Surprisingly, not with picks and shovels and implements of destruction.
State regulators have already told the developer and the township that much of the land Fieldstone had hoped to build on likely was wetlands. Of the 41 units township planners agreed could be built on, at least 14 would sit in areas the DEP has questioned.
Township officials were made aware of the DEP's reservations about the property in July 2004, but it is unclear whether the information was taken into account when the plan was studied and the 41 lots were agreed to.
It sure doesn't look like it was!
The candidates running to replace current Hamilton Township council members are, of course, shouting that the council was negligent in their investigation of Klockner Woods and should not have bought it. Also, there is no provision for Hamilton to back out of the sale if the State or County chooses not to fork over the cash.
I expect, as with any investigation, there will be information of which the public is unaware. There will be some justifications and reasoning for agreeing to this purchase with this rotten deal. The DEP will weigh in and that may change the assessment.
But we don't need a fortune teller to predict that the council members who voted for this deal don't have a shot of being reelected.
2 comments:
Since it's a Dem council now, I fear what a Repub council could do to Hamilton though. Tough call.
Without all the information, it's hard to determine exactly what's going on here.
If it's indeed wetlands, then Hamilton should buy it - albeit at a reduced price - to preserve it as open space.
--*Rob
One way or another, it should be preserved space. It looks like the land is unsutible for building anyway, if so many developers passed it up before now.
IMHO, in very local politics, party affiliation matters little. I hate to see Repubs make gains in NJ at all, but I don't think it means a whole lot on a township level. 'Course, Hamilton is WAY bigger then my small town, so maybe it means more there.
Post a Comment