Residential
Site Improvement Standards: A Uniformly Bad Idea?
Residential Site
Improvement Standards threaten the future of the Great
Swamp. Learn what you can do to help defeat this bill
and see Long Hill's draft resolution as a model for your
community.
The New Jersey
Department of Community Affairs has caved in to the
developers' lobby and is quietly trying to put the
finishing touches on the legislation (N.J.A.C. 5:21)
during the summer months. Presented under the guise of
eliminating red tape and development costs, the
Residential Site Improvements Standards will essentially
require a cookie-cutter approach to development without
regard to community preferences. The new rules take away
the power of local planning boards and will spell
disaster for communities that are trying to stem the
tide of urban sprawl.
Here are a few of the problems:
a. The rules will
"pre-empt all existing municipal
improvement requirements" setting both the
minimum and
maximum requirements (i.e., local boards will have no
choice!)
b. Street designs
require widths and curbing that meet all
"anticipatable traffic conditions", in
effect requiring
towns to become a part of the ever-increasing spiral
of
building and increasing traffic.
c. Under these
rules, "the developer shall determine the
highest order street required to be used in a given
residential development", disallowing the
deliberate use of
narrower (28 ft is the minimum allowed), less damaging
roadways that preserve rural and semi-rural character
of
communities.
d. The rules
would "replace the multiplicity of existing
local design standards ... with uniform, statewide
technical
standards", failing to recognize that Atlantic
City might
have different goals than Califon.
e. Sidewalks (of
standard design, of course) would be
required in virtually every case, usually on both
sides of
the street, forcing an urban appearance on all new
development.
f. Despite the
fact that almost every requirement
exacerbates stormwater runoff, the new rules specify
the
same old engineering standards based on peak rates,
and
would not allow municipalities to use modern
techniques that
control volume.
Read
LHTreso.html
in reaction to this proposed legislation.
--LWH
UPDATE 1/97:
Department of Community Affairs Commissioner, Jane
Kenny, approved the Uniform Residential Site Standards
regulations on Thursday December 5, 1996. The standards
are expected to appear in the January 6, 1997 New Jersey
Register. All related municipal ordinances must be
changed to conform by the effective date of June 3.
Legislation supported by municipalities to amend the
standards, A-331 (Arnone) and S-1556 (Connors) is
stalled.
John
Thonet responds to proposed Residential Site
Improvement Standards
John A. Thonet, a
professional land development planner and engineer with
twenty-four years of experience outlines his reasons why
the Residential Site Improvement Standards ( N.J.A.C.
5:21 ) should not be made into law.
(Click
here to see his letter to the Department of Community
Affairs.)
Resolution
Opposing Uniform Residential Site Improvement
Standards Adopted
In a surprising
refutation of its own engineer, the [Chatham] Township
Committee passed Resolution 96-131, opposing the state
imposition of Uniform Residential Site Improvement
Standards. The Township Engineer serves as the chairman
of the Site Improvement Standards Commission, which is
responsible for drafting statewide regulations pursuant
to an act signed by Governor Florio in 1993. A similar
resolution was
passed by neighboring Long Hill Township earlier this
year. --GCC
Harding
Opposed Statewide Residential Site Improvement
Standards
Harding Township's
engineer registered the Township's opposition to the
proposed Statewide site improvement standards for
residential developments in testimony he presented at
the July 11 public hearing at Kean College and in a
subsequent letter to the Department of Consumer Affairs.
The Township has also endorsed a regionally-based
rejection of the proposal drafted by the Ten Towns
Committee. --GCC
