Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

GARDEN STATE ENVIRONEWS 031104

0 views

Skip to first unread message

GSENet

unread,

Nov 4, 2003, 2:31:28 AM11/4/03

031104

GARDEN STATE ENVIRONEWS

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

TABLE OF CONTENTS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{*} OP/ED: VOTE TO PRESERVE NJ'S ENVIRONMENT
{*} CHRISTINE WHITMAN: LOOKING BACK, LOOKING FORWARD
{*} TOXIC IMMUNITY
{*} EPA TO EASE SEWAGE TREATMENT RULES
{*} WASTEWATER ON GOLF COURSE CONCERNS RESIDENTS
{*} CONTROVERSIAL LAW NETS AN HONOR
{*} THE BACKLASH AGAINST `SMART GROWTH'
{*} JUST AROUND THE BEND, A NEW LOOK AT ROADS
{*} DRIVING A HARD BARGAIN
{*} RECYCLING REBOUNDS AFTER '99 LOW POINT
{*} AS USES GROW, TINY MATERIALS' SAFETY IS HARD TO PIN DOWN
{*} CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INITIATIVE
{*} SAND STOCKPILE
{*} WORKSHOP: ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES IN NJ - NOV 7
{*} VOLUNTEER MONITORING SUMMIT - NOV 7-8
{*} DISCUSSION ON TAX RATABLES PLANNED - NOV 13
{*} ANJEE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONFERENCE - JAN 8-10

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Many thanks to our volunteers: Jerry Cullins, Jeff Hook,
Peter Montague, Paul Neuman, Phil Reynolds, and to all
you folks out there who contribute in so many ways.
If you have a couple hours a week, and would like to help out,
please email us at mai...@gsenet.org.

* * *

Our Fall Fundraising Campaign is under way!
To donate, please visit:
http://www.gsenet.org/support/donate.php

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

OP/ED: VOTE TO PRESERVE NJ'S ENVIRONMENT

Date: 3 Nov 2003
From: tdall...@RPA.ORG

Times, October 31, 2003

On November 4th, New Jersey voters will have a unique opportunity to
have our say on not one, not two, but three of the most important
issues affecting our quality of life - open space preservation,
brownfields redevelopment, and water management. For the first time,
these three major environmental initiatives will appear on the same
ballot. Regional Plan Association through its New Jersey Committee
endorses all three initiatives as an investment in New Jersey's
future.

As increasing sprawl threatens New Jersey's natural resources,
drinking water supply, and quality of life, it is vitally important
now more than ever to support open space preservation efforts. Public
question #1 is a constitutional amendment which would add an
additional $150 million for parks, farmland and historic preservation
programs, taking us one step closer to meeting our goal of preserving
another million acres in the Garden State by the year 2010.

Since voters gave their approval in 1998 to establish a new statewide
program of open space, farmland and historic preservation, many
counties and local municipalities have adopted their own open space
dedicated taxes. However, the demand for and dependence on such grants
from the Garden State Preservation Trust has increased dramatically,
now exceeding available funds established just 5 years ago!

As the value of land increases, the cost of open space and farmland
preservation will continue to rise. If approved, the additional $150
million established by the amendment can be used to maximize land
acquisition efforts by purchasing open space, farmland, and historic
sites now, before the costs of doing so become prohibitive. Regional
Plan Association is especially pleased that, if this question is
approved, $50 million would be prioritized for land acquisition in the
Highlands, helping to protect New Jersey's drinking water supply,
while another $50 million would be slated specifically for park
development in urban and suburban areas throughout the state. Simply
put, this will mean more parks where people live, and large,
contiguous areas of open land to promote farming, protect water and
ensure a place we can proudly call home. That's a double win for the
Garden State.

But New Jersey has another side. With over 12,000 brownfield sites,
there is enormous potential for redevelopment projects if given the
financial resources to clean up those sites. Public question #2 seeks
to expand opportunities for brownfield clean-up and create a
permanent, stable source of funding for remediation by expanding the
authorized uses of funds in the State's Underground Storage Tank (UST)
program.

Since 1996, 4% of the corporate business tax (CBT) revenue has been
constitutionally dedicated to the UST program. If approved, this
amendment would restructure the current allocation of funds from the
UST program, making a larger portion available for the remediation of
brownfield sites and extend the life of the program indefinitely,
without requiring an increase in dedicated CBT revenue or seek
additional tax revenue sources. With currently $80 million of unused
funds in the UST program and an additional $20 million in CBT revenue
anticipated in fiscal year 2004, this larger, permanent source of
funding for brownfield remediation projects could increase
opportunities for the redevelopment of New Jersey's brownfield sites
into housing, schools, community centers and retail development, such
as Trenton's Waterfront Park. Regional Plan Association has long
supported the redevelopment of brownfields as an essential tool of
smart growth, reducing the need to build on prime farmland or forests.

Water management is a primary concern, not only in the Highlands, but
throughout the state. Public question #3 would establish the "Dam,
Stream, Flood Control, Water Resources, and Wastewater Treatment
Project Bond Act of 2003," and authorize the State to issue bonds
totaling $200 million to finance various water restoration, clean-up,
flood control, and treatment projects.

Up to $90 million will finance State run dam repair and restoration,
flood control, water resource and wastewater treatment projects, with
the State assuming all responsibility for the interest generated by
the total debt. The remaining $110 million, provided in the form of
low-interest loans, would assist private owners of lakes, streams,
private lake associations, and dams for projects deemed necessary by
the State to diminish severe flooding. The partnership created between
the State and private owners can lead to more consistent and efficient
water management in the short term while addressing New Jersey's long-
term problems related to flooding, ecosystem restoration, and
wastewater treatment. Regional Plan Association shares the fiscal and
environmental concerns that others have raised regarding this ballot
initiative, but holds that proper implementation with stringent
oversight will help protect us from future floods and water
contamination.

At the center of each question is how to fund vital programs without
burdening NJ taxpayers. Much like a mortgage, these three ballot
questions do just that, providing essential funding that is affordable
over an extended time. Few doubt these investments are necessary; all
should support the opportunity presented to us to address these
problems. As the nation's oldest, independent planning organization
dedicated to improving the quality of life in the tri-state area,
Regional Plan Association urges voters to say: Yes! Yes! Yes!

- - -

Thomas G. Dallessio AICP/PP is a licensed professional planner and the
New Jersey Director of Regional Plan Association.

