Slow the growth in Jackson
We ran a story in Wednesday's Press about a 2,531-unit housing development proposed for a 611-acre site in the Jackson Mills section of Jackson, south of I-195. If built, it will add 8,000 people to Jackson's rapidly growing population, which was 51,180 in the July 2005 Census estimate, up from 42,000 in the 2000 Census.
Earlier this week, the Jackson Planning Board voted 6-3 to approve a 965-unit age-restricted development on 650 acres in the Cassville section, despite vocal opposition to it from local residents concerned about its impact on traffic and the environment. Another 493-home subdivision on Grawtown Road will come before the planners Monday night.
Bottom line: Jackson's schools and municipal services can't cope with the existing growth, let alone what's planned for the near future. Taxes have gone through the roof, and the school system hasn't been able to keep up with the increased student enrollment. The school district is now using 37 trailers, many of which have been in use for years. School officials say they haven't figured out what the impact on enrollment would be of a 2,531-unit housing development. They need to find out, and join forces with the groups that are rightly concerned about the effect this development - and the two others - would have on Jackson's quality of life.
It's a shame that Jackson township officials seem to be leaving it up to concerned citizens and environmental groups to fight overdevelopment. Citizens should keep the pressure on them. Those interested in fighting the Jackson Mills development should go to the "Stop the Building Madness in Jackson Township" Web site at: http://www.pcicon.net/index.htm, or contact the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, Ocean County group, http://newjersey.sierraclub.org/Ocean/, or the National Trust for Public Land (Barnegat Bay Program) at http://www.tpl.org/tier3_cdl.cfm?content_item_id=11224&folder_id=2286.
Here's Wednesday's new story: http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070228/NEWS/702280316
Earlier this week, the Jackson Planning Board voted 6-3 to approve a 965-unit age-restricted development on 650 acres in the Cassville section, despite vocal opposition to it from local residents concerned about its impact on traffic and the environment. Another 493-home subdivision on Grawtown Road will come before the planners Monday night.
Bottom line: Jackson's schools and municipal services can't cope with the existing growth, let alone what's planned for the near future. Taxes have gone through the roof, and the school system hasn't been able to keep up with the increased student enrollment. The school district is now using 37 trailers, many of which have been in use for years. School officials say they haven't figured out what the impact on enrollment would be of a 2,531-unit housing development. They need to find out, and join forces with the groups that are rightly concerned about the effect this development - and the two others - would have on Jackson's quality of life.
It's a shame that Jackson township officials seem to be leaving it up to concerned citizens and environmental groups to fight overdevelopment. Citizens should keep the pressure on them. Those interested in fighting the Jackson Mills development should go to the "Stop the Building Madness in Jackson Township" Web site at: http://www.pcicon.net/index.htm, or contact the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, Ocean County group, http://newjersey.sierraclub.org/Ocean/, or the National Trust for Public Land (Barnegat Bay Program) at http://www.tpl.org/tier3_cdl.cfm?content_item_id=11224&folder_id=2286.
Here's Wednesday's new story: http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070228/NEWS/702280316
posted by Randy Bergmann at 1:31 PM
5 Comments:
Do you live in Jackson, Mr. Bergmann? If so, don't you think that fairness would dictate that you mention that to your readers?
You wouldn't be using the editorials of The Asbury Park Press to influence public policy that benefits you personally and finacially, would you, Mr. Bergmann?
That silence speaks volumes. Shame on you, Bergmann!
I'm sorry, exactly how does my hometown relate to my views on the kind of unmanageable growth that is taking place in Jackson? No town could handle what's coming down the pike in Jackson. And no town should be forced to absorb that much growth in such a short period of time.
Judging from your question, I assume you think this kind of development is good for Jackson?
If you live in Jackson, you have an ethical obligation to tell your readers that you are using the editorials of The Asbury Park Press to support governmental policies that, if enacted, would benefit you personally and financially. (And make no mistake, those proposed developments will increase Jackson property taxes if they are ever built.)
Failing to mention that you live in Jackson while writing on Jackson politics would be like Andrea Clurfeld reviewing a restaurant that she owns. Ms. Clurfeld would never be that ethically challenged; it's a shame that you are.
Post a Comment
<< Home