Welcome to the Township of Sparta Environmental Commission meeting of Thursday, April 23rd, 2026. Uh the meeting is called to order at 7:06. We are live in the council chambers at the municipal building. Uh the stream is on
YouTube. Uh the channel is Sparta TWWP uh streams. Please take notice that action will be taken on the following items. Um, adequate notice of the meeting was provided to the public and the press on April 17th by delivering to the press
and posting on the township website a copy of the notice. We have a salute to the flag >> to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for
all. First on the agenda is approval of minutes. >> Neil, just do roll call. >> Oh, sorry. >> It's okay. >> I skipped ahead.
>> All right. >> Chair Neil Sourin >> here. >> Vice Chair Christine Rogers >> here. Christine Dumbar >> here. >> Barbara Casulka >> here. >> Robert Otto >> here. >> Alex Birdie >> here. >> Councilwoman Margie Murphy >> here.
>> Nicholas Drada. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Now we have the approval of minutes. >> Does anybody have anything or need a chance to review them? Is this correct? >> Barbara, are you looking at page four?
>> Page four. >> Page four. Page four. Yeah, you got it. >> I wasn't here, so I'm not even like >> I had to read it a couple times. I think that that should probably it relates to the winter salt week um
engineering solutions video and um I think that I don't recall maybe Christine does that we were going to prepare a document but we can prepare a document that looks at this video and
draws out points we think would be helpful to Sparta. I think um that that's in the minutes because I misspoke and I said that um they were preparing the document but what it was in regards to is the next topic where it says that
I clarified. So >> um they were working on the document for >> the checklist right for applications and then part of that >> was we were going to incorporate winter considerations. >> Yeah. So I'd almost strike in the second
paragraph I would strike Rob and Barbara are preparing a document related to winter salt week engineering solutions for the committee's response. Uh, I would just strike that whole sentence. And then for the next section, environmental commission checklist, you
could say, uh, vice chair Christine Rogers clarified that or just, uh, said that Rob and Barbara are preparing a document that >> as a checklist. I don't know. I mean, it's not really the salt management. I I
would get rid of the salt management stuff. >> Um, >> that was a different topic. We're trying to help people that come in with applications, >> right? >> And we want to be upfront with what we'll be looking at to help them.
>> Yeah, that's why we should remove the salt reference from the checklist paragraph. >> So, it's just a it's a environmental impact statement and like kind of Yeah. Best best pract Yeah. Um, >> it would really only apply if they were
a company that was a landscaping company that was contracting to salt areas also. >> Well, no. I I think >> it's a totally separate topic. It's not right. It's not related to the the salt um >> salt week,
>> right? It's a checklist for applications so that environmental commission can do um a review and and provide a summary of whatever concerns we might have from an environmental perspective and that would
kind of be on par with the um planning and engineering professionals for the town. We're providing the environmental local lay person uh with a packet for applications
um when in advance of planning and zoning or planning or zoning review for an application. Is that >> but isn't it also that as part of that we were discussing in the meeting prior that part of the considerations like if
we were talking about native plants we'd have kind of a a list for that right? So, >> I mean, it could have Saul. It It could have all >> I thought we were just talking about that we would have like a section about it. So, that's why I was trying to clarify that that it wasn't in regards to this. It's in the wrong section that brought it up. So, it basically like you
said, cross it out of that first >> engineering solutions >> sentence. That's just not right. That's first sentence can be um removed and then maybe add in a sentence about >> because we're gonna talk about like
impervious. We're going to talk about like some of the design standards like parking standards like we looked at that recent application and while it >> would require for a certain use a certain number of parking spots if if we could say from our perspective we would
rather have the the buffer the continuous forest area in the back than a couple more parking spots which we did and they changed the application. That's that's I think what we're trying to >> Right. So, can it be in in the um environmental commission checklist of
concerns for application section? Can it be vice chair Christine Rogers clarified that you've been working on a document like an application checklist for like exactly what you said? We'll say that and then such a document may include a
section >> discussing best practices for winter road salt management. >> Something like that. >> Sure. >> Yeah, >> sounds good. Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, it's not going to be Yeah. Exactly. Few >> other So, that was just your segue was
just while we're talking about So, okay, >> I got it. >> So, so in the second, just to be clear, so in the second paragraph, we're going to completely strike the first sentence. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Sounds good.
And the third paragraph has to be rewritten. >> Well, we can leave it because it reflects what was discussed apparently. So even though we would we're trying to like say, oh, but but we
want to include this other stuff in best practices and whatever, this the minutes are a reflection of what was said. So, did say that we did say that it was >> No, >> no, she was >> No, it was Christine saying that. >> It was me saying it and I said it in the wrong section. >> Yes.
>> Right. Yeah. Sorry. >> And I did clarify that in the last meeting, but I think we also did discuss that it was a full >> Okay. >> Uh checklist >> checklist part of the checklist. So we can clarify that one item. There's we have a big checklist,
>> right? So I think we fixed it in that first sentence. >> Okay. Yes. >> Right. And we're working on a document >> that will include a >> checklist. >> How do you want to word it? >> And and sold will be part of it. >> Right. A checklist of
>> would you say >> an example an application? >> I mean it's going to help us I think do our application reviews. Right. So it's best practices related to native plants
to salt to parking to forest all the environmental commission type >> right >> things. So >> we did say that in the last meeting. So this was just we called it out more about salt because that's what we were discussing but we did make it that it was
>> larger than the salt issue. Right. We we have that correct now, right? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um People need more time. >> Yes. No.
>> I can't make that motion because I wasn't there. So, >> thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. Can I have a motion to >> have a motion to approve, >> please? >> The minutes for April 9th. It
>> April 9th minutes. >> You're making >> Making the motion to approve as amended. >> Uh second. >> Yep. >> Yes. >> I'll second. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. All in favor? I >> I >> opposed. The minutes are approved. >> Correspondence. We have none. Uh we have no applications. There's no one here from the public to comment.
So reports would like to uh I uh we we have not had a meeting yet. The planning board I have nothing to report. Oh, I can report on the trails committee though. All right.
If if you don't mind, can I just move forward on uh on that? >> Yes, please. >> Okay, great. Um I have a flyer here for our exhibit that we can put out. We did I I at the last meeting I had mentioned
that we were planning a hike, a trails hike. And we decided on a date and one of the committee members made this lovely flyer, hike the Sparta Glenn. It's going to be on June 6 at nine o'clock
and we're going to meet at the Yonkers. Um that's a very busy Saturday in June. Uh it's a 9:00 and um it's a 2 and a half mile hike. Uh it's easy uh fairly easy, but there will be some
steep places. and um they're going to be meeting at the Sparta Glenn trail head. So, I will have this flyer at our table and there's a QR code for registration
if people would like to register. It's a little bit early right now for people to know what they're going to be doing a month and a half from now maybe, but um but it gets them they can take a picture of it and refer to it later >> and it can be posted on the town website.
>> Well, that's what I was going to send you right now. Uh I'll send you a copy of that and if you could some somewhere uh post it um so that I don't know we don't have our own web page the trail committee so I don't know we'd have to
just go directly for to the main page or through the EC which is it's the environmental commission to find something through the environmental commission is challenging um but we could put it on there. And
then maybe at the beginning of June, we could have it on the the lightboards, you know, outside, you know, hike the Glenn June 6th, 9:00. >> We could still put that on the uh environmental commission page though or the
>> the Facebook page. >> Yeah. If you want to send it over to me, I can have that posted tomorrow. >> I'm sorry. Send it over to her. She can have it posted. >> Okay. I'm gonna send it right now so I don't forget. >> Perfect. Good idea. >> Okay.