* * *

# # #

Thomas G. Dallessio AICP/PP
Director, New Jersey Office
Regional Plan Association
94 Church Street, Suite 401
New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901
tel: 732.828.9945
fax: 732.828.9949
email: tdall...@rpa.org
web: http://www.rpa.org

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

CHRISTINE WHITMAN: LOOKING BACK, LOOKING FORWARD

Date: 031103
From: LGold...@aol.com

[SPECIAL REPORT - Excerpt - Read the full article at:
http://www.gsenet.org/library/14njs/whitman.php]

FROM DRINKING WATER STANDARDS TO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE,
THE FORMER GOVERNOR REFLECTS ON KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

By Lewis Goldshore and Marsha Wolf, NJ Law Journal, 10-20-2003

Christine Todd Whitman seemed like an odd selection to head the Bush
Administration's U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

It's a highly technical, no-win type of position that is replete with
traps for the unwary. With the exception of open space preservation,
Whitman, as New Jersey's governor, appeared not very interested in
environmental issues. But the lure of a cabinet post - even a not very
glamorous one - in an incoming Republican administration was tempting
enough to cause her to leave Trenton one year early.

Dark clouds were looming from the very beginning of her tenure - it
just did not have the markings of an environmental-friendly
administration. President George W. Bush had never been comfortable
with the environmental community and made no great efforts to court
its support.

[Snip]

- - -

Goldshore is a partner at Szaferman, Lakind, Blumstein, Blader,
Lehmann & Goldshore of Lawrenceville. Goldshore and Wolf are co-
authors of New Jersey Environmental Law, the Environmental Law
Citator, the Environmental Law Newsletter, published by the New Jersey
Institute of Continuing Legal Education, and an online New Jersey
environmental newsletter, http://www.njenvironews.com. Goldshore is a
co-author of New Jersey Brownfields Law, published by New Jersey Law
Journal Law Books. Their column appears regularly in the Law Journal.

* * *

# # #

Szaferman, Lakind, Blumstein, Watter, Blader, Lehmann & Goldshore
Quakerbridge Executive Center Ste 104
101 Grovers Mill Rd
Lawrenceville NJ 08648
T: 609-275-0400
F: 609-275-4511
W: http://www.szaferman.com

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

TOXIC IMMUNITY

Date: 031103
From: http://www.motherjones.com/

FACED WITH A HAZARDOUS-WASTE CRISIS, THE PENTAGON IS PUSHING HARD
TO EXEMPT ITSELF FROM THE NATION'S ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS.

Jon R. Luoma, Mother Jones, November/December 2003 Issue

"It feels like somebody wrote a new rule - the bigger a mess you
make, the easier it should be to just walk away," says Laura Olah, a
Wisconsin activist who heads a grassroots group called Citizens for
Safe Water Around Badger. Badger, in this case, is a former Army
ammunition plant near the town of Sauk Prairie, Wisconsin - a
sprawling industrial complex that operated from World War II through
the mid-1970s and produced not only munitions, but a flood of toxic
wastes. Today, a witches' brew of contaminants, including the heavy
metals mercury and cadmium and the cancer-causing compounds carbon
tetrachloride and trichloroethylene, is seeping into the groundwater
beneath the 7,300-acre site. For more than a decade, several local
farm families unwittingly drew their well water directly from the
heart of the contamination; in the nearby Wisconsin River, sediments
are contaminated with more than 20 times the allowable amount of
mercury.

Olah says her group just wants the Defense Department to clean up the
site before it abandons Badger entirely. But the Pentagon has missed a
series of deadlines in a cleanup agreement with the state of
Wisconsin. In recent years, it has also backed away from a plan to
remove large volumes of contaminated soil from the base, proposing
instead to fence off and monitor the toxic hot spots.

Badger is hardly an isolated case. From Cape Cod in Massachusetts to
McClellan Air Force Base in California, the Pentagon is facing
mounting criticism for failing to clean up military sites contaminated
with everything from old munitions to radioactive materials and
residues from biological-weapons research. Now, citing the demands of
the war on terrorism and working with sympathetic officials in the
administration and Congress, the department has stepped up efforts to
remove substantial parts of its operations from environmental
oversight.

Last December, Defense officials drew up a 24-page strategy
memorandum, laying out a plan for a "multi-year campaign" to exempt
the military from federal laws including the Marine Mammal Protection
Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Air Act, as well as
rules governing solid and hazardous wastes. The strategy also called
for Congress to state "that munitions deposited and remaining on
operational ranges are not 'solid wastes'" - a move that with one
stroke would exempt the Pentagon from having to clean up the old
shells, fuels, and other weapons "constituents" that turn places like
Badger into health hazards.

The Pentagon is seeking these changes even though current law already
allows it to gain exemptions from any environmental regulations that
might hinder military preparedness; according to a 2002 study by
Congress' General Accounting Office, the Defense Department has never
run into any significant problems in this regard.

Nonetheless, Bush appointees at the EPA appear to have embraced the
Pentagon's agenda. In April, EPA enforcement chief John Suarez told
Congress that the Pentagon's proposals to ease hazardous-waste
regulations were "appropriate" and in line with "existing EPA
policy" - even though only weeks earlier, a report from Suarez's own
staff to the President's Office of Management and Budget had
specifically warned against relaxing the waste rules, noting that the
munitions could present "an imminent and substantial endangerment of
health or the environment." The hazardous-waste exemption failed to
pass Congress this spring - though the Pentagon got one step closer to
an item on its environmental wish list when the House approved an
exemption to the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which has been an
impediment to a controversial Navy sonar program. Hill staffers say
they expect the hazardous-waste proposal to be introduced again in the
coming months.

The changes could affect thousands of sites across the nation. Late
last year, EPA staffers prepared an internal briefing document for
Suarez, suggesting that removing toxic waste just from the Pentagon's
thousands of weapons ranges "has the potential to be the largest
environmental cleanup program ever to be implemented in the United
States." According to the report, which was never publicly released,
the contaminated ranges cover an area as large as Florida, or about 40
million acres. Yet, it noted, there had been a "disturbing trend" on
the Pentagon's part of taking "ill-advised short-cuts to limit costs."

In all, more than 27,000 military waste sites have been documented
nationwide; they include the vast Massachusetts Military Reservation
on Cape Cod, where contamination threatens the drinking water for more
than a quarter million residents, as well as Fort Detrick in Maryland,
where cleanup contractors in 2001 turned up test tubes filled with
residues of anthrax and other bioweapons materials. But even as the
scope of the problem continues to expand, internal EPA reports
suggest, the Department of Defense is seeking to conceal the extent of
the contamination.

According to a survey of inactive weapons ranges commissioned by the
Pentagon in 2000, nearly half the 206 sites studied lacked adequate
fencing, or even simple signs, to keep the public away from areas
where hazardous munitions might lie. The same report also found that
wastes from chemical or biological weapons might be present at more
than 50 percent of the sites. The document's first draft stopped just
short of calling the Defense Department a scofflaw, stating that it
"often does not adhere to...applicable statutes or regulations" and
concluding that "the ranges in this survey pose potentially
significant threats to human health and the environment."

By the time the final version of the report appeared later that year,
both of those statements, along with seven additional pages of
observations and criticisms of the Pentagon, had been removed. Jeff
Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility - a whistleblower group that obtained copies of the
original document - says agency staffers told him that the report had
been censored in response to pressure from the Pentagon.

