Wyeth, Sarnoff sites stir municipal angst, The Trenton Times, March 29, 2002
Over-Development Steals 300 Billion Gallons of Water, Sierra Club, New Jersey Chapter, March 06, 2002
Center seen as return to small-lot houses, The Trenton Times, February 25, 2002
Fast growing suburbs get tax bills that match, The Star-Ledger, February 17, 2002
Compromise might come just in time, Princeton Packet Editorial, February 8, 2002
Sarnoff, WW planners foil bid to reduce density, Princeton Packet, February 8, 2002
Sarnoff forces zoning face-off, The Trenton Times, February 7, 2002
Decisions deadline nearing, The Trenton Times, February 5, 2002
Novel downzoning plan would reward research, Princeton Packet, February 1, 2002
West Windsor plan sets rules on building, The Trenton Times, February 1, 2002
McGreevey Creates Smart Growth Policy Council, Official Press Release from Governor's Office, February 1, 2002
Governor's New Smart Growth Council - The Missing Link to the State Plan? in "The State We're In," by Michele S. Byers of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, January 30, 2002
McGreevey names growth council, The Trenton Times, February 1, 2002
Governor Signs Smart Growth Executive Order, The NJ Environmental Federation, February 1, 2002
McGreevey Alarms Sprawl Foes, Mobilizing the Region, January 28, 2002
Aim of ordinance is traffic reduction, The Trenton Times, January 30, 2002
Layoffs Start in New Jersey as Towns Brace for Cuts, The New York Times, January 26, 2002
Anti-sprawl blueprint offered, The Trenton Times, January 23, 2002
Sarnoff shows pared-back plans, The Trenton Times, January 23, 2002
Sarnoff campus nears review, The Trenton Times, January 22, 2002
Smaller Sarnoff plan still may face a fight, Princeton Packet, January 18, 2002
Sarnoff downsizes W. Windsor growth plans, The Trenton Times, January 15, 2002
Wyeth, Sarnoff sites stir municipal angst
Friday, March 29, 2002
By KAREN AYRES
WEST WINDSOR - When BASF announced nearly a year ago it was closing its doors on the sprawling American Cyanamid site along Route 1, visions of exploding development on the property and traffic gridlock nearby sent many into panic mode.
The 653-acre parcel isn't much smaller than all of Princeton Borough and in the minds of commuters, business owners and local officials it would create a potential nightmare if it were fully built out under current zoning guidelines as a mall or office park.
Information from Our AdvertisersThe property's owner, American Home Products, now known as Wyeth, has agreed to cooperate with West Windsor's efforts to shrink the amount of allowable development on the site and reduce potential traffic generated by the parcel by 40 percent.
``Wyeth hereby acknowledges that it has agreed to a reduction in the floor area ratio (FAR) for its property from 30 percent to 21 percent,'' William Kelly, a Wyeth assistant vice president, told township council members in a letter.
``In addition, Wyeth supports the traffic reduction goals of the township,'' Kelly said.
He also said that even though BASF will cease operations as scheduled in June, Wyeth will not sell the property, do anything to lose control of it or submit a development application for it until company officials give the town 90 days notice.
That announcement settles fears that the company would sell the massive site to a developer before West Windsor officials were able to reduce the level of permitted growth.
It also allows local leaders to focus more on zoning changes at the Sarnoff Corp.'s property just north on Route 1, which faces a more looming deadline.
Sarnoff is expected to submit the final components of a plan for a 3 million-square-foot ``technology campus'' next week, leaving the town 120 days to vote on zoning changes before the law requires them to approve the application.
``If the planning board approves the application before any ordinance is adopted, it's the rule on the books,'' said Sam Surtees, township zoning officer.
Planning board members spent the past several weeks negotiating a tentative agreement with Sarnoff on a zoning plan that would cut growth from 30 to 21 percent and restrict uses of the 300-plus acre property to reduce potential traffic by 40 percent.
Some township officials say others are stalling the review of the Sarnoff plan, which must be voted on by the council, and consequently slowing negotiations with Wyeth.
Council President Alison Miller on Monday postponed a public hearing on an original proposal to restrict growth to 18 percent on both properties for another two weeks, even though most council members say they want to eliminate that proposal in favor of the Sarnoff plan developed by the planning board.
``It's a stall tactic and a refusal on the part of other members of council to make a decision,'' said Councilwoman Kristin Appelget. ``They're really putting the township at a tremendous risk and failing to consider the economic significance of these two pieces of property.
``I don't know how long we can expect the businesses to be cooperative.''
The Sarnoff plan, which the planning board approved 8-1 last week, would allow the company to develop 21 percent of its site with at least 30 percent of it being devoted to uses that generate little traffic, such as hotels or research facilities. It also phases growth based on when officials build the Millstone Bypass or a ``functional equivalent.''
-- -- --
The planning board opted to develop separate zoning ordinances for both properties recently after deciding the sites were too different to be developed under the same regulations. Planning board attorney Gerald Muller said that is legal because of the size of the two properties.
Township attorney Michael Herbert said the council can't introduce the revised version for Sarnoff until they dispose of the first plan, which Councilwoman Rae Roeder introduced and still supports. It has little support from other members.
Councilman Charles Morgan, who was not at Monday's meeting, said the council needs to move faster to make new zoning regulations official because current guidelines allow both companies to build on up to 30 percent of their respective properties.
``I'm dumbfounded,'' Morgan said. ``It makes no sense to me at all. We're only shooting ourselves in the foot if we delay on moving forward with the Sarnoff downzoning thing.''
Councilwoman Jackie Alberts, the council's liaison to the planning board, and Miller both denied any attempts to slow the review of the Sarnoff plan or discussions with Wyeth.
``I'm not trying to stall, I'm trying to get this done,'' Alberts said. ``It takes hours and hours to change any line in that ordinance. Any stalling that has happened is just a function of what it has taken to get to this point - to get both property owners to agree to the traffic-reduction goal.''
-- -- --
Miller said the council only received the letter from Wyeth announcing intentions to cooperate with the township a few minutes before Monday's meeting.
``I did not know what the Wyeth letter would contain until Monday,'' Miller said.
Miller said that although Morgan, Appelget and Alberts initially have supported the Sarnoff plan, which also forces the company to provide a right-of-way for mass transit, she wants to review it at Monday's agenda session before voting on it.
``I don't want to narrow our options until I know if it has support,'' Miller said. ``The devil is in the details.''
Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh said he also supports the Sarnoff ordinance, which is known around town as the ``compromise'' ordinance because it has been the result of weeks of talks with the company.
``I enthusiastically support that alternative because it accomplishes the objectives of limiting traffic generation while allowing the Sarnoff Corp. to undertake a realistic expansion of its site and thereby assure its continued existence as a vital part of this community,'' Hsueh said.
Tom Lento, a Sarnoff spokesman, said although the company tentatively supports the latest version of the downzoning plan, they still need to review the details, which have changed many times during review.
``We believe that (ordinance) is moving in the right direction,'' Lento said. ``We don't want to make a definitive comment because we know there have been revisions since we saw it.''
Kelly said Wyeth is open to negotiating with the township and doesn't feel the regulations for Sarnoff necessarily should be applied to the Wyeth site.
``We see this as a more enlightened process than forcing a solution tailored for a different property onto the Wyeth site,'' Kelly said.
Copyright 2002 The Times
Over-Development Steals 300 Billion Gallons of Water
Date: 020306
From: http://www.enn.com/NJ SIERRA ANALYSIS: OVER-DEVELOPMENT STEALS ALMOST 300 BILLION GALLONS PER YEAR OF OUR PRECIOUS WATER SUPPLIES
From Sierra Club, New Jersey Chapter, March 06, 2002
Trenton - Using landscape data from the Rutgers Center for Remote Sensing and Spatial Analysis (see CRSSA website at http://www.crssa.rutgers.edu/ projects/lc) Sierra Club, NJ Chapter released an analysis that demonstrates that over-development is robbing NJ's reservoirs and ground water supplies of almost 300 billion gallons per year.
