You can email the Governor's office at this website

http://www.state.nj.us/governor/govmail.html

This is what I sent him.

Governor McGreevey-

I am writing to express my astonishment and extreme outrage at how the DEP has effectively gutted the intent and spirit of the Highlands Law by granting exemptions before a commission has even been seated. Being a resident of Morris Cty and living in the core area protected by this important piece of legislation, I am extremely concerned by a huge development project being proposed in our town. The applicant is Christ Church of Montclair, NJ. They are proposing a 300,000 sq ft mega-complex in the core area and on designated wetlands. Their project lies within 1500' of a municipal drinking water well and is surrounded by two C-1 streams that feed reservoirs that supply drinking water to millions of New Jerseyans. They applied for and received an exemption from the DEP, under the Highlands Law, based on their claim not to be increasing the total impervious surface of the existing complex by more than 1/4 acre which I firmly believe was improperly calculated. I dont believe the DEP properly examined the details of their plans, or was inappropriately staffed this early to do so and they missed several important points that would negate this exemption. I have written to the DEP with my observations but to date have not received any response. The text of my letter to them is included here. I implore you to intervene and have this situation re-examined in detail so this exemption can be rescended. Thank you for your consideration. C. Mueller.

N.J. Department of Environmental Protection   September 27, 2004
Division of Watershed Management
Attn: Highlands Applicability Determination
401 E. State Street, P.O. Box 418
Trenton, N.J.   08625-0418

Re: Objection to Highlands Exemption Application by Christ Church of Montclair, N.J.

Recently, a tremendously large and environmentally dangerous project was proposed to the Planning Board of Rockaway Township, NJ. The applicant, Christ Church of Montclair, NJ proposed to buy a 107 acre piece of property from Agilent Technologies at 140 Green Pond Rd, Rockaway, NJ, and build a Mega-church/Business/School in what is part of the core of the Highlands protected area in Rockaway Twp. Since they are unable to do so and work within the restrictions of the Highlands Bill, they have applied to the DEP for a total exemption from all Highlands regulations.

I am writing to strongly urge the DEP NOT to grant any exception to Christ Church of Montclair, NJ. under the Highlands Law.

I personally have read over the text of the Highlands bill, and understand that the definition of “Impervious Surface” is “any structure, surface, or improvement that reduces or prevents absorption of stormwater into land, and includes porous paving, paver blocks, gravel, crushed stone, decks, patios, elevated structures, and other similar structures, surfaces, or improvements”, but I am not clear on what the guidelines for calculating “impervious surface” are. I feel that this applicant is NOT calculating the amount of impervious surface correctly for their proposal, and definitely NOT within the intent of the Highlands Bill, and is thereby not even coming close to the requirements for an exemption under the law, specifically, “that the reconstruction does not increase the lawfully existing impervious surface by one-quarter acre or more.”

I believe that their total calculations, and the basis of their application for exemption, were done strictly on a two-dimensional basis, that is, based on an aerial view of the footprint of their proposal. I believe the correct way to calculate the total impervious surface under the intent of this act, would be to do so on a three-dimensional basis, to include all such surfaces exposed to the elements and therefore providing potential run-off, specifically as follows:

- Their calculations for the roof of the main building facing Green Pond Rd. treat the square footage of the surface as though it were a flat roof. If the roof were peaked, as this would be, it will substantially increase the total square footage of the roof “impervious surface”.
- Their calculations do NOT include the under-building paved parking lot area. This area will be open on all sides to the elements and therefore collect rain, snow, and ice along with road salt, oil and gasoline leakage from the vehicles the same as any fully exposed parking lot.

Those two points alone would more than double the total impervious surface from the original building.

Further:

- Their plans call for a total demolition of the existing main building. Due to
nature of their plans, extensive excavation of soil will take place, as well as, deep and substantial footings to support the new multi-level structure. This will, in all probability require such footings, if not the total foundation, to be built directly into the existing water table, as the property has a water table of only 8 feet below grade.
- In addition, their proposal calls for another double-decked parking area to
the North of the main building. Again, their calculations regarding total impervious surface fail to consider the additional level of paved parking area in this structure.

In addition to the inherent discrepancies in the calculations for impervious surface, this project has the potential to seriously damage water sources for millions of NJ residents for several other reasons.

- This property sits over an existing “sole-source aquifer” which supplies drinking water for all of Rockaway Twp and surrounding areas. In fact, the entire project lies within less than a 1500 foot radius from one of the Rockaway Twp. municipal drinking water wells.
- This property is surrounded by two C-1 streams, Hibernia Brook and Beaver Brook which feed local reservoirs that supply drinking water to much of NJ. The proposed project doesn’t even attempt to abide by the Highlands requirement of a 300’ buffer from such waterways, but instead uses as little as 50’ to a maximum of 150’ buffer from these streams.
- The project proposes a highly condensed level of parking, using smaller parking spaces than is presently required under municipal ordinance. Due to this increased density, their proposal puts approximately 270 parking spaces actually on designated wetlands areas on this property. 

Again in closing, I strongly urge the DEP to deny any and all exemptions requested by the applicant for this project. To grant any such exemption from the Highlands law would be deny the intended protections to millions of NJ residents and to gut all effectiveness of this much needed environmental legislation.

Thank you for your consideration.

      Sincerely,

      Charles A. Mueller
      Rockaway, N.J.   07866