In recent months, the Pentagon has quietly scored a series of other
concessions from the EPA. In one decision - announced in a press
release late on a Friday last July - the agency declared that it would
not, as had been widely expected, tighten drinking-water standards for
perchlorate, a rocket-fuel additive that has contaminated scores of
bases and weapons- manufacturing sites. Perchlorate seeping into the
Colorado River from a Nevada rocket plant has contaminated the
drinking-water supply for 15 million people; a recent study by the
nonprofit Environmental Working Group suggests that most of the
nation's winter lettuce - the bulk of which is irrigated with Colorado
River water - contains significant amounts of the toxin.

Also this summer, the EPA announced it would no longer require
property owners to remove polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which are
also suspected carcinogens, from buildings before selling them - a
change that would largely benefit the Pentagon, which owns hundreds of
PCB-contaminated sites. Under the new rules, the Pentagon could
transfer those sites to schools, hospitals, and other civilian users
without incurring liability for the contamination or requiring
evidence of any cleanup.

Watchdog groups expect the Defense Department to continue pushing for
environmental exemptions, both within the administration and in
Congress. "This isn't over," says Karen Wayland of the Washington-
based Natural Resources Defense Council. "There was such a public
outcry when they first floated these ideas a couple of years ago that
we thought they'd back off. But they're casting it as an issue of
military readiness in the age of terrorism, and leaning hard on
everyone from the moderate Republicans in Congress to the EPA to get
out of the way."

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

EPA TO EASE SEWAGE TREATMENT RULES

Date: 031103
From: http://www.usatoday.com/

CHANGE WOULD LET PLANTS SKIP CLEANING STEP DURING HEAVY RAIN

By Peter Eisler, USA TODAY, 20031103

Washington - The Bush administration is shifting policy so cities and
towns can skip a required treatment procedure for sewage they pump
into rivers, lakes and coastal waters during high rains.

The change aims to settle years of disputes over how municipal sewage
plants handle the increased flow of waste - mainly storm runoff - that
comes during wet weather. At issue is whether local governments should
have to spend billions of tax dollars upgrading those plants so peak
flows of sewage can get all the sanitary treatment that federal law
demands in normal conditions.

The administration's plan would let hundreds of communities big and
small escape that expense by partially treating sewage surges in big
storms. Environmental groups and some federal regulators say those
flows should be treated completely to keep disease-carrying microbes
out of recreational waters.

The Environmental Protection Agency plans to propose the policy
change this week, and there will be 60 days for public comment before
it can be finalized. USA TODAY obtained a copy of the initiative.

"We've been pushing hard for a national policy on this," says Ken
Kirk of the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, which
represents public treatment plants. There has been "a lot of
confusion" over how much treatment is required for sewage surges in
wet weather, he says. If the EPA required full treatment, "it would
have been very costly for a lot of communities."

Federal law normally requires that sewage treatment plants send waste
through a series of cleaning steps. First, solids are separated and
removed. The sewage then goes through "biological treatment," where
living organisms break down remaining solids and kill bacteria.
Typically, the waste also is treated with disinfectants to meet
sanitary standards before it is discharged, usually into waterways.

But the heavy flows of wastewater that come in wet weather often
exceed the capacity of plants' biological treatment. Many plants
divert peak flows around the second treatment step. After some
disinfection, the diverted waste is blended with fully treated sewage
before it is released.

The EPA's new policy would permit blending and say that blended waste
still must meet normal discharge standards, including limits on
bacterial content and clarity.

But "those standards don't cover viruses or parasites...and those are
the contaminants that don't get removed if you skip biological
treatment," says Nancy Stoner of the Natural Resources Defense
Council, an environmental group that wants more federal aid to help
communities increase sewage plant capacity. Blending "will put more of
those contaminants in water supplies."

Industry surveys suggest 20%-50% of the nation's 19,000 public sewage
plants blend waste in wet weather. Some of the EPA's 10 regional
offices allow blending, but several have fined communities for doing
it.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

WASTEWATER ON GOLF COURSE CONCERNS RESIDENTS

Date: 031103
From: http://www.phillyburbs.com/

PLAN TO SPRAY TREATED WASTEWATER ON GOLF COURSE CONCERNS RESIDENTS

By Paul Leakan, Burlington County Times, November 3, 2003

Medford Lakes - Some residents are seeing red over a proposal by
Medford Lakes Country Club to spray treated wastewater on its golf
course to keep it lush and green.

A number of residents who live on the fringes of the course have
expressed concerns the treated effluent will filter into the
groundwater and contaminate drinking water in their private wells.

"I don't have proof that it's going to contaminate (the
groundwater)," said resident Jim Cottingham, whose property backs up
to the course, "but they haven't provided me with any proof that it
won't, and they haven't provided a backup plan if it does."

Earlier this year, management from the country club and the Borough
Council reached an informal agreement to pipe treated wastewater
underground from the borough sewer plant on Stokes Road to the country
club on Oak Drive.

Under the tentative pact, the country club would pay for improvements
to pipe the reclaimed water and to construct a reservoir resembling a
large pond on the golf course.

The water would collect in the pond and then be used to irrigate
greens and fairways.

Country club officials tout the move as a way to ensure the course
stays green all year without drawing water from underground aquifers
or surrounding lakes. They also say they will follow all state laws
and regulations to ensure no problems arise.

"We certainly don't want to contaminate any groundwater, and we won't
do anything to contaminate groundwater," said Mike Newland, chairman
of the club board of directors.

Mayor Gary Woodend acknowledged residents' fears, but said he has yet
to see any proof the proposal would cause any problems.

"Their only real concern is that somehow the country club is going to
be sprinkling so much more water that it will filter down into their
wells somehow," he said. ": I haven't heard any engineer say that's
possible."

The plans have yet to be approved by the borough Planning Board and
the state Pinelands Commission.

The commission sent a letter to the country club Thursday asking for
more information, said Fran Rapa, commission spokesman.

"One of the primary concerns with the commission is whether there
would be any adverse impact on the groundwater," Rapa said.

At least one other golf course in Burlington County has used treated
wastewater to irrigate greens and fairways.

Since 2002, municipally owned Indian Spring Country Club in Evesham
has used treated effluent from the Evesham Municipal Utilities
Authority's Elmwood wastewater-treatment plant to irrigate.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

CONTROVERSIAL LAW NETS AN HONOR

Date: 031104
From: http://www.nj.com/news/gloucester/

By Shawn Menzies, Gloucester County Times, November 02, 2003

Washington Twp. - The Association of New Jersey Environmental
Commissions has recognized the municipality's environmental commission
for protecting drinking water through its Wellhead Protection
ordinance.

The ordinance, which the council adopted last year, restricts 26
different types of business and development near shallow water wells.
The rules create zoning overlay districts throughout the municipality.

Vicky Binetti, vice chair of the Washington Township Environmental
Commission, said the town was gratified by the recognition. She looks
forward to continuing support from environmental organizations and
municipal governments statewide.

