Comments for New Jersey Future http://www.njfuture.org Working for Smart Growth: More Livable Places and Open Spaces Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:28:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by Mark Demitroff http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-47589 Mark Demitroff Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:28:46 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-47589 Chris, Thank you for your response. Agreed, there is a disconnect between redevelopment’s spirit and its application in the Pinelands. Since New Jersey Future’s mission is to “promote responsible land-use policies,” what is your position when leaders act irresponsibly? Can you help me protect natural lands and farms from becoming sprawl in the Pinelands National Reserve, or are you an advocacy-only group? Mark Chris,

Thank you for your response. Agreed, there is a disconnect between redevelopment’s spirit and its application in the Pinelands. Since New Jersey Future’s mission is to “promote responsible land-use policies,” what is your position when leaders act irresponsibly? Can you help me protect natural lands and farms from becoming sprawl in the Pinelands National Reserve, or are you an advocacy-only group?

Mark

]]> Comment on Why Hunterdon County Should Regionalize Its School Districts by Tim Evans http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/27/hunterdon-school-regionalization/#comment-46693 Tim Evans Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:34:43 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11391#comment-46693 I'm actually beginning to harbor some hope about municipalities or school districts pursuing consolidations and/or greater sharing of services on their own. This article from today's NJ Spotlight -- http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/12/0213/0002/ -- quotes Bill Dressel of the League of Municipalities as saying, "There has been more real interest in shared services in the last few years than in the previous 35 years combined." We can probably thank the severe economic downturn and its attendant drop in government revenues, combined with the 2-percent cap on property tax increases, for prompting municipalities to take a hard look at how they're spending their money. The article also cites the Hunterdon countywide school district proposal. I’m actually beginning to harbor some hope about municipalities or school districts pursuing consolidations and/or greater sharing of services on their own. This article from today’s NJ Spotlight — http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/12/0213/0002/ — quotes Bill Dressel of the League of Municipalities as saying, “There has been more real interest in shared services in the last few years than in the previous 35 years combined.” We can probably thank the severe economic downturn and its attendant drop in government revenues, combined with the 2-percent cap on property tax increases, for prompting municipalities to take a hard look at how they’re spending their money. The article also cites the Hunterdon countywide school district proposal.

]]> Comment on Why Hunterdon County Should Regionalize Its School Districts by Joe Metelski http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/27/hunterdon-school-regionalization/#comment-46678 Joe Metelski Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:53:52 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11391#comment-46678 Jorge is correct that the way home rule districts will move towards regionalization is incentives, penalties or mandate. As an example Bedminster has a retiring superintendent for its single school, PK-8 single district. The Board of Education is proceeding to replace the superintendent. Another example is the Somerville-Branchburg 9-12 regional school district. Both superintendents are retiring and both communities are replacing their superintendents, missing an opportunity to at least combine superintendents. A big push by the counties or the state is needed to start obtaining cost effective education in much of New Jersey. Jorge is correct that the way home rule districts will move towards regionalization is incentives, penalties or mandate.

As an example Bedminster has a retiring superintendent for its single school, PK-8 single district. The Board of Education is proceeding to replace the superintendent.

Another example is the Somerville-Branchburg 9-12 regional school district. Both superintendents are retiring and both communities are replacing their superintendents, missing an opportunity to at least combine superintendents.

A big push by the counties or the state is needed to start obtaining cost effective education in much of New Jersey.

]]> Comment on DEP Launches ‘Environmental Management’ Initiative by Bill Wolfe http://www.njfuture.org/2011/10/27/dep-initiative/#comment-46369 Bill Wolfe Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:09:41 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=10229#comment-46369 This is full of SLOGANS! If you want to learn how Chrisite administration is rolling back regulatory protections under the guise of promoting economic growth and eliminating Red Tape", try reading Executive Orders, regulations and policy documents instead of the press releases. This is full of SLOGANS!

If you want to learn how Chrisite administration is rolling back regulatory protections under the guise of promoting economic growth and eliminating Red Tape”, try reading Executive Orders, regulations and policy documents instead of the press releases.

