realize that all of our municipal 19 officials, they know what's best for their 20 municipalities. The young people that are 21 raising families there and they too hope that 22 their families can remain as Sussex County 23 residents and be able to grow and still maintain 24 that good quality of life that we enjoy. 25 So I am asking you please consider 43 1 approving these Center petitions. It's important 2 for Sussex County and it's also important for the 3 State of New Jersey. Sussex County is one of our 4 tourist designations, an attraction to a lot of 5 people in this great state. We need your help 6 and I strongly urge you to adopt these petitions. 7 Thank you. 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Last 9 comment. 10 MS. HEINRICH: Helen Heinrich, I 11 represent the New Jersey Farm Bureau and I just 12 had one thing to say. I think the question here 13 is one that I've seen come up over and over again 14 since 1988 whenever we started this process. 15 Whether or not we're going to let our rural areas 16 grow and grow in a way that is recommended by the 17 State Plan. Concentrated densely, protecting the 18 environment and I just want to say that if this 19 kind of planning is not improved and encouraged, 20 the farm community believes that it is going to 21 slowly die. The kind of planning that spreads 22 houses across the landscape but very large 23 acreages is the death nail of the viable 24 agriculture. 25 We know Sussex is going to grown. 44 1 We know some of the rural counties are going to 2 grow and the farm community would like to see 3 them grow in a way that there is some of the good 4 land left for agriculture. With the restrictions 5 on all sorts of the environmental 6 characteristics, it's the best farmland that is 7 the focus of development and if the town or 8 county doesn't plan like these communities are 9 doing, it's simply going to spread out all over 10 the best land, and further weaken agriculture in 11 these places. So I hope you will seriously 12 consider endorsing the concept that our rural 13 areas need to grow and that this supports your 14 State Plan concepts. Thank you. 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Do we 16 have a roll call? Did you want to add anything? 17 MR. MCKENNA: I just want to add two 18 things -- and I apologize for being late again. 19 I hit three detours on the way here unfortunately 20 in downtown Trenton. I think I know the entire 21 city. 22 I was struck by some of the comments 23 and also I thank you for faxing us the objections 24 last night because I got them and then took them 25 home and actually I got the objections -- 45 1 Highlands and then sat down with my PIA again and 2 read it again and I had several thoughts. 3 First of all, I think the PIA is 4 excellent. We can sit down and debate different 5 issues, but I think a lot of it has to speak to 6 the confidence that we have in our commissioners 7 to do what is right. And I'm struck this morning 8 I pick up the newspaper and I see an article 9 about the endangered species process that now 10 everyone is going to have to go through and I'm 11 thinking to myself that all developers hate Brad 12 Campbell and all the environmentalists say he 13 doesn't do enough. So you can't win, and that's 14 really what we're talking about is balance and 15 that's what we're hearing from everybody. 16 The fact of the matter is I think 17 our commissioner of Environmental Protection is 18 doing an excellent job as is the department. I 19 have great faith in Rick Brown and all of his 20 people. If they're telling us that they sat down 21 and they worked out everything to the point where 22 they think it has to be, then I think we've got 23 to have faith in our commissioners and I feel 24 very strongly about ag and I went through the 25 agricultural aspect of this and I'm really glad 46 1 that somebody from the farm bureau world is here 2 because I was concerned about that, all the 3 different aspects of it. 4 So, sure, you can see where people 5 would have objections, but if you sit down and 6 look through it logically and then look at the 7 balance and then show some confidence in the 8 people that we have, I beg to differ on one other 9 thing, that's the monitoring process and I'll 10 tell you why. Not only in my capacity as the 11 Mayor, but in doing some other things, I've had 12 the occasion to deal with state departments 13 recently -- and Jeff, if you have Center 14 designation which we have, let me tell you 15 something, first thing that I ask you is are you 16 in compliance? We're going to check your town, 17 we're going to monitor your town to make sure you 18 are doing what you're supposed to be doing before 19 we can even consider any application that your 20 town is making with funding. 21 So it may not have been monitored in 22 the past and it may not be perfect today, but I 23 can tell you the monitoring process -- and I'm 24 aware of two applications in Monmouth County that 25 have been called into question specifically 47 1 because of the appropriateness of dealing with 2 the whole Smart Growth issues. 3 So whatever happened in the past we 4 can't make up for. We can only deal with what 5 we've got right now. Certainly it seems to me 6 that our agencies are doing -- are very proactive 7 in addressing the whole Smart Growth issue and 8 ensuring that anything that they're dealing with 9 comply with it. 10 So after sitting down and reading 11 the objections is last night and I can certainly 12 understand and appreciate them, it's also pretty 13 darn obvious that Sparta did a whole lot of work 14 on this as did Vernon on theirs and then reading 15 the PIA which is so detailed. I don't have any 16 reservation about voting for this. I think when 17 it comes to money, I know -- I'm sorry I'm late. 18 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: That's all right, 19 Mayor. 20 MS. McVICKER: Michele Byers? 21 MS. BYERS: I did have a couple of 22 comments. First of all, I would like to commence 23 Sparta because I do think that they've done a 24 good job and I agree with Edward the PIA is good. 25 I want to back up to from my 48 1 perspective as a member of the commission over 2 the last five to six years, it's been very clear 3 that Center designation is not, you know, an 4 effective means of dealing with regional issues 5 and additional planning and state-wide planning 6 which is what the State Plan was designed to get 7 at. And so because of that the commission, you 8 know, planned to phase out Center designation, 9 move to planning endorsement which is a much more 10 regional process and I do not want to belabor 11 that. Now here we are, this is about five years 12 since we made that decision and we're still 13 addressing Center designations. 14 I also, you know, hear what everyone 15 is saying about fairness and that the Commission 16 had told many towns over the last few years that 17 we would go ahead with Center designations and I 18 understand that and I've been a strong opponent 19 of that. But I think I finally reached a point 20 where it really is time to move to plan 21 endorsement and I don't think -- in spite of the 22 fact that, you know, we may have good Center 23 designation applications, I don't think it's 24 really benefitting the towns or the communities 25 to move forward on Center designations anymore 49 1 and I'm not trying to, you know, penalize or 2 criticize or in any way, you know, take away from 3 the work that Sparta has done and the work that 4 DEP and all the agencies have done on the Center 5 designations, but I think also in hearing what 6 we're doing through the office of Smart Growth 7 now and moving towards plan endorsement, there 8 are going to be a lot more incentives for plan 9 endorsement than there will be for Center 10 designations. The Center designation is really a 11 thing of the past in terms of planning and in 12 terms of the State Plan. I think that spending a 13 lot of time now on Center designation is just 14 going to mean that communities are going to want 15 to come back right away to get plan endorsement 16 because that's where the incentives are going to 17 be, not in Center designation. I think from that 18 pragmatic point of view, if you look at the time 19 line of maybe not for Sparta but for some of the 20 towns that are still in the hopper probably it 21 would make more sense and it would only be a few 22 months difference between achieving Center 23 designation or plan endorsement. So I had one 24 other point and then I'll give my vote -- and I'm 25 sorry for taking up the time on this. 50 1 In particular with the Sussex County 2 towns, it was three years ago or so where the 3 office of Smart Growth, office of state planning 4 at the time via the county of Smart Growth 5 planning ground, and I understand there is a lot 6 of good work that's underway in the county, that 7 that planning effort is underway, but we haven't 8 seen that. It's not complete. And I think that 9 the regional issues that it will raise that it 10 will bring to light are going to have an impact 11 directly on Sparta, on every single Center that 12 comes in, and I really do think that you're 13 putting the cart before the horse to give Center 14 designation out without looking at the regional 15 context and we're so close from having the county 16 plan and we're so close to having the plan 17 endorsement process going . It just seems to me 18 to be a real non-benefit to move forward on 19 Center designations anymore. 20 So I actually, you know, as the 21 chair of the planning limitation committee, I 22 will give due to all of the applications that 23 come in, whether they're plan endorsement or 24 Center designation but are not going to be voting 25 for anymore Center designations as we go forward. 51 1 So I will vote no on the Sparta Center based on 2 those comments. But, again, not to take away 3 from the work that you've done and I think Sparta 4 is definitely Center -- there's no question about 5 it. Meets the criteria for a center, but there 6 are extremely important regional issues that 7 simply can't be addressed by this process 8 anymore. I don't have faith in the Center 9 process. I think it's time to move on, so I 10 won't belabor that anymore. Thank you. 11 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 12 MS. McVICKER: Joanna Samson? 13 MS. SAMSON: Yes. 14 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher. 15 MR. CURTIS FISHER: Yes. 16 MS. McVICKER: Monique Purcell. 17 MS. PURCELL: Yes. 18 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos? 19 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Yes. 20 MS. McVICKER: Marilyn Lennon? 21 MS. LENNON: Yes. 22 MS. McVICKER: Brent Barnes? 23 MR. BARNES: Yes. 24 MS. McVICKER: Marge Della Vecchia? 25 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Yes. 52 1 MS. McVICKER: Daniel Levine? 2 MR. LEVINE: Yes. 3 MS. McVICKER: Edward McKenna? 4 MR. McKENNA: Yes. 5 MS. McVICKER: George Pruitt? 6 MR. PRUITT: Yes. 7 MS. McVICKER: Timothy Touhey? 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. 9 MR. ESKILSON: Just for the record, 10 I'm abstaining under the advice of DAG. 11 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you, 12 Mr. Chairman. 13 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 14 Let me say this to the whole body 15 now we're through on Sparta before we move in. I 16 think the hardest challenge the Commission is 17 going to have particularly to the point with this 18 made area is how we will grow in our rural areas. 19 That is a challenge that we all take very 20 seriously. I'm going to speak a little bit for 21 Ed McKenna and Tim Touhey who come from urban 22 environments have worked and believe our urban 23 Centers need to be vitalized in a dramatic 24 fashion. That is where our passion and where our 25 heart is. With the challenge of the State Plan 53 1 in our rural communities. Thank you. Michele? 2 MS. BYERS: Let's move on to the 3 next petition. Resolution 2003-09 designating the 4 Vernon Town Center in Vernon Township, Sussex 5 County. Again, we use the same format. I'll 6 move the resolution and ask for a second. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Second. 8 MS. BYERS: We'll take discussion on 9 the petition and then ask to -- Vernon -- I see 10 Mayor Logan is here. 11 MR. ESKILSON: Just for the record 12 once again, I'm not participating in this 13 discussion under the advice of D.A.G. 14 (Recess is taken at this time.) 15 MS. BYERS: I just wanted to make 16 sure for anymore comments, questions, discussion 17 from the members of the Commission before we go 18 public? 19 MS. PURCELL: Michele, I just have 20 one comment. I just wanted to follow-up on a 21 comment from Jeff that he said that most of the 22 efforts for the state planning commission have 23 spoken from rural with New Jersey and that is 24 true, however, most of you have been no growth 25 Centers. So I find it refreshing that we're 54 1 actually talking about the difficult issues today 2 and agree with Chairman Touhey about growth in 3 rural areas of the state. This is where the 4 challenges are and it really seems to me that 5 we're going to be working together through the 6 PIA and it begins with Vernon and Sparta to do 7 just that. 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 9 MS. BYERS: Mayor Logan, welcome. 10 MAYOR LOGAN: Thank you. Good to be 11 here. Well, I would like to begin by again 12 thanking the members of the Commission for 13 hearing us today and having us here. It's been a 14 long process. I think if we play -- actually I'd 15 like to ask any of the Vernon professionals that 16 are here today just to raise your hand just to 17 get a sense to the amount of folks that Vernon 18 has involved our taxpayers have had to support to 19 get through this process. It's been a long 20 process, very detailed, but it's ultimately one 21 of balance. 22 When we talk about creating our Town 23 Center, I think people are aware of the 24 opportunity presented itself with Mount Creak, 25 which is a world class tourism based development 55 1 in the Center of our town. We're trying to 2 coincide that with developing our Town Center 3 village. So that creates some economic 4 opportunity for the town, about seven percent of 5 our ratable basis is commercial. There is an 6 economic opportunity but the balance comes into 7 play when you look at what we're doing outside 8 the Center as well. We're looking at down 9 selling. We're looking to go from two to three 10 acres and three to five acres and extending that 11 five acre zone for a wider area in the environs. 