These huge losses of water are caused by paving over the natural landscape.
"Sprawl and over-development are robbing New Jersey of its precious groundwater. With over 40% of NJ developed, we are creating a macadam desert" said Jeff Tittle, Director. "Just one acre of pavement stops the recharge of 333,333 gallons of rain water per year, compared to natural field or forest that was there before."
NJ's annual average rainfall is about ranges from 42 to 53 inches per year. That amount of rainfall, over New Jerseys approximately 5 million acre land mass, amounts to more than 5.8 trillion gallons of water. By comparison, NJ residents and businesses consume less than
730 billion gallons/year, or about 12.5 percent of total rainfall that hits the state. When this rain falls on natural forested landscapes, large amounts are recharged to groundwater, stored in soils, and slowly released to streams, thus replenishing ground water supplies and reservoirs.When the natural landscape is lost to development, paved surfaces and rooftops create large volumes of storm water runoff. Such runoff does not recharge groundwater supplies or replenish reservoirs, but rapidly drains to rivers and is lost to the ocean. Paved surface not only create huge additional volumes of runoff, but they destroy the natural landscape's ability to recharge and store water in soils and ground water. The combined statewide effect of loss of recharge and huge increases in runoff amount to almost 300 billion gallons per year.
Study Methodology
In order to estimate just how much of our precious water resources are being lost to development, Sierra Club relied on Rutgers CRSSA data. Rutgers data show that during the period 1984 - 1995, NJ lost over 222,390 acres of land to development, an average of over 20,000 acres per year. The Rutgers land loss data is broken down by land cover, to show how much forest, grassland, and wetlands NJ has lost during this period.
To conservatively project this data from 1995 through 2002, Sierra assumed the same rate of annual and lost during the period 1984-1995. The updated data suggest that NJ has lost a total of 343,692 acres to development since 1984.
Each land cover type (e.g. grass, forests, etc) recharges rainfall at a certain rate. Mature forest recharge and store the most rainfall. To generated estimates of the total amount of recharge lost, each the analysis based on land type lost to development and DEP average recharge rates. Then, Sierra estimated the amount of storm water runoff created by roads, rooftops and parking lots created by development. The addition of loss of recharge plus additional runoff provides an estimate of how much water NJ is losing to development.
This 300 billion gallon/year estimate does not include an estimate of how much additional new demand for water that this development created.
It is clear, however, that over-development not only robs NJ of precious water recharge (thus reducing available supply), and simultaneously creates additional new demand on this dwindling supply. This imbalance between supply and demand leads to over-pumping aquifers and additional pressure on reservoirs.
For more information, contact:
Jeff Tittel, Director
Sierra Club, NJ Chapter
609-924-3141
jefft1@voicenet.com
Web site: http://www.enviroweb.org/njsierra/Copyright (C) 2001 Environmental News Network Inc.
Center seen as return to small-lot houses
02/25/02
By LAURIE WHALEN
Staff WriterWASHINGTON TOWNSHIP -- When Matt Cox and his family lived in Jacksonville, Fla., they had a large yard and knew their next-door neighbor.
"But beyond that we didn't know many more," Cox said. "You didn't see your neighbor. But here we see them all the time."
Cox is among the first residents to move into Town Center, where home buyers find neither private havens nor secluded country villas.
The suburban development is being marketed as a return to neighborhood-style living for people interested in close-knit, small-lot houses with porches and alleys.
Town Center -- bordered by Routes 33 and 526 and Washington Boulevard -- is still five years from completion.
Cox, an airline pilot flying out of Newark and New York, was perched on a ladder on a recent day, hammering up crown molding inside his carriage-style home.
The Cox family -- wife Colleen and sons, Shaun, 8, and Daniel, 6 -- moved into the development in August.
As proposed, Town Center is similar to other walkable communities such as the Disney-built one in Celebration, Fla., where residents do not have to travel far for any day-to-day needs.
"That basically is a community where you can walk to places," said Colleen Cox, who lived in Celebration with her parents. "You could never leave there."
Colleen Cox said with their knowledge of the Gulf Coast's 1,000-home community, the family was excited to buy into the idea here.
"Basically we knew it was supposed to be the same sort of thing," she said.
About 37 of the expected 560 homes to be built by the Sharbell Development Corp. have been occupied. The development is also to include about 200,000 to 300,000 square feet of commercial space near Route 33.
"There are 120 units under construction with many expected to be occupied by the end of July," said Tom Troy, a senior vice president at Sharbell.
The development features town houses, duplexes and single homes and will occupy 148 acres.
"Town Center is the best example of what people mean when they talk about smart growth," Troy said.
Traditional suburban real estate developers would have used 560 acres of land to build 560 homes, he said.
Under the land's original zoning, developers could have built 144 single houses on three-quarter-acre lots, Troy said.
"Instead, the town takes a place that normally would have had about 144 houses on 140 acres and puts 560 houses there and preserves the remaining acreage that would have otherwise been gobbled up by that development," he said.
In Town Center, the biggest lots for single homes are one-sixth and one-10th of an acre, he said.
-- -- --
Residents do not mind the lack of yard space and point to the development's public parks and lakes as compensation.
Two lakes are to be included in Town Center -- one is finished while the other is expected to be filled by the end of the summer -- with more than a dozen public parks, including one especially for children.
"It's not like we're squashed in here," said Brian Coffield, who lives in a corner property and has a fenced-in yard for his Labrador retrievers.
Coffield said he liked being close to the public parks and is excited about the one planned by Mercer County.
County officials said they plan to turn 80 acres south of Pond Road and west of Robbinsville-Edinburg Road into a park used for recreation such as softball and trail walking.
Colleen Cox said the grassy patch of yard across the street from their Woods Edge home was ideal for watching her children play.
A few local real estate brokers have likened the trade-offs between negligible back yards with a desire to belong to a community.
"Everything goes full cycle. The city was the place to be for my grandparents, then my parents moved into the semi-suburbs and then my generation moved a little further out," said Beverly Hubscher, a real estate broker with Weidel Real Estate.
"Now people are trying to bring back the things they had -- sitting on their porches talking with neighbors and walking places."
Hubscher said many home buyers still do not understand the concept of a Town Center.
"The town is starting to develop a personality and a core. Before Washington Township was just sort of out there around Route 130," said Hubscher. "That's what they're trying to achieve with a (Town Center) community. That's the point."
Troy said such so-called smart growth communities are the wave of the future.
"The days of the big-lot division are less of a mainstay," he said.
-- -- --
Town Center has garnered praise from the state for being the epitome of smart growth, and despite the planning and design, the residential development means little more to some residents than a convenient location with access to major transportation arteries and a quality school district.
Brian and Malaina Coffield said part of what drew them to Town Center were the other things that seemingly make this development so popular.
"A school district that is good was a big factor in our buying the house," said Malaina Coffield.
The Coffields, who have three sons, also said they capitalize on the development's proximity to the New Jersey Turnpike, which Brian Coffield uses frequently to head into New York for construction work.
Real estate brokers said the combination of the township's waning rural character and access to major highways make it a hot spot.
"It seems most people are excited about Town Center," said Dale Michele, a real estate agent with Coldwell Banker. "People like Washington Township because it has a feel of the country but is so close to the conveniences that Hamilton Township offers and the conveniences on Route 130."
Michele said she will be curious to see how the township's development progresses with increasing property taxes and neighboring Route 130 development.
"They have to build the schools," Michele said, referring to the December approval of nearly $60 million for a new high school and a middle school addition.
Town Center houses, depending on the size and style, range in price from $170,000 to $350,000.
The average taxpayer in the township can expect his or her school tax rate to increase at least $616 per year to help pay for building the $50 million high school and the nearly $10 million middle school addition. Operating costs will likely make the projects even more expensive, school officials have said.
At the Coxes' Woods Edge home, Matt Cox continued to hammer up molding in the dining room and living room.