"Hundreds of large and small communities throughout the country have
used their local zoning authority to protect their water resources,"
said Binetti, author of the ordinance, who noted that the township's
action is consistent with the New Jersey State Plan. "In the past,
people have not made the connection that what we do on the land
affects the quality of water resources, including drinking water, but
that is changing," she said.

Mayor Randee Davidson commended the members of the commission, saying
they had earned the recognition through hard work on behalf of
township residents and the environment.

"I have had the delight of being able to work with them and I have
learned a lot from the commission and the people who have served there
as volunteers," Davidson said. "I just cannot give them enough
accolades as to how they have worked on quality-of-life issues."

Not long after the law was adopted by the township council in
September 2002, it was challenged in a lawsuit brought by the New
Jersey Fuel Merchants Association (NJFMA). The NJFMA argued the law
was "too stringent and exceeded local government zoning authority."

In July, a judge ruled in favor of the NJFMA, but courts have granted
the municipality a stay allowing the Wellhead law to be enforced until
the matter is appealed and a final decision rendered. That hearing,
township Solicitor Michael Albano said, could start this spring.

Washington Township Residents for a Better Community, a local grass-
roots group backing the ordinance, reports on its Web site that Ernest
Hahn, of the state Department of Environmental Protection, stated at a
recent conference that DEP would support the municipality in its legal
fight to enforce the Wellhead Protection ordinance.

At its award ceremony Oct. 25 in New Brunswick, the association also
recognized Franklin Township for community outreach through a 12-page
booklet explaining what residents can do to protect streams, lakes and
groundwater in the municipality.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

THE BACKLASH AGAINST `SMART GROWTH'

Date: 031104
From: http://www.innobriefs.com/

Editorial, Innovation Briefs, November/December 2003

The debate about "smart growth" shows no sign of subsiding.
Increasingly, however, the Smart Growth forces - long basking in
uncritical acclaim - find themselves on the defensive. In Loudoun
County, Virginia - the second fastest growing county in the nation -
opponents have filed more than 200 lawsuits to overturn tough growth
control measures enacted in the late nineties to control sprawl. In
New Jersey, builders and developers are mounting a series of legal
challenges against the policies of Governor James McGreevey to promote
"smart growth." In Colorado, local communities, eager to spur
development and increase local tax base, are turning away from
previously adopted growth restrictions. In California, the state has
shelved legislation designed to shape California's future growth
through financial rewards to cities that adopted the "smart growth"
vision. Elsewhere, advocates for affordable housing and pro-growth
forces are challenging "smart growth" initiatives in South and North
Carolina, Michigan, Oregon, and Utah. These are just some of the overt
signs of what many see as a growing backlash against anti-sprawl
measures enacted in the 1990s - measures which were meant to slow down
suburban growth but whose outcome has come to be seen as exclusionary
and elitist. Increasingly, the "smart growth" movement is defending
itself against accusations that its real motivation in urging denser
infill development is to shelter wealthy suburbanites from further
urbanization and shift the burden of growth to the city; and that its
main consequence has been to raise suburban housing prices, maximize
developer profits and deprive low income households and minorities of
an opportunity to pursue the American dream of home ownership.

The strict growth controls enacted by Loudoun County supervisors in
January 2003 were meant to curb some of the rampant suburban expansion
that took place throughout the Northern Virginia county during the
1990s, transforming rural landscapes, necessitating costly school
construction and overwhelming the county's road network. But many
critics say the supervisors, elected in 1999 on promises to stop
sprawl, have overreacted. The new zoning limits development to just
one house per 10 acres in most areas and imposes impact fees that make
it economically impractical for builders to construct anything but
expensive tract mansions. "Smart growth" policies Loudoun County
style, charge critics, are nothing more than exclusionary policies
masquerading as "open space conservation." They do not prevent
sprawl - they just spread it over a larger area. Exurban counties
surrounding Washington DC, which a decade ago were primarily dairy
farms and agricultural fields, are now dotted with mini-mansions on
10-acre lots. In the meantime, construction of affordable housing on
the urban periphery has slowed down to a trickle and in many areas has
come to a complete standstill.

Faced with accusations of exclusionary practices and with pressures
to provide affordable housing, many communities are relaxing
previously adopted anti-sprawl policies. But "smart growth" forces are
not about to surrender to populist pressures. Instead, they are going
to ridiculous extremes to demonize sprawl by blaming it for all sorts
of contemporary problems such as traffic congestion, last years's
drought and disappearance of neighborliness. Their latest offensive is
to blame suburban sprawl for America's growing obesity epidemic. A
report, Measuring the Health Effects of Sprawl , released by Smart
Growth America and the Surface Transportation Policy project, purports
to demonstrate that people living in low density suburbs walk less and
therefore tend to be overweight. "If these results hold up," claimed
the report's author, Reid Ewing, "then building more compact
communities will become a public health imperative." But critics tend
to dismiss these claims as laughable. "This is another attempt by the
report's sponsors to spin research showing only trivial weight
differences between city and suburban residents into a national crisis
requiring land use restrictions," said the Heritage Foundation's
Ronald D. Utt. "It sets a new record for political spin [by]
manipulating the inconsequential to feign significance," echoed
Wendell Cox, a well-known debunker of "smart growth." Other critics
point out that obesity is associated more with poor diet than with
geography, as witnessed by the fact that the highest incidence of
obesity is found among minority residents of inner cities rather than
among fitness-conscious suburbanites.

"Smart growth" critics are not beyond exploiting popular public
concerns. Cox argues that the recent power blackout in the Eastern
United States and Canada is just one more reason to reject smart
growth and its advocacy of rail transit and high density. He contends
that, unlike downtown New York or Toronto where thousands of commuters
were stranded when elevators and rail transit stopped working, car-
reliant residents of suburban communities were only mildly
inconvenienced by the power outages. In a recent commentary, Cox
called the smart growth forces an "anti-opportunity" movement that
would "force housing prices up and deprive millions of households of
home ownership." His arguments do not go unheeded. "If sprawl allows
more people to own homes, keeps housing prices down for middle- and
lower-income buyers, and lowers transportation costs and time spent in
traffic, why are we against it?" a Montgomery Journal (MD) editorial
asked recently.

The perception of elitism is another point on which the "smart
growth" forces are vulnerable. "The Smart Growth movement struggles
mightily to overcome the suspicion that it is an effort by urban
aesthetes and environmentalists to impose their lifestyle choices on
the majority who generally prefer a suburban lifestyle," notes Matthew
J. Kiefer, a planning critic generally friendly to growth management,
in a recent article in the Harvard Design Magazine ("Suburbia and Its
Discontents: Notes from the Sprawl Debate," Fall 2003/Winter 2004).

Finally, as architect Roger K. Lewis notes in a recent Washington
Post article (October 4, 2003, p. F3), a commonly held view is that
"the real motive for proposing higher density is money." These
sentiments, he writes, are voiced repeatedly by citizens attending
public hearings to fight proposals for denser forms of development.
How do you persuade skeptical homeowners, he asks plaintively, that
developers who "cram houses one on top of the other" are not primarily
driven by greed or that local officials who approve these projects are
not mainly motivated by a desire to augment local tax revenue?

