Mr. Rogers asked if what Mr. Shea was saying was that if it is not listed, it is a non-permitted use. Mr. Shea replied that it is correct. What this ordinance does is specifically prohibits and that increases the evidentiary burden at the D1 level. It does not impact the Planning Board because any non-permitted or prohibited use goes to the Zoning Board. This is just a finding of whether it is not the ordinance that the Board has to have.
Mr. Heller thought Mr. Shea put it very eloquently and made it very understandable. Mr. Bressi also had great points. Mr. Heller asked if there is anyone that can elaborate at all if there is any beneficial use whatsoever to data centers in Jackson. He does not see any personally, but he was curious for discussion on that.
Ms. DeMarzo agreed with the fact that the Master Plan Subcommittee did not list it, it is definitely already not permitted. The way the ordinance is written right now, it is very vague. Ms. DeMarzo thinks it would really open up a door that we do not need to open. She does not think that this is consistent with the Master Plan.
Mr. Parkes, having read through the Master Plan again specifically for the relevant parts of it, thought it was very useful to have this discussion because he realized with that knowledge that it does not appear to be consistent with the Master Plan and certainly outlining the ramifications of it being not permitted to be danger and it could open up an avenue for these to be actually installed in the Township.
Mr. Sullivan stated that if you look at the wording, and he has seen some legal interpretations of this, it is really a meaningless ordinance. It is placating to the public because they fear this is an issue. But in reality, it does not change anything. Anybody that would want to build a data center would have to go to the Zoning Board and would require a D1 variance. This does not change that. Whether or not this is consistent or inconsistent with the Master Plan, Mr. Sullivan supposes it is inconsistent in that it is addressing something that does not need to be addressed and that it is creating a perception that the governing body is directing the Zoning Board to have a certain shaded belief towards an application. While the Zoning Board is an independent body, he does not think people quite realize that Planning Boards are appointed by the Mayor. We are not an independent body. The Zoning Board, however, is appointed by the Council, but it is considered an independent body because they are working outside the scope of the Master Plan and the zoning. They can give people variances that would allow them to build something that is technically not allowed in the Master Plan or in the zoning. To have the Council direct the Zoning Board to have an opinion towards certain types of applications would open up the Township to litigation that it might lose and therefore, the ordinance would create an issue that the ordinance is trying to fight. It is a catch 22. So no, it is not consistent with the Master Plan and at the same time it does not affect the Planning Board. This is a Zoning Board issue.
Dr. Campbell thought this discussion has been very helpful to the Board members. Before going to a vote, she asked Mr. Peters, with a simple yes or no, if this is consistent with the Master Plan. Mr. Peters replied it is not a simple yes or no answer. It is asking for a yes or no answer to what amounts to a popularity contest. Mr. Peters does not disagree with any of the comments the Board members have made, but he is not sure that this ordinance was not crafted for the purposes