12 We have instituted a tax, and as 13 republicans we cringe when we implement taxes, 14 but we implemented tax for open space in the town 15 two years ago that we're following through on. 16 We have plans for a bike trail to go through the 17 valley and to use that to be the spine to 18 purchase open space. So we've got a fairly 19 comprehensive plan that would really create a 20 balance so we have an economic sustainability 21 while preserving the environment. Ultimately 22 with the tourism based economy in Vernon, the 23 environment is the product. We need to preserve 24 that product and ensure that if people are coming 25 from out of town from Red Bank will be able to 56 1 enjoy the environment. So we're very cognizant 2 of that and all the efforts and the money the 3 town has spent and in cooperation we've had in 4 working with the environmental DEP I think bear 5 that out. I look forward to a fair and 6 reasonable process today. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you, Mayor. 8 Any questions for the Mayor? Okay. Any public 9 comments? Give your full name. Please. 10 MR. WILKINSON: My name is Eric 11 Wilkinson, and I'm a policy director of 12 New Jersey Future. This application as well as 13 the Sparta are prime examples, I think, of what's 14 wrong administratively with the Center 15 designation process. We urge a speedy resolution 16 for this and we hope that the Commission can move 17 on with plan endorsement and we especially hope 18 that the Commission and staff can weave in the 19 extension of Center designations just enacted 20 into the plan endorsement process. Thank you 21 very much. 22 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: You and Senator 23 Littell probably need to talk. 24 MR. WILKINSON: Yes. 25 MS. FREY: Hello. My name is Wilma 57 1 Frey, that's F-R-E-Y, and I, again, am 2 representing the Highlands Coalition and the 3 approximately 14 organizations that I listed in 4 the previous statement and I would also like 5 permission to put the letter which is 6 organizations who wrote to the state planning 7 commission and have that entered into the record. 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes, no problem. 9 MS. FREY: Thank you. I'd like to 10 just extend one or one -- two -- 11 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I'm sorry, was 12 that the letter I received yesterday? 13 MS. FREY: Yes, it was. I would 14 like to note that the Highlands Coalition and its 15 member groups have been very involved in the 16 creation and implementation of the State Plan and 17 the Highlands Coalition initiated the process 18 which resulted in the recognition by the State 19 Planning Commission of the Highlands as the 20 state's first special resource area in SERP. 21 I'd like to remind this body that it 22 was the critical environmental resources of the 23 Highlands and the fact that they are threatened 24 that propelled this recognition by the State 25 Planning Commission, and I do think that the 58 1 State Planning Commission has a special 2 responsibility to assure that these resources in 3 the Highlands are indeed protected and I don't 4 think that this Center designation process is 5 doing that. The resources are the water, the 6 forest, the wild life and the Center designation 7 process is not protecting these resources. It's 8 partly doing this because there is no specific 9 reduction in densities or there is no real -- 10 it's not clear that the surrounding areas, the 11 environs around the Centers aren't going to be 12 just as much developed as they would have been if 13 the Center weren't there. So what you end up 14 simply with higher density agglomerations and a 15 sea of sprawl and I mean that is quite possible 16 under this process. 17 The other thing I would like to 18 comment on is that it is my understanding one of 19 my colleagues told me that the most recent plan 20 implementation agenda arrived yesterday 21 afternoon. Well, I happened to have had a 22 meeting outside of my office yesterday afternoon. 23 I think that that is an unacceptable process for 24 public participation. Does not allow anyone 25 outside of the extreme inner circle to even see 59 1 the materials much less review it or comment on 2 it. And I just think that this is not an 3 acceptable way of operating. This is supposed to 4 be a public process. 5 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Let me stop you 6 there. I'm going to have Paul respond to it. It 7 isn't really that extreme of an inner circle. We 8 obviously are open. 9 Paul? 10 MR. DRAKE: Yes, I'm Paul Drake, 11 manager of the State Planning Unit. The PIA has 12 not changed from the time it was placed on the 13 web well over 30 days ago. So the plan 14 implementation agenda has not changed for at 15 least 30 days. It's been on our website. 16 What we did change send to the State 17 Planning Commission yesterday was a slight minor 18 map amendment modification to the Sparta Town 19 Center that was discussed just prior and it was a 20 map that was June of last -- June 2003. The map 21 amendment was discussed in July of 2003 and that 22 was the discussion that took place for Sparta, 23 but those map amendments were at the request of 24 the agencies themselves and we worked with the 25 township on that. 60 1 So there has not been any change to 2 the plan implementation agenda for Vernon 3 Township at all for a minimum of 30 days. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay. 5 MS. FREY: One would not know that 6 if one just knew that the information had just 7 arrived. How does one know that? Anyway, I'll 8 give this letter to the secretary. 9 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 10 MS. FREY: Again, we would 11 infinitely prefer that this go back to the PIC 12 and have these environs issues dealt with rather 13 than having this simply approved in a hastily 14 fashion. Thank you very much. 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Just for the -- 16 Adam, just for publication for the public and the 17 record. You were on the website 30 days prior? 18 MR. ZELLNER: Yes. 19 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Why don't you talk 20 to them about that? 21 MR. ZELLNER: I was just going to 22 say, that all of the information is clearly 23 posted on our website. In fact, I will tell you 24 comments that were received as late as yesterday 25 were e-mailed last faxed out to everybody. We've 61 1 had these up for on the website, we had them 2 mailed out, we had them e-mailed out. It's more 3 notification than I think any other organization 4 does at this point. And, again, even as late as 5 yesterday with some groups coming in, very late 6 comments, even though it's been on the agenda for 7 a long time, we were still able to turn around 8 and get this out to the interested parties in 9 time. 10 We do want to make very clear that 11 we have really gone out of our way to give public 12 notification on this. 13 MR. TITTLE: Jeff Tittle, director 14 of New Jersey Sierra Club and I just wanted to 15 mention something. I'm also in charge of 23,000 16 members and we do have 75 members in Vernon and 17 about an equal number in Sparta. We are also 18 concerned about what's happening in their 19 communities. 20 My concern here, again, dealing with 21 Vernon is we're not again not looking strategic. 22 There is no transfer of development from the 23 environs from the Center. In fact, this Center 24 you can call it a highway wishbone of sprawl 25 because it goes down one highway. It's an -- 62 1 intersection comes back up another highway having 2 two competing nodes and quite frankly from a 3 planning standpoint, you really should have one 4 major Center with the development there versus 5 two competing ones which will be undercutting 6 each other. 7 Quite frankly when Vernon first 8 worked on the original town Center proposal which 9 was around Vernon and didn't include a 10 development and Hamburg Mountain many of our 11 members had actually supported it and been part 12 of that process. But what we see now is a Center 13 that's being used to justify a major resort 14 development. That's what it's about. It's about 15 Intrawest. This is not about Smart Growth. This 16 is not about good planning. This is about 17 justifying a massive development. Luckily after 18 three loses by the Sierra Club, the mountain is 19 no longer on the table and other environmental 20 organizations I might add, so that we feel 21 positive of. But, again, there is no benefit, 22 there is no transfer, you know, Intrawest instead 23 of donating that land to have their little 24 center, instead we spend $7.2 million of public 25 money to buy it, so they get a benefit, we get a 63 1 benefit, but there's no transfer which if you're 2 really going to have growth boundary, that would 3 be the way to do it because that should be 4 outside the Center and that should be preserved 5 by them, not with our money which they still get 6 to use the land anyway. But we're glad that's it 7 preserved because quite frankly I don't need 8 another lawsuit. 9 Again, you have competing cores and 10 if you really want to disservice the mountain, 11 Vernon Town Center in the Center of Vernon should 12 be the place with shuttle busses and jitneys and 13 other things going back and forth. I think from 14 a planning standpoint it really doesn't work 15 because they're in competition. But more 16 importantly, dealing with the issues in this 17 area, this is a very environmental sensitive 18 area. I know it well being from, you know, the 19 community Vernon part of my life. There's always 20 been issues of water supply and sewers. One of 21 the major problems is that the sewer plant dumps 22 into the Wallkill. Another major problem is that 23 going back over 20 years and I worked with Vernon 24 well before this Mayor in trying to save the 25 lands back in 1979 and in 1980 and there was 64 1 always a major concern about water supply. The 2 Sussex towait (phonetic) plant for 1981 talks 3 about a minimum of one house per five acre 4 density in order to have enough water for that 5 part of the valley and we're greatly exceeding it 6 with existing development and golf courses which 7 are going up and down the valley, but now we're 8 noticing 1,600 units and 1.8 million square feet 9 of commercial, we're going to well exceed that, 10 and that's really what it's about. There's no 11 apparent character testing analysis done ahead of 12 time, we're designating first or planning against 13 second. Do we really have that water supply or 14 what are the impacts of sewers, in fact, because 15 the ground water depletion we're talking about 16 some sort of cock-a-mammy scheme of running a 17 sewer line down, treating it and running it back 18 up building seepage pits, can we even meet the 19 water quality standard for that? Especially when 20 you're dealing with very environmental sensitive 21 land, C1 stream and even FW1 streams in that 22 area. 23 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: There's going to 24 be no definite planning limitation talked about 25 asking Vernon to look at the water supply and 65 1 buildup. 2 MR. TITTEL: But remember if the big 3 map goes forward, a Center becomes a green light. 4 It doesn't meet the same standard of an 5 environmentally sensitive area. That's been my 6 major point. That these areas are supposed to 7 have the same standard, not a stricter standard 8 which we're trying to get to protect these areas 9 and that's really what it comes down to is that 10 you're creating a large loophole in protection of 11 the C1 areas and the environmentally sensitive 12 area in the State of New Jersey. There's also an 13 area with a lot of endangered species and again, 14 in the proposals for endangered species rural 15 Centers are not to be looked differently than the 16 environs of other areas. So this is a giant 17 loophole for development. You can call this a 18 Center, but it's still sprawl. There's no 19 transfer outside. You have more than -- three 20 times more growth happening outside of your 21 Center and especially on commercial. You have 22 300,000 square feet inside and 1.5 million square 23 feet outside. It's a little bit more than a 24 half. Again, instead of concentrating on places 25 like Dover, we're concentrating on places like 66 1 Vernon with our money and our resources and our 2 permitting and that's what's going on. 3 Right now there's a major concern in 4 the state about bear hunting. So let's put more 5 development up in Vernon and Sparta so we can 6 have more bear hunting because there's going to 7 be more conflict between people and humans as we 8 keep impacting on the habitat and building more 9 and more developments in the middle of prime bear 10 country. It just goes on and one. 11 One thing I just wanted to kind of 12 mention about the previous administration since I 13 did work with them quite a bit at the State 14 Planning Commission, it was true and devious as 15 well when they didn't like the proposal, they 16 buried it. They didn't want to say no, so what 17 they did is they put it on the shelf and they 18 hoped it went away. What we're seeing now is all 19 these proposals that they really hoped went away 20 because they didn't think they were good are now 21 coming forward and going to be designated and 22 that to me is disturbing because these are not 23 good Centers and the work really wasn't done 24 properly in the first place when it comes to 25 protecting the environments and really having the 67 1 planning in place ahead of time. 2 Again, we should be looking at this 3 strategically, not only for the county, but for 4 the region and we're not. You know, we 5 designated the Highlands as a special resource 6 area, but the Commission hasn't done anything 7 about it. You know, we've talked about having 8 sprawl legislation instead we're designating 9 sprawl Centers. We have no legislation but we 10 have plenty of sprawl Centers that are going to 11 undermine Smart Growth in the State of New 12 Jersey. 