Um and and the other thing is is that we did close the trail sign grant and the really good news is we're doing a lot of work and we're going to meet the deadline and submitting the county grant for clearing out the sunset in trail to
Demeous section of the iron horse trail. >> Oh wow. >> So there's a lot of competition though. We heard um this year a lot of the towns u want to do something with their trails and are asking for monies. Um but this would be a hopefully we would get a
$25,000 uh grant and it would pay for the clearage um clearing of down trees, any ash trees, okay, that might be close to the trail. It would pay for signage at
both ends of the trail at Demerest and at Sunset End and gates at both ends >> to keep vehicles out. >> Yeah. Keeping the vehicles out. Yeah. And so right now, um I don't know if anybody knows anybody who um does
clearing type of work like that. Um, we're right now we've um got a couple of uh companies that I guess were asking right now, but one of them doesn't seem very interested in doing it. So, it's not much competition if we only have one
company that's, you know, interested in doing it. So, if you can think of any uh companies that are interested in doing that type of work, that'd be great. >> Did you talk to Doug Dyster about that? because he was at a meeting with me with the county
>> a while ago and the county said that they had equipment to help by doing a clearing trails um that Tammy Horsefield was at ran. >> Right. But that's our trail hikes that
we do and we do go out u and do a little clearing uh >> well they had equipment. >> Yeah, they they partner with the KVSP. Doug did add um ask the maintenance at KVSP if they could perhaps you know uh
do the clearing or and we would pay them for it and they said no. Oh. >> So, >> okay. >> Well, they have they have like 200 miles of trails to to take care of, so it's Yeah, they're underst staffed. So, that
so that was that's a good idea, but they're not in the game. >> Oh, okay. >> How long is this? >> Doug would know. >> How long is this trail to be cleared? >> Oh, it's just short of uh It's about a mile. >> Okay.
>> It's a mile trail. Yeah, it's beautiful. Going to the Sparta wetlands area there. Yeah, >> I can like I can send some some company. Maybe they're interested in paying it and looking into it.
>> Oh, great. I'll um if you give me the information, I'll forward it to the person who's managing the clearing, which is Doug. >> Doug Dystra. >> Yeah. Is there something that we could do as volunteers to help clear
>> do clearing? Um there are there's minor things we can do because in the beginning at both ends there's shrubbery >> but when you get in the middle where they have the older trees and some of them are ash and there's two patches
that I saw um that were really obstructed with trees that had come down. >> That's not really something I don't think that it would be appropriate for us to do. We certainly can we certainly can
>> trees out h >> have a hike there every year and maintain it you know unless there is a big log that comes over and then we need to have somebody um to call on hopefully our DPW would be able to maybe take care
of that um you know since it's our trail in those instances. >> I don't know. Oh, I think we're also looking into um asking uh Sparta if if they could if they have time or could
clear that area and then they would be recipients of grant the grant money. >> So that's another thing we were talking about. And then there's this other company and then there's maybe yours also. So,
>> that would give us a fair accounting of um you know what it might cost. >> Was all this part of the grant request? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, we have to we have to have a complete budget uh in another I think it's our next
meeting. Okay. So, our next meeting is I should have wrote this down, but it's next week and it's at 3:30 right here uh in the conference room. I believe it's the 29th.
If that's a um Wednesday at 3:30, we're going to meet. >> It's Wednesday. >> Is it Wednesday? Yeah. And uh all are welcome. >> Anything else? Kristen,
>> that's it. Thank you. Thanks. Um, as of right now, I I know that Andover, as we had talked about, Andover had passed an ordinance for
a larger building to be built over on I mean, I don't know if this this probably isn't this can go into new business discuss it with that because I I did go to the one meeting. Um I did not go to the town
council meeting but to the >> be unfinished >> land use that would be unfinished. Yeah. The land use. >> Yeah. Other than that. >> Okay. No. Um Earth Day Saturday.
What if it pours? Do we have a rain day or we're continuing? We're going inside. >> We are. We are inside now. >> We are inside now. Yes. >> Made the call. >> Oh, we did. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, we don't need the tents. >> No. >> Okay. >> Done.
>> Unless the weather changes. >> 100% chance of rain. Maybe. Okay. Never inside. >> Great. Okay. Thank you. I missed that email. >> Yeah. So, you don't want me to >> sited today. Oh, >> okay.
>> Just before you came in. So, >> do you need a canopy for the like the food truck or people to eat outside or No, >> I'm going to bring ours. Um, are we just are we moving on to Earth Day? >> Well, yeah, we'll we'll move on to that after we're done with the reports.
>> Sorry. >> That's all right. >> No. Are there any other reports or should I just go? >> I have one. >> Oh, okay. Go ahead. >> All right. >> Um, the uh master plan subcommittee met on uh met last last Monday. >> Yes. on the 13th. Um
we're continuing with uh um we're continuing under the um Highlands grant the sorry I'm stumbling with this the uh the Highlands grant assessment which we were
hoping for is uh still is ongoing. So we're continuing with to move forward with the uh master plan >> re-examination. Yes. So, we don't know yet, but it seems like we'll be getting, you know, we'll be getting enough funding to keep moving. Um,
and uh then next our next meeting is May 11th. So, we we talked about the um the circulation element that we that was presented at the last meeting.
And that's it. So I guess with that we can move on to unfinished business which happens to be Earth Day. >> Okay. >> Now we can talk about it. >> All right.
>> So our Earth Day event it's two days from now on Saturday, April 25th from 11 to 3. Uh Neil and I talked earlier today and we were both in agreement that the forecast looked pretty certain that it's
going to rain. So I think it makes the most sense to just officially move it inside. Um we were previously given permission by the township manager to have access to the hallway area, the side conference room, and this room. So
there should be plenty of space to have our vendors um spread out. And I think that's also a better decision because then people know um that they're not going to get wet and it's still going to be a great event indoors. So, a lot of the sporting events are going to be cancelled this weekend. A a lot of
outdoor events are going to be cancelled. So, everyone's weekend's going to be free and now everyone can come to our indoor Earth event at Town Hall. So, it's going to be inside this building. Um and it is from 11 to 3 on Saturday. So, our final list
of exhibitors, >> it's going to include um our group, the Sparta Environmental Commission. We're going to have the New Jersey Highlands Coalition, Office of Mosquito Control for Sussex
County, uh the Walkill River Wershed Management Group, the Americanore, New Jersey Watershed Ambassador Program, the Sussex County Municipal Utilities Authority,
Lake Mohawk Preservation Foundation, Foodshed Alliance, and The Poland skilled wershed community, New Jersey Forest Fire Service, Ridgen Valley Conservancy, the High School Ecology Club, they're
going to be doing the um popcorn with the biodiesel. Sparta Community Food Pantry. Uh North Jersey Trout Unlimited. Steve Kums is going to be doing our
music again this year. The trails committee is going to be coming. And then we have our Blue Her Farm and Native Nursery. So, they're going to be doing our native plant sale.