In the end, the verbal skirmishes fought over "smart growth" are of
little practical consequence, for the "smart growth" movement has no
power to reshape America's urban landscape in any significant way. The
demographic and economic forces driving metropolitan expansion are too
powerful to be reined in or influenced by a planning ideology. As the
noted urban analyst, Anthony Downs, points out, the biggest factor
influencing future land use decisions is the nation's need to
accommodate a 23 percent gain in population by 2020 - a projected
increase of some 64 million people ("What Does "Smart Growth" Really
Mean?", Planning Magazine, March 2003). It is hard to conceive that
this population bulge could be fitted into existing built-up areas
where neighborhood opposition to increasing density through infill
development already is fierce. Thus, absent some cataclysmic energy
crisis, continued dispersal of urban population and economic activity
seems inevitable.

The "smart growth" movement is likely to go down in history as yet
another planning ideology that has foundered for lack of a realistic
understanding of demographics, market forces and consumer preferences.

* * *

INNOVATION BRIEFS
A publication of the Urban Mobility Corporation
10200 Riverwood Dr
Potomac MD 20854-1536
tel: 301.299.1996
Fax: 301.299.4425
email: kor...@erols.com

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

JUST AROUND THE BEND, A NEW LOOK AT ROADS

Date: 031104
From: http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/

TOWNS WORK ON 'CONTEXT SENSITIVE DESIGN,'
FANCY WORDS FOR COMMON-SENSE MAIN STREETS

By Steve Chambers, Star-Ledger Staff, November 03, 2003

Four years ago, Mayor Jerry Hauselt was fighting a frustrating battle
with state government that is all too familiar for local officials.

His tiny Monmouth County community of Avon-by-the-Sea had grand plans
for redesigning Main Street, but it was being stymied by the state
Department of Transportation.

The street also happened to be a state highway, and DOT engineers did
not approve of the borough's proposal to reduce Route 71 from four
lanes to two by inserting islands and fancy "traffic calming" devices,
making it less a speedway and more a thoroughfare of a sleepy
downtown.

This past summer, however, work on the project was completed just the
way Hauselt and the town envisioned it.

What happened was a small victory in a quiet revolution sweeping
government engineering departments in New Jersey and other parts of
the country. Known as "Context Sensitive Design" in the engineering
world, it boils down to the notion that roads can move cars and still
respect pedestrians. It also introduces the radical notion that locals
may know their town better than bureaucrats.

The movement is focused on reviving old-fashioned downtowns that
suffered in the malling of America, and it has become a rallying cry
for anti-sprawl advocates arguing that automobile worship is devouring
open space and all sense of community.

The concept began building steam in New Jersey about three years ago,
when hundreds of DOT engineers started taking a five-day course that
included such esoteric subjects as the viability of communities and
the art of conflict resolution.

The administration of Gov. James E. McGreevey has embraced the
concept as part of its war on sprawl, and local officials said
constant preaching from above has started to influence DOT engineers
across the state.

"That's the job these days," said Gary Toth, the DOT's director of
project planning and development. "It's no longer taking out the
hammer and pounding people into submission. It's all about
negotiation."

Netcong Administrator Marvin Joss recently took the five-day course
in New Brunswick with other municipal officials and DOT engineers.

He said it was sometimes amusing to watch the engineers struggle to
reconcile their preoccupation with "car counts" with the notion of a
pedestrian-friendly downtown.

"Road engineers trained their whole lives to make roads safe for
cars; no one explained to them that people might need to walk on those
roads," he said.

Netcong is in the process of becoming another success story, having
convinced engineers that DOT plans for widening the Route 183 circle
and straightening a sharp curve entering town would be a mistake. The
engineers agreed to violate all their rules and allow a bend in the
road that had always slowed traffic to remain.

All participants in the ongoing discussion concede there is a tricky
balance to keep. State highways need to handle increasing amounts of
traffic, especially with population rising in rural New Jersey. And
the old solution of a bypass road is equally offensive, because it
spawns more commercial development that chokes that road and kills the
old downtown.

Beth Lippman, president of Downtown New Jersey, said the key is for
engineers to keep an open mind as they enter discussions with local
officials. She said that is happening to a surprising degree.

"They are starting to see the light," said Lippman, whose non-profit
organization advocates for traditional downtowns. "The view in the
past was always, 'We're just moving people through.' Now, they are
saying, 'We also want people to be able to cross streets, to drive
safely and carefully and get in and out of parking spots. To get out
of their cars and shop.'"

New attitudes do not mean victory in every case, however. Lippman
said Livingston is having trouble convincing the DOT, for example,
that a major downtown redevelopment on two sides of Route 10 needs a
traffic light in mid-block at a pedestrian crossing.

Newton, she said, is similarly struggling with a request that could
slow truck traffic approaching its town square.

Still, she said, there is no question that something big has changed
for the better at DOT. The department even sponsored a Rutgers
University report called "Flexible Design of New Jersey Main Streets,"
although its first suggestion for a title was "Flexible Design
Standards for Highways through Communities."

Three years ago, at the height of his frustration, Hauselt, who is no
longer Avon's mayor, finally requested a sit-down with a roomful of
engineers, including pedestrian safety representatives.

"We'd made this presentation dozens of times, but now everyone was
there," he said. "And they were nodding their heads."

In the end, the DOT paid nearly $2 million for the project. Hauselt
said there had been a few naysayers in town who worried about traffic
congestion, but it never materialized.

Mary Elizabeth Sheppard, the city clerk in Lambertville, said the
regional DOT engineers have always been polite. But the town had
trouble, until recently, convincing them that crosswalks were needed
mid-block across Route 29, where people entered the riverfront walk.

Now that project is in the works, but city efforts to get the speed
limit on Route 179 reduced below 35 mph are ongoing. (It was reduced
from 40 mph several years ago, after a truck plowed into a building
and killed a woman.)

"The one thing you have to remember about government," she said, "is
that the price of liberty is slowness."

* * *

Steve Chambers covers land-use issues. He may be reached at
scha...@starledger.com or (973) 392-1674.
Copyright 2003 The Star-Ledger.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

DRIVING A HARD BARGAIN

Date: 031103
From: http://www.gristmagazine.com/

MILEAGE-BASED CAR INSURANCE COULD BE A BOON FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

By Elisa Murray, Elm Street Writers Group, 03 Nov 2003

Most of us don't think much about car insurance. We eyeball the
policy every year, fiddle around with a few changes to bring down the
premium, and then forget about it until the bills come. And come they
do - each exactly the same amount, no matter whether we've driven

Doesn't sound right, does it? Mileage - like factors such as age and
driving record - has long been correlated with accident risk. The more
you drive, the higher the chance of a crash.