13 Again, going back to Bruce 14 Springsteen, Vernon will be a Center but Asbury 15 Park isn't, something is wrong in this system. 16 Thank you. 17 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I would love for 18 Asbury Park to become the next major work product 19 redevelopment. 20 MS. McINTOSH: Pam McIntosh from the 21 Association of New Jersey Environmental 22 Commission. First I just have two general 23 comments. Again, just on the Center designation 24 process. This is -- Vernon's petition is another 25 example of how that process is lost by not 68 1 looking at the whole town, just looking at the 2 Center and not the environs, the town as a whole 3 so that it's allowing for greater density and 4 approving greater density in the Center without 5 any continent in reduction in growth in the 6 environs and just resulting more sprawl than 7 would have resulted in the first place. 8 Again, it's also an example of how 9 the Center designation process versus plan 10 endorsement is also has its failings because it's 11 not through this process you are approving it, 12 you are going to approve the Center without 13 hearing a state environmental analysis beforehand 14 and then plan endorsement happens that wouldn't 15 be feasible that would have to be fired up front 16 without allowing the Center be designated and be 17 approved already. 18 Two specific points are on Page 4 of 19 5 of the resolution in the bottom paragraph, it 20 begins further resolved. It says the Vernon Town 21 Centers will automatically expire 18 months from 22 the date of designation if upon determination by 23 the State Planning Commission it can be shown 24 that time -- that by the time that the town of 25 Vernon did not complete the build out analysis to 69 1 determine accuracy of productive wastewater flows 2 to be generated by the Vernon Town Center did not 3 complete the environmental analysis of the town 4 Center and did not previously agree to water, 5 ground water monitoring program. And I just 6 suggest that you change that word and to or 7 because the way it's worded now, and the way I 8 would read it would be -- they would not do all 9 three of those in order for it to expire at 18 10 months, and I would think you would want it to be 11 that they would be required to do all three of 12 those and since they didn't complete all three of 13 those, that the designation would expire at that 14 time because the way it's worded now I read it as 15 if they even just did the -- to what they had 16 previously agreed to but not done, the ground 17 water monitoring program that it wouldn't be 18 expiring or this wouldn't be a requirement that 19 it expired at that time. I also have a question 20 -- 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Could you stop 22 there? 23 MS. McINTOSH: Sure. 24 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Actually, I would 25 support the change of that language. Paul? 70 1 MR. DRAKE: Yeah, I think certainly 2 the point she made is a valid point and I think 3 the interpretation has always been that they 4 would do each one of them and not just do one of 5 the three, so certainly the point she's raised is 6 a valid consideration. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Certainly change 8 the language. 9 MR. FISHER: I saw a shaking of the 10 head at the table. 11 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes, I am 12 aware of those three issues and we have -- we 13 will have no problem with the change of the 14 language. Thank you. 15 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The approach 16 we're taking going in -- 17 MS. McINTOSH: Also, I have -- there 18 wasn't any changes in the PIAs from the June 6th 19 date to the one that's dated July 16th that was 20 just sent out. I think that would be a confusing 21 point is changing the date, don't you think? 22 MR. DRAKE: Right. 23 MS. McINTOSH: So I spent -- in the 24 Vernon one I did find one change in the 25 environmental section that I'd like to ask 71 1 question about on Page 5 of 12 of the June 6th 2 draft final PIA kind of in the second box, there 3 is a requirement of a legal analysis for 4 reapplication of existing SCUMA capacity and that 5 has been deleted in the final one and I would 6 like to ask why that's been deleted. 7 MR. ZELLNER: The Attorney General's 8 office recommended that -- actually told us we 9 could not include that its legal requirement 10 because the MUA the town could not statutorily 11 require the -- we removed -- 12 MS. McINTOSH: Thank you. 13 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Let me just say 14 that that doesn't mean that the town has to agree 15 to look at the alternatives and to look at the 16 options available under that. There's a 17 complicated set of issues they're willing to take 18 a look at and try to struggle to find the best 19 alternative to address those issues of waste 20 water issues, but all we took out was the 21 requirement. 22 MS. MCINTOSH: So you haven't added 23 in a requirement so they look at all the options? 24 MS. DUNN SAMSON: I think it's 25 pretty comprehensive they have to look -- we sent 72 1 it out separately. You know, that they all have 2 sorts of requirements to look at their analysis 3 for waste water. 4 MS. MCINTOSH: Okay. 5 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Yes. 6 MS. HORSFIELD: Tammy Horsfield, 7 Sussex County Chamber of Commerce. First of all, 8 I'd also like to say that I was raised in Vernon. 9 I went to school in Vernon, and I have family in 10 Vernon, so not only do I live in Sussex County, 11 but Vernon is certainly close to my heart. 12 I've seen Vernon go through some 13 change over the years and I think that I applaud 14 Vernon Township for moving forward and bringing 15 in Intrawest Corporation. I think Intrawest is 16 certainly a feather in our cap, not just in 17 Sussex County's cap, but New Jersey's cap and I 18 say that because it brings along with it over 19 $600 million into the State of New Jersey 20 investment. 21 I don't think there's too many 22 companies throwing around that kind of money for 23 investment in the State of New Jersey right now 24 and that's a positive in moving forward. It also 25 brings to the table thousands of jobs, thousands 73 1 of jobs that are sorely needed in Sussex County 2 and the State of New Jersey. It brings a 3 perspective as a resort and brings another icon 4 to the State of New Jersey in addition to of 5 course our Atlantic City and our ocean seaside 6 resort areas as well. 7 I think it provides if you want to 8 call it balance again to the State of New Jersey 9 from the top to the bottom and I certainly want 10 to applaud Vernon for moving forward. I also 11 want to applaud Intrawest because they have bent 12 over backwards to make this work and they have 13 not gone through that with their other resorts 14 across the country, but they believed in 15 New Jersey and they believed in Sussex County and 16 they hung in there and they've gone through it 17 and they've worked through some challenges, some 18 big challenges in moving forward. I commend them 19 for that. They've taken a lot of effort. 20 They've stuck it out and they're ready to move 21 forward with a world class resort that New Jersey 22 should be proud of and Vernon certainly is proud 23 of at this point. 24 I also want to just take this moment 25 to let you know that more than three-quarters of 74 1 the people here today are from Sussex County. By 2 the way, folks, if you'd let us know you're here, 3 many of us are here from Sussex County because we 4 believe so strongly that Vernon is one of our 5 leaders as well as Sparta as you saw here today 6 for Sussex County. They play well. They follow 7 the process. They tried to work as fast as 8 possible through all that they need to go through 9 to make this a balanced project, a balanced 10 community and a balanced state. 11 So with your support in moving 12 forward with the Center designation, you bring 13 investment not just to Sussex County, but to the 14 State of New Jersey as a whole and I think we 15 should all be proud of that. And, yes, nothing 16 is perfect in its entirety, but working through 17 each step and getting through the process, I 18 believe in the long run you're going to see 19 another gem here in New Jersey. 20 So with that, I hope that you will 21 move forward with these Center designations for 22 Vernon. Vernon has really worked hard to make 23 sure that both of these Centers are really one 24 and they become one as they work together and 25 they partner to make Sussex County and New Jersey 75 1 strong. 2 So thank you and I hope that in 3 advance I'm thanking you for your support in 4 moving forward with the Center designations and I 5 want to thank all of you from Sussex County who 6 have come here to support these designations 7 because they are important to us. They are very 8 important to the survival of many of us who live 9 in those communities and we all live in those 10 communities and we represent not only as 11 residents, but people who work in those 12 communities as well. We don't have others who 13 have to come here and talk -- we're it and we're 14 from Sussex County and proud of it. Thank you. 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Mayor, just kind 16 of respond to the regional concerns that were 17 raised by Jeff an economic balance between Sparta 18 and your Center. 19 MAYOR: Well, my interpretation of 20 Jeff's comments in addition to his quote of the 21 day, was the -- he's looking at the potential 22 competition between the Intrawest village concept 23 and while down the road Vernon's Town Center, and 24 I will just say businessmen are speculating now, 25 buying up land in our Town Center, so obviously 76 1 these folks who have the experience do not view 2 Intrawest as a threat of liability of our Town 3 Center. They feel it actually will compliment 4 and play off each other. 5 There's a couple of other comments 6 while I'm on that that were made in terms of the 7 size of the Intrawest development which at one 8 point we were up on the mountain top and at that 9 point they were speaking to folks that were 10 opposing that and said, hey, no, we don't have a 11 problem with the village at the base of the 12 mountain, but we have a problem with the mountain 13 top. So now the mountain top is off the table 14 and I'm hearing about problems with the street, 15 with the village. They scaled back the proposal 16 with 1,600 units, now it's a thousand. The 17 comment was made that this plan hasn't evolved 18 over the last two years, it certainly has -- it's 19 been scaled back dramatically. Sparta and Vernon 20 I think will work well together. We have 21 different pockets of development in Sussex 22 County. You have Franklin with big box. You 23 have Hampton with big box and I think we'll have 24 tourism in Vernon, so we think there's a lot of 25 dichotomy and a lot of diversity in Sussex 77 1 County, and Vernon will be in many ways the straw 2 that stirs the economic drink in all of Sussex 3 County and we're very excited about that. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Come on up and 5 your name. 6 MR. PERU: Yes. My name is Austin 7 Peru from Vernon Township. Thank you for 8 allowing me to speak. I have been a resident for 9 33 years in Sussex County. I'm currently the 10 chairman of the open Space Committee in the 11 County, have been the past chairman of the 12 environmental commission in the Township. 13 Actually, in that particular environmental 14 commission won second place for protection of the 15 water ship in the State of New Jersey. So we're 16 very concerned in Sussex County in the governing 17 body was part of that process, in fact, the town 18 won that particular prize yet the environmental 19 commission did work. 20 My comments should be the State Plan 21 seems to indicate to direct growth in the 22 population Centers and not in the environs to 23 suburb and sprawl. To me there would be no logic 24 not to have a Town Center designation where the 25 town would have that particular tool along with 78 1 the zoning and other planning tools to direct 2 that growth in the Town Center and protect the 3 environs. As you know, without that Town Center 4 designation, the developers are not going to go 5 away. The population is not going to go away. 6 What they're going to do they are going to 7 develop and they're going to develop not 8 necessarily the way the town would like it or the 9 State would like it. So it would haphazard. 10 It's going to be impacting the environs. You're 11 going to have businesses that are going to be in 12 areas that we don't want those business. The 13 reason that they'll be there is there will be no 14 infrastructure to direct them to a Town Center 15 where they could be controlled, where there would 16 be some control over what type of businesses. 17 In Vernon there is peculiar 18 characteristics. There are some serious limestone 19 deposits that perhaps septic systems would not be 20 advantageous over those. They're great for our 21 aquifer, but once again, because of the 22 limestone, they're very easily polluted. 23 So perhaps a sewer system might be 24 something that might be advantageous to that 25 particular area and once again, the businesses in 79 1 particular that might be adversely impacting 2 aquifers as septic systems could take advantage 3 of that. 4 So once again, I would like to 5 encourage you to support this particular 6 application. I think it would be good for 7 Vernon. Once again, we would have a tool to 8 direct that development. The development is 9 going to come. The government doesn't own the 10 land in the town, the developers in most cases 11 own the land and they're not going to give up 12 their land and go away because there is no Town 13 Center designation. What they're going to do is 14 they are going to develop an areas that we don't 15 perhaps like to develop. So once, again, thank 16 you very much. 17 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. 18 MR. TROAST: David Troast, director 19 or planning for Sparta Township. Since Sparta 20 was brought up, I feel I need to respond. 21 Sparta Town Center is a community 22 Center focusing on providing the needed services 23 to service the 19,000 people that work in Sparta. 24 We do not have a full service supermarket. Did 25 you hear that? 19,000 people and we don't have a 80 1 full service monitoring supermarket. That's what 2 our Center is geared towards. 