And then we have uh Mount Taco is a food vendor locally who's going to be offering taco and rice bowl options for lunch that are going to be available for purchase. They have a truck. >> So, it's a um an it's like a a No, it's
not a truck. It's It's a tent situation. So, they're going to be um either outside or bringing it inside without the grill. >> Okay. >> The plants same figure it out. >> Yep. >> So, the plant sale, um she knows that
she needs to bring a table. So, the So, back to the plant sale. So, they're going to be offering um a number of different natives that are available for purchase. Um a number of pollinator plants, plants like blackeyed, susan,
soft rush, bonus, blue vervane, new England aster. So, that would be great to get some native plants for your garden. Um we are having a food drive for the Sparta Community Food Pantry. So, we ask
that attendees bring some non-p perishable food items for donation. And then we are having um a number of kids activities including face painting,
pollinator planting, recycling bingo, and then I brought some examples of the crafts. So, we have bumblebees made out of toilet paper
rolls. >> Awesome. >> Butterflies with coffee filters. Um, we're going to be doing some pine cone bird feeders. Did you make them? >> Yeah. I've been doing a lot of crafting lately. We have some
>> egg curtain flowers. A >> and then we also have our Earth Day crowns. >> So, we really want people to come. It's going to be a great event. So, make sure you tell everyone you know in town.
Still come indoor Earth Day. It's still on and we want to see you there because we there's nothing worse than going to an outreach event that's dead. You know that people aren't there. People are giving up their Saturdays. Tell everyone you know we're still on. We still have
our vendors. We moved everything indoors and it's going to be the same Earth event even though it's raining outside. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Wonderful. We'll post it. >> Thank you, Christine. >> Thank you for all the work you've done on this. Amazing.
>> And it has been advertised um to the schools and I sent it out to some of the preschools in town. So hopefully whole families come out. It's not only for kids though. So, if you don't have kids, you're also welcome. There's a lot of things to do, but it's fun for the whole
family. So, we hope to see you there. >> Wonderful. >> Beautiful. >> What time should we be here to set up? >> Um, >> what time can we get in?
>> We were saying between 9 and 10:30. So, anytime in in that time frame should be okay. >> Should be good. >> Did you say you're doing something tomorrow to Yeah, I am um meeting with Michelle and with Courtney and we're going to go out go through and set up the layout and
determine where everyone's going to be so that when people arrive I can tell them exactly where to go. >> And if you need tables, let me know. >> Okay. >> And what size. I have access to a lot of long ones that we have at the pantry and I have like four feet and six feet. So,
do they ever have you ever been to an event like have they ever done an indoor event here where like can we move some of these seats do you think or >> Yes, we c there >> I do have
>> I remember something in here. >> Okay, because I do have a number of high schoolers from the Key Club and National Honor Society who are coming to help. So, we'll just do all hands on deck in the morning and help with setup and have people the high schoolers can help bring stuff in for the
>> room, too. >> Right. So, we're just going to spread out. There should be plenty of space for everybody. >> Right. Do you need help tomorrow? >> No, we should be good. >> Yeah. >> All right. Looking forward to it.
Uh, next under unfinished business is uh data center model ordinance. We've been looking at this for a while and um we had one from um
Warren County that uh was a um proposed and I think we had one from the other town in South Jersey that passed passed uh passed it recently >> to pass the ordinance to prohibit. >> Yes.
>> Okay. That's where this came from. um kind of I think >> that one >> which one is which here? >> So So the one that you you provided that I'll say it's the much simpler one. Um >> Rob, can you speak into I'm sorry I
don't mean >> it's purposeful. Um, so Neil, uh, what I what I was working on was off of the data center ordinance that you had
provided. So that is pretty straightforward. Um, I think we had talked previously about there's different scales, different sizes of these. Uh and it you can go down a rabbit hole um with that but
>> I did >> I did too. And then I came up for air and uh then I watched a webinar on data centers and started working a totally different um ordinance but then I found myself back
to what you had initially provided and all I did with that and I know we don't have a copy of it so I don't know if I could just I modified the be like I went through and just tailored it to Sparta Township.
Um I referred to our current population. The um consumption of water 80 to 100 gallons per person is typically the average. I think we talked about that with the um
detention center um conversation. Uh, and then the I think the town is 20 megawatts of electricity per day. Um, with 20,000 residents and 2 million
gallons of water. Uh, and that our Germany flats tannis wellfield um may currently supply 2.4 million gallons of water per day. Um
and then then it goes to what you have in there which is uh that the New Jersey state legislature has cautioned large scale data centers can use as much as 3 to 5 million gallons of water in a single day. Um and that's for for
cooling. So we've already dwarfed what the entire township would use per day on several levels. Um and and then um some data centers require 300 megawatts
of electricity. Again, we're at like 20 for our 20,000 residents. Um so it gets tricky um because if if you rely on
it to be sorted out by oh, it could never happen in here. um because our grid can't sustain it. Then potentially there's on-site power generation which is oftentimes going to be natural gas or
diesel. Um and then we then we're particulates and 24/7 operations. Then we have noise pollution. So um I kind of that that example that we've been kind
of pestering I just basically put in all the Sparta specific thing I mean uh updating section 18-2.1 definitions to what a data center is then um putting it squarely as my
suggestion would be to put it in um in the in the code as a restricted prohibited use in all districts and let us sort it out because that doesn't preclude because when we get into scales
most of the concern I think is hypers scale and the hypers scale is going to be your like 100 megawatt and up um and it's going to be your three to five million gallons of water per day twice to several times what the entire
townships using per day. So that exceeds the capacity of what the wellfield what the um wellhead can provide for Germany flat. So we could say like oh it would never happen here but there's potential
engineering that might allow it. Um, and so I would feel more comfortable suggesting that we push forward with these I I will call them kind of minor adjustments which are just specific to
Sparta. So where in the code we would need to actually change and this is again just environmental commission our suggestions but where it would fit into our existing land uh comprehensive land management um code the sections where we would define
what a data center is broadly. We wouldn't specify the various because there's so many different we kind of have fallen into the trap of here's a definition and that was a definition from the 70s and then we look at that
definition through the optics of today and it's a totally different scope and scale than what was envisioned. So, I I would suggest that we just move this forward in light of what our
neighbors are uh doing and then we can always tweak it later. And I think we should tweak it later, but I think we're not in a position to uh have all the answers and perfectly
write it up. And presumably there's going to be a consistency review. there's going to be a public session. So, let the public do what the public should do, which is to weigh in on whether they want this,
whether they don't want this. But I think from what I've seen, maybe it would never happen, but um I think we should advance something that in the off chance there's a parcel out there, there's an application. We
wouldn't right now that use it's not a permitted use. It's not specified but we can't that's kind of sloppy to not just address it. So I think I I would prefer to advance
an updated version of what you had provided. >> That sounds that sounds good. I like what you've done here. Um this I'm looking at the um uh the section under uh it's on the third page. >> You're looking I think you're looking at
the at different documents. >> Is that the what's the title on that one? >> This is an ordinance of the mayor and township uh >> 26- um >> well no but what's the >> it's the moratorium right? >> Not the large scale >> that's a different document.
>> Yeah that's for separate that's a we haven't discussed that at all. Oh, >> but that's kind of >> related to >> So, all right. I have Okay, so there's this one. Um, an ordinance of the mayor and the council of the township of Sparta to place an indefinite zero
moratorum on largecale development in all zones. >> So, that's not the one I was just referencing. >> The other one that I started reading um earlier today was an indefinite zero hypers scale data center moratorum.
that that was an older draft from a couple days ago. So there were two things that went today which is one is related to this old business which is just a tailored updated uh with the specific sections in the code that would
need to be uh a definition would need to be added and a restriction would need to be added where they are and just the language of how we write ordinances here. So that's essentially what Neil had provided us which we've been talking
about um which is just an outright ban on data center the definition with with you know in in the spirit of previous townships that have just ban them because they're not comfortable.
