February 17, 2007
 
  Mr. Neal Ferrari
  NJ Department of Environmental Protection
  Division of Watershed Management
  401 East State Street, 7th Floor West Wing
  P.O. Box 418, Trenton, NJ  08625
 
  Re. Holland Townships WMP Request to Extend Sewer Service onto Landscape
  Project Threatened and Endangered Habitat at Block 6, Lot 61.
 
  Dear Mr. Ferrari,
 
  We are writing to request that your Bureau maintain its October 3, 2006
  correct protocol decision to deny the sewer service extension onto the
  Landscape Project Ranked 3 eastern portion of Block 6, Lot 61 as requested
  in Holland Townships Wastewater Management Plan.
 
  Hollands Planning Board chairman requested a member of the planning
  board, who is also a member or the environmental commission, to write a
  report to help exempt this Rank 3 Habitat from the Landscape Project in
  order to extend sewer service onto that habitat.  If successfully
  exempted, a sewer extension could enable a local developer who is
  apparently politically-favored to build two apartment buildings behind the
  second oldest house in the Township in the Conservation Zone identified in
  the Highlands Land Use Capability Map.
 
  We find it especially troubling that the planning board, and not the
  developer, is petitioning the NJDEP for this exemption.  Although
  represented as being prepared by the Holland Township Environmental
  Commission, the report seeking Landscape Project exemption was crafted by
  David Grossmueller with the help of Planning Board chairman Peter Craig
  and just presented to the full Environmental Commission after the fact,
  with no input or participation from the full Commission.
 
  Many claims in the report are flawed and slanted toward clearing the way
  for this otherwise non-conforming development.  The Township is proposing
  to rezone the currently built-out lot to accommodate the high-density
  apartment buildings, and is changing ordinances specifically to benefit
  this development.  The Township represents that the lot is within the
  water service area when, in fact, there are no water pipes to the subject
  lot.
 
  A piecemeal destruction of upland habitat destines all upland habitat to
  a cumulative demise.  Habitat protection should not be site by site, but
  regional; otherwise any applicant for development will argue the habitat
  area is too small.
 
  Wisely, there is currently no process in place to remove (cherry-pick)
  lots from the Landscape Project.  If Holland Townships request is somehow
  granted, and Block 6, Lot 61 is removed from the Landscape Project, it
  would set a very dangerous precedent, which would encourage wide-scale
  destruction of habitat, followed by questionable reports like Hollands
  seeking the same exemptions to promote sprawl through loss of habitat.
  The cumulative impact and fragmentation would be devastating to any
  habitat protection, which is now barely adequate.  Creation of an
  exemption process will render the Landscape Project meaningless and set
  environmental protection back decades.
 
  Thank you for your consideration of our request that you maintain your
  justifiable decision to deny (both sewer extension and habitat exemption).
 
 
  Sincerely,
 
 
  Michael King
  Chairman, Phillipsburg Riverview Organization (PRO)