3 The Vernon center, and I would like 4 to commend them for their process, does exactly 5 what the State Plan calls for. Tourism in 6 planning areas four and five. That was one of 7 the carets that was brought out from the state 8 planning process that we are the playground of 9 New Jersey. Well, they have taken that and they 10 have embraced it braced and they have planned 11 well and they have a marquis company ready to 12 move in and do it. 13 Implementation, every planner's 14 dream. You have an opportunity to not only move 15 Sussex County forward, but the State of New 16 Jersey forward, and I urge you as a planner, as a 17 professional planner and I will testify under 18 oath today that this plan meets the criteria of 19 the State Plan. I haven't heard anybody in 20 objection willing to stand up and say that, as a 21 licensed professional planner in the State of New 22 Jersey for the Vernon plan fits the criteria of 23 the State Planning Commission and of the State 24 Plan as the designation of a Center. Thank you. 25 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. Yes. 81 1 MR. DESMOND: Good morning to the 2 Commission and to the Chairman. Neil Desmond, 3 Vernon Township counsel. I was going to come and 4 make a couple of comments of my own today, but I 5 was asked by a local resident who was unable to 6 be here and who could more eloquently put my 7 thoughts into words to read a brief statement. 8 Due to illness, I was unable to 9 appear before you today as you consider the 10 designation of Vernon Center in Sussex County. I 11 regret that I cannot join my friends, business 12 leaders, Mayor Logan, Councilman Desmond and 13 other distinguished local officials and leaders 14 today as they impress upon you the importance of 15 recognizing Vernon's historic and functional 16 village Center as the Town Center under the State 17 Planning Act. 18 My connection to this matter is 19 perhaps unique in its perspective. I am not only 20 a 48 year old and fourth-generation native of 21 Vernon, I was also the town's planning board 22 attorney from 1990 to 1999 and the preparer of 23 its current Comprehensive Land Development 24 Subcode, which won a Sussex County Planning Award 25 in 1998 for carefully balancing environmental and 82 1 economic objectives. 2 I am also a member of the Board of 3 Trustees of the Sussex Economic Development 4 Partnership and the Vernon Chamber of Commerce, 5 as well as the Chamber's legal advisor, both of 6 which organizations strongly support this 7 petition today. 8 From 1999 to 2002 I was the 9 presiding officer for Mountain Creek Resort in 10 Vernon, and a vice president of Intrawest 11 Corporation, a leader in the development and 12 operation of the village-center resort villages. 13 In that capacity, I first formulated and then 14 executed a plan to transfer ownership of the top 15 of Hamburg Mountain from Intrawest to the State 16 of New Jersey, and administered the sale for 17 Intrawest through the Whitman, DiFrancesco and 18 McGreevey administrations. 19 I also offer these remarks today as 20 a long-time associate counsel for New Jersey 21 Planning Officials, the preeminent state-wide 22 planning organization that supports Vernon's Town 23 Center designation today. 24 It seems ironic and almost academic 25 that we should be formally considering today a 83 1 designation of circumstances that were so long 2 ago actually established and had been informally 3 long recognized. For although the incorporated 4 municipality of Vernon Township has always been a 5 vast and diverse area of many square miles, the 6 location and viability of its actual Center have 7 never been in serious question. It is the place 8 where revolutionary war officer's stopped at 9 Winan's Tavern in the early 1780s. It is the 10 place where for many years the Vernon Township 11 Committee met and conducted the business of 12 Vernon at the Vernon Hotel and where Wallace's 13 Store provided groceries, dry goods, general 14 merchandise, newspapers and mail for nearly one 15 hundred years. It's where Vernon's first gas 16 station opened in 1924, owned and operated by the 17 town's justice of the peace for 40 years. 18 It includes the so-called lower deck 19 area near the train depot and Vernon Crossing 20 Road where the Lehigh and Hudson River Railroad 21 came through Vernon in 1881 prompting the 22 establishment of a general store, a small hotel 23 and a creamery. 24 Vernon Village is the site of the 25 original two-room Vernon School which opened in 84 1 1903 and is now the office building for the 2 Vernon Township Board of Education. It is also 3 the site of the Methodist and Episcopal churches 4 in Vernon, the oldest of which dates to 1837, as 5 well as the location of Vernon's Main Street, the 6 origins of which go back 100 years before that. 7 Today, Vernon Village is the 8 location of those same variable churches as well 9 as professional and business offices, bakeries, 10 art galleries and dance studios, a florist, 11 delicatessens, shopping centers, restaurants, 12 retail shops, a VFW Hall, gas stations and other 13 uses associated with traditional main streets and 14 downtowns. 15 Vernon Township's sheer size has 16 long made it a place of internal travel by wheel, 17 whether by horse-drawn carriage or car. The 18 distances between Vernon settlements and hamlets 19 like McAfee, Glenwood, Vernon Village and the 20 Township's many lake communities can be several 21 miles. 22 What is perhaps most surprising 23 about Vernon, notwithstanding its broad 24 geographical diversity and substantial size, is a 25 tradition with -- of citizenry to celebrate its 85 1 central themes and values, family, faith, 2 education, hard work, nature-based recreation, 3 congress, the environment and civic contribution. 4 But throughout its busy past and present and 5 against the steady tie of increasing vehicular 6 traffic demands, the Vernon Village never enjoyed 7 an opportunity to stake out local logical 8 locations for sidewalks, pedestrian plazas -- 9 public art, parking areas and a pedestrian 10 functionality and aesthetic values to support its 11 main street and its historic center. 12 Modern infrastructure and regulatory 13 requirements now a threat to conspire against 14 Vernon Village's long-term liability as Vernon's 15 Community Center. 16 In the absence of a comprehensive 17 Town Center and transportation planning and 18 formal recognition, Vernon Village cannot realize 19 its potential as a central community of place. 20 Investment or reinvestment in places and things 21 is a function of the promise of those places and 22 things. Promise is a function of vision and it 23 is a community's vision which is today's very 24 important subject. 25 The popular support for the plan of 86 1 Vernon Center enjoys celebrated throughout the 2 town by all objective accounts and thus tells us 3 that it needs only the coupling of government 4 support to fulfill the town's and reasons 5 objectives. 6 Any objective and empirical analysis 7 of the standards and criteria of the State 8 Planning Act and state planning rules tells that 9 it's not only not within the authority of the 10 commission, but its' expressed duty to 11 coordinate, facilitate, and support meritorious 12 applications of this kind, especially when a 13 place of strong geography and diversity seeks to 14 centralize its community character and 15 functionality. 16 It is understood that the 17 establishment and recognition of the Town Center 18 in some cases and in other locations might raise 19 legitimate concerns of stimulating unwanted 20 surrounding growth. 21 Vernon's circumstances are highly 22 distinguishable from those other cases. Growth 23 in Vernon has already occurred. These 24 improvement areas define its development profile 25 as its substantial protective open spaces and 87 1 many development constraints whether they're 2 physical or regulatory. 3 Vernon seeks to consolidate and 4 centralize its community character and 5 functionality, not expand them or watch them 6 become further diluted. In this important core 7 respect, Vernon purposely precisely mirrors those 8 the State Planning Act, the State Plan, the 9 Municipal Land Use Form and the stand town's own 10 zoning and land use ordinances which include a 11 model Town Center classification and far-site 12 criteria. 13 In enacting the State Planning Act 14 in 1985 the legislature declared that it is in 15 the public interest to encourage development, 16 redevelopment and economic growth and locations 17 that are well situated with respect to present or 18 anticipated public services and facilities. 19 The Act is replete with passages 20 that stress the importance of offering, state 21 coordination, cooperation and facilitation to 22 local governments who have undertaken 23 comprehensive, consistent planning measures as 24 Vernon has indisputably done here in an 25 exemplarily fashion. 88 1 The Act requires that the State Plan 2 be designed and implemented to represent a 3 balance of development and conservation 4 objectives. It is for this very balance of 5 important environmental conservancy and economic 6 interest of the Vernon Township land use 7 regulation received its prestigious award from 8 the County of Sussex in 1998. 9 The Act expressly contemplates that 10 the state's planning offices will serve important 11 local interests such as the promoting beneficial 12 growth and re-growth and respecting and 13 prevailing local values in the community 14 character. 15 The State Planning rules are even 16 more pertinent to the circumstances involving 17 Vernon Township. Vernon's desire to establish a 18 pedestrial-oriented area of commercial and civic 19 uses serving and surrounding the municipality 20 meets the very definition of core in the rules 21 for instance. 22 Although Vernon was never required 23 by law to have its master plan nor its various 24 land use, commercial housing, transportation and 25 environmental policies become consistent with the 89 1 State Plan, it has nonetheless consistently and 2 proactively and comprehensively done so. When a 3 municipality prepares a plan for designation that 4 is consistent with the State Plan and which in 5 this case serves the very purposes of the act by 6 centralizing solidity in local growth, the state 7 planning rule require this recognition. This is 8 not to suggest that the designation should be 9 perfunctory in this or any other meritorious 10 case. 11 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: This is a 12 tremendous letter. How many more pages do we 13 have? 14 MR. DESMOND: Just one. Trust me, 15 you don't know how hard this has been to get 16 through. 17 As a matter of fact, the writer of 18 this letter owes me more than he knows. 19 The future of Vernon Village and 20 Vernon Township is not only a figure of 21 crossroads, it is at a literal crossroad in 22 intensifying vehicular traffic, which in the 23 absence of modern Town Center planning and design 24 could forever deprive the community of the true 25 core and character and expressions the neighbors 90 1 so deeply desire. 2 There are apparently some 3 nonresidents who argue that to the extent that 4 Vernon is planning and seeking to become a more 5 desirable place in which to live, work and play. 6 This represents a threat to the safe planning 7 objectives and is likely to leave the population, 8 migrations and thus growth. 9 To the contrary, see Vernon's plans 10 friendly challenge to other communities to 11 undertake the same measurements to enhance the 12 quality of life in those communities. Quality 13 and community life, both at local levels and 14 state-wide collective levels is at the heart of 15 the state planning process. 16 It is a privilege and a pleasure to 17 have been present today if only by word and I 18 would like to thank the undoubtedly tired reader 19 of this letter as well as the distinguished 20 members of this commission. 21 Most of all, I'd like to express my 22 appreciation on behalf of myself, my family and 23 my Vernon friends and ancestors, to all of the 24 communities who have so diligently and 25 persistently pursued the designation of the 91 1 Vernon Center plan. 2 Sincerely and respectfully, Donald 3 M. Ross. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 5 MR. DESMOND: On behalf of Neil 6 Desmond, councilman and the residents of Vernon 7 Township, thank you for your fair consideration 8 of our application and your extreme indulgence in 9 me reading this letter. 10 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. Do you have 11 a letter as well? 12 MR. ZEOLI: I have a book. Thank 13 you very much. 14 My name is Richard Zeoli and I am a 15 resident of Vernon Township. I'm the former vice 16 president of Sussex County Economic Development 17 partnership and I'm presently the district 18 director for Congressman Scott Garrett who 19 represents Vernon. And I would just like to very 20 briefly say that you will not find I think a more 21 dedicated group of local officials and business 22 officials and residents who are as concerned 23 about protecting their environment as the people 24 in Vernon. They understand first and foremost 25 that their town is one of the most 92 1 environmentally pristine areas of the county, 2 it's a real jewel, tourists and those who visit 3 to be able to see and enjoy the beauty that 4 Vernon is and the people there, the leaders and 5 the business community and the people who are 6 behind this Town Center plan understand that and 7 appreciate that. So this committee can take a 8 nice deep breath of peace and understanding that 9 these people are going to do everything they can 10 to respect the environment for generations to 11 come because that's been the tradition of Vernon. 12 I've only lived there a short while, but I grew 13 up in Sparta, so I can help relay your fears 14 about Sparta and Vernon competing with each 15 other, two different economic engines, two 16 different groups of people commuting to probably 17 two very different areas of New Jersey. 