But unlike a driver's age and record, how far you drive is not much
of a factor in determining your premium. Some companies do offer low-
mileage discounts, but these don't come close to capturing the actual
difference in accident risk between high- and low-mileage drivers.
Todd Litman, director of the Victoria Transport Policy Institute in
British Columbia, has done extensive research on the relationship
between annual mileage and insurance claims. His studies suggest that
if other risk factors - such as age of driver, time of day, and type
of driving - are constant, then accident risk tends to increase in a
roughly linear relationship with mileage. Translation: If you drive
twice as much, you're about twice as likely to have an accident.

The result is an inequitable insurance system and an incentive to
treat driving like an all-you- can-eat buffet: Once you've paid the
price, you may as well gorge - which increases the environmental and
social problems related to driving. For starters, think of the three
C's: congestion, collisions, and climate change. Highways are becoming
increasingly congested - - according to the Texas Transportation
Institute's latest study, the average driver wastes 51 hours a year
stuck in traffic, a four-hour increase in the last five years. Auto
collisions are a leading killer of young people. And vehicles are a
leading cause of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAYD FOR

The good news is that small changes in everyday activities, such as
how we market and sell car insurance, could make a big dent in
problems like these. Out here where I live and drive in the Pacific
Northwest, the state of Oregon is taking a crack at lowering car
insurance costs and reducing the collateral damage from driving. In
July, Gov. Ted Kulongoski (D) signed a new law that encourages
insurers to offer pay-as-you-drive insurance - or, in its acronym
form, PAYD.

PAYD is an innovative approach to insurance that rewards motorists
for driving less by selling insurance on a per-mile rate instead of a
fixed rate. PAYD also incorporates existing rating factors, such as a
driver's crash history, age, and geographic location. Mileage can be
checked either through high-tech satellite technology - GPS - or
simple odometer readings. Essentially, pay-as-you-drive makes buying
car insurance more like buying gasoline: The less you drive, the less
you pay.

The Oregon bill, sponsored by the Oregon Environmental Council and
widely supported by consumer, environmental, and business groups,
helps insurers reduce the set-up costs for such a system by giving
them a limited tax credit for offering per-mile premiums. It is purely
voluntary: No mandates, just incentives. Now that the bill has become
law, Oregon is the first state to give insurance companies a financial
incentive to "test drive" per-mile premiums.

Getting this law on the books is a huge victory for Oregonians.
First, if offered by insurance companies, PAYD will give consumers
more control over their insurance costs - making it more affordable,
for example, to insure a vehicle that is only driven a few thousand
miles a year. The amount motorists could save with PAYD would depend
on several factors, of course - including their insurer's rate plan
and their mileage - but data from a pilot project run by Progressive
Insurance in Texas several years ago showed that participants saved an
average of 25 percent.

Second, the new pricing structure could spur motorists to drive less,
which would reduce driving-related problems such as congestion and
auto accidents. One study, by Aaron Edlin of the University of
California at Berkeley, estimates that a universal system of per-mile
auto insurance would reduce driving nationally by about 9 percent with
a potential insurance savings of $8 billion a year and congestion-
related savings of an additional $9 billion. Litman, for his part,
estimates that PAYD would reduce driving by around 10 percent and
crashes by 12 to 15 percent.

But the payoff for you, your family, and your community is not only
that reduced driving would keep more dollars in your pocket, but also
that it would help slash the huge environmental consequences - sprawl,
air and water pollution, energy overconsumption, ruined wildlife
habitat, drilling in places such as the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge - of America's drive-through way of life. PAYD would even help
address the problem of global climate change. As Dean Baker,
codirector the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington,
D.C., has noted, mileage-based auto insurance "may be the biggest free
lunch around in reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

The Oregon law also should serve to accelerate the work on similar
programs in other states and countries. Efforts have been launched in
Georgia, Massachusetts, and England, among other places. Texas has
passed a bill authorizing insurers to offer PAYD, but Texas lawmakers
did not offer incentives to insurers, which may be a key factor in
getting the programs started.

If pay-by-the-mile insurance is as successful as its supporters in
Oregon anticipate, the dynamics of the marketplace will take over,
giving more consumers a chance to save money - and make the world a
bit better - by spending less time behind the wheel.

- - -

Elisa Murray is a writer and the communications director for Northwest
Environment Watch, a Seattle-based research and communications center.
http://www.northwestwatch.org/

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

RECYCLING REBOUNDS AFTER '99 LOW POINT

Date: 031103
From: http://www.phillyburbs.com/

By John Reitmeyer, Burlington County Times, November 3, 2003

Burlington County residents may not be recycling as much as municipal
officials would like, but they have been bucking a statewide trend
that shows a drop in the overall residential recycling rate.

Residents of New Jersey municipalities recycled 36 percent of the
waste they produced in 2001, the most-recent statistics available from
the state Department of Environmental Protection. However, residents
of Burlington County towns recycled 38.6 percent of their waste during
the same 12 months, those statistics show.

In addition, Burlington County recycling officials have been watching
the county's recycling rate steadily rise while the overall state
average has been dropping.

The county rate increased from 32.3 percent in 1999 to 34.1 percent
in 2000, to 38.6 percent in 2001. Meanwhile, the state average fell
from 39.2 percent in 1999, to 37.6 percent in 2000, to 36 percent in
2001.

Burlington County's Office of Recycling has been trying to boost
recycling rates in the county's 40 municipalities through public-
awareness campaigns for the last several years, said Ann Moore, the
county's recycling coordinator.

The rates were above 40 percent in the early 1990s, but then began to
drop off, Moore said. Now they are rebounding.

"I think our education efforts are starting to pay off," Moore said.

Still, the county's goal for the municipal recycling rate is 50
percent and Moore is constantly trying to figure out new ways to
convince residents to pitch in. More than 500 schoolchildren tour the
county's main recycling center in Westampton each year as part of
outreach efforts by her office, Moore said.

This year, the office also is reaching out to apartment-complex
managers to generate more recyclable materials from apartment
dwellers.

Moore said the county would also participate in a national effort to
reach men between the ages of 18 and 34. Industry studies indicate
that group is the biggest consumer of recyclable materials, but the
least likely to actually recycle.

"We're going to see if we can borrow" from the national campaign,
Moore said.

The DEP will also take a look at reaching out to the 18-34 male
demographic to boost recycling rates, said agency spokesman Fred
Mumford.

Mumford said the packaging of goods is making it more difficult for
residents to find ways to recycle. "The solid-waste stream is
changing," he said.

The state agency reinstated a grant program this year to help
municipalities pay for local recycling efforts, Mumford said.
Encouraging small-business owners to recycle is another focus for the
DEP, he said.

Moore said recycling can be a tough sell because consumers don't
always see the direct effects of their cooperation, but products are
cheaper if they are made of recyclable materials and the recycling
process produces less pollution than manufacturing containers from raw
material.