"Most of the other places we looked at, they weren't this type of community," said Cox. "They were similar houses but on half-acre lots, bigger and spread out. I always wanted a big yard for my kids and dog, but this is where we want to settle down."
© 2002 The Times.
Fast growing suburbs get tax bills that match
Increase in revenue offset by cost of providing more municipal service
Sunday, February 17, 2002
BY MATTHEW REILLY
Star-Ledger StaffIf what happened to property values and tax bills in Hunterdon and Somerset counties during the past decade shows anything, it may be this: in New Jersey's wealthiest suburban counties, the "ratables chase" is a race that can't be won.
For that matter, it may be impossible to agree on a finish line, let alone separate the winners from the losers.
In both counties, the towns that saw heavy development and resulting increases in total property value from 1990 through 2000 are the same towns that saw some of the biggest increases in average property tax bills.
In other words, towns like Readington in Hunterdon County and Montgomery in Somerset County were the most successful in chasing ratables, building new housing and attracting new homeowners and tenants. Their reward: Some of the biggest increases in property tax bills for residents and business owners.
"It's not a simple equation that can be translated into: more ratables equals more tax money, because that's based on an assumption that everything else remains static, and it doesn't," said Donato Nieman, Montgomery Township administrator. "I have infrastructure to expand, roads to plow and pave and patch, parks to build and maintain, sewage treatment plants to maintain, sewer lines to keep operating."
On the other side of the coin, towns that did little in the way of adding developed properties to their tax rolls also tended to enjoy smaller increases in property tax bills.
Take tiny Millstone Borough in Somerset County -- only one house has been built there in the past decade. From 1990 through 2000, it has, in fact, lost more than $2 million worth of taxable value and its population has dropped from 450 to 410. During that same 10 years, property owners saw an average increase in property taxes of just $187, a 5.5 percent increase that is the lowest in Somerset County.
"In the 27 years I've been here, there's actually only been one house built," said Ralph Nalepka, owner of the Millstone Sport Shop, a little hunting and fishing store tucked in a hillside along the Millstone River. "As far as school, we farm our kids out. For police, we use the State Police."
Millstone Mayor Alice Dorschner said taxes in the borough, which is just six-tenths of a mile square, are more or less at the mercy of the families who have children.
"Our taxes are governed by the number of children we have in school," she said. "We send to Hillsborough schools and pay them per child. The borough council also makes a concerted effort to keep municipal taxes down because we have a large percentage of senior citizens living on fixed income.
"We depend heavily on volunteers to run the town," Dorschner said. "The few paid employees we have are mostly town residents, so they've been willing to accept a salary that someone living outside the town might not be willing to accept."
Montgomery Township, on the other hand, has seen exponential growth from 1990 to 2000: an 82 percent increase in population, a 90 percent increase in property value and a 77.5 percent increase in average property tax bills.
Nieman, the township administrator, said the increase in property tax bills, which now average more than $7,500 per year, comes with the township's growth.
"As the municipality has grown, we have been forced to increase staff to provide services," he said. "You have to expand your employee base just to provide additional services. We had 9,000 police calls last year. You need a department to respond to those calls."
The story is similar in Readington Township, Hunterdon County, where Tina Gwidz moved from Springfield, Union County, seven years ago seeking "a better place to raise kids as far from New York City as I could get."
The land across the street from her house was farmland when she moved in. Now, it's covered with large, single-family houses, typical of the kind of development that added more than $650 million in taxable property value to Readington during the 1990s at the same time the average property tax bill has risen from $3,455 per year to $5,991.
"It's definitely getting more congested," Gwidz said. "Our taxes have gone up considerably and I'm sure they're going to keep going up. Is that a bad thing? It depends on how you look at it. It's still a nice town to live in, with nice people and we love the school. It's a nice community."
As a local business owner who has lived in the township for close to three decades, George Magalio has witnessed the change in the landscape and on his property tax bill up close, yet he remains sanguine.
"We bought out here because we like the open air," said Magalio, owner of Blaher's Office Furniture Outlet on Route 523, just outside of Flemington. "We've seen a lot of growth. You used to be able to walk from my house, right down the road, to here without seeing a car.
"And taxes? They go up, they've never come down," he said. "But we get good services, in terms of schools. As a business owner, taxes are really meaningless as long as you've got sales."
Copyright 2002 The Star-Ledger
Compromise might come just in time
By: Packet Editorial February 08, 2002
PACKET EDITORIAL, Feb. 8
The best actors have it. The great home run hitters and base stealers have it. So do orators and orchestra conductors, quarterbacks and wide receivers, Swiss watches and finely tuned engines.
It's called timing.
Perfect timing is a beautiful thing, whether it comes in the form of a bang-bang double play or a punch line delivered by a deadpan stand-up comedian. And bad timing can be downright ugly: an intercepted pass, a missed cue, a butchered B flat in the string section.
Sometimes, government is all about timing, too. President Bush's pre- and post-Sept. 11 approval ratings are testimony to the importance of timing in the political arena. National security issues that drew little interest after the Cold War ended were suddenly thrust into prominence when the war on terrorism began. For years, Washington was perfectly content to take a laissez-faire attitude toward business - and then along came Enron.
West Windsor Township knows a thing or two about timing. For years after the Supreme Court of New Jersey ordered growing municipalities to accept their fair share of low- and moderate-income housing, West Windsor officials turned a deaf ear. When the court later came up with the infamous "builder's remedy," forcing municipalities that did not meet state affordable-housing requirements to accept developments that included four market-rate units for every affordable unit, West Windsor officials still dragged their feet.
Finally, after Toll Brothers filed suit in 1993, the township woke up to the fact that it had to take its obligations under the court's Mount Laurel doctrine seriously. But by then it was too late; within three years, despite West Windsor's belated effort to bring its zoning into compliance with Mount Laurel guidelines, a Superior Court judge had gone ahead and awarded a builder's remedy to Toll Brothers.
And the rest, as they say, is unpleasant history. Now, West Windsor finds itself in another complicated land-use matter that involves timing. More than a year ago, the Sarnoff Corp. announced plans to expand its facility on Route 1, which is zoned to allow up to 30 percent of the company's property to be developed. After much discussion with neighbors and municipal officials, Sarnoff refined its proposal so that only about 21 percent of the site would be developed.
Meanwhile, three members of the Township Council - Rae Roeder, Jackie Alberts and Council President Alison Miller - voted to introduce an ordinance that would reduce the level of development allowed on the Sarnoff property from 30 percent to 18 percent. The Planning Board came up with another idea: a sliding scale of development that would allow a higher percentage for research space (which generates little traffic) and a lower percentage for retail or office space.
Sarnoff, whose relationship with West Windsor has generally been as cordial as Toll Brothers' has been contentious, nevertheless felt it had no choice at this point but to lodge a formal protest, an action that prevents a simple 3-2 majority of the West Windsor Council from downzoning the property, requiring instead a "supermajority" of 4-1. Since council members Kristin Appelget and Charles Morgan are on record opposing the ordinance, it is effectively dead.
It would be easy to accuse Sarnoff officials of seizing on an arcane legal loophole to thwart the community's wishes. But look at it from their point of view. If the community felt that allowing development of as much as 30 percent of the Sarnoff property was ill-advised, the Township Council could have started taking steps long ago to downzone the property - instead of waiting until the company announced a development plan, then worked with neighbors and township officials to reduce the size of the project to bring it in well below the level of development currently permitted on the property.
In the end, the more creative sliding-scale approach contemplated by the Planning Board may lead Sarnoff and West Windsor down the path toward a mutually acceptable development plan. Getting there will require good faith, patience, openness, sensitivity - and, when all is said and done, that one exquisite attribute that seems always to be just beyond the township's grasp: timing.
©Packet Online 2002
Sarnoff, WW planners foil bid to reduce density
By: Gwen Runkle, Staff Writer February 08, 2002
The Township Council does not appear to have the votes to reduce allowable development on two Route 1 properties.
