Jackson planning board officials hope to wrap up Six Flags Great Adventure's solar farm application before the end of March. Watch video
JACKSON TOWNSHIP — After several months of meetings and more than 30 hours of testimony, a decision on Six Flags Great Adventure's controversial plans to construct a solar generation facility on 66 acres of existing woodlands is expected soon.
After another two hours of public comment and expert testimony Monday night, the planning board scheduled two meetings during which board Chairman Robert Hudak said he hopes to "bang out" the remaining testimony, cross examination and public comment.
The first meeting is scheduled for the planning board's regularly scheduled meeting night of March 21. The second would be a special meeting on March 23, which would be held only if the matter is not wrapped up on March 21.
Monday night's meeting saw more of the same comments from the public, many of whom have stated in recent months that they support Six Flags investing in solar energy but question why it has to be done at the expense of thousands of trees.
"Everyone who's an environmentalist knows that you plant a tree to save the world. And it doesn't make any sense ... for anyone to consider this kind of plan. Because you're not being environmentalists if you're going to cut down all the trees to install a solar system," said Doreen Rivell, of Colts Neck, adding Rutgers University was an example of a place with solar panels over its large parking lots. "So it's easy to do, it's been done. You just have to make the commitment."
Jeff Tittel, the director of New Jersey Sierra Club, which is one of the groups opposing the project, released a statement Monday saying the group supports Great Adventure's efforts to install a solar farm to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
"But this proposal will undermine the benefits of clean energy. The Jackson Planning Board should tell Six Flags to move the solar farm to prevent the clear-cut of 16,000 trees. There are plenty of alternatives Six Flags could take that do not harm the environment, sacrifice habitat, or add to stormwater runoff," he said in the release. "Six Flags needs to put solar on their parking lot, staging and ticket areas, existing buildings, or other disturbed areas.
Tittel added that the Sierra Club worked with Jackson Township to uphold its conservation zone in court and implement a tree ordinance, but argued the Six Flags proposal is now violating it.
"The Jackson Planning Board needs to uphold these laws, vote this down, and save the forest," he said.
Six Flags president John Fitzgerald previously said that putting the panels in the theme park's parking lot would be too close to the public and would put visitors at risk of injury or the equipment in danger of being damaged.
Monday night's meeting also saw more expert testimony and debate about the presence a C-1 stream on the proposed development site and stretching to the opposite side of Reed Road.
An expert for the applicant previously testified that there was no culvert under the roadway to allow water to pass through, thus giving the impression that the stream ended at the road and did not continue past it.
However, an expert for the opposition testified that he visited the site subsequent to the applicant's declaration — which an attorney for Six Flags said may have been trespassing — and said he not only found a culvert, but water flowing through it.
The planning board accepted a video of the culvert into evidence, but the video was not shown during the meeting due to opposition from the applicant. It may, however, be shown at a future meeting Planning Board officials said.
Rob Spahr may be reached at rspahr@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @TheRobSpahr. Find NJ.com on Facebook.