]]> Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by chris Sturm http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-45155 chris Sturm Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:36:00 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-45155 Mark, I am not familiar with the site that you mention, so I can't comment specifically on the redevelopment proposal for Richland Place. However, there does seem to be a disconnect between the basic definition of "REdevelopment" - developing something on land that has already been built on - and your description of the redevelopment plan for Richland, which involves redeveloping "wetlands, original woods with T&E species, agricultural land". Mark, I am not familiar with the site that you mention, so I can’t comment specifically on the redevelopment proposal for Richland Place. However, there does seem to be a disconnect between the basic definition of “REdevelopment” – developing something on land that has already been built on – and your description of the redevelopment plan for Richland, which involves redeveloping “wetlands, original woods with T&E species, agricultural land”.

]]> Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by Tim Evans http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-43264 Tim Evans Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:55:26 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-43264 Carlos -- "Build-out" is a meaningful concept if you're talking about how close a state is to having built on all of its developable land. From a land-development standpoint, full build-out comes when the number of undeveloped but still developable acres in the state reaches zero -- that is, the point at which every acre in the state has either had something built on it or is undevelopable, whether because of environmental constraints or because it's been permanently preserved as open space. Once a state has reached build-out, any further development is going to have to be redevelopment, because there's no longer any undeveloped land that can be built on. But if your problem with "build-out" is its use to imply that no more growth is going to happen after that point, then I agree the concept is meaningless. Civilizations have always re-used lands whose initial uses have become obsolete, and we will continue to do so. Sometimes previously-developed land even reverts to nature -- check out some of the ghost "towns" in the Pine Barrens for examples. "Built out" does NOT imply "full." (After all, Manhattan island has been completely built-out for many decades now, yet it continues to grow.) Carlos — “Build-out” is a meaningful concept if you’re talking about how close a state is to having built on all of its developable land. From a land-development standpoint, full build-out comes when the number of undeveloped but still developable acres in the state reaches zero — that is, the point at which every acre in the state has either had something built on it or is undevelopable, whether because of environmental constraints or because it’s been permanently preserved as open space. Once a state has reached build-out, any further development is going to have to be redevelopment, because there’s no longer any undeveloped land that can be built on.

But if your problem with “build-out” is its use to imply that no more growth is going to happen after that point, then I agree the concept is meaningless. Civilizations have always re-used lands whose initial uses have become obsolete, and we will continue to do so. Sometimes previously-developed land even reverts to nature — check out some of the ghost “towns” in the Pine Barrens for examples. “Built out” does NOT imply “full.” (After all, Manhattan island has been completely built-out for many decades now, yet it continues to grow.)

]]> Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by Tim Evans http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-43260 Tim Evans Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:48:09 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-43260 New Jersey has gained population every decade since the first Census was conducted in 1790. So while it may not be true that population growth is inevitable, it has nonetheless been constant. The reason New Jersey is losing a Congressional district is that the number of districts nationwide is fixed, while New Jersey has been growing more slowly than other parts of the country, so that its proportion of total U.S. population is shrinking. But New Jersey's population itself is not shrinking. New Jersey has gained population every decade since the first Census was conducted in 1790. So while it may not be true that population growth is inevitable, it has nonetheless been constant. The reason New Jersey is losing a Congressional district is that the number of districts nationwide is fixed, while New Jersey has been growing more slowly than other parts of the country, so that its proportion of total U.S. population is shrinking. But New Jersey’s population itself is not shrinking.

]]> Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by carlos rodrigues http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-43112 carlos rodrigues Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:49:04 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-43112 This is a clear indication of how ridiculous and discredited the concept of "build out" is. It has no validity in the planning literature, and only people who confuse zoning with planning would take it seriously. The entire history of human civilization is one very long case study of redevelopment and rebuilding. The built environment is never static, unless it is dead. Even in places designated by UNESCO as world heritage sites -- where historic preservation concerns are a top priority -- there is considerable redevelopment and new construction. That's why they stay healthy and vibrant. Discussions of "build-out" are meaningless and will not advance the redevelopment agenda. If the intention is to show that NJ can grow substantially simply by attracting new jobs and residents to existing built places, then the focus should be on what is preventing that from happening now and what public policy can do to encourage it. This is a clear indication of how ridiculous and discredited the concept of “build out” is. It has no validity in the planning literature, and only people who confuse zoning with planning would take it seriously. The entire history of human civilization is one very long case study of redevelopment and rebuilding. The built environment is never static, unless it is dead. Even in places designated by UNESCO as world heritage sites — where historic preservation concerns are a top priority — there is considerable redevelopment and new construction. That’s why they stay healthy and vibrant.