Um and so as a first step ban them until we know more. But they those those bands don't address u the scale or anything. >> Right. So that's so there's some there's a followup to it because we need to have that discussion and it kind of it's it's
a larger discussion but I think it's a good discussion for environmental commission to have but I just want to get through this. So I'm proposing two things. The first one is easier, which is to take what Neil provided
>> um slightly update it to fit within Sparta, add to it in the preamble um the number of residents we have, the what I think I think my numbers are correct as far as the flow rate of uh Germany flats
that we pull from and kind of just just give people a sense of the relationship with the power and water needs just those the power and water needs of the entire township
versus a data center. And granted, it's a hypers scale data center, so it's very large, but I think that would address the concerns of, oh, oh my gosh, the power grid is going to
be strained. Our water usage is going to be overt taxed, our rates are going to go up, we're going to have generators running 24/7. If we put this forward, we're showing that we're
planning and we're thoughtful and we have good reasons for like putting this into our code. And so if if an application came tomorrow or we don't have this right now, it it would
still but this would show that we've contemplated it. our reasoning is sound and it wouldn't just be arbitrary and capriccious that we're saying oh we don't like you we don't like you know our our reason is health safety and
welfare of the community and I think it's demonstrated very easily in the beginning of that so that it's our it's our water resources that are up in the air and it's our electrical usage that's up in the air Um, so I would like to do
that and then the other the other is a much longer further discussion um for new business or uh I mean it could kind of be combined with a lot of the rest of the stuff like the water bottling and some of the other
stuff. >> Thanks. Uh yeah, I um when I started looking more into like these the ones that have the total bands and then realizing and seeing what following what's going on around in the news and seeing that we have a data center in
Newton that's a small earlier in the day >> we talking I think he has three there's four of them in Sussex County >> we don't want >> oh with the nonpermitted So, so yes. Um, and
>> we don't want to restrict things like that >> and we don't um but until we can scope in what what we should limit um any pre-existing use is allowed. So,
currently there isn't one. I don't know that there's an intent to build one, but we could we could modify as needed, but I think um there's no application and there's still
other things if you have a me if you have a midscale is kind of I think what you're talking about a small to medium-sized one. So it's like small, medium, large, hypers scale, edge, all these. Um so
I think we all need to know more but in the meantime this offers some protections um and we could modify it. I think if recent history was any uh teacher to us
when we wait and we don't um look at guidance like we had we've had other projects where there was guidance that was available that we could have taken and when if we don't if we don't put in put something in
place and then we get an application it becomes pretty difficult. Plus, you kind of set expectations. If if you haven't specified your concerns, then I think it's a disservice to a developer. It's a
disservice to the community because it exposes the township to a challenge. Uh if if we open up a certain way and we find out like, yeah, a smaller medium is good. We think we want that. But then
we don't have uh an environmental impact statement requirement and maybe the application wants to build in a certain way and we haven't we haven't backfilled in a protection which would
say yeah maybe you can have this but maybe we want to specify certain areas where they would be allowed and probably that would be economic development zone but Um there there's still challenges if they're smaller. There's not the
off-site traffic, but there's the on-site um heating and the cooling needs um and the grid pressures. So >> we need specifics to put down guidelines.
>> We Yeah, but in the meantime, I think we're just environmental commission. So, we're making a recommendation and it's again going to go to consistency review. I think um it would be introduced at town council level. It would be massaged
and rewritten. So, there's still many opportunities for the community to weigh in and if they want to say, "Yeah, like maybe this instead of a complete ban, we've decided anything
under 10 megawatt probably is fine. But then what is the do you have a square footage in mind? Do you have a water usage in mind? Do you want a closed loop? Do you want you know like there's there's so many variations
because it is like the wild west like some other uh uses were a couple years ago. Um that I think the better thing is to kind of like wait and see. Um, I I don't know of any
imminent application coming. I mean, if I did, I wouldn't be able to even propose this, I suppose. But, um, but I don't think that there's anyone banging on our door trying to open up a data center. But I think >> let's get ahead of the game, >> right?
>> Just get the ball rolling and have the conversation in public. But what I don't want us do is the reverse of this. So, I see this as in the past we've had uh zoning by ordinance. So, we've said,
"Oh, we're going to like blow open the doors and we're going to allow this and and this is I think what happened in Andover. We're going to raise heights. We're going to allow this use." And the public's like, "Why didn't you check with us first?" So, now I would hate to be there because that might be another
town from a couple years ago that dealt with a situation where the governing body said we're going to allow this thing and they didn't check with their constituents. They didn't check with who they're representing and that thing
might have come and now you have to challenge it and a developer's spent earnest money putting together an application. So, I'd rather get ahead of it. And if if an applicant comes forward and says,
"I really want to do this." Then you sit down with them like we should be doing anyway. We should have a conversation, say, "These are our concerns. We'd love for you to do business in Sparta. How can we work together on this?" I just I think sometimes when we
see this stuff, it's so far down the road. they've spent so much in engineering and planning effort and everything that they got to recoup that money. So it becomes a lot harder then to say, "Oh, could you make your building smaller? Could you, you know, change this?" Because they're like, "Well, I already So now we have to
generate a whole new set of plans." So >> Sure. >> Okay. So anything is still subject to an environmental impact statement no matter what we do. >> Well, if we see it, I don't know. >> Well, >> and what and what kind of I mean, we
don't really have a template for an environmental impact statement >> or the the the detail that should be included in it. >> Yeah. >> Hit or miss. >> Yeah. I I have I I have some comments to like
some additions to to that document. But >> is it to the data center one? >> Yeah, they're are very minor. just adding you know a few things uh regarding the storm water impact to like the second one to the second paragraph right then um
>> oh to the whereas >> yeah to the second one >> but I don't know not everyone has not everyone has the documents so I don't know >> this is >> we can discuss it or >> I think this is the one the one that ends with use in all zones
>> yeah that's the one yeah >> and and you're saying the second whereas you're talking Yeah. So after the water use, I would just say storm water impacts. >> Yeah. >> Traffic associated with construction and maintenance. Just add that line >> if that makes sense.
>> But I can send my I can send my comments to everyone. >> Okay. >> That we can look. And then >> um for one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 for the 10th.
10th one after water resources I would add including potential impacts on private wells, public water supply and uh connected ecological resources because that also would uh
basically you know include the connected ecological resources with other towns right and other regions and it's not just our groundwater under Sparta. Right. It's like Rob, you mentioned that before, right? It's not just us. >> Well, yeah. And that's that's kind of
for maybe for later, but for our neighbors that choose to pass ordinances for uses, I I would I would want us to I mean, this is to challenge that because when we're
talking about aquifers, aquifers don't care about where we've drawn our town lines. So they're regional scale things. So if if a neighbor a nextoor neighbor or beyond is
uh approving a use which is going to affect the entire region I think that we should be speaking up or if our air and water quality is going to be adversely affected. It's not just being not a good neighbor. It's it's a little bit
shortsighted. >> Yeah. So yeah, so you want to add a bunch more whereas a bunch more. No. Yeah, I know. >> This was these were just like kind of examples there. There plenty of >> I don't even think there's anything
about air quality, but that would be dependent on >> Mhm. >> behind the meter generation. And I have like another one that's basically like adding one more.
