Highlands Council passes controversial ‘strict compliance' measure

Sussex county - On the one-year anniversary of its inception, the Highlands Council passed a draft resolution that would require municipalities in the Highlands region to strictly comply with the Highlands Act rules for planning areas, if they choose to opt into its regional master plan. After a two-hour debate on Dec. 15, a majority of council members approved the resolution, making it necessary for towns in the region’s planning area to adhere to all the Highlands Act regulations, because without strict compliance, the act itself could be undermined, they said. The Highlands Act governs land use and planning and development regulations over 800,000 acres, half of which is within the planning and preservation area. The 15-member council is charged with drafting a master plan for the region. Towns that want to be included in the Highlands Council Regional Master Plan will be required to adopt specific regulations set out in the resolution, although the council will consider municipal amendments if additional information becomes available later. Under the Highlands Act, municipal compliance in the planning area is optional. June deadline Counties and municipalities in the Highlands region must come up with local master plans and development regulations that conform to the act, which must be submitted to the Highlands Council before June 2006. A total of 88 municipalities in the Highlands region will have to comply with the environmental act’s restrictive laws, with 47 communities having land in both the preservation and planning areas, and will be affected by the council’s recent resolution. Preservation areas in the Highlands region are governed by rules set by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection and are automatically included in the council’s regional master plan. The act subdivides the region into planning and preservation areas, each governed by varying regulations. Roughly 145,000 acres of the Highlands region are undeveloped, and another 398,000 acres are considered preserved. Jack Schrier, Highlands Council vice-chair and Morris County Freeholder director, who worked on writing the resolution and voted for a partial opt-in during committee discussions, was vehemently opposed to the rigid standards set out in the resolution. Critical issue “Partial or full compliance, it is fair to say that no other issue is so critical to the Highlands Council,” said Schrier. “Voluntary means voluntary.” Schrier noted that the wording in the Highlands Act itself is not clear and said the council’s discussion was “confusing.” He said his preference would be for partial compliance, but whether municipalities would be required to strictly adhere to regulations when submitting a master plan should be decided by the council, Schrier said. “Some of the act is interpretive,” said Schrier. “Some decisions have been left to the council.” He noted that partial compliance would return some planning control to regional towns. With a softer approach, said Schrier, the council would not create a hostile atmosphere and would allow the communities more latitude and include them in the process. The act entrusts the Highlands council with protecting regional headwaters that feed the state’s rivers and streams. With this far-reaching goal in mind, the council adopted the resolution. Council member Eileen Swan of Lebanon said she was “open to persuasion” because a decision without a completed plan is extremely difficult to make. Making this mandatory goes directly against the Highlands Act,” she said. She reminded the council that the resolution was in draft form and still subject to change. “We don’t want a plan that looks like Swiss cheese,” she said. “The resolution follows the goals and objectives of the regional plan.” Debate will continue Liz Maziarz, Highlands Council communications director, said she expects the council to revisit the issue down the road. “I don’t believe they are done discussing this issue,” said Maziarz. “I am sure more will be debated in the coming year.” Steve Balzano, science and planning director for the council, pointed out that of the 88 towns covered by the Highlands Act, Sparta alone refused to divulge its mapping information. Vernon, Byram, and Hopatcong in Sussex County, and three of the six Highlands regional counties have not reported planning data, Balzano said. Officials in Vernon, Byram, and Hopatcong said they will provide the information, he reported.