Recycling also creates jobs and saves dwindling landfill space, Moore
said.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

AS USES GROW, TINY MATERIALS' SAFETY IS HARD TO PIN DOWN

Date: 031103
From: http://www.nytimes.com/

By Barnaby J. Feder, NY Times, November 3, 2003

When researchers fashion nanomaterials so small that their dimensions
can be measured in molecules, the unusual and potentially valuable
characteristics of those materials tend to show up immediately. But as
businesses race to exploit those benefits, investors and policy makers
are finding that pinpointing the potential environmental and health
impacts of nanotechnology could take years.

In fact, the first stages of environmental impact research are
generating more new questions than answers.

Take the experience of researchers at DuPont, who are testing
microscopic tubes of carbon, known as nanotubes, valued for their
extraordinary strength and electrical conductivity. When the
researchers injected nanotubes into the lungs of rats in the summer of
2002, the animals unexpectedly began gasping for breath. Fifteen
percent of them quickly died.

"It was the highest death rate we had ever seen," said David B.
Warheit, the research leader, who began his career studying asbestos
and has been testing the pulmonary effects of various chemicals for
DuPont since 1984.

Yet surprisingly, all the surviving rats seemed completely normal
within 24 hours.

What initially looked like disaster pointed to a possible safety
feature: the nanotubes' tendency to clump rapidly led to suffocation
for some rats exposed to huge doses, but it also kept most tubes from
reaching deep regions of the lung where they could not be expelled by
coughing and could cause long-term damage. Now researchers see the
clumping of carbon nanotubes and other nanomaterials as a new field
for inquiry.

The DuPont research is among the most sophisticated efforts to date
to examine potential hazards of nanoscale materials, generally defined
as those with at least one dimension less than 100 nanometers (a
nanometer is roughly the width of 10 hydrogen atoms). Such materials
are already embedded in hundreds of products, including sunscreens and
cosmetics, to make them clear; textiles, to make them stain-resistant;
and power machinery, to add durability.

Early research has raised troubling issues. DuPont and others, for
example, found evidence that the cells that break down foreign
particles in rodent lungs have more trouble detecting and handling
nanoparticles than larger particles that have long been studied by air
pollution experts.

No one has yet created a realistic test for the effects of inhaled
nanoparticles; such a test could easily cost more than $1 million to
design and carry out, toxicologists say.

Lungs are not the only concern. Research shows that nanoparticles
deposited in the nose can make their way directly into the brain. They
can also change shape as they move from liquid solutions to the air,
making it harder to draw general conclusions about their potential
impact on living things.

"It's going to be 10 years before we can answer the 'so what should I
do' question for people," said Eva Oberdörster, an aquatic
toxicologist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. Last month,
she began studying how the spherical carbon molecules known as
buckyballs are absorbed by water fleas. Eventually, her research could
clarify what effects, if any, release of such nanoparticles into the
air and water to monitor or control pollution might have on the food
chain.

"This field is in its infancy," agreed Joseph B. Hughes, a professor
at the Georgia Institute of Technology who oversees environmental
engineering research at the Center for Biological and Environmental
Nanotechnology, which is at Rice University in Houston. "The first
papers and first results will have to be cautious. The field is
growing so rapidly in the discovery end that questions about their
environmental consequences are still being generated."

Today's nanotechnology applications and those nearing
commercialization use tiny amounts of the materials, and for that
reason many entrepreneurs say there is no reason yet for them to
investigate potential environmental impacts. DuPont, which has been
sued over the health issues of chemicals used in products like Teflon,
however, has been more cautious. "It would be unwise to claim that
just because there are tiny amounts, it's harmless," said Jim Romine,
director for materials science and engineering at DuPont's global
research campus outside Wilmington, Del. "We need the data to show
that."

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INITIATIVE

Date: 31 Oct 2003
From: ea...@crosslink.net

EASI DOES IT!
CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INITIATIVE

Do you enjoy working with children?

EASI's award winning Children's Environmental Health Program is a
community education plan under an EASI-EPA cooperative agreement, to
recruit and train older Americans to educate their communities on
environmental hazards that negatively impact the health of children in
the community. Senior volunteers in EASI Senior Environment Corps from
Pennsylvania to Montana work with children in local schools and
community groups, educating them about a variety of factors and habits
that can negatively impact their health, while offering ways to avoid
these hazards and hazardous behaviors.

EASI's Ambassadors (trained senior volunteers with experience in
environmental senior volunteer programs) will come to your
organization and work with you to develop mentoring teams of senior
volunteers and/or teachers, often working with younger volunteers such
as high school students, to bring this important information to 4th -
6th graders.

EASI's training manual for the project contains the materials needed
by these volunteers in making their presentations in the community,
including fun games and activities that interface with lessons covered
in some detail. All of this is presented in language that can be
understood by 4th to 6th graders, on such timely and important topics
as surface and ground water, indoor and outdoor air, toxic substances,
environmentally healthy lifestyles, and environmental injuries.

Assisting EASI staff with this project is an outstanding committee of
the highest caliber, with extensive backgrounds in public health and
environmental issues, who will oversee production of materials and
program content. The members of this committee are retired officers of
the U.S. Public Health Service, former Assistant Surgeons General of
the U.S., Presidents of the American Public Health Association,
university professors, environmental scientists, and a former
Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations and Deputy Executive
Director of the United Nations Environment Programme.

Whatever the community health concern, EASI's quality-assured
training provides informed volunteers ready to work with teachers,
other community leaders, and directly with the children, to give them
solid information in an interesting format so they can make better
choices with regard to their health. Volunteer training includes how
to develop effective presentations as public speakers and how to
involve both the children and the entire community in this program.

For more information, please contact Karen Caron, EASI National
Program Director, at ka...@easi.org or by phone at
540.788.3274
Fx: 540. 788. 9301
POB 250, Catlett, VA 20119-0250;

- - -

ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE FOR SENIOR INVOLVEMENT

The largest senior environmental action network in the world
http://www.easi.org
http://www.environmentaleducation.org

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

SAND STOCKPILE

Date: 031104
From: http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/

Press of Atlantic City, November 3, 2003

The problem: The beach keeps washing away.

The solution: Have a big pile of sand at the ready to replace what
gets lost.

Sometimes you just have to admire an idea's simplicity.

Ocean City is under contract with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
have sand pumped onto its beaches by a dredge every three years
through at least 2041. But what about when a storm eats away at the
beach in those middle years?

City officials propose a sort of "sand bank" on the north end, where
50,000 cubic yards of sand will be pumped and stockpiled for stopgap
replenishment needs.

The Army Corps likes the idea and a spokesman says he thinks it's a
first in New Jersey. The state Department of Environmental Protection
still has to approve the plan, but city officials seem to have sound
arguments on their side, financial as well as logical.

The extra sand will add to the cost of the $8.4 million beach-fill
project, which will soon dump 1.6 million cubic yards of sand onto
beaches from the north end to 36th Street. But the idea takes
advantage of the dredge already being in place, something officials
say costs $1 million even before any sand is pumped.

The city says the sand bank would be enough for 2,700 dump-truck
loads. That sand would be a comfort the next time a storm takes a bite
out of the resort.