Uh, hold on one second. Oh, that the yeah the the mayor mayor and council further finds that data centers uses are distinct from customary accessory server rooms or on-site digital equipment that are that are
clearly and I have this whole paragraph written that I can sense to everyone but that's the so that's the question like do we want to limit it to just the data uh data centers or we are or we also want to include the server
rooms and things like that. >> Well, that's why I have that's I I think I ended up with that same question because I was having a hard time. >> Yeah. uh with the definition and I really um
I really got an education on like planning where planning is driven by uses defined uses but >> but really as as we look at these applications >> that that shouldn't really be what
defines it. It's what is the spirit of it? What's the overall goal? And if you're looking at high level, it's um that the zones are broken up into kind of the carrying capacity of like what uses would fit in those zones, what uses if
if there's not much parking, what could you reasonably expect in those areas? Mhm. >> Um, so really the the other thing that I'm proposing is more of a intensity
based metric system which kind of dovetales into our uh checklist or whatever which is it's not the name, it's not the definition. That seems to be the problem that we've had sever for several years
is that can be argued. Um, no, no, it's this because of this or it's this because of this. It kind of to me it doesn't really matter. If you're using a lot of power, if you're using a lot of water, if you're generating a lot of lot of particullet, >> if you're creating a heat island, these
are all adverse effects. And so and or if you've superersized a use that was allowed, I don't think that was necessarily necessarily the intent. So I would like us to kind of recapture the intent and
spirit of the planning process. And while we're not the the planning board, I think that from environmental commission, we have an opportunity to define what are the natural resources that are at risk in
our township to educate people as to the areas of concerns and to then help steer uh application reviews in such a way where we can say like, hey, this this
intensity might really be not a good fit for this this zone. And here is why. You know, like we we've we're kind of already doing that. Again, we had like this nice old growth forest buffer and it was going to be cut back
for a few parking spots, but we said that biodiversity is more important, that buffer is more important than a few parking spots. And so that was changed. So yeah um kind of got a field from that
but it's uses uses is how land use is done now um planning is done based on uses but I think environmental commission should kind of champion an intensity of use um
reviewbased metric um and looking so the environment environmental impact um statement for every application would help us do that. >> Agree. Thank you, Robin. >> Thank you. So, when is the next meeting
that we could uh like that this could be presented at like >> to the council? >> Yeah. When is that? >> Tuesday. >> Next Tuesday. >> This coming Tuesday. >> Do we want to continue working on this some more though? Find it before we do
that. Do we want to like can we maybe uh work uh kind of offline? Everyone reads his uh ordinance at home and make
changes or we want to do it during the meeting. >> I'm hoping we could present something because we've been looking at it. It's not a new thing. Um, and again, um, they're going to take it, they're going
to review it. They're going to have their own thoughts on it. Then if it gets introduced, they're going to wait and then before they vote on it, they're going to have a whole public session on it, right? So, there's
plenty of time for people to weigh in. But you're asking >> to have it presented this coming Tuesday would have to be in tomorrow. >> Yeah. >> If it were on the agenda. >> I don't think we should like further delay this. >> I don't think we should further delay
this one. And I think the discussions that we could have for the other >> Yeah. broader thing could help um prior to anything that would make its way to becoming >> uh
an approved ordinance be I think if we keep we put this suggestion forward to town council. I would like to do that. And then if we work on this open meeting, then we could say, hey, maybe like add this little section here. Add this. Add this.
>> We should do it. So, let's present it the way if everyone agrees the way it is written. And right >> that's that specific data center. >> Yeah. >> This Yeah. >> Um, >> how do does this have to go to the
planning board first or does >> for consistency review? I don't know. But I mean, >> does it go to >> It would still go to town council, I think. Right. So, you guys >> still has to go to them. Yeah. What's the order of things? >> I thought it would go to uh town council. They'll take a look at then
planning board will do consistency review and I'll come back and and I just don't know if >> the consistency review I would assume that happens and then it needs to get introduced.
Yeah. So that's what I say though. There's there's going to be a lot of people looking at this. So I'm kind of like we we've looked at it. >> So So if I'm I'm reading this correctly, what we're doing is we're looking at a
um at an a an ordinance perhaps. Um and this ordinance though is expressing our concerns uh with our water usage with our energy
use usage. It's not setting any real except for let's see >> this is a use restricting ordinance. >> It's setting um some maximums for electrical water.
>> No. Which one are you reading? I think. >> Oh, wait a minute. >> I'm reading the wrong one. Okay. So, we're not setting we're not setting any >> limits for anything with >> we're just >> with the one we're just saying we are concerned about these things
>> because you know we're Sparta >> and um >> is the intention for us to build on this by making um if it's an ordinance making specific recommendations such as there needs to
be um a cooling system if there were ever to be a DA data system that um it would have to use renewable energy. There would have to be air internal air circulation and no air released. That there would have to be um the water
recirculated. Uh it have to be carbon neutral. >> That's not that's not my intent. My intent is to advance this to the governing body, do a consistency review, and get it uh put in as a um prohibited
use, and then we learn more in that all the things that you talked about are are good, but there's still so many questions. I mean, if you're recycling the water, um >> how many times can you recycle it? No,
it's it's all it's all good >> because nothing will get done if we do that and our neighbor just is paving the way for something. So the suggestion for this is get this one in ASAP. We've um and then
then now with this recent webinar which was targeting a moratorium on hypers scale which are the very very large ones um taking that for a further discussion but that's kind of a new business thing. So, so this is just the there's not
really a motion, but I would make a motion that we take what Neil had provided months ago that then I tweaked to fit um the specific Sparta code and then added some stuff in the preamble
and then it sounds like Barbara has some further preamble um details and that's just kind of strengthening the argument as to why these are unsuitable. Um, so I'd make a motion to introduce that.
But then again, we're just we're not the planning board. We're just the environmental commission. So it's just uh this is our suggestion and then it's up to the governing body. The governing body has to can say we don't agree or they can say we agree. And if they agree
then I think it still needs to go to planning board. planning board can say perhaps you'd like to add a scale to this or maybe they'd say we don't want to get in the weeds on this. We agree that we want to prohibit it for now
until we learn more and then it would go back to uh the governing body. The governing body would I think then introduce it. Then there would be time for the public to think about it a couple weeks. It would probably get
noticed. It would be in the paper. People would be talking about it and then they would vote on it and people would speak about it prior to the vote. So there's it's quite a process and I just don't want to I I've held off because I want to learn
more and I understand other people want to learn. I always want to learn more, but there's also a time where it's like sometimes we just need to push something and then tweak it later. And there's a lot of tweak it later time now because we're
not the governing body. >> So I just to be clear, I I don't think I have the ordinance with your tweaks in it. >> Okay. >> That was that in our packet? >> It's It was It's not in our packet today. It's an email. Um >> I can't find the right. >> It was sent today. Yeah.
