You can't make this stuff up! I hope this is one of the "traffic experts" that cc has hired to present this load of crap to our planning board.
3601. No scientific empirical proof by BuddDems, 1/11/05 13:48 ET Photographic is not scientific, empirical evidence. Although I trust that investigators are telling the truth with their narrative, they have no mechanism to document over a timeframe the median outcomes for the Sayreville Church with reference to their travel time. They present no standard deviation. They have not presented enough observations to qualify as scientifically valid. And even if they had conducted that study, the case they are studying is nonapplicable to CC.
Real data on GPR and CC must be presented. What will be the median time? What are the standard deviations? What the impact on weather to travel time?
What is GPRs hourly capacity? What is the normative travel speed of GPR? What is the surplus and deficit capacity of GPR given certain car access usage rates? And, how do you scientifically define terms like "good", "fair" and "bad" usage rates and travel times on GPR?
That's the kind of data that can be compelling. What has been presented here is mostly quasi-quantitative proof laced with emotionalism. There has only been one empiriical observation of a non-related entity and that has been passed of as quantitative proof. It just doesn't hold scientific water.
The single most important piece of data would be, how many cars will there be? Ignore the higher order stuff, because if we do not know the number of cars the rest is crap (crap in, crap out). And we will not know the number of cars because Ireland will not forcast his membership numbers.
So, in summary, there will be a huge difference between 5000 members and 20,000 members. What number is RT allowed to use? Probably, only the number that Ireland has presented which is 5000.
No, when CC fails to commit to any number ("it's hard to quantify growth" - from the rev's mouth) our planning board has the right to fill in the blanks with educated guesses gathered from all testimony. And traffic is but one of the reasons this plan will ultimately be denied - court here we come in the comming years, may the best lawyers become rich (and win for our towns sake).
Mr. Ireland's full quote from the 2/24/04 Daily Record was I never said I had no projection of growth. I just said it's hard to quantify. I would hope that at some point, the planning board will press him for his 'hard to quantify' growth projections.
In the May 28, 2003 Montclair Times, Mr. Ireland said "We’ve never lost members from a move,” The article went on to state this this will be his seventh move as pastor of Christ Church. Clearly, he has experience moving and having people follow him.
When asked about growth in the December 2003 issue of Church Business, Mr. Ireland stated "We have definite plans for future ministries. We work with our strategic plan, looking at where we’re going to be in five years and what we want Christ Church to look like."
I would hope that the Rockaway Township planning board will at some point clear up the following:
Current membership totals for Christ Church: The May 2003 article stated 5000. Has he had ZERO growth over the past 20 months? If so, then why does he need such a large facility. If not, what is the current membership? Why have we heard the 5000 number for almost two years with no adjustments for his 2003, 2004, and now 2005 growth?
Is there a five year plan as implied in the Church Business article? Our planning board should ask to see it.
What new ministries are planned for Rockaway Township? In the Church Business article, Mr. Ireland said he has 'definite plans' for new ministries. As far as Rockaway Township is concerned, new ministries will equate to more people during the week and more traffic. Our planning board needs to find out how many new ministries will be drawing how many people on which days and times.
Mr. Ireland stated that he has growth projections, although they are hard to quantify. Our planning board needs to find out what those growth projections are. Obviously, they must understand that projected growth is a number that is hard to quantify, but I am sure these estimates will give them a ballpark figure to work with.
(LOL) YES, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO TRAFFIC TO BE PRODUCED BY THIS CHURCH. EVER. THE RATE OF INFIDEL PASSAGE WILL ACTUALLY BE IMPROVED AS WILL THE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF RAINWATER RUNNOFF WHICH WILL NOT BE INCREASED DUE TO THE EXTENSIVE REDUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE WHICH ALTHOUGH EXPANDED WILL ALSO BE MUCH BETTER OVERALL.
has cc ever differentiated between "members" and "attendees"???
it is not uncommon for a church to have only 50-75% of its church be official members (many people can't be bothered taking the membership classes)
if they have 5000 members it is reasonable to think 6500-8000 adults & children call cc home
that of course assumes no growth over the past year or two
It is a shame that the PB only looks at present numbers... especially since they will need way more $$$ (translated people) to afford 30 mill + ... ( BTW they don't have enough parking)