18 I myself commute down to Bergen 19 County often, most people in Sparta, I think a 20 lot of them commute to New York City and so 21 you're going to have different people taking in 22 the shopping and the recreation and the tourism 23 that will generate -- who will have to offer 24 both towns excellent and the importance for 25 business that enhances and preserves the quality 93 1 of life for the people of Sussex County in 2 effect. And if you pass the Town Center today 3 and I certainly hope you do as does the 4 Congressman, I hope that you will understand that 5 you will be handing over that trust and 6 responsibility to a very dedicated and concerned 7 group of people who will not break this trust or 8 violate it and they will create a project that 9 will bring the people of Vernon together because 10 it is such a geographically large town and I've 11 driven around it a lot lately and frankly we need 12 that place for the families to come together and 13 the community to come together, in our day and 14 age, that is so critical and so important to 15 keeping our families safe, our kids off drugs, 16 all of those goals can be achieved with a nice 17 community and Town Center for people to come and 18 spend some time together. And also, this will 19 enhance and this will make New Jersey better. 20 This will improve the reputation of our State. 21 Give us one more gold star on the map for people 22 to come visit us every year and spend their money 23 in New Jersey, create jobs and overall create a 24 better quality of life for all of us. Thank you. 25 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you very 94 1 much. I think the next -- sir -- 2 MR. SULJIC: Good morning. My name 3 is Fred Suljic from Newton, New Jersey. I've 4 come to the table with two hats. The first hat 5 being the entire county planning director of 6 Sussex County from 1978 until last year in 7 September. We worked on projects -- more 8 quality. We've gone through two processes and a 9 cross acceptance plan. That was the place where 10 we discussed all the regional issues from the 11 State table, from the county and the 12 municipalities. 13 Vernon Township was right there from 14 1972 on when it decided that it wanted to 15 designate an area originally was the McAfee and 16 the Vernon Valley area and now it's changed to 17 the Vernon Center itself, the -- '94 and McAfee, 18 but remember it was Vernon Valley that started 19 all of this. 20 What I want to just indicate to you 21 that I know there was some comments that were 22 made about square footage and acreage. The 208 23 plan and all the other plans that we've done on 24 lake restoration as well as county Capacity. We 25 did county capacity analysis in the early '80s 95 1 when no one even went to work then. We did that. 2 We won an initial award for it, places like 3 Vernon and Sparta were foremost in trying to 4 employ those types of things. 5 In 1999 the Town Center zone 6 district was created, so it has been already 7 created. The ADT zone that surrounds it is ten 8 acres, it's not one or two or three, it was done 9 in 1999. It was zoned as a result of all the 10 hard work that the Vernon officials. Its' 11 business leaders, its' citizens have done. It's 12 been a collaborative effort. I just want to 13 bring that to your attention. 14 The other hat that I wear is I work 15 for a major consultant which is the consulting 16 planners for the zoning and the planning board. 17 Recently it was completed an open space plan for 18 the township and currently we're working on some 19 changes to do some additional items in the 20 environs to lessen that density. 21 Along with that and the preservation 22 efforts that the township has worked on in 23 cooperation with the county, how much better 24 would you want it? Centers and preservation of 25 the environs and everything that Vernon Township 96 1 done, I think it compliments the State Plan very 2 well. By the way, we were one of the counties 3 that first started with three or four 4 applications with Newton as a first regional 5 Center, Andover Borough over to Hopatcong. There 6 are other applications you have in Sussex County 7 and I dare say if and when all approved, we 8 probably come pretty close to being either first 9 or second county with the most designated Centers 10 in the State, and I applaud your efforts in terms 11 of reviewing all this data and I would hope that 12 you would support the application. Thank you. 13 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 14 MR. PRINGLE: Thank you, Mr. 15 Chairman. My name is David Pringle and I'm the 16 campaign director for the New Jersey 17 Environmental Federation. We have 70,000 18 individual members and an additional coalition of 19 a hundred member groups across the State. 20 I know we're talking about Vernon, 21 but -- just put on the record even though we did 22 join a letter from the Highlands Coalition 23 opposed to the Sparta Center designation. 24 Overall, I must be missing something 25 because for the last six months the 97 1 administration has had very strong anti-sprawl 2 rhetoric but the actions of the administration 3 hasn't come even close to living up to that 4 letter and, in fact, those actions have been more 5 than towards blessings for all of us this whole 6 Center designation process as coming front and 7 Center. At the same time the administration is 8 moving forward supposedly with increased 9 protection for key waterways particularly the 10 category one effort, there's no greater candidate 11 for a category one protection than the Wallkill 12 and the -- with all due respect to the previous 13 testifier, I think the leaders in Sussex County 14 have, in fact, broken public trust. The Wallkill 15 and the black street (phonetic) have been 16 degraded in terms of water quality over the last 17 ten years so they're not holding the Sussex 18 Counties natural resources in the public trust 19 the way they should. 20 This plan will increase sewage 21 discharge into these critical waterways. At the 22 same time the process here is severely flawed. 23 This should be a plan endorsement process, not a 24 Center designation process, but also when the 25 horrible Centers that were approved by this 98 1 Commission in May for northwest and Sussex 2 County, particularly Montague and Sussex, with 3 Montague and Sandyston and went through. We were 4 told that we got involved too late in the process 5 and needed to go through the planning and 6 limitation committee. Well, this time we did 7 that and what the planning limitation committee 8 told us, well, you can always go before the State 9 Planning Commission. 10 So we're getting the runaround. 11 We're extremely frustrated and we're not going to 12 put up with it anymore. During the State of the 13 State wonderful letter. Even yesterday 14 Commissioner Campbell announcing threatening 15 endangered species rule, great, but then that's 16 the rhetoric, where is the rules? We talked 17 about stopping sprawl, but it's not happening. 18 Let's review the record. We talked about a lot 19 of bills in the State of the State. We're going 20 to move through the legislature. Well, not only 21 the bills not moving, they haven't even been 22 introduced. The big map is delayed, the C1 23 effort has been stalled after the initial 15 24 waterways is a minimum six months behind 25 schedule, the storm water rule is still pending 99 1 and hanging out there. The threatening 2 endangered species rules as good as that could 3 be, it -- 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I appreciate your 5 comments. 6 MR. PRINGLE: I will be wrapping 7 up -- 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I was going to ask 9 you to wait and end public comments unless you 10 have something specific to Vernon? 11 MR. PRINGLE: This Center is grounds 12 zero on whether this administration is serious 13 about stopping sprawl and serious about promoting 14 Smart Growth. And I think while you need to look 15 at the totality to help factor that in. I will 16 be wrapping up. 17 I would just say that it's unclear 18 to the environmental community who is controlling 19 the administration's sprawl agenda, and I'm 20 saying the administration because the vast 21 majority of you, either directly represent the 22 administration or have been appointed by the 23 administration. 24 Who is controlling the sprawl agenda 25 of this administration? Is it the administration 100 1 or is it Senator Littell? Regulations haven't 2 been promulgated, bills haven't moved, part of a 3 budget deal? Well, some budget deal. The DEP 4 budgets got cut, bad hazardous waste bill gets 5 amended goes through, the center's process gets 6 an extra year, a Danville gets approved that 7 allows taxpayer money to go to private homeowners 8 who have secluded lakes that the public doesn't 9 have access to. That's not a good budget deal 10 for the taxpayers. It's not a good deal for an 11 administration who are supposedly committed to 12 stopping the sprawl. So I urge you to stop this 13 Center today and to the degree that you don't we 14 charge the administration to regain control of 15 their own sprawl agenda. 16 MAYOR: Thank you. Just one quick 17 point of clarification related to I guess the 18 only comment I heard specific to Vernon that this 19 plan would degrade the Wallkill River when, in 20 fact, it's a discharge to ground water. 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I actually got it, 22 but I want to get through. 23 MR. KILDUFF: Jim Kilduff, director 24 of planning and community development for 25 Hardyston Township and Franklin Borough. 101 1 You heard the letters from my good 2 friend Don Ross -- would you care for a power 3 point presentation? I'd like to thank the 4 Commission for soliciting all of this public 5 input today. 6 The communities which I represent 7 are contiguous with actually both of the petition 8 application today, Sparta and Vernon Township. I 9 know Vernon Township very well. I actually 10 worked up there. The Route 23 corridor runs 11 through Hardyston Township and Franklin Borough 12 and Route 94 runs through Hardyston. So the 13 decisions that the Commission is making today 14 will have a direct impact on these communities 15 and I would like the Commission to know that both 16 of the townships I represent are supportive of 17 Vernon's Center designation petition. I think 18 that's important because we are direct neighbors, 19 so the Commission should keep that in mind. 20 Thank you very much. 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Senator Littell? 22 SENATOR LITTELL: I wasn't going to 23 speak, but when I heard the comments from the 24 gentleman before the last speaker, I have to 25 speak out. Senator Robert Littell, 24th 102 1 District. 2 There is no truth to the statement 3 that was just made that the Wallkill River is 4 more polluted today than it used to be. The 5 Township of Sparta and the Lake Mohawk Country 6 Club Association together organized and stopped 7 the use of fertilizes on the homes, lawns and the 8 gardens in that area. The result of that and a 9 new system at the dam, they've reduced phosphates 10 by 40 percent in one year. They've taken the 11 Sparta waste water treatment facility off line 12 and have built a line all the way to Franklin to 13 tie into the system up there. We've cleaned up 14 the Wallkill River. Giving a category one 15 doesn't do a thing, it doesn't clean one gallon 16 of water. We've cleaned the water and I really 17 resent the allegations that we're not tending to 18 business up there. 19 Our people are responsible. We've 20 taken care of the land and the air and the water 21 and it's outrageous to have somebody get up here 22 and say something that isn't true. I'm sorry to 23 get excited, but that's my county and I've lived 24 there all my life and I know what the Wallkill 25 River was like when I was a kid and I know what 103 1 it's like today, it's better. I just want to 2 tell you some factual information. 3 Vernon Township has sacrificed the 4 taxes because of a court case on the Newark Water 5 Ship property and any other water ship property 6 that's around. We have a substantial amount of 7 property in Vernon Township that's protective of 8 the water supply. The Fishing Game land that 9 connects with that is very significant. The 10 property that surrounds the Highland Lakes area 11 is surrounded by the way we run the state park 12 and down at the bottom of the hill is the 13 Appalachian trail which runs from Maine to 14 Georgia and the Brass (phonetic) trail project 15 and the US Fish and Wildlife Preserve and on and 16 on and on. 17 Vernon's given at the office if you 18 want to think about it that way. They have 19 preserved an awful lot of open space, they have 20 preserved farm land, they've done everything 21 they've ever been asked to do and more, so it 22 seems to me that the evaluation of this project 23 is rather simple. They know what they're doing. 24 Their plan makes sense. It's fair and equitable 25 and they've got the people behind them. Vernon 104 1 Township has 25,000 people who live there and 2 their density is just as small as most other 3 municipalities in the area because they've got 4 the largest geographic area, about 65 square 5 miles in Sussex County. 6 We don't get taxes on all that 7 State-owned land. We don't get taxes on the 8 Federal-owned land. A substantial amount of the 9 property tax in Sussex County has to be picked up 10 by homeowners and the few businesses that we're 11 lucky enough to have. In order to preserve High 12 Point State Park and Forrest and Sportsman State 13 Park and Kitapenny (phonetic) State Park and Lake 14 Hopatcong State Park and so on. 15 We lose all of that tax income to 16 our communities. We pass the law on the water 17 ship moratorium offset Eddie, and I would urge 18 you to take that into consideration because they 19 have to compensate for that somehow. They have 20 to make that up by spreading the cost amongst all 21 of the other taxpayers. So I think Vernon's been 22 an outstanding community in our State. They 23 deserve the recognition that your position here 24 today will grant them and I think they ought to 25 go home happy. Thank you. 105 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 2 Anymore comments? Yes. 3 MR. CERENZIO: My name is Peter 4 Cerenzio. I am the consulting engineer for the 5 Sussex County Municipal Utilities Authority. I 6 did not intend to speak today, but there were a 7 couple of comments made that I really need to 8 correct the record on. 9 There was a comment made relative to 10 the Upper Wallkill treatment plant owned by the 11 Sussex County Municipal Utilities Authority 12 dumping sewage into the Wallkill River. I've 13 been involved with that plan for 25 years from 14 its inception. That plan preceded the refuge. 