>> Well, just send it again. >> Well, so here's the other thing. When I send email, if you look by subject line >> because there was there was additional things added to that email. So, I separated out resent it because unrelated things were added to that
email. So, just search by subject >> two at >> yes >> that one >> probably. Yeah. >> Data center ordinance. >> And then there was something around noon that was the Okay. So those two are two separate. >> Okay. >> But the the first one is the one that
we've been that's old business. >> The first one >> the first one from 1052 is just a modification of what Neil had provided. >> Okay. >> Oh, so >> numerous times. >> So which one what time that you were
>> but that's 1052. >> Yeah. Why don't you just resend where you had something? >> That this is what's clear this sends like two three months ago and Rob just puts some changes to it to include spa details basically
>> the one at 1052. >> Yes. Okay. >> The one from 10. Yes. And so >> I sent a couple actually there were two couple of different ones. >> Barbara, Barbara, if you have changes, can you just incorporate your changes and send it and then we'll do a final
>> send it in that string. So the string the subject is data center ordinance draft 10:52 a.m. >> small auditions. That's >> and then we're all reading the same final draft that we're recommending. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Makes sense. And then we should So do we
want to make that motion of introducing that after we look at the changes or or like can we do it or >> Well, we can >> I would make that motion to introduce it with uh whatever last updates that we
have because I don't think they >> they're just additive. They don't change >> yes >> what was already discussed which is just to uh do a ban of data centers. They simply add supportive language as to our
rationale for this action. Do I have a second? >> So we uh >> No. What? You want to say something? >> Uh yeah, go ahead. Second. >> No. Yeah, go ahead. >> I I I was going to say we can tweak it and give it sent to Margie by tomorrow, right? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Yeah, that's >> I second. Thanks. >> All in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> Okay, thank you. Next is uh water bottling facility
ordinance. I don't think we have anything any kind of model for that. was just a topic we were because we were concerned with um an operation that might also be withdraw uh withdrawing water from the our
aquifer, our shared aquifer and something we can continue to discuss. So Margie had a question about that I think in a previous meeting, but if uh we kind of have a template for a
restricted or prohibited use. So I was going to do it, but it was so last minute that I was like, I'm not going to three throw show up with three ordinances. But I could uh create what I think that would look like if we're all
in agreement. This this follows along the same spirit of um it's a balance of the resources for the community. So if the community needs 2 million gallons of water per day and
we're we're pulling 2.4 from the tannis field, um that's a bunch that's 20,000 little straws dipping into that aquifer. So, I just think it's a little foolish to say
to not say we don't want a huge straw going into the aquafer next to all these little straws. I rather spread the risk. Um, and if especially if we had a drought condition or something like that which would draw down that aquafer um or if we have a neighbor who might be
bottling I don't want to in so I I would um I could put together an ordinance that I think would be reasonable that would just if if we agree that we don't want uh um to allow for the use of a water
bottling um company in Sparta. I think we can make that recommendation. >> Do we currently Margie, do you know if we currently sell water from only if I I
actually got this clarified today. >> Good. >> Number one, we are not in a deficit with the in the aquafer. >> You're not >> there. We are not. um according to our our water engineer um and the town
manager and we do not unless someone needs desperately needs it to use water from from our
wells from our our water we build them. if another town as of now. No, we do not sell our water as on a regular basis at this point. And I remembered something about this happening years ago, which it did, and
there was going to be put through a a a contract with a a firm like 2008ish, and um it never came to fruition. So it is not being sold unless it's an
absolute necessity. And also we have Morris Lake which goes into Newton is which is there which goes through the Glenn. >> Yeah, we sold that. So, and that um there's there's that one,
but other than that, there is no deficit in our water, which we've all heard conflicting, you know, conflicting comments on that, but I was told today there is not. >> How do they make >> Yes, we are in a drought.
>> Excuse me. How do they make that determination? they measure somehow and I don't honestly know how but yeah that's something I want to find out but this was a a question I only had >> I I don't know how they measure that >> but they probably watch the wells I
would think the capacity >> but also doing that you can go on the Highlands Council website and um they um they have uh as part of their mapping program they have uh you know they can tell you
whether whe it's um if we're recharging or not in Sparta. So we could that's how we you know on the EC can um you know find out. So, a long time ago, um, I the way I did it was I had a monitoring
well, uh, I I drilled groundwater wells, um, deep groundwater wells, and you get a known volume, and you set your stopwatch, and you measure the flow rate, and you basically extrapolate out and say, "All right, this this is what
that aquafer or that layer is producing." So, it could be something like that. I don't know if they've gotten more uh different technology to do that. But um I did bedrock and sand and gravel wells
way back when. >> That's pretty awesome. >> You do that you do that for a living now? >> No, I I did that right out of uh undergrad and turned into begout for the water and sewage authority. >> Oh, so are you like a hydraologist? >> I'm a geologist.
>> Oh, so cool. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I I saw I saw some I hat >> Yeah. So, uh >> I wear I wear a lot of hats. Uh but >> you only wear that one.
>> But I Yeah. But uh but after college before grad school, it was um hydrarology for the water and sewage sewage authority. So basically explor exploration geology and then you
know this is why water is so important because we had villages that did not have um reliable water resources and so we sunk deep uh deep deep mega watershed uh
aquafer uh wells that didn't require treatment. So, um it's it's just kind of like a to me it's a very basic human right and uh it's a little bit frustrating when we are 12 to
14 ft from the surface with an aquifer subject to because >> contamination. Yeah. Subject to contamination. So, >> and a lot of that is um from what I understand is is is perched. the perched aquifer has been scraped away because of
our allowing um the mining operations in our area to go on. They scrape away the surface and that hasn't been helping us. Yeah. But no, that's really cool. So you did that as an undergraduate? >> Yep.
>> Yeah. I collected California poppies. I did a transsect from the Pacific Ocean to the Sierras. That was I mean that was Yeah, that was a job that was I >> for school I was in the Galopagos. Come on.
>> Yeah, I did my masters in Cayman Islands. >> Nice. >> So, so I have a question for the water botting facility ordinance. Do we want to just call it water bottling or we just want
to have a broad uh water use uh kind of uh ordinance? Oh, sorry. >> Well, I think I think with the what makes the water bottling so intrusive is
by definition probably 90% of that water is going to be leaving the waterhed or aquafer area. So that water is gone once it's extracted from the ground versus another use where it's put back in the ground such as residential use. So
>> Okay. >> But that propos proposed facility is not actually a water bottling facility though, right? >> No, it's water Yeah, it's water withdrawal that they're going to be use using for water bottling at taking it
somewhere else and bottling it elsewhere. turn in. >> Yeah. >> So, so that would we'd have to be careful about any kind of language that that addresses. >> This is why I don't like uses because it's very easy to skirt that. So, I
would I would answer it the same way that I think that we should answer the data centers, which is to do we could do a bottling uh offsite or on-site with the bottling with the intent to sell uh
or or capturing with the intent to bottle whatever it is. But then the followup is this this broader uh proposed ordinance to come later which would talk about natural resource use and
extraction I think. >> Okay. Okay. All right, then. Where do you want to go with this? Um, should we continue to research? >> We could we could continue jump ahead to
uh the bottling in the Andover data center and just talk about it with uh the printout that was provided if if everyone's okay with that. And then afterwards we could go to ecology
education winter salt week uh and the I guess the checklist but even the checklist could be rolled into bottling checklist data center I think all rolls into this idea which is
pretty meaty. So, if you guys have this in front of you, um it kind of came from discussions that have been ongoing over the past couple years and beyond that um with
applications that that I've seen and uh that have come before town council years ago. So my thinking is again that what I think I know about planning is that it's use-based and those uses
are well defined um by professional planners um and you have engineers and you have parking standards and you have sign standards and you have lighting and whatever design standards you want. So, we're in