WEST WINDSOR - Things are not looking good for an ordinance introduced by the Township Council to reduce the amount of allowable development on the Route 1 properties of Sarnoff Corp. and American Home Products from 30 percent to 18 percent.
Not only have Sarnoff Corp. officials filed a protest that could make adoption highly unlikely, but the township Planning Board has recommended the council not adopt the ordinance. The council may not be able to develop an acceptable alternative before early March.
On Wednesday, Sarnoff Corp. officials filed a protest with the township clerk which, according to state code, will require four members of the deeply divided Township Council to agree before the introduced ordinance, or any similar ordinance, is adopted.
"Filing the protest activates a provision under state law that requires a super-majority, four out of five votes, for adopting such zoning changes," said Thomas Lento, Sarnoff's communications director. "We believe the ordinance is so deeply flawed that it deserves that kind of consideration."
Sarnoff was able to file the protest because it owns 20 percent of the land affected by the proposed zoning change, as required by state law, said Pat Murphy, Sarnoff's general counsel and vice president.
So far the council has been divided over the ordinance, with Council President Alison Miller and members Jackie Alberts and Rae Roeder, who introduced it, in support, citing the need to reduce traffic in the township. Council members Kristin Appelget and Charlie Morgan have expressed opposition to the ordinance.
Now, either Ms. Appelget or Mr. Morgan - both of whom have said the financial implications of reducing allowable development need to be examined before determining acceptable levels of square footage on the sites - would have to vote in favor of the ordinance in order for it to be adopted.
In addition, the Planning Board, at a meeting Wednesday night, voted 7-0, with two abstentions, in favor of recommending the Township Council not adopt the ordinance.
Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh and Ms. Alberts, the council's Planning Board liaison, both abstained.
"I am in favor of a .21 floor-area ratio," Mayor Hsueh said. "But, on the other hand, I understand the concerns of the community and council about traffic issues and quality of life. I need to look at this carefully. To say yes or no right now is a bit premature. I want to have time to communicate effectively with all the parties involved."
Ms. Alberts said she could not vote for or against recommending the ordinance until she sees "a viable alternative."
But the majority of the Planning Board believes such an alternative could be fashioned, as long as the board is given enough time to further develop a draft ordinance created by the board's Ordinance Review Subcommittee.
The council already delayed holding a public hearing for its introduced ordinance until Feb. 25 so the Planning Board could get public comment on its alternative, but the board felt its subcommittee would need more than a week to incorporate public input and redraft the alternative ordinance.
As a result, Ed Steele, Planning Board chairman, slated discussion on the redraft for March 6 and asked Ms. Alberts to see if the council would delay its action until an alternative is solidified.
Ms. Alberts said she would try, but was uncertain if the council would do so.
Ms. Miller, the council president, said she would like to have the public hearing on Feb. 25 and just not close it so it could be continued after the Planning Board comes up with a final alternative.
The draft alternative ordinance creates a research and development zone for the Sarnoff Corp. and American Home Products' properties with a "sliding scale" of allowable development - the more research activity the site includes, the more the property is allowed to be developed.
It also calls for transit-friendly designs and requires traffic improvements to be in place before certain stages of building begin.
Current ordinances allow Sarnoff to build on 30 percent of its 345-acre property. The company's recently filed general development plan for a 3 million-square-foot technology campus calls for just under 21 percent of the property to be developed.
The plan also states that 25 percent of the project could be restricted to research.
Sarnoff opposes the alternative ordinance, however, because while the company's vision is to have more than 25 percent of its technology campus used for research, it can't guarantee that a market for that type of use will exist and be an economically viable option in the future.
"If it turns out that 100 percent of Sarnoff is research, we would be very happy," said Dean Lundahl, senior vice president of The Advance Group, the development manager for Sarnoff. "But don't tie our hands behind our backs with an ordinance."
American Home Products, which owns the 640-acre property known as the American Cyanamid site, had no comment about either ordinance.
©Packet Online 2002
Sarnoff forces zoning face-off
02/07/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Using state law to their advantage, Sarnoff Corp. officials filed a protest yesterday that requires four members of the sharply-divided township council to agree before proposed ordinances are adopted reducing the amount of allowable growth on Sarnoff's Route 1 site.
Sarnoff lawyer Patrick Murphy said the protest, filed at the township clerk's office yesterday afternoon, objects to the proposed zoning ordinance that would set growth levels at 18 percent of the property and any other ordinance that may be developed that sets similar levels.
According to state code, the protest makes it necessary for four members of the Township Council, known as a "supermajority," to approve zoning changes instead of three members. The change means either Kristin Appelget or Charles Morgan, both of whom have repeatedly objected to such proposals, would have to agree to new zoning for it to be enacted.
"It's a very smart tactical move in terms of protecting their interests," Morgan said. "I love the fact that they've done it now. It forces those who are fashioning whatever ordinance to make sure they've addressed Kristin's and my concerns."
The planning board last night voted to recommend the township council not adopt a level of 18 percent on both properties. Jackie Alberts, the council's planning board liaison, and Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh abstained.
"Until I see an alternative, I can't vote on this," Alberts said.
"I'm in favor of 21 percent," Hsueh said. "But on the other hand, I understand the concern about traffic. I don't want to put myself in a compromise position in terms of voting yes or no so I can communicate with the community."
Company officials said yesterday they filed the protest because they spent a year revamping plans for a 3 million-square-foot technology campus to meet traffic and design concerns expressed by nearby residents and they don't want to be forced to alter plans again to conform to new ordinances.
"We spent a year and a lot of money building that general development plan," Murphy said.
Sarnoff was able to file the protest because it owns 20 percent of the land affected by the zoning change.
Current ordinances allow Sarnoff to build on 30 percent of its 345-acre property. The company's plans for the technology campus call for 21 percent to be developed.
The council is slated to hold a public hearing on Feb. 25 to review the ordinance the planning board voted against last night. It was first recommended by Rae Roeder, who maintained her support for it yesterday.
"There are some people who are going to have to make difficult decisions," Roeder said. "If they want to say no on the ordinance, they'll be voting yes on massive development."
Appelget and Morgan have repeatedly said township politicians need to look at the financial implications of reducing the allowable development before determining acceptable levels of square footage on the sites.
The planning board also reviewed another proposal last night that would set the amount of allowable development on the Sarnoff and American Cyanamid tracts based on the percentage of research space allocated for the sites. Those who designed the proposal, including Alberts, claim research space requires fewer employees, and consequently fewer cars to worsen local traffic problems.
The proposal also would force both companies to make traffic improvements before building.
In a letter to Township Zoning Officer Sam Surtees, Sarnoff lawyer Kevin Moore said the company objects to the proposal because it doesn't give Sarnoff credit for voluntarily altering the plan for the campus in response to local concerns and makes it difficult to market the property.
© 2002 The Times
02/05/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- More than a year of debate over levels of acceptable growth on the Sarnoff Corp. and American Cyanamid sites must come to a close within the next few months for any zoning changes to be enacted in time to control Sarnoff's plans for a Technology Campus.
Township Zoning Officer Sam Surtees deemed Sarnoff's general development plan for 3 million square feet of growth on 21 percent of the property incomplete when it was filed a few weeks ago, but he said yesterday he expects the company will submit the final components by the end of the month.
At that point, Surtees will have 45 days to formally deem it complete and state law will force West Windsor officials to review Sarnoff's plans within 120 days or the plan automatically will be approved.
While some political leaders said yesterday they are determined to finalize plans to reduce allowable square footage within the next few weeks to aid the review of the plans, others said they must thoroughly review the fiscal and traffic implications of zoning on the township's largest commercial properties before making any changes.
"I wouldn't call it a race against time, but I would call it important for us to act in a timely fashion so we can preserve equity between the two properties and control traffic on the Route 1 Corridor," said Alison Miller, township council president.
"If we don't show the region that we are responsible and we see there is a problem, they will simply move and dissolve our problem for us and that wouldn't be good for the neighborhoods surrounding any road that could be potentially widened."