Discussions of “build-out” are meaningless and will not advance the redevelopment agenda. If the intention is to show that NJ can grow substantially simply by attracting new jobs and residents to existing built places, then the focus should be on what is preventing that from happening now and what public policy can do to encourage it.

]]> Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by Mark Demitroff http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-43084 Mark Demitroff Sun, 29 Jan 2012 17:13:55 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-43084 I am a resident of a Village in the Pinelands National Reserve (PNR) where redevelopment officially began in October 2006, although the municipality had already completed a good part of their work between 2004 and 2006 – with much controversy. Agreed, redevelopment can be a useful land-planning tool as you suggested, for example by "reconfiguring or repurposing existing buildings...,” etc. However, at Richland Village (and nearby Comar Place) wetlands, original woods with T&E species, agricultural land, and historic structures were deemed blighted and in need of redevelopment. While I realize that a 2003 amendment to the Local Development and Redevelopment Law (LD&RL) provided an “absurdly vague criterion for designation of an ‘area in need of redevelopment’” (Kinsey, 2008: 7), the LD&RL does not to the PNR. There are 47 Pinelands Villages on 26,000 acres, which are slated to become Priority Funding Areas with redevelopment. The Pinelands Commission recently stated they were “obligated” to water and sewer these areas in support of growth. Is this a proper use of redevelopment, or antithetic to your suggestions? I am a resident of a Village in the Pinelands National Reserve (PNR) where redevelopment officially began in October 2006, although the municipality had already completed a good part of their work between 2004 and 2006 – with much controversy. Agreed, redevelopment can be a useful land-planning tool as you suggested, for example by “reconfiguring or repurposing existing buildings…,” etc. However, at Richland Village (and nearby Comar Place) wetlands, original woods with T&E species, agricultural land, and historic structures were deemed blighted and in need of redevelopment. While I realize that a 2003 amendment to the Local Development and Redevelopment Law (LD&RL) provided an “absurdly vague criterion for designation of an ‘area in need of redevelopment’” (Kinsey, 2008: 7), the LD&RL does not to the PNR. There are 47 Pinelands Villages on 26,000 acres, which are slated to become Priority Funding Areas with redevelopment. The Pinelands Commission recently stated they were “obligated” to water and sewer these areas in support of growth. Is this a proper use of redevelopment, or antithetic to your suggestions?

]]> Comment on Does New Jersey Have Room to Grow? by Fred Akers http://www.njfuture.org/2012/01/26/population-growth-2/#comment-42974 Fred Akers Sun, 29 Jan 2012 00:37:54 +0000 http://www.njfuture.org/?p=11368#comment-42974 I disagree with your premise that increased population is inevitable and must be accommodated. Population has already decreased to a point where we are losing one seat in Congress, a very significant population bench mark. I suggest that the current population level is unsustainable and the cause of the current massive social austerity problems in NJ, and that further population reductions are both inevitable and will be beneficial to the long term prosperity of New Jersey. I also suggest that we should learn how to plan to achieve prosperity without growth for a sustainable future, rather than how to jamb more unsustainable, uneconomical growth into our state given it's finite economic, ecological, and social resources. For more on the concept of prosperity without growth, go to http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/jan/23/properity-without-growth-tim-jackson I disagree with your premise that increased population is inevitable and must be accommodated. Population has already decreased to a point where we are losing one seat in Congress, a very significant population bench mark. I suggest that the current population level is unsustainable and the cause of the current massive social austerity problems in NJ, and that further population reductions are both inevitable and will be beneficial to the long term prosperity of New Jersey. I also suggest that we should learn how to plan to achieve prosperity without growth for a sustainable future, rather than how to jamb more unsustainable, uneconomical growth into our state given it’s finite economic, ecological, and social resources. For more on the concept of prosperity without growth, go to http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/jan/23/properity-without-growth-tim-jackson

]]>