this town. We're a bunch of residents and we're like, how do we logically split up the use of this town and balance the pros and cons of obviously, you know, keeping everything functional. We want to get taxes, but we don't want
to give up certain resources to the point where, for instance, it's somewhere in here, but um you know, having a functional aquifer that's providing us with clean water that we need to live is
preferable to ruining our aquifer and having to buy bottled water in perpetuity. So this is this is kind of like I don't know this is this is an experiment to basically say that
uh developments of a certain scale are in congruent with um much of our township. So, I mean, I could read through
the beginning portion of it prior to getting to all the codes because they're just a bunch of whereas statements and then the rest of it. I I could just skip through. Let me just start and um
because it's pretty lengthy, but whereas the Sparta Township master plan emphasizes protection of the township's rural character, agricultural lands, scenic landscapes, environmental resources, and historic and cultural heritage. And whereas preservation of common
resources is an inherently beneficial use. And whereas there has been a fundamental shift in land use patterns from traditional industrial and commercial applications to developments of unusual size. I was bored thinking
about Princess Bride. Um whereas these projects including data centers and logistics hubs may be defined by large-scale regional resource depletion, extreme energy density, significant thermal exhaust, elevated and continuous acoustic outputs and high volume
resource consumption. So that's where we kind of hook in the water bottling or water collecting. Uh whereas large-scale development may present an intense and unique form of land use and development and may pose significant challenges related to electricity consumption,
noise, air quality, water use, community character, and long-term planning objectives. Because if you if you want to you don't want to put all your eggs in one basket, but if you are going to put all your eggs in the Sparta basket, you don't want to put a big ostrich egg in there and not have space for like the quail and chicken eggs, right? you want
to have variety and uh spread that risk and diversity. Um so basically this is pushing back that uh development
no development should supersede um a site being capable of sustaining the project scale. Um the T community members shouldn't um have to accept high density or high intensity development in
sensitive areas um which might place them in foreseeable peril. Um and this is that point about you know once we lose it we might lose it for a long time or our lifetime. uh the preservation of common resources and infrastructure
watersheds in place of man-made filtration is an avoided cost and uh therefore inherently beneficial. So that kind of hasn't really been scoped in applications. We think about the short-term benefit. What are what's the tax benefit going to be? But often times
we miss the longer term benefit. Is this resource going to be around for our kids, for our grandchildren? Are we going to have to start making up a deficit because we're we're trucking away a bunch of water from this aquifer? So, and it doesn't really unfortunately
doesn't really get from what I've seen, it doesn't get considered in some of the development. So, um, and then there's a bunch of language in there which basically is meant to protect us in terms of we're doing this.
We're showing that we're thinking about our resource protections on a township level, but then on a state level and then even on a federal level with our constitutional rights that uh and federal air, clean air and clean water
standards, those need to be protected. So that basically air and water are uh property held in trust for the public. any use that depletes these assets um constitutes an unconstitutional taking and is subject to federal preeemption
via the Clean Air Clean Water Acts. And this is kind of what I've seen, which is that prior ordinances and provisions of the comprehensive land management code within the township of Sparta may not have foreseen proposed uses at the scope or scale that are contemplated today.
And so therefore, planning and zoning might be unprepared to ensure development occurs in balance with the overall community. So, I'm kind of putting putting it at the town township at our town council as a governing body and saying basically you have a duty um
under all of these scary subsections um state regulations to protect our water, to protect our air, to shield us from, you know, pollutants and storm water, protect water quality. And um these are
obligations that that the governing body has for its residents and that we have uh to the state. Um >> and it's basically to safeguard the public health, safety and uh welfare and the environment of the residents from
cumulative air quality, water use, storm water and noise impacts associated with large-scale development. So it goes on but basically what I think would be subject discussion and certainly anything that you want to add as as far
as all those whereas statements but if you agree in the spirit of this um the tricky thing is how do you define one of these large scale developments because we started to get into it with the data centers is a hypers scale data center could be 100
megawatts could be 300 megawatts or larger Realistically, are we going to see that in Sparta? No, because we're considered not businessfriendly, but two, because uh we don't have the space for it
realistically. But that said, maybe there could be like a mid-range one or, you know, maybe a bunch of warehouses could be converted. So, you know, I I don't I don't know. So, I would heir on the side of
some things we can't fix and I'd rather think it through and have a adequate protection in place uh or at least require a developer or an applicant to step through and show us this is a good
fit. But when we don't have thoughtful ordinances in place uh or when alternatively when we prepare an ordinance that allows for zoning that was never contemplated and could not
possibly fit in concert with the natural resources in that zone, then we're stripped of our power to do anything about it. Then then we're just wasting money on lawyers and trying to claw it back. So anyway, um under near the bottom of the of
the third page, there's electrical at greater than or equal to 10 megawws per day. So that would be that would capture a lot of the data centers that we're concerned about, but it wouldn't touch I don't believe No, I know it would not
touch um a local vendor's data center. Uh and then water uh greater than or equal to.3 million gallons per day. Um so that wouldn't but Christine to your
concern about >> closed loop open loop recycling all this uh if we start putting in water usage the problem kind of gets to sort itself out because the onus is on the applicant to say we can't make it work with our
technology that's too little of an amount of water and then we'd say well then you have to go to a closed loop system or you have to go to an air cooler, you have to do this. But that's also the opportunity as you would know from from planning where you could say,
"All right, maybe we condition this, right? So you're going to use like a green energy resource for whatever it is for your electrical blah blah blah." So then, yeah, that makes sense. So then we have those discussions. I think we're pretty far hopefully from having any of
these concerns, but I want to have this in here as a starting point. Um, the other thing was like greater than or equal to 350,000 square ft, but do you recall for the PCED um or the warehouse uh guidance? I was
going to look it up, but um I don't know if it was 200,000 square feet or Margie, would you know for cuz it >> Well, no, the >> it was modified. >> Yeah, it was modified. So, so I would just while we're talking about I would
uh make that number match what it was modified to um for warehouses and then I have less than or equal to 45 dB at the property line. Um >> I know that I know the height originally yeah >> before like 21101
>> was 32 feet. Uh but then there's the incentive for rail adjacent. But yeah, yeah, I'm I was talking about total square footage >> 56 if I'm not mistaken. >> Okay. >> 54 to 56 >> 52 or 56 something >> between 52 and 56.
>> Yeah. But there was a square footage >> but there was a square footage too and then it got repealed back to well not repealed and then it got >> after 21 it got sent back to 175,000. >> 175. All right. So, so this square
footage, thank you. Uh, I knew it was around 200. So, I would I would right now just say kind of 175,000 because again, you could have someone come in and say, "I want to build 200,000 even though this exists." And they could make their case,
>> then you have to go for a >> Yeah. But if if you're building a 200,000 square foot, presumably you can afford to state your case. Mhm. >> So the rest of it uh Oh, there's I guess
there's some duplicates. Oh no. So the rest of it the prohibited action it just further it takes that those numbers again. So 175,000 and puts it in um and then so this is this is styled as a
moratorum. So I got the question earlier like the indefinite zero moratorum. It's just an indefinite it's it's banning it immediately with no end in sight. Um
and but again it's we tailor it to what we think strikes the right balance. This to me this provides guard rails um for the community so that they're not caught
unaware with some application that threatens to upend the future viability of this community. That's not good for anyone. It's I don't even understand how it's good for an applicant.
>> That's PCED. Which one? Which one? >> You were saying PCED. Which zone? >> ED is >> the economic development. >> Yeah. >> Zone is 175,000. >> PCED. >> Yep.