Under current zoning, Sarnoff is allowed to build on 30 percent of its property, which would clearly accommodate current plans at 21 percent.
But some township officials want to push that figure down to 18 percent. The planning board is scheduled to review a proposed ordinance tomorrow that would set the level based on the percentage of the property that will be used for research.
Whatever zoning ordinance is in place at the time of the final approval will be used to determine what is acceptable on the property, Surtees said.
"Our process in this country is a slow and messy one, but that's what makes it good," said Charles Morgan, a township council member. "These are big decisions and we will look foolish if we jump precipitously without knowing what we're doing."
Morgan and fellow council member Kristin Appelget said political leaders need to consider how reducing levels of growth will shrink the tax base.
"It's irresponsible on the part of the people who are pushing to get this through to not look at the real economic factors that are involved in this," Appelget said.
Jackie Alberts, township council liaison to the planning board, said the earlier the council votes on new zoning for the property, the easier it is for both parties to review the plans.
"It's kinder to the town and it's kinder to the applicant that we do it sooner rather than later," Alberts said. "You don't want to get into a situation where you're midway through the township's review and there is a zoning change that requires a potential re-engineering."
© 2002 The Times
Novel downzoning plan would reward research
By: Gwen Runkle, Staff Writer February 01, 2002
West Windsor panel urges 'sliding scale' of development.
WEST WINDSOR - The Township Council is expected to delay voting on a downzoning ordinance it recently introduced so the Planning Board can flesh out a possible alternative based on a sliding-scale concept.
The Township Council was scheduled to vote on the downzoning ordinance, which would reduce the amount of allowable development on both Sarnoff Corp. and American Cyanamid's Route 1 properties from 30 percent to 18 percent, on Feb. 11 after having a public hearing.
But now that the Planning Board's Ordinance Review Subcommittee has come up with an alternative, which was unveiled at a Planning Board meeting Wednesday, the council indicated it is willing to extend the clock in order to examine the plan.
"We're putting off the public hearing originally scheduled for the 11th until Feb. 25," said Council President Alison Miller, who supported the original downzoning ordinance. "We're doing this because we want to work with the Planning Board. It doesn't mean we're totally happy with (the alternative ordinance), but I'm eagerly awaiting our conversation Monday."
She said the council plans to discuss the alternative ordinance at its agenda session Monday.
The alternative ordinance creates a research and development zone for the Sarnoff Corp. and American Cyanamid properties with a "sliding scale" of allowable development - the more research activity the site includes, the more the property is allowed to be developed.
For instance, according to the proposal, a company could develop 15 percent of its property if 20 percent were research, 18 percent if 35 percent were research and 21 percent if 50 percent were research.
In its new general development plan, Sarnoff has proposed building a 3 million-square-foot technology campus on a little less than 21 percent of its 345-acre property.
The plan states that 25 percent of the total 3 million-square-foot project could be restricted to research. That 25 percent comes from the company's expansion of its current 600,000- square-foot facility to 750,000 square feet.
And while Sarnoff is still analyzing the alternative ordinance and plans to make formal comments at the Planning Board's Feb. 6 meeting, Pat Murphy, Sarnoff's vice president, did express some concern about the ordinance.
"We are uncomfortable restricting a certain percentage for research and development, because today (our company) is for research and we hope it is that way indefinitely and tend to continue in that direction, but restricting that way can affect property values," he said.
But the subcommittee stressed the reasoning behind the sliding scale was to create a better way to reach one of the main goals of the council's downzoning ordinance - reducing peak-hour traffic by at least 40 percent at full buildout.
"Traffic reduction is not just related to floor-area ratio," said subcommittee chairman Steve Decter. "It is also related to the mix of uses of a property, and office has a much higher traffic impact than research."
According to Gary Davies, township traffic consultant, research generates 40 percent less traffic than office for the same amount of floor space.
Other traffic reduction provisions in the alternative ordinance include requiring rapid transit rights-of-way and transit-friendly development designs as well as proper staging of structure and road construction.
Representatives from American Home Products, which owns the 640-acre property formerly known as the American Cyanamid site that borders Route 1, Quakerbridge Road and Clarksville Road, said they had no comment on the alternative ordinance because plans for developing the property have not been completed.
"We still haven't made a decision about the property," said Diana Blankman, a company spokeswoman. "But we are getting closer and should have some plans by mid to late February."
©Packet Online 2002
West Windsor plan sets rules on building
02/01/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Any developer who wants to build more than 1.5 million square feet of office or research space on the American Cyanamid property would have to construct an overpass at Route 1 and Nassau Park Boulevard, according to a proposed ordinance discussed this week at the township planning board meeting.
The stipulation marks one of many attempts by a planning board subcommittee that drafted the ordinance to reduce traffic in the area by forcing developers at American Cyanamid and Sarnoff Corp. to make road improvements before building facilities that are likely to place thousands more vehicles on already congested local roads.
The proposed ordinance also mandates that the Millstone Bypass, or some functional equivalent, be built before Sarnoff Corp. can build more than 1.2 million square feet of space.
"This is a work in progress," said Steve Decter, who is chairman of the planning board's ordinance review committee and presented details of the ordinance at Wednesday night's planning board meeting.
The ordinance also would allow both companies to develop a higher percentage of their properties if they designate a greater proportion for research space, which typically produces fewer cars than office space.
Current zoning allows growth on 30 percent of both properties. The draft of the new ordinance suggests growth on 15 percent if 20 percent of the property is used for research; on 18 percent if 35 percent is research; and on 21 percent if 50 percent is research.
The new ordinance represents a major redrafting of an ordinance first introduced by Councilwoman Rae Roeder that called for allowing development on 18 percent of both sites regardless of research levels.
Planning board members on Wednesday postponed discussing the details of the draft until next Wednesday's meeting because many hadn't yet reviewed the document.
"I consider this ordinance and its implications to the property owners and this township to be magnificent," said Bill Benfer, a subcommittee member. "We need to do this right and we need more time."
As a result, the township council postponed a public hearing on the subject until Feb. 24.
Decter said the proposed ordinance would meet the subcommittee's goal of reducing traffic by 50 percent while fostering the area's image as a technological hub.
Sarnoff and American Cyanamid officials are slated to respond to the proposal next week.
Sarnoff recently filed plans with the township for a technology campus that calls for more than 3 million square feet of growth on just short of 21 percent of the 335-acre campus.
Patrick Murphy, Sarnoff's general counsel and a company vice president, said Sarnoff officials haven't yet reviewed the proposed ordinance.
"We need some time to study it," Murphy said. "It has serious consequences."
Murphy said he's unclear how the township will designate "office" versus "research" space and also said it's difficult to say how the property will be used until companies interested in renting space approach Sarnoff officials. Much of the technology campus will serve Sarnoff and its spinoff operations, but some square footage will be rented to other companies.
"It's very hard to predict what will come," Murphy said. "It's somewhat market dependent."
BASF is slated to vacate the American Cyanamid site this summer, but officials from American Home Products, which owns the property, have declined to say what they will do with the Route 1 site.
© 2002 The Times
McGreevey names growth council
02/01/02
By LARRY HANOVER
Staff WriterTRENTON -- One week after gutting the Office of State Planning, Gov. McGreevey has won applause from anti-sprawl groups by issuing an executive order establishing a Smart Growth Policy Council.
The 12-member council will include the commissioners of the departments of Transportation, Environmental Protection, Community Affairs and Agriculture. It will be chaired by a yet-to-be-named senior policy adviser from the governor's staff.
Sue Burrows of New Jersey Future, a smart-growth group, lauded McGreevey's executive order as a historic move.
"They have moved into the major leagues here on smart growth," she said.
The executive order calls on the panel to ensure that state agencies incorporate the principles of smart growth and the State Development and Redevelopment Plan -- the voluntary blueprint for guiding growth -- into their spending, policies and regulations. Agencies will be required to prepare an impact statement to determine the effects of any proposed action on smart growth.