15 The reason why that plan was built was because 16 back in the late '70's there were 13 different 17 treatment plants or cluster septic systems 18 discharging into the Wallkill either primary 19 treated effluent or effluent without entry. It 20 was an abominable situation which needed to be 21 resolved. As the Senator had said earlier, there 22 were State orders to do something about it. The 23 authority was formed, we built the Wallkill plant 24 and we eliminated 13 inadequate discharges. That 25 plant provides advance secondary treatment plus 106 1 ammonia removal, process removal, infiltration 2 and ultraviolet disinfection. 3 That plant and the authority have 4 won awards for excellence in operation. They won 5 a national award for technology development for 6 its process that it developed to convert the 7 sludges from the treatment plant in the county to 8 a fertilizer which is used throughout the county 9 for landscaping purposes. I just wanted to get 10 on record and a correct portrayal of that plant 11 is some kind of a monster. That plant is the 12 reason why the refuge has clean water because as 13 the Senator said, the Wallkill was in very bad 14 condition years ago. It's in extremely good 15 condition now. The sampling program was 16 conducted under the water ship management program 17 this year and we found excellent quality within 18 the river. 19 The second point that I just need to 20 correct is the waste water from the proposed town 21 Center area from Mt. Creek and from Vernon Center 22 will not be discharged to the Wallkill River. We 23 evaluated many alternatives for proper treatment 24 in handling of that waste water. We did not 25 generate a cock-a-mammy plan, we generated a very 107 1 sound plan. The first thing we did is we did a 2 water culture analysis. When I say we, I mean 3 Vernon -- an outstanding concern -- based on the 4 depleted consumptive use analysis it was mandated 5 that all treated effluent from that area be 6 returned to the ground water. As a result of 7 that, we spent a year and a half searching for 8 sites where we could properly do that. The site 9 was located, an extensive study was done by 10 hydrogeologists and we have a site that can 11 properly accept the waste water that has been 12 treated and utilized it to recharge the aquifer. 13 We will be treating it to class 2A 14 ground water standards before it is even applied 15 to the ground. So that effluent will need ground 16 water standards before it's even put into 17 disposal debts. No treatment is required to 18 soil. It meets the standards once it's applied. 19 So we have a very sound plan and that plan was 20 developed through a lot of effort, over a lot of 21 parties in concert with the police staff. 22 So just again for the record, I just 23 wanted to let you know that we have a very sound 24 plan and the Upper Wallkill plan is a very good 25 plan. Thank you. 108 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Next comment. Yes. 2 (Recess is taken at this time.) 3 MR. BOYLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 4 My name is Tom Boyle. I'm a resident of Vernon, 5 I'm also a past member of the zoning and planning 6 board in Vernon where a lot of this started. 7 I come today as a resident. I came 8 originally for moral support, not really to speak 9 and I was moved by some of the testimony and 10 offer the Committee a perspective from a 11 resident. 12 I've lived in New Jersey for 21 13 years. I've lived in Sussex County for the last 14 nine in Vernon. I brought my family up there 15 because I felt it was a great place to raise a 16 family and I don't think I made a mistake. 17 The intent of the Town Center in my 18 view and in a lot of my fellow residents' view is 19 to give us an improved quality of life we 20 currently don't have. I'm one of those 65 21 percenters that leave the county to work and I 22 would love nothing more to have the opportunity 23 to open up a local business one day. 24 This Town Center designation 25 provides me and a lot of my fellow neighbors that 109 1 opportunity and I would like to ask the Committee 2 to consider that this is a bigger issue than just 3 a Town Center. We're very, very, excited about 4 it. We are looking forward to it and we support 5 it and I would like to ask for your support as 6 well. Thank you. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Jeff -- 8 MR. TITTLE: I have two quick 9 points. Jeff Tittle is here, but I do want to 10 agree with Senator Littell that the Wallkill 11 River has gotten cleaner in a lot of ways over 12 the last 20 years. Although it is on the list 13 what's called a 303D list which is the 305B list 14 which is the state and federal list of impaired 15 water wastes actually listed as polluted for 16 fecal coliforms, nitrates and phosphorates and 17 part of the reason is that we need to do upgrades 18 on the sewer plants and we need to do a non-point 19 pollution in that area. Unfortunately, I don't 20 believe that the development patterns that are 21 happening up there will do anything to make that 22 better. 23 The other concern we do have is that 24 there will be Centers -- there will be sewers 25 outside of the Centers for alleged development. 110 1 Again, in that compliance with State Planning 2 policy on the rural waste water systems. Thank 3 you. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thanks, Jeff. One 5 more? Is this a rebuttal. 6 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Off the 7 record again. 8 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: We'll give you 9 five minutes. 10 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The river is 11 on the 303 D list if it exceeds water quality 12 standards for any parameter. The Wallkill River 13 is on the 303 D list for phosphates, however, 14 under the water ship measurement program, an 15 extensive sampling program has been conducted 16 this past year and has found that the water does 17 not exceed standards for phosphates. In 18 discussions we've had with DEP personnel, that 19 river will be removed from the impaired list of 20 phosphorous in the next round. 21 Relative to nitrates, I do not 22 believe it's on the impaired list now stream from 23 the treatment plant for nitrate while, in fact, 24 just about every river in the State of New Jersey 25 had fecal coliform because of geese and other 111 1 types of animals. So the river is not polluted 2 no matter how anyone tries to portray it. It is 3 not a polluted river. Thank you. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Anyone else from 5 the public? Thank you for your input and 6 comments. 7 Anyone from the Board? 8 MR. FISHER: I would like to add a 9 few remarks. I'm new to the Commission, but not 10 new to the administration and I just wanted to 11 thank everyone today for coming and obviously the 12 chairman for letting everyone get an opportunity 13 to speak. 14 The governor in his State of State 15 and almost every week has articulated the need 16 for New Jersey to grow smart and protect the 17 environment and there's been no governor who has 18 done more already in his first 18 months than 19 Governor McGreevey and I want to just make a 20 mention of the kind of distinctions that exists 21 that I think are being brought out here today 22 that there's been in the former administration 23 discussions of Smart Growth and we need economic 24 growth and environmental protection. The tough 25 decisions were put in cause. This governor is 112 1 like on the budget not going to put tough 2 decisions and deposit it and sweep it under the 3 rug. The Governor is going to tackle the 4 problems that exist in the State of New Jersey 5 with thoughtful policies and thorough 6 accountability and implementation and I think 7 today is just one part of a larger agenda. We 8 can't take any one piece apart and just say this 9 stands alone. This is part of a comprehensive 10 agenda in terms of the DEP has been working day 11 and night to protect the water quality of the 12 State of New Jersey like no other DEP whether 13 it's C1, whether it's for the first time 14 implementing the phosphorous standards of New 15 Jersey and enforcing them or the natural resource 16 damages program. 17 The DEP's track record is 18 unprecedented and I want to commend them for 19 continuing that as well as the DCA because this 20 Smart Growth agenda requires economic growth and 21 we are going to make the tough decisions whether 22 it's in Asbury Park Press with a one-stop shop, 23 permitting program in Camden. 24 I just made note there was one 25 statement to the Intrawest being $600 million of 113 1 investment. That's great. Camden on the 2 Waterfront, hundreds of millions of dollars, if 3 not -- I've heard even larger numbers in that. 4 Asbury Park as well. Those things are happening 5 because of the DCA, because of the McGreevey 6 administration and I just want to take note of 7 the importance of those actions that distinguish 8 where we are at today, but where we need to go. 9 There's no question more needs to be done. I 10 just want to mention in terms of the legislature 11 and Senator Littell who is here today to commend 12 their action. We have two very important valid 13 initiatives that I can tell you that the 14 Governor, his key staff, we were on the floor 15 every day making sure that there's going to be 16 150 more millions of dollars dedicated to a 17 Highlands initiative to purchase property. There 18 is a valid initiative in addition to that that 19 puts I think something in the neighborhood of $82 20 million on the street for Brownfield development 21 and redevelopment. Those are things that the 22 Governor has successfully worked with the 23 legislature and passed just in the last few 24 months. 25 So I just want to take note of those 114 1 things and again commend the Commission and DCA 2 for their work. 3 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you, Curtis. 4 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Thank you, Mr. 5 Chairman. I also would like to thank the 6 officials from Vernon Township in working so 7 actively with the DEP. We, again, were impressed 8 with how responsive you all were in dealing with 9 some of these very complex issues and agreeing to 10 work with us and working them out over the next 11 period of time, the next couple of years. 12 I guess I also want to say that this 13 is a very difficult time in the process because 14 there were these 14 towns left at the end of this 15 process that, in fact, did have very complicated 16 issues -- Jeff was right about that. I think 17 given this extra time we can actually actively 18 deal with those issues and we can actually deal 19 with them without putting blinders on to the 20 regional implications and the change in policy 21 that Governor McGreevey is trying to achieve. So 22 we certainly as an agency are looking at this 23 transition period and trying to work 24 cooperatively with all of these towns and you 25 guys have been wonderful and responsive. We 115 1 thank you for addressing those issues and 2 realizing they were complicated and that, in 3 fact, we may have been more difficult in these 4 processes than we've been in previous times 5 before the policy started to change, so we are 6 appreciative of the fact that you care as much as 7 we do about the petitions. Thank you. 8 BOARD MEMBER: Thank you for 9 recognizing our efforts. 10 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you for your 11 leadership. Clearly for those who have 12 institutional history with the State Planning 13 process and/or cross acceptance and/or 14 discussions of all levels of planning 15 implementation is always going to be the hardest 16 piece and that if we turned our backs to all of 17 this, I don't know if the towns that presented 18 themselves today would stop the development 19 beyond those Centers. I want to applaud the town 20 for trying to create a growth Center designated 21 where investment can go or housing can go or 22 economic development can happen by also 23 preserving around that. I think that is going to 24 be the tough issue here. There is a reason and 25 it's Curtis' point why we have these 14 left. It 116 1 wasn't because they were easier. We appreciate 2 all of the efforts here by all of the agencies 3 and the public members. 4 MR. McKENNA: I just note what 5 you're saying. I have the highest respect for 6 Michele and I'm a big believer in plan 7 endorsement and that is where we should be going 8 and, in fact, we're going to be dealing with that 9 if we ever get to them later today. As far as 10 the rule -- on the other hand, I feel a lot more 11 comfortable dealing with Center designations and 12 continuing to address them and getting 13 commitments from these municipalities to 14 undertake certain actions than just leaving them 15 alone, letting them fall by the wayside and 16 letting them do whatever they want to do. 17 Mayor Logan, I have the pleasure of 18 knowing him personally and also know his 19 governing body as well as the representatives of 20 Sparta and counting anyone else. You have two 21 very responsible municipal governments with 22 serious histories of planning and addressing 23 environmentally sensitive issues and I have great 24 faith in them. I think this Center designation 25 is going to help them rather than hurt them and I 117 1 think it's a big plus for Sussex County and I 2 think we owe it to them and to Sussex County to 3 award them. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Roll call? 5 MS. McVICKER: Michele Byers? 6 MS. BYERS: I'm going to abstain. 7 MS. McVICKER: Joanne Dunn Samson? 8 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Yes. 9 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher? 10 MR. FISHER? Yes. 11 MS. McVICKER: Monique Purcell? 12 MS. PURCELL: Yes. 13 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos? 14 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Yes. 15 MS. McVICKER: Marilyn Lennon? 16 MS. LENNON: Yes. 17 MS. McVICKER: Brent Barnes? 18 MR. BARNES: Yes. 19 MS. McVICKER: Marge Della Vecchia? 