>> 25,000. >> Yeah. All right. So, but the ED zone update was uh 175. >> I just want that number. 25,000 is way that's we can't >> we can't do that. No, I think
>> but it these zones already have so so this would override everything um with guard rails again. So each zone would still have its standards. Um, but this would sit on top of that and basically say
rather than say you have, and I'm not going to say the certain types of uses because they might be in litigation, but you have a certain type of use. Technically, maybe it's that use. Maybe it could be interpreted a different way,
but it's a really big version of that use that was never contemplated. um when the code was written. So what this does is say it's not so much the use, it's the intensity. So and it's it's the the water use, the
electrical use, the the sound that's generated on site. And I mean you could get into particulate. So the particulates portion would be like page five. And this is where we need to really drill into this, but this came from that webinar. Um, because
if we were really savvy, but also if we had a ton of land, um, we would be on top of this and we would have this, we would have a lot of people wanting to build hyperscaled data centers around here and we would need this
last year. Uh but we would have like you need to show us what type of system you're using, how much water, how much electricity, you need to uh have an environmental impact statement. So this has this all in here because I
think this is good, but uh we should take our time talking about this. I think >> definitely. So did this this u the um the basis for this come from that webinar? >> So this came Yes, >> I didn't finish that webinar. Well, because I watched it while you guys were
all presuming up here. >> I started to watch the replay, but I when I got to hypers scale, I I stopped dive into the smaller ones. >> So, so this came from there were two examples. There's one that was an outright uh ban, a moratorum, and then
there was another that was a a document that was prohibiting conversion of existing warehouse space. So, like a Philipsburg or something where they're they might be dealing with an empty a huge empty warehouse and a lot of people might say, "Hey, like this is a win-win.
We don't have all the truck traffic and we have this huge building, so let's fill it with computers." But there's other it's unfortunately it's it's not necessarily as simple of a it's not necessarily a great swap. It's
they're both they both have their their issues. So it came from those documents. Um but this actually combines let me just find the page. It combi combines that conversion
language because I looked at at those Maybe not. Oh, because maybe it doesn't because >> so it started with data centers, but I made it more broad for just
we we get challenged on uh the name and it's not the name, it's the amount of resource allocation. So, I actually stripped that out of there. Good. So, but I mean page six, it's energy,
water, air quality, noise, vibration, storm water, and health and socioeconomic impact analysis. I think this is a totally appropriate thing to ask for anything that's 175,000 square feet or larger in our town of 20,000
people. And then Christine to your page seven, binding mitigation. um including but not limited to there is this number three water recycling
cooling system minimum 90% reuse. So all of this is kind of contemplated noise caps of less than 45 dB. Um so that's kind of why I pulled that and put that in the beginning portion as well. Um,
so a lot of this I think I don't know Barbara if we didn't really get a chance because this is the time to speak about it, but >> uh the the latter portion of this kind of starts to lay out some of what I'd
like to see for our environmental impacts. It's on greater scale than we'd probably need for most of the applications we see, but it kind of That's kind of our checklist right there is like
how much energy, how much water use, >> noise, vibration, storm water, health and socioeconomic impact. So that that was the other reason for I was like oh this is good because we could build off of this. >> Yeah. >> So
>> so I had a question regarding this. I mean like not question comment because this is indefinite zero moratorium and from what I was seeing it shouldn't be indefinite. It can be like up to six months. So
>> where were you seeing that? >> In the in the New Jersey statue. >> So oh and that's another thing is New Jersey is working on their guidance, right? >> Okay. So we're also like let's get something in and then we'll see what
guidance comes. It might come any day. >> Um but that was for data centers right the moratorium. >> No no I'm talking like in general term the zero indefinite zero moratorium shouldn't exceed six months but I but
maybe I'm saying something wrong and once again like I don't have to comment on this. It would be probably lawyers that would be deciding that. So, >> well, we could we could call it just an indefinite moratorium because indefinite zero, I think, is confusing.
>> Yeah, >> if that's what you're saying. It's a terminology um thing. Yeah, I was I was struggling with that. But, >> and then the in inherently beneficial use, that's like a legal term. >> Oh, what?
>> Oh, inherently beneficial. Yeah, >> that's like a legal term. term that's used uh >> for a see test. >> So I don't I don't know if like how yeah >> if we can use it. >> Yeah, >> I'll let the lawyer sort that out. >> But yeah, exactly like that's the that's the thing I think you know lawyers would
be looking into it and they they would decide whether we want to use the term or not. page you want the first page. >> Well, and the argument is um it's it's stating it's claiming something which yeah, our township
attorney may disagree with and so I'll leave it up to them, but um it's stating that you know there there are specific inherently beneficial uses like schools and hospitals for like a SECA balancing test. So, it's not exactly it's not
that, but I'm saying it's beneficial to have an aquafer that's not tainted that that we can use versus versus um having to rely on bottled water. And so
I think what and maybe this is a broader argument, but I think what we've historically done is overlooked, you know, resource depletion or um again like air and water quality
concerns. So I'm trying to say there is an inherent value. I don't know what that value is, but I think that maybe the value I'm trying to point to if if you're trying to develop a certain
size thing and you're using X number of gallons or you're risking our aquafer, I think that in some way we need to quantify what that the value of an untainted aquifer is. Um,
>> and yeah, and I agree. I I just think Yeah, that maybe >> they want to change. That's what I'm saying >> because that's that's a legal term that's used in like the land use. Uh >> yeah. So >> So this is the big document. So if you
guys could just take a look at it. Um it's it's a high level attempt at um getting our land use decisions to think of the intensity because I think this will also help with some of our
smaller applications because again you know parking standards maybe they don't matter as much as we say that they do. My only question to this was is the township willing to
do the you know engage in hiring someone to do the study and all of that >> environmental impact or >> Yes. >> So I I think the burden should be on an applicant. I mean taxpayers have been paying for professionals to do all of
these reviews. So that's a whole other discussion. But in my mind, >> again, if you if you have 175,000 foot or larger um square footage building,
you can probably afford the hourly rate. And why are taxpayers like taxpayers can pay for an applicant uh or or for a planner, an engineer?
I mean even that if not the applicant's bringing forth the idea. So we need to hear the idea and we need to have a say on the idea but I I think for the cost for that sure I'm not proposing that taxpayers pay for
that. I'm proposing that the applicant pays for that. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Um, let's keep reviewing this. And >> I know it's a lot. Thanks for
>> No, thanks for thanks for all this all the work. >> If anyone's been paying attention to what's been going on in our town and towns around here for the past four or five years, I maybe you'll appreciate where this is coming from. Right. Yes.
Of course. Absolutely. >> All right. Let's move on to um new business ecology education grants for bats. Barbara, I think you have the
>> that was the Yeah, I think that should be unfinished business, I guess. But that was uh uh yeah, I applied for the grant and I guess we're just waiting for the >> Yeah. to hear back from them. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh Christine, you had Winter Salt Week
Engineering Solutions. I have not been working on that. >> Oh, >> lately, but I um I intend to get back to looking at not only that video on the engineering solutions, but other videos
that were shown in that winter um week webinar series. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um environmental commission checklist of concerns for applications. We just We don't need to get back into
the Just when I got out. >> Wasn't Wasn't that what we just did? >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. >> And uh Well, we've already discussed uh what's going on around us. So, >> yeah. >> Uh I think
unless anybody has anything else, >> make a motion to adjurnn. >> I have a second. >> You have anything? Miss have a second. >> I second. Chris Dunar seconds. >> All in favor?
>> I >> thank you all for all your work. >> Thank you. Tremendous. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you Christine for Saturday and just let know what table. >> Okay. We have a ton. >> Yeah. Either way. Okay.
>> And they're all the long >> the long tables. So