McGreevey came under fire last week when the administration laid off 15 planners, architects and mapmakers, leaving a staff of five in the Office of State Planning.
The move came as 600 non-civil service employees were laid off statewide.
Although a McGreevey spokesman said yesterday's action was simply fulfilling a campaign promise, Jeff Tittel of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club said he believed the state-planning layoffs were an inadvertent snafu that embarrassed the administration into moving up its timetable.
"That's OK. It's a victory," he said.
The state planning office will remain within the Department of Community Affairs, although each state department will provide technical assistance to the newly created council, DCA Commissioner Susan Bass Levin said.
She said the overhaul of the office is going according to plan.
"Yes, this will be the first of many reorganizations in state government," Levin said. "We'll be doing things better and more efficiently to put resources where they're needed and make the precepts of smart growth a reality."
The executive order also authorizes the attorney general to intervene on behalf of municipalities in cases of statewide significance where they are sued by developers and have a plan consistent with smart-growth objectives.
William Dressel of the New Jersey State League of Municipalities said McGreevey's action is a mixed bag. He is pleased to see the state have to follow its own State Plan, but said the league may have to drop its support of the plan if the administration starts forcing municipalities into following it.
The executive order also is intended to ensure that the state's massive school construction program is done in a way to revitalize communities.
© 2002 The Times
Governor Signs Smart Growth Executive Order
Environmentalists Praise Effort to Curb SprawlTrenton: NJ The NJ Environmental Federation (NJEF) praised Governor McGreevey,s signing today of a smart growth Executive Order, calling it "a significant step toward stopping sprawl.
The Executive Order establishes a Smart Growth Policy Council (SGPC), housed and chaired in the Governor's Office, and charges it with implementing smart growth principles and State Plan policies throughout State government.
"The Governor's Executive Order fulfills a campaign promise and demonstrates his commitment to implementing the State Plan, stopping sprawl, and promoting smart growth, stated David Pringle, NJEF's Campaign Director. "After 8 years of an Administration of almost all talk and very little action on this issue, it's significant and refreshing that this is one of the very first acts of the new Governor clearly it brings these issues to the fore and makes the Governor accountable for them.
Pringle noted some of the key provisions in the Executive Order:
- Creates the SGPC -- consisting of key members of the Governor's cabinet and other relevant State agencies, and chaired and housed in the Governor's Office raising the profile of, and the Governor,s accountability to, smart growth and the State Plan;
- Ensures State spending programs and rules and regulations,, including school construction, and 'actions are consistent with the principles of smart growth and the State Plan,; and
- Directs the State Attorney General to defend and/or intervene on behalf of municipalities, counties or regional entities that have adopted plans that have been endorsed by the State Planning Commission (SPC) or that are consistent with major smart growth objectives.
"Sprawl degrades the State,s natural resources, raises property taxes, increases traffic and congestion, and otherwise negatively impacts the high quality of life, New Jerseyans so richly deserve, concluded Pringle. "With a revitalized Office of State Plan and SPC, both of which work with local government, the SGPC with its focus on State government can provide the Governor with a new, original, and effective 1, 2 punch to combat sprawl.
NJEF is the state,s largest environmental organization, with 75,000 individual members and an additional 100 member groups. It is the Garden State Chapter of the DC-based Clean Water Action.
The NJ Environmental Federation, February 1, 2002
Editorial boards around New Jersey lambasted Governor Jim McGreevey on Friday for wiping out the professional staff of the Office of State Planning with layoffs earlier in the week. The Office oversees New Jersey's State Development and Redevelopment Plan, which on paper directs development to cities and other areas with mature infrastructures.
McGreevey had campaigned on an anti-sprawl platform, and pledged to strengthen the state plan. Now, the Bergen Record calls him "a man without a plan," and other papers question his commitment to contain sprawl. In response to the flap, McGreevey said he would reconstitute the state planning office in the future, and launch a task force on sprawl issues.
The editorials drew attention to the loss of staff experience at the planning office. But perhaps some good can come from a reorganization of the state's anti-sprawl efforts. Executive agencies whose projects have profound land use impacts like the NJ Department of Transportation have never taken the state plan seriously. But state agencies and their capital and local aid programs have the ability to structure public investment and encourage municipal behavior in ways that can strongly reinforce state plan policies. If McGreevey can get the big agencies in line behind the state plan, it will be a step forward in New Jersey's struggle with sprawl.
Mobilizing the Region 348 #350, January 28, 2002
Tri-State Transportation Campaign
Aim of ordinance is traffic reduction
01/30/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- The planning board is slated to review an ordinance tonight designed to reduce traffic by limiting growth on the Sarnoff Corp. and American Cyanamid sites based on how much of the property will be used for research.
The ordinance, which has been designed by a board subcommittee, would allow both companies to develop a higher percentage of their properties if they designate a greater proportion for research space. Research facilities typically have fewer employees than an office setting and produce fewer vehicles.
"This goes a long way to getting to our goals of a 40 percent traffic reduction," said Bill Benfer, a subcommittee member. "The traffic is the major issue."
The new ordinance represents a major redrafting of an ordinance first introduced by Councilwoman Rae Roeder that called for allowing development on 18 percent of both sites regardless of research levels.
Current zoning permits a flat level of 30 percent of growth on both properties, but planning board members are reviewing the master plan draft that suggests reducing that figure to 15 percent.
The draft of the new ordinance suggests growth on 15 percent if 20 percent of the property is used for research; on 18 percent if 35 percent is research; and on 21 percent if 50 percent is research, Benfer said.
"I'm not sure if it's going to get support from anyone or get completely redrafted," said Jackie Alberts, another subcommittee member. "But there's a huge emphasis in this ordinance on the traffic coming off these sites."
Sarnoff Corp. recently filed plans with the township for a technology campus that calls for growth on just short of 21 percent of the 335-acre campus.
According to Alberts, the application, which will be reviewed by the planning board in April, didn't specify how much of the property will be used for research. Sarnoff officials were unavailable for comment yesterday.
BASF is slated to vacate the American Cyanamid site this summer, but officials from American Home Products, which owns the property, have declined to say what they will do with the Route 1 site.
Political leaders have been debating levels of growth on both properties for more than a year, after Sarnoff filed its initial plan for the campus. While many in town want the development because it will bring in tax money, others are concerned about traffic the site will generate.
"We've tried to set a criteria," Benfer said. "But it's subject to discussion."
The planning board will vote on the ordinance although it's unclear if the vote will take place at tonight's meeting at 8 at the municipal center or at a later meeting.
Zoning changes must ultimately be approved by the township council.
© 2002 The Times
Layoffs Start in New Jersey as Towns Brace for Cuts
By IVER PETERSON, January 25, 2002
TRENTON, Jan. 24 - Even during his campaign for governor, James E. McGreevey warned New Jerseyans that a yawning budget deficit would cause pain. Now, as governor, he has begun to inflict it.
So from state government employees to local governments, the question today was where his knife would cut the deepest.
About 600 state employees, most of them in technical jobs outside Civil Service protection, ended their day Wednesday with brusque notices saying they were laid off. In the process, Mr. McGreevey eliminated the Office of State Planning, headquarters for the state's nationally recognized efforts to control sprawl.
And that may be just the start. His staff has also put already nervous Civil Service unions on notice by warning that some layoffs of regular employees, of the kind that roiled the state under Gov. Jim Florio a dozen years ago, may also be coming.
And Mr. McGreevey has told New Jersey's towns and municipalities, where costs have been rising steadily, that their nearly automatic annual increases in state aid are a thing of the past, and that they will get no increase for the new budgets many of them have just begun to draw up.
The new governor, who took office on the 15th, has put some of the blame for the state's budget problems on his Republican predecessor, the former acting governor Donald T. DiFrancesco. Some Democratic officials went out of their way today to pin the impending pain on the Republicans, and Governor McGreevey himself declared that he would stir a political hornet's nest by auditing, and perhaps trying to reopen, the $500 million, seven-year contract the departed Republican administration signed in 1998 with Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group to operate New Jersey's auto emissions testing program.