20 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Yes. 21 MS. McVICKER: Daniel Levine. 22 MR. LEVINE: Yes. 23 MS. McVICKER: Edward McKenna? 24 MR. McKENNA: Yes. 25 MS. McVICKER: George Pruitt. 118 1 MR. PRUITT: Yes. 2 MS. McVICKER: Timothy Touhey? 3 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. 4 MR. ESKILSON: Once again for the 5 record I will be abstaining. 6 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Congratulations. 7 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you very 8 much. 9 MS. BYERS: Okay. Moving right 10 along. We have another designation in front of 11 us, Seaside Heights Town Center. 12 MS.LENNON: Michele, before we go 13 on, I would like to go on the record. I serve in 14 the capacity as director of the planning and 15 redevelopment of the Borough of Seaside Heights 16 and I'm going to have to recuse myself on any 17 action or comment on this petition. 18 MS. BYERS: Thank you, Marilyn. 19 MR. FISHER: I have to add that I've 20 been spending the last two weeks trying to keep 21 the lights on in Seaside Heights -- go ahead. 22 MR. ESKILSON: I'm back in the game. 23 MS. BYERS: I'd like to move 24 resolution Number 2003-10 designating the Seaside 25 Heights Town Center in Seaside Heights Borough, 119 1 Ocean County. 2 MR. McKENNA: Second. 3 MS. BYERS: Any questions or 4 discussions from the Commission? 5 MS. CAMERA: Joyce Camera, I'm 6 Seaside Heights Borough Council Member. Thank 7 you for having us here today. I'm happy to 8 represent our Mayor Ken Hershy and the other 9 members of counsel to express our support of 10 State Planning and appreciation of your 11 consideration. We certainly look forward to 12 being designated a town Center and we fully 13 accept our responsibilities under that 14 designation to make it a true benefit for our 15 entire area Ocean County and the State of 16 New Jersey. 17 MS. HOLLOWAY: Chas Holloway, 18 Birdsall Engineering, the engineer for the 19 redevelopment agency and the bureau of Planning 20 Board. Simply we endorse the planning 21 implementation committee's recommendation for the 22 Borough. We think that the Center designation 23 will assist the Borough's overall revitalization 24 projects. That's basically everything I wanted 25 to present. We're very happy to be here for this 120 1 action today. 2 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Glad to make you 3 regional Center any other comments? Jeff? 4 MR. TITTEL: Jeff Tittle, New Jersey 5 Sierra Club. I just want to say that finally a 6 place that is appropriate to channel the 7 resources and from the State as well as making 8 sure it grows properly and redevelops properly. 9 The environs we do need to protect are mostly 10 water -- thank you. 11 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you, Jeff. 12 MR. FISHER: No stories about 13 Seaside Heights? 14 MR. TITTEL: I have one good. 15 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: There's a big 16 sigh. 17 MR. McKENNA: For the first time I 18 actually got calls from residents of Seaside 19 Heights in support of it. I just wanted to make 20 that note on the record. Very nice people. 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I got a lot of 22 e-mails as well. I want to acknowledge that. 23 Okay. Let's move it. 24 MR. ESKILSON: So move. 25 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Second? 121 1 BOARD MEMBER: Second. 2 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Roll call? 3 MS. McVICKER: Michele Byers? 4 MS. McVICKER: Joanna Dunn Samson? 5 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Yes. 6 MS. McVICKER: John Eskilson? 7 MR. ESKILSON: Yes. 8 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher? 9 MR. CURTIS FISHER: Yes. 10 MS. McVICKER: Monique Purcell? 11 MS. PURCELL: Yes. 12 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos. 13 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Yes. 14 MS. McVICKER: Brent Barnes? 15 MR. BARNES: Yes. 16 MS. McVICKER: Marge Della Vecchia? 17 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Yes. 18 MS. McVICKER: Daniel Levine? 19 MS. McVICKER: George Pruitt? 20 MR. PRUITT: Yes. 21 MS. McVICKER: Timothy Touhey? 22 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. Thank you 23 very much. Congratulations. 24 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: The rules for 25 the next item Bill Harrison is going to come up 122 1 and talk to us a little bit about follow up from 2 our PIC meeting on the rules. 3 MR. HARRISON: Do you want the two 4 hour version or -- 5 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: No. 6 MR. HARRISON: Let me just briefly 7 outline for the members of the Commission who 8 were not in the meeting -- the basic provisions 9 of the rules and then go over the changes since 10 the PIC meeting and I'll do that in five minutes. 11 We're making very basic changes to the State 12 Planning Board -- 13 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I'm sorry. Do you 14 know what we need to do for the record? I did 15 say we should have read it into the record 16 because on the Vernon and/or we didn't. 17 MR. McKENNA: I thought we amended 18 it. 19 MS. DUNN SAMSON: I don't think it 20 was formally -- 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Can we just take 22 action. 23 MS. STERN: I think you should adopt 24 -- move to amend it and then vote on it. 25 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I move to amend 123 1 the approval of the resolution for Vernon with 2 the word or. Do you second? 3 MR. FISHER: Second. 4 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Roll call, please. 5 MS. McVICKER: Michele Byers? 6 MS. McVICKER: Joanna Dunn Samson? 7 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Yes. 8 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher? 9 MR. CURTIS FISHER: Yes. 10 MS. McVICKER: Monique Purcell. 11 MS. PURCELL: Yes. 12 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos? 13 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Yes. 14 MS. McVICKER: Marilyn Lennon? 15 MS. LENNON: Yes. 16 MS. McVICKER: Brent Barnes? 17 MR. BARNES: Yes. 18 MS. McVICKER: Marge Della Vecchia? 19 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Yes. 20 MS. McVICKER: Daniel Levine? 21 MR. LEVINE: Yes. 22 MS. McVICKER: Edward McKenna? 23 MR. McKENNA: Yes. 24 MS. McVICKER: George Pruitt? 25 MR. PRUITT: Yes. 124 1 MS. McVICKER: Timothy Touhey? 2 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. Thank you. 3 I'm sorry. 4 MR. HARRISON: The regulations as 5 they relate to cross acceptance and adoption of 6 the State Plan, we have tried to reorganized the 7 provision so the provisions usually meet the 8 municipalities are grouped together, provisions 9 relating to counties are grouped together, try to 10 streamline the process and improve the process. 11 For planning endorsement -- let me do this 12 sequentially. We deleted the letters of 13 clarification of subchapter of the rules. The 14 plan endorsement, we have setup a two-step 15 process where a municipality will initially 16 petition for full endorsement. They will -- when 17 status is done they want to enter into a plan 18 endorsement contract with the State Planning 19 Commission that will specify the obligations both 20 of the entity seeking plan endorsement and the 21 State Planning Commission and the State Agency 22 Members. 23 Once that contract has been 24 fulfilled, the municipality or county or regional 25 grouping will be eligible for final plan 125 1 endorsement. There will then be a planning and 2 implementation agreement that will carry through. 3 The State agencies are required to 4 designate both the regulatory benefits and 5 funding program benefits that will be available 6 at the initial step of planning endorsement and 7 on the final approval of plan endorsement to 8 municipalities so they will know what is out 9 there for them and what benefits will accrue. 10 We're hoping that will serve as a significant 11 attraction to municipalities including some of 12 those that have pending Center petitions as being 13 a better process to enter into. 14 For map amendments we greatly 15 limited circumstances under which map amendments 16 can occur. We precluded counties and 17 municipalities and regional agencies from seeking 18 map amendments. Independently they are required 19 to do that through the plan endorsement process. 20 Once a jurisdiction has had its plan 21 endorsed, it is -- other entities have precluded 22 for seeking map amendments that would apply to 23 that, the endorsed area, so basically map 24 amendments would only occur through plan 25 endorsement or in areas who do not have endorsed 126 1 plans at the initiation of other entities, that's 2 the basic provisions of the rules unless someone 3 has questions. I'm going to go through what has 4 changed since the last -- since we went over in 5 the PIC. 6 We changed the language at one point 7 to be -- we had indicated we were working on that 8 to try and clarify a little better what State 9 Planning Commission actions were that you were 10 not reviewing individual ordinances, individual 11 master plan provisions, but you were looking at a 12 package of materials in determining whether it 13 was consistent with the State Plan or not and not 14 endorsing -- not certifying each and every 15 element thereof but looking at things at its 16 entirety. 17 We made significant changes to the 18 definitions. We clarified definitions relating 19 to Centers, relating to consistency, relating to 20 cross acceptance, what constitutes an endorsed 21 plan concerning negotiation and negotiation 22 sessions and definitions of the preliminarily 23 State Plan and the State development and 24 redevelopment plan and the State plan policy map. 25 We added definition with a draft final plan, 127 1 final petition and final State Plan impact 2 assessment, initial petition, map amendment, 3 petition petitioner plan endorsement contract, 4 plan endorsement guidelines, planning and 5 implementation agreement, prior Center 6 designations and State agreements and 7 disagreements. 8 We deleted definitions of functional 9 State agencies because we couldn't find any. 10 Identify -- proposed Centers standard and 11 objective as those terms are no longer used in 12 the regulations. 13 We made some changes, some of which 14 -- one of which is -- after we sent it out we 15 discovered that we had missed something to the 16 public participation Section We clarified 1.6 B 17 as to the process by which a member of the public 18 can request to be on the list so they get notice 19 of meetings on a particular topic, such for 20 example the Sparta discussion today. Early on in 21 the process notice would be put on our website to 22 clarify that. 23 We also added to 1.6 B we had 24 neglected to put in the rules public 25 participation during map amendments and we added 128 1 that provision. We redid the public notice 2 section and we're still working on making sure we 3 picked up all the cross-references and there may 4 be some little technical changes to that and it 5 actually appears in the rules to make sure that 6 everything is there. We've expanded who gets 7 notice in response to some of the public comments 8 we got to make sure all relevant local agencies 9 are getting notified of actions by the 10 municipality or county concerning either cross 11 acceptance or plan endorsement. 12 In 2.3 we better defined what would 13 be included in the cross acceptance manual so 14 that would be clear to everyone. Part of that is 15 it will include a draft work program, a draft 16 schedule, a sample negotiation and so hopefully 17 municipalities, counties will not have to start 18 from scratch on those things. Obviously they'll 19 be able to make modifications provided in drafts 20 and things that would speed things along. 21 We clarified language in 2.3 C 22 concerning the process by which a draft -- work 23 program gets finalized. We redid the language in 24 7.2 B as to what plans are eligible for 25 endorsement hopefully making that a little 129 1 clearer. 2 John Eskilson had raised in 7.2 C 3 making sure municipal master plans we receive 4 priority consideration if the county plan had 5 already been endorsed if they were consistently 6 adding language to do that. 7 We revised the definition of State 8 Plan policy map in the language in 8.1, there was 9 definition on matter in 8.1 that we moved the 10 definition Section 11 Since we sent this out besides some 12 typographical and English grammar corrections, in 13 addition to the change to 1.6 that I did, we 14 changed 7.2 D to again with language added 15 dealing with supporting plan implementation 16 mechanisms to modify the county master plan. 17 We clarified the language, the 18 validity for a period of plan endorsement in 7.11 19 A, so it was -- the language was not clear and we 20 hopefully fixed it so the -- we have the time 21 that we discussed at the PIC meeting to the 22 period will run until the next scheduled 23 re-examination report and we clarified the 24 language that they would also it be good while 25 any amendments to their endorsed plan where 130 1 they're seeking re-endorsement of any 2 circumstances pending before the State Planning 3 Commission, so it wouldn't die while they 4 submitted a petition to have their revised plan 5 endorsed or any -- or if they just wanted to have 6 the existing plan re-endorsed. 7 We also added language to reflect 8 the language that was put in the budget 9 concerning Center designation, so Center 10 designated between January 7th of 2002 and prior 11 to July 1, 2004. That actually helps the rules 12 since the rule had been written that dealt with 13 Centers designated after January 7, 2002. This 14 further makes clear that the Center designation 15 process is coming to an end. We will be over it 16 and it will only happen through plan endorsement. 17 That's the basics of rule. If you 18 go ahead today it will be published in the 19 September 2nd register and there will be a 60 day 20 public comment period which would end on November 21 1st -- November 2nd date that's in the memo that 22 was in the packet. 23 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: I also just add 24 for the Commission -- 60-day process comments are 25 made, we'll have an internal group that looks at 131 1 those to see what -- waive those changes as they 2 come in from the public. So you're informed 3 through the process. 