"More sand is never a bad thing," says Public Works Director George
Savastano.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

WORKSHOP: ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES IN NJ - NOV 7

Date: 031103
From: http://www.state.nj.us/

The Central and Northern New Jersey (CNNJ) Chapter of the Air & Waste
Management Association (AWMA) is pleased to announce it's upcoming
fall Workshop covering "Environmental Initiatives in New Jersey" on
Friday, November 7, 2003.

The Workshop will held in the Public Hearing Room at the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Headquarters, 401 East
State Street, Trenton. The program features speakers from NJDEP who
will speak about the latest environmental initiatives affecting New
Jersey businesses and the public health.

A few of the topics scheduled include:

-New Source Review (NSR) reform
-Sweeps and other enforcement efforts
-Issues surrounding the new PM standards
-Multi-media enforcement, and
-Proposed mercury emission regulations

A few of the speakers currently scheduled include:

-Bradley Campbell, NJDEP Commissioner
-Dr. Edward Bresnitz, DHSS Assistant Commissioner
-Jeanne Herb, Office of Policy Planning & Science Director
-Samuel Wolfe, Environmental Regulation Ass't Commissioner

Come join us for an informative workshop to learn about NJDEP's
vision for the future. The Workshop is scheduled for 9 am to 3:15pm
and includes a planned question and answer period. Early registration
costs (before October 25) are only $45 for AWMA members, $70 for non-
members, $5 for students, and $10 for government employees (which
includes lunch). Please sign up soon, space is limited. For more
information or to download the preliminary program and registration
form, please go to:
http://www.mass-awma.net/files/Nov-7-2003_NJDEP_Conference.pdf

* * *

Department of Environmental Protection
POB 402
Trenton, NJ 08625-0402

VOLUNTEER MONITORING SUMMIT - NOV 7-8

Date: 03 Nov 2003
From: Meg Lipman {g...@AESOP.Rutgers.edu}

STILL ACCEPTING REGISTRATIONS!

AN UPDATE ON WATERSHED MONITORING IN NEW JERSEY

To download the full brochure or register online, visit
http://www.cookce.rutgers.edu/ and click on the Volunteer Monitoring
Summit under "Special Programs."

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

DISCUSSION ON TAX RATABLES PLANNED - NOV 13

Date: 3 Nov 2003
From: "Erica" {er...@njconservation.org}

SUSSEX & WARREN COUNTIES' FARMLAND & OPEN SPACE ROUNDTABLE TO MEET

Far Hills - Does your community welcome development for the wrong
reasons? Does your municipality shy away from land protection for fear
of losing potential tax revenue? How can you keep your community out
of the circular trap of chasing ratables?

To address this issue, Sussex & Warren Counties' Farmland and Open
Space Roundtable will hold a public discussion on Thursday, November
13th on the topic of "The Ratables Chase". The discussion will be held
at 8:30 a.m. at the Meeting House in Waterloo Village in Stanhope, NJ.
This event is open to the public and is intended for local, county,
and state officials, non-profit conservation groups, and anyone
concerned about local land use issues.

Featured speakers Kim Ball Kaiser of the Association of New Jersey
Environmental Commissions (ANJEC) and George Hawkins of the Stony
Brook Millstone Watershed Association will lead off the discussion on
the economics of development and land preservation.

Attendees will be invited to join in the discussion, and there will
be time for questions and opportunities to meet others working on open
space and farmland preservation issues in Sussex and Warren Counties.

"The Ratables Chase" refers to the practice of encouraging
development to increase property tax revenue. In truth, development
usually costs a community much more in services and infrastructure
than any increase in property taxes.

The Sussex & Warren Counties' Farmland and Open Space Roundtable is
the result of a partnership between NJDEP Green Acres Program, New
Jersey Conservation Foundation, Ridge and Valley Conservancy, Warren
County Department of Land Preservation, The Nature Conservancy, Byram
Township, and Sussex County Agriculture Development Board. The purpose
of the roundtable events is to educate and facilitate discussion on
important open space, farmland preservation, and land use issues.

- - -

New Jersey Conservation Foundation, based in Far Hills, is one of the
nation's premier land conservation organizations. Since 1960, it has
protected tens of thousands of acres of New Jersey forest, farmland,
parks and open space - from the Great Swamp, to Patriots' Path, to the
Camden River Greenway. NJCF has been in the forefront of land
preservation policy, including historic laws protecting the Pine
Barrens, farmland, water quality and every Green Acres open space
initiative. For more information, call 1-888-LAND-SAVE, or visit their
website at http://www.njconservation.org.

* * *

Contact
Tim Morris
Phone: 908-234-1225
timm...@njconservation.org

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ANJEE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONFERENCE - JAN 8-10

Date: 1 Nov 2003
From: WEart...@aol.com

Alliance for NJ Environmental Education

You are invited to participate in the 19th Annual Statewide
Environmental Education Conference:
BUILDING THE FUTURE:
ONE GREEN BRICK AT A TIME

Thursday - Saturday, January 8-10
Rider University
Lawrenceville NJ

As environmental educators, we build the future every day, with every
person we reach. The buildings and places in our communities have
always been excellent tools in teaching environmental literacy to
people of all ages. Now there's a law that is changing all New Jersey
schools into high-performance green schools that serve as active
community centers. It calls for maximum public involvement in siting,
design, building and use decisions.

This is our opportunity, as formal or informal educators, to maximize
the benefit of schools as environmental education tools for the whole
community throughout New Jersey for the next thirty years. This
conference will explore the details of this amazing program, the
opportunity it provides, and the many other ways that a community's
features can serve as teaching tools for formal or informal
environmental education.

The goals of the state administration also strive to improve
education by building strong relationships within communities. Several
workshops and panel discussions should assist you in making
connections with untapped resources in your community by better
understanding other needs.

For those of you who have attended the ANJEE conference in previous
years, we invite you back to see old friends and increase your
environmental literacy.

For newcomers, we extend a sincere invitation to join other
interested in improving environmental education at Rider University in
January. The conference is an opportunity for a highly varied audience
including educators from parks, schools, nature centers, non-profits,
government agencies and anyone interested in environmental education
to network and gain new ideas and lessons. Come, enjoy and learn!

* * *

Alliance for NJ Environmental Education
POB 693
Bernardsville NJ 07924
T: 908-766-5787
W: http://www.anjee.net

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Phil Reynolds - Editor - reyn...@gsenet.org
Ivan Kossak - Executive Director - kos...@gsenet.org

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Back issues of the Garden State EnviroNews are available at
http://www.gsenet.org/library/11gsn/11gsn.php

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Garden State EnviroNet, Inc.
19 Boonton Ave, Boonton NJ 07005
Tel: 973-394-1313 - Fax: 973-394-9513
mai...@gsenet.org - http://www.gsenet.org/

EnviroNews mailing lists:
TEXT - subscribe-en...@gselist.org
HTML - subscribe-en...@gselist.org

0 new messages