At the end of the day today, many of the men and women who had been laid off were cleaning out their desks and hoping that their jobs might yet be saved. After all, they said, the 600 jobs that were cut would save only about $25 million according to the governor's own calculation. Of that, the 27 people in the Office of State Planning accounted for only about $2 million of the $2.8 billion budget shortfall Mr. McGreevey has said he must erase.
"Everybody was shocked," said Kathleen Bird, who had been the spokeswoman for the planning office. Like the others, she received a letter telling her that her "duties and obligation to report to work cease immediately" and that she would get two weeks' severance pay. Some of her colleagues wept, Ms. Bird said, and others were simply numb.
In a note of concern, champions of managing the state's rapid growth added that the cost in sprawl could be much greater if the planning office is left vacant.
"What McGreevey said was that these people are expendable, they're unnecessary or they're political hires," said Barbara Lawrence, executive director of New Jersey Future, a controlled-growth advocacy group. "But in the case of the Office of State Planning we are losing the best professionals you can hire. They are the brains behind the concept of smart growth in New Jersey."
Mayors and managers of New Jersey's more than 500 municipalities have been left scratching their heads over the impact of Governor McGreevey's freeze in municipal aid, which towns and cities apply to abating their high property taxes. Officials in several wealthy towns said today that Mr. McGreevey's ample warning of a budget crisis prepared them to expect no additional help. But for large cities, where state aid accounts for a disproportionate share of municipal revenues, the prospect of a freeze brought a sense of foreboding.
New Brunswick, for example, had been counting on a 3 percent annual increase to keep up with inflation, said Thomas Loughlin, the city administrator. A freeze would amount to $510,000 lost, he said. "We're going to feel the impact here, there's no question of that."
Eric Maurer, business administrator for Morristown, was among the town officials who said they were in the dark about the impact of the governor's freeze in state aid levels. "We're operating in an information vacuum," he said.
Mr. Maurer said officials from the previous administration had promised Morristown a $100,000 increase in state aid, to $3.8 million. The town is already planning to raise the tax rate by an amount equal to $180 for a typical $200,000 home, he said. If state aid is frozen at the current $3.7 million aid level, that tax increase will grow by an additional $16.
In Newark, Mayor Sharpe James said his city received about a quarter of its $432 million budget from Trenton, but he did not know how much it would be hurt. "Recognizing the budget crunch, all of us have to share in that pain," he said.
A spokesman for Parsons Group said that it was ready to work with the new governor in examining the state's auto emissions testing contract, but that the engineering company was not prepared to reopen the contract, as Mr. McGreevey had suggested. Matching the discussion of the state's budget problems, Parsons seemed prepared to do the same as the newly empowered Democrats: blame the departed Republicans.
"We welcome the opportunity to work with the McGreevey administration to show how effective the system has been for New Jersey motorists," said Bob Sommer, the spokesman. "We could not agree with him more that some of the previous administration's contract specifications and a condensed time frame were the cause of many of the start-up problems, and they bear further review."
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
01/23/02
By TRACEY L. REGAN
Staff WriterTRENTON -- It is the outset of a new administration, and New Jersey's many advocacy groups pushing for meaningful controls on sprawl development are giving voice to cautious optimism.
But just in case the new governor has forgotten the sentiments he expressed on the campaign trail, three prominent anti-sprawl groups have produced a helpful reminder -- a booklet titled "Saving Our Land & Water."
"It is vitally important to set a new course for the new administration," said Amy Goldsmith, of the New Jersey Environmental Federation, one of the authors of the work, with Janine Bauer of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign and Michelle Byers, of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation.
"While Governor (James E.) McGreevey is clearly more of a friend to the environment, this is not a time to sit back and wait for things to happen," Goldsmith added.
Among their many recommendations for checking growth, the groups are calling on the administration to channel infrastructure dollars to developed areas, to fix existing highways and bridges and to adopt stricter standards for drinking water.
The authors of the booklet presented their work at a gathering of environmentalists yesterday in Trenton that included outdoorsmen, coastal protection groups and the Delaware Riverkeeper, among others. Their report was sponsored by the New Brunswick-based foundation, The Fund for New Jersey.
"I'm looking forward to the new administration," said Dery Bennett, director of the New Jersey Littoral Society. He added, however, that McGreevey is "an unknown quantity."
The report's editor, Jon Shure, of New Jersey Policy Perspective, said that he passed the governor in the hall at the State House yesterday afternoon and handed him a copy. Shure added that he wasn't counting on an official response, but said he expected that the new administration was "looking for ideas."
The Fund's executive director, Mark Murphy, vowed that the report would not become a "shelf document." The Fund, he said, would be offering grants for follow-up reports on "the progress in meeting these recommendations."
© 2002 The Times
Sarnoff shows pared-back plans
01/23/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Sarnoff Corp. President Jim Carnes told community members last night the company has redesigned its plans for a technology campus in response to their concerns over traffic and the appearance of the Route 1 property.
Area residents gathered at Sarnoff last night to view the company's second set of plans for the campus. It calls for 3 million square feet of growth.
Carnes and architects for the project pointed out several changes to plans first unveiled a year ago -- namely that the new proposal is 500,000 square feet smaller than the old one.
"We have reshaped the concept to respond to your concerns," Carnes told those in attendance. "We've made the whole development more attractive."
The company eliminated the 500,000 square feet by cutting off one level from every parking garage as well as entirely nixing plans for a 50,000-square-foot strip mall and a hotel.
Many Fisher Place residents loudly objected to the company's plans last year and formed a group in opposition to the original proposal. They claimed the development would worsen mounting traffic problems.
The new plans call for building a cul-de-sac on Fisher Place to stop motorists from cutting through the street from Route 1 to access Sarnoff's campus.
Instead, plans call for creating an access road just north of Fisher Place.
Pam Boner, a Fisher Place resident, said last night she likes the new plans better than the first set, but she is concerned the new road is very close to the properties along Fisher Place.
"You've made some good changes," Boner said, "but that road should be moved further away from those people's homes."
Sarnoff officials submitted the second set of development plans to the township on Jan. 11, after a year of redrafting.
Under the new plans, about half of the 3 million square feet would come in the form of 19 new buildings. The current building, which would be renovated, is about 600,000 square feet.
About 900,000 square feet is allocated for property the company intends to sell to Princeton University, contingent upon the township's approval of the new plans.
University officials have said they have no intention of immediately building on the property, but the company needed to include the projections in documents submitted to the township.
Originally the company projected the entire campus could be completed in 15 years, but Carnes said last night that the new plans phase in the entire project over 20 years. The plans still include areas for soccer fields as well as a baseball diamond, he added.
According to company officials, the primary goal of the new development is to provide housing for Sarnoff's various spinoff operations, which Carnes said yesterday is essential to their success.
"The proximity and the flexibility are really important," he said.
The company has set aside about 8 acres of the Route 1 property for a public transportation system, which would most likely be bus rapid transit.
The plans call for growth on slightly less than 21 percent of the property. Last year's proposal was about 24 percent. Current law allows 30 percent, but township officials are now reviewing acceptable growth levels on the property and may change the rules before the application is reviewed.
The planning board will likely review the new plan at the beginning of April, said Sam Surtees, township zoning officer.
© 2002 The Times
01/22/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Residents packed the meeting room of the municipal building slightly less than a year ago to get their first glimpses at Sarnoff Corp.'s plans to build a massive Technology Campus.
Now, it's time for round two.
The planning board is scheduled to review Sarnoff's second set of plans, which call for significantly less growth than the first batch, on Feb. 27, according to Chairman Ed Steele.
In the meantime, the planning board is slated to resume review of the township master plan draft, which dictates acceptable levels of growth on the property, and also look at a proposed ordinance to reduce approved development levels on the site.
In the next 37 days, those in favor and those opposed to the plans will have their say before the formal review of the project that calls for about 3 million square feet of construction on the company's 335-acre property along Route 1.