4 MR. McKENNA: A motion? 5 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: We have a motion. 6 MR. ESKILSON: Second. 7 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Any other 8 comments? 9 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank the 10 staff of going through the tedious work of 11 putting this rule together over the last several 12 months and in particularly hearing municipal 13 concerns and making agreements into contracts. I 14 think we've moved light-years ahead in its 15 processes by that single move alone I would 16 change today to give priority consideration to 17 the master plans that are part of endorsed county 18 plan again, moving light-years ahead of the 19 process. And I think, in fact, some of these 20 Centers have -- we may be able to award them 21 because of plan endorsement process because of 22 some of the things we're doing here today. I 23 commend you all for the hard work. Well done. 24 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thanks. Roll 25 call. 132 1 MS. McVICKER: Michele Byers? 2 MS. BYERS: Yes. 3 MS. McVICKER: Joanna Dunn Samson? 4 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Yes. 5 MS. McVICKER: John Eskilson? 6 MR. ESKILSON: Yes. 7 MS. McVICKER: Curtis Fisher? 8 MR. CURTIS FISHER: Yes. 9 MS. McVICKER: Monique Purcell? 10 MS. PURCELL: Yes. 11 MS. McVICKER: Peter Lazaropoulos. 12 MR. LAZAROPOULOS: Yes. 13 MS. McVICKER: Marilyn Lennon? 14 MS. LENNON: Yes. 15 MS. McVICKER: Brent Barnes? 16 MR. BARNES: Yes. 17 MS. McVICKER: Marge Della Vecchia? 18 MS. DELLA VECCHIA: Yes. 19 MS. McVICKER: Daniel Levine. 20 MR. LEVINE: Yes. 21 MS. McVICKER: Edward McKenna. 22 MR. McKENNA: Yes. 23 MS. McVICKER: George Pruitt? 24 MR. PRUITT: Yes. 25 MS. McVICKER: Timothy Touhey? 133 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes. 2 Are there any Commission reports? 3 MS. DUNN SAMSON: Can I request that 4 either through the AGs or through the office of 5 Sparta that we get sort of a condensed version of 6 process for the plan endorsement, you know, sort 7 of like a cliff note for those who have limited 8 attention spans would be great. 9 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Yes, we'll do 10 that. 11 MS. BYERS: In lieu of the 12 Commissioner report, I just want to agree 13 completely with what Joanna just said. I think 14 we have had some trouble with the Center 15 designation process. Over time I think it was an 16 improved process, but plan endorsement is going 17 to be absolutely critical that we have a clear 18 process that makes it very crystal clear what 19 communities need to do, what the thresholds are 20 for acceptance or endorsements and the public 21 participation has to be very clear and frequent 22 and be able to have, you know, date certain when 23 materials get out and what those materials are 24 and if they're not out then they don't have a 25 meeting. I think we just have to put some real 134 1 discipline and some real clarity into the 2 process. 3 I would like this to be an agenda 4 item outline Joanna asked for and the discussion 5 in probably a PIC meeting, whichever one works so 6 that we can plan this process out and let's get 7 the process clarified from the beginning rather 8 than jump in then try to catch up with ourselves 9 after the fact. Thank you. 10 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Adam, you got the 11 chart. 12 MR. ZELLNER: Got it. 13 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Okay. Any other 14 comments? No more Commission reports? Any 15 public comments? Jeff? 16 MR. TITTEL: Jeff Tittel, New Jersey 17 Sierra Club. 18 On a couple of items and I'll try to 19 be brief, I know a lot of talk today and a lot of 20 people here. Just one thing I wanted to mention 21 is that if you look at the census update that 22 just came out, the fasted growing towns in 23 New Jersey are Greenwich, Wuhlrich (phonetic), 24 Mansfield Townships and they're all basically 25 rural environmental sensitive areas, so sprawl is 135 1 continuing in its own group over 20 percent in 2 just a few years. So as we hear and talk about 3 Centers and talk about plan endorsement the 4 sprawling machine march is on. The other couple 5 of other points I want to make is that -- is 6 there a list of the 14 Centers because I want to 7 know exactly what they are? 8 MR. ZELLNER: Uh-huh. 9 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: We'll make sure we 10 get that to you. 11 MR. TITTEL: Some of them may no 12 longer be around or incomplete, had no work, town 13 didn't know what they were doing, the staff had 14 tremendous problems with them. They really were 15 lack of a better word crap. So I'd like to see 16 that list. And the other thing that I wanted to 17 address, made mention about monitoring and I just 18 wanted to ask about the monitoring on at least 19 three Centers where there's major developments 20 that are happening outside of Centers where there 21 have been citizen complaints because there has 22 been no monitoring by the Commission or the 23 staff. I wanted to know what happened to the 24 monitoring reports on developments in 25 Bloomingdale, the horse farm, K5 Montague, state 136 1 forest, Princeton development and planning area 2 five, many of these complaints were done by 3 citizen groups and put in the Sierra Club more 4 than three years ago and there's been no action 5 on them and I think there's going to be a fourth 6 one in Washington Township over land major 7 development so, you know, after three years I 8 would like to know where they are. 9 MR. ZELLNER: They are coming up. 10 Start with -- let's start with Bloomingdale. 11 Bloomingdale we've met with a couple of times 12 with the complaints, the town, the developer and 13 the other interested parties. We have put 14 together that meeting, COAH, office of Smart 15 Growth and the DEP and what we did was looked at 16 the -- trying to come up with a compromise to 17 give the town public certification. 18 The complaint sounds clean and the 19 developer and the town have been meeting. They 20 believe they have a compromise worked out between 21 the three groups and they are coming forward to 22 us with a resolution from the town -- and then in 23 turn require us to do a resolution for COAH, make 24 sure the town has protection. 25 The actual parties are working this 137 1 out as we speak. We've facilitated meetings, put 2 them together at the table and now they're going 3 forward. We're waiting for them to come back to 4 us at this point. 5 Princeton they've done their 6 monitoring report and we have agreed to work with 7 them on plan endorsement. They have agreed to 8 see plan endorsement. They are looking for our 9 assistance and we're providing that to use a 10 regional group. They are suffering from some of 11 the same core pressures around them from the 12 sounding towns, so we are working with -- I don't 13 have a report on Montague and on Washington 14 Township I don't -- 15 MR. TITTEL: Citizen -- 16 MS. ZELLNER: I haven't seen it yet. 17 MR. TITTEL: Find out. I just 18 wanted to mention one thing on Bloomingdale. I'm 19 not sure what the compromise is or what have but 20 of the planning limitation agenda called to that 21 area removed from the sewer service area and to 22 be down zoned. Charles Kushner (phonetic) is the 23 developer and I just hope that doesn't play into 24 anything. Thank you. 25 MR. CERRA: Good afternoon. Mike 138 1 Cerra on behalf of the State League of 2 Municipalities, I'll be brief. I have a 30 page 3 statement -- I just want to make a few comments 4 regarding the existing Center petitions and the 5 fairness of the process. 6 Listening to the petitions today and 7 the past experiences, just as preface and I'll do 8 this quickly. I recall a conversation I had call 9 with an outgoing Mayor two or three years ago in 10 a conference -- it was at the Irish Pub -- he let 11 his hair down -- why is it that the 12 municipalities do what the State asks us to do 13 are the ones that get hurt and when I hear a 14 petitions that have been filed in 1988 and I know 15 one is pending since 1994, 1995, that comes to 16 mind and it calls into the fairness of the 17 process. I think -- asking to send the petitions 18 back to the subcommittee and to review again. 19 It's clearly left a delay impact. 20 As an employee in the past and a apparently wants 21 to be employed in the future, to draw a sports 22 supports analogy is a four-corner offense. You 23 know, they're just going to keep on passing the 24 ball hoping the clock runs out. Again, it comes 25 down to fairness. These petitions, these towns 139 1 have doubly asked, some of them may be further 2 along the process, some may not be. They deserve 3 their day in the sun. They deserve to be heard 4 and they deserve to be heard quickly. I would 5 ask that you bypass these delay tactics, deal 6 with the issues quickly, deal with them fairly 7 and let's move on because the credibility of this 8 process is at stake in many of these towns. 9 A lot of the end users don't view 10 the difference between center designation and 11 plan endorsement. It's the same Planning 12 Commission. It's the same process and if they're 13 left out in the cold, I don't think anyone wants 14 us to tarnish the credibility of the process. 15 We're at the table and we want the planning 16 endorsement and moving ahead and moving forward I 17 would hate to have this tarnish and essentially 18 take one step forward and two steps back and I 19 just hope I don't have to make the same speech in 20 the spring. Thank you. 21 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Thank you. 22 MR. FISHER: I just want to say, you 23 know, putting aside today's vote is that Senator 24 Littell was in the room and he is the person who 25 requested that they be delayed. So I think if 140 1 you have concerns regarding any delay, it was 2 Senator Littell who put it in the budget. 3 The change -- I just want to make 4 sure that the terms from this body from the last 5 meeting that I attended, it was the intent to try 6 to deal with those issues and Senator Littell 7 asked for a delay. I just wanted it to be on the 8 record that, you know, from the previous the 9 record there was an intention to try to address 10 the tough issues and Senator Littell asked for a 11 delay. 12 MR. ESKILSON: Probably asked for an 13 extension and what we got was an extension to 14 allow this body more time to deliberate and give 15 a fair treatment and not the bum's rush to the 16 petitions that were left -- where we weren't 17 going to run out the clock and they didn't 18 deserve the bum's rush just having been in 19 municipal management worked on those plans that 20 it's not crap and it represents hundreds of 21 thousands of taxpayer dollars, thousands and 22 thousands professional and volunteer community 23 work. I mean they deserve time and what we got 24 was an extension through the budget process. 25 That's not a delaying tactic it's an extension. 141 1 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: Hold it. 2 MR. ESKILSON: It's fair. 3 MR. FISHER: It was an extension and 4 I used the word delayed to -- I mean the reality 5 is it was an extension. I agree with you that it 6 was attended to be the same. The fact of the 7 matter is the extension delays the decision, but 8 didn't -- 9 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: -- the planner of 10 Sparta was here 30 days ago challenging the 11 commission and challenging the integrity of the 12 Commission on how quickly we would move. This 13 administration -- I've been here a year. So I've 14 taken what I consider -- I won't call it a year 15 of crap, I'll call it a year of molasses that 16 pours out of the jar slowly you can imagine, but 17 everybody with their own special interest and 18 where we're going to grow or not grow in this 19 State. 20 What this commission is committed to 21 is the State Plan, limitation of the State Plan 22 and we're moving to that process for plan 23 endorsement. We appreciate the League's 24 participation. We're glad you're at the table. 25 We don't want you to go anywhere and we'll be 142 1 strong partners. 2 MR. CERRA: I apologize if I was 3 unclear. We welcome these sessions. Our concern 4 is that some of these petitions have been -- 5 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: As I say, it's a 6 new day. Okay. 7 MS. BYERS: Some of those petitions 8 were heard in the past and the Townships were 9 told to go back and make substantial revisions. 10 They were not consistent with the State Plan. I 11 agree with you about fairness, but we also need 12 to get an outcome that is consistent with the 13 State Plan. Some of that goes in that 14 list. 14 If they have not gone back to the drawing boards 15 and make substantial provisions since the last 16 time they came to the Planning Limitation 17 Committee, they may not get through either the 18 next year and they may end up at thus point in 19 time to go through plan endorsement which is -- 20 MR. McKENNA: I think the message is 21 we're prepared to deal with every one of them 22 provided they do what they've done. It's just 23 that simple. You can tell everybody at the 24 League that we're prepared, particularly the time 25 given to us to deal with every one of these 143 1 Center petitions, but on the other hand, the 2 municipalities have to tow the line too. 3 CHAIRMAN TOUHEY: We hear your 4 point. We hear it loud and clear. 5 Anyone else? 6 Listen, we have a meeting in August? 7 Have a great summer. Everything about sprawl and 8 Smart Growth, bring it with you. 9 - - - 10 (Whereupon the hearing concluded at 11 12:35 p.m.) 12 - - - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 144 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 I, CINDY M. MAINS, a Certified Shorthand 3 Reporter, (License No. XI 02093) and Notary 4 Public of the State of New Jersey, do hereby 5 certify the foregoing to be a true and accurate 6 transcript of my original stenographic notes 7 taken at the time and place hereinbefore set 8 forth. 9 10 ________________________________________ 11 Notary Public of the State of New Jersey 12 My Commission expires 07/18/2004 13 14 Dated: August 4, 2003. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25