Controversial downzoning plan up for public comment

Planning Board could approve 10-acre zoning by next week

By: Scott Morgan
   SPRINGFIELD — After months of heated debate, a plan to introduce 10-acre zoning in the township could be adopted by the Planning Board as early as next week.
   Introduced in May, the plan to increase minimum lot sizes from 3 to 10 acres (a process known as downzoning) has generated no end of controversy as it has wound its way through official hearings and workshop meetings. While proponents of the plan say downzoning is the surest way to control development and preserve Springfield Township, critics say the plan will create a playground for the very rich and render native families financially unable to stay in town.
   On Nov. 15, the Planning Board will offer its strategy for public comment. According to officials, the plan includes a program similar to Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) known as "density transfer." Like TDR, density transfer allows developers to buy land credits from one section of the township in order to build in another; unlike TDR, though, density transfer does not require water and sewer connection. Springfield has no sewerage and officials have repeatedly said that there are no plans (and no interest) in developing sewer. The density transfer option allows for pockets of development in specified areas, thereby keeping a tight fist on development.
   But to critics, density transfer is merely a way to skirt TDR’s strict water-use laws and still pack areas of the township with dense housing. The strategy the Planning Board is set to vote on next week allows the building of approximately 500 new houses over the next several years. Critics say it is too much, while officials say they have cut the number of houses they could build (about 1,200) down to a reasonable amount.
   The most vociferous opponents to downzoning are a group of township landowners known as The Homeowners of Springfield Township. Members of the Homeowners, such as Roger Lord, who owns an 80-acre farm on Burlington-Jacksonville Road, have said that officials have "got it in their heads to pass" a plan that, under all the discussion, is flatly unworkable.
   Indeed, the New Jersey Farm Bureau, which has given at least two presentations to township officials regarding their plan, say that downzoning has been shown to undercut the value of large tracts of land (i.e., farms, which make up much of the township and are seen as the cornerstone of Springfield’s identity) and plunge landowners into a riskier future.
   Township Councilman and Planning Board member Richard Toone said that while he understands the Farm Bureau’s perspective, the organization is, really, a special interest group.
   "They are a vested interest," Mr. Toone said. "If I was in the Farm Bureau, I would say the same thing."
   But, he added, the township is made up of many residents, not all of them farmers — and that most of the township’s farmers already have their land in farmland preservation, which renders them immune to whatever decisions township officials make on downzoning.
   At its heart, the arguments surrounding the benefits and perils of downzoning come down to whose interests are best served by the direction the township wants to take.
   Mr. Lord said in an interview Monday that 10-acre zoning actually speeds up development by consuming larger pieces of land and that, in the end, will create plots of land that only those with a lot of money can afford.
   Mr. Lord added that township officials simply have not listened to residents and their concerns over the plan — a major reason he and the Homeowners hope to raise enough public support at the Nov. 15 meeting. He said he hopes people will come out, "put some pressure" on officials and, if their efforts fail, at least convince people to "vote intelligently" next time an election rolls around.
   Councilman Peter Sobotka said Tuesday that not only has the township listened, it has taken no efforts to hide its plans. He emphasized that the plan, with maps, is available for review at the township Municipal Building and that he hopes everyone with an interest in the strategy will take some time to review it. Above all, Mr. Sobotka cautioned against emotions and special interests getting the better of anyone.
   "Don’t let your individual economic interests block your hearing," he said, referring to what he called a phenomenon of opponents "hearing what they want to hear." The overall goal, he said, "is preserving Springfield."
   The Homeowners remain unconvinced, even going so far as to distribute fliers around town in an effort to generate support and dissent. The flier itself advises residents to "just say no" to a variety of ills, such as "unnecessary township debt" and "a plan that will not work."
   Ultimately, though, support for the opposition may lead to naught.
   "We’re not going to reinvent the process because a few people came out," Mr. Toone said. "I suspect they’ll approve (the plan), but I don’t know what the Planning Board will do."
   The Planning Board meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, Nov. 15, at 7:30 p.m. in the township Municipal Building, 2159 Jacksonville-Jobstown Road.