On Jan. 30, the planning board will review an ordinance introduced by Councilwoman Rae Roeder that calls for reducing the amount of allowable development from 30 percent to 18 percent on the Sarnoff and American Cyanamid properties.
Sarnoff's latest plans call for about 21 percent of growth, which means the company would have to get a variance to build beyond 18 percent if the measure passes.
Council members Jackie Alberts and Alison Miller have strongly supported Roeder's proposed ordinance, but fellow council members Charles Morgan and Kristin Appelget have opposed it.
Morgan said yesterday he is against the measure and doesn't feel it will pass.
"My position is that we need to let Sarnoff get to 21 percent if that's what they need," Morgan said. "It's very bothersome to me that we wouldn't recognize the value they bring to the community. They're a very unusual corporate neighbor."
Roeder was unavailable for comment yesterday.
Morgan supports an ordinance that allows for 18 percent of growth on its face but would provide for increased levels of development if a property owner commits to things that benefit the community, such as preserving open space.
On Feb. 6, the planning board is scheduled to resume its review of the master plan draft, which currently allows for 30 percent of growth on the property. The board tentatively voted several months ago to reduce the level to 21 percent.
"My guess is that the planning board will stick with the 21 percent, but that's just a guess," Steele said.
On Feb. 20, the board will continue reviewing the master plan draft, but it's unclear if the board will vote on the entire document before the Feb. 27 hearing on the Sarnoff application.
The new proposal calls for about 500,000 square feet less than original plans and includes about 10 acres to be set aside for a public transportation system to help alleviate traffic on Route 1.
© 2002 The Times
Smaller Sarnoff plan still may face a fight
By: Gwen Runkle, Staff Writer January 18, 2002
New development plan submitted, but a zoning change is in the works.
WEST WINDSOR - The new development plan for Sarnoff Corp.'s proposed Route 1 technology campus is now in the township's hands.
But while the plan, which was filed Friday, calls for developing 20.7 percent of the company's 345-acre property, which is less than was previously proposed, several township officials still are unsatisfied and plan to continue to push for an ordinance that would reduce the amount of allowable development even further.
In December 2001, the Township Council introduced an ordinance to reduce the amount of allowable development on the Sarnoff Corp. and American Cyanamid properties from 30 percent to 18 percent. The measure has not received final passage.
If the introduced ordinance is adopted before the Sarnoff plan comes up for a vote before the Planning Board, Sarnoff would have to start the application process all over again, said Sam Surtees, the township land use director, provided the Sarnoff plan does not meet the new restrictions.
Alison Miller and Jackie Alberts, both Township Council members and supporters of the ordinance, said it is needed to reduce traffic in the township.
"We have to put some ordinance in place because we can't live with .30," Ms. Alberts said Wednesday. "We'll drown in our own traffic."
Ms. Miller agreed.
"Sarnoff has filed its GDP (general development plan), but unless we limit the FAR (floor area ratio) down from .30, there's nothing that stops them from building out that much," she said. "It's really important we all work together toward the goal of reducing traffic."
But Walter Schmidlin, Sarnoff's director of facilities management, said while Sarnoff's development will bring more traffic, reducing the amount of allowable development might not be the way to reduce traffic.
"Obviously, there would be an increase in traffic," he said. "But there is not a linear relationship between reducing square feet and reducing traffic. When you reduce the square feet, you don't necessarily get a reduction in traffic. There's more to it than that."
To help reduce traffic, he said, Sarnoff plans to dedicate 10 to 12 acres of its property for the right-of-way of a bus rapid transit or light rail system to provide alternate ways of getting to the technology campus.
In its previous general development plan, Sarnoff had planned a 3.5 million-square-foot technology campus with a floor area ratio of 24 percent.
Under the new plan the technology campus would consist of 3 million square feet of office, research and other facilities at full build-out.
Of that 3 million square feet, only about half, or 1.5 million square feet, would be new development, since the figure includes Sarnoff's existing 600,000-square-foot building and 900,000 square feet of possible development that is expected to be transferred to Princeton University.
Princeton University is expected to purchase 90 acres of Sarnoff's property along Route 1 and the Millstone River if the new general development plan is approved by the township. Shirley Tilghman, Princeton University's president, has said she does not see that land being developed in her tenure.
Sarnoff does not anticipate speedy construction, either. According to the general development plan, the company's technology campus will be built in three phases over 20 years.
The phases include building 450,000 square feet of offices for its venture projects and affiliates near the existing facilities, expanding the existing facilities from 600,000 to 750,000 square feet and constructing 600,000 square feet of office and research space and a combined hotel and conference center east of Little Bear Brook.
Mr. Schmidlin noted Sarnoff also has provided some land for athletic fields and could be willing to dedicate some of the land along the Millstone River as greenbelt.
Mr. Surtees anticipates Sarnoff's general development plan will not be reviewed by the Planning Board before Feb. 27.
The council's down-zoning ordinance currently is being reviewed by the Ordinance Review Subcommittee of the Planning Board, which is expected to report to the board Jan. 30, Mr. Surtees said.
A public hearing on the ordinance is expected to be held before the Township Council on Feb. 11.
©Packet Online 2002
Sarnoff downsizes W. Windsor growth plans
01/15/02
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Sarnoff Corp. has filed new development plans for its "Technology Campus" that call for significantly less growth than an original proposal filed about a year ago.
The company submitted a general development plan to the township on Friday that projects about 3 million square feet of construction on the 335-acre property along Route 1, according to Sarnoff project manager Walter Schmidlin.
The proposal calls for about 500,000 square feet less than originally outlined in documents filed last January that caused an uproar among neighbors who feared the growth would worsen mounting traffic problems in the region.
Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh and township zoning officer Sam Surtees said they haven't yet looked at the new documents, but will review them within a month.
"The central issue is going to be what they can do to reduce the traffic," Hsueh said. "The second issue has to do with the benefits to the township. We would like to see some kind of recreational facilities. They have no obligation, but if they have that it would be a big positive for whatever they're proposing."
The new plans include about 10 acres to be set aside for a public transportation system to help alleviate traffic on Route 1, Schmidlin said.
"Once you have the right-of-way it gives you options for lots of things," Schmidlin said. "We're working on other traffic mitigation issues."
Playing fields also are included in the plans.
"They may even be at a higher level," Schmidlin said.
The new plans call for growth on just less than 21 percent of the property. Last year's proposal hit 24 percent. Current law allows building up to 30 percent, but township officials are reviewing West Windsor's master plan and likely will reduce that level during the coming months.
Many politicians have advocated a law that calls for 21 percent, but some officials are pushing for a lower figure. That could force Sarnoff to obtain a variance from the township to complete the project.
About 900,000 square feet of growth on the new plans is earmarked for a parcel the company plans to sell to Princeton University contingent upon the township's approval of the general plan.
University officials have said they have no immediate plans to develop the parcel, but company officials needed to submit the plans as part of the general document.
A total of 600,000 square feet of the plan represents the company's current building, which will be expanded about 150,000 additional square feet.
In total, the document indicates Sarnoff will build 17 new structures totaling about 1.35 million square feet.
The current plans show the company eliminated a proposal for a hotel along Route 1 and also nixed plans for two three-story buildings near Fisher Place after residents loudly objected to the proximity of the structures to nearby houses.
A 50,000 square-foot strip mall also was eliminated from the plans and several buildings were reduced in height.
In response to township leaders' concerns over the environment, the company has moved buildings near the railway tracks away from wetland areas.
"Instead of pushing it out of the woods, we pulled it in closer," Schmidlin said.
The company, which is nationally renowned, plans to move a variety of its spin-off operations onto the property once the project is complete. Schmidlin said that still will be possible with a smaller project.
Officials said last year construction wouldn't start until at least 2003 and would take several years to complete. Schmidlin yesterday said the new timeline will hinge on the township's review of the documents.
© 2002 The Times
Land Use Articles after April 1, 2002
|
|
|
|
|