I just wanted to take a moment to review the purpose of VORT. We oppose an application to develop an environmentally sensitive part of Rockaway Twp., specifically 140 Green Pond Rd.
A review of the master plan of the township denotes this portion of town as environmentally sensitive, thereby it is not simply our opinion that it is environmentally sensitive, it is documented fact. This area is predominately “wet lands” and is documented as such in many official documents in the State of NJ.
In addition to our concerns over the environment we are extremely concerned over the traffic impact this project could have on the road ways. The roads in question include – Green Pond Rd., Rt. 80, Morris Ave, Meridian Rd., Old Beach Glenn, Farber Hill, Sanders Rd. and all other road ways within this portion of town. Traffic flow, congestion and safety are the primary concerns we have.
Water is a significant and urgent problem associated with this application for redevelopment. The land is surrounded by very important water ways that move water from one reservoir to another reservoir. These reservoirs provide drinking water to Jersey City, Newark and Kearney. The land also sits on the well fields that provide Rockaway Twp with its drinking water. The addition of 1000 parking spaces will have significant negative impact on the water quality in the rivers and well fields. There are massive environmental concerns with this application. There are MANY issues that the State of NJ is attempting to deal with new legislation that will protect the land, air, and water as well as help to limit urban sprawl. These matters make it very clear that these are STATE WIDE problems that require swift attention in order to protect the land, air and water from further harm.
First aid and safety are of major concern for several reasons. First, the only way to get from the north of town to our local hospital is via Green Pond Rd., a one lane road with no shoulder in many areas. Fire and first aid units will have a difficult time getting in and out of the north end of town with thousands of vehicles on the roads at peek times, which include Sundays but also includes “special events” which can happen at any day or time. Further, the only place we have to land a helicopter in the north section of town is on the 140 Green Pond Rd. Property. A week ago Sunday a man was injured at 7:30am Sunday morning and was flown out from that location. According to the plans submitted by Christ Church the area where the helicopter landed is marked as a “staging area” for construction equipment for the first 2 years that they will occupy the space. Thus it is unclear if there will be a space available to land a helicopter - during testimony by Mr. Ireland this was discussed, yet no changes to the plan were submitted to date. To continue in the area of infrastructure the need for additional police officers during peek traffic times will be significant, calling for the tax payers to contribute to the cost of such services by means of compensations to the officers and lack of staffing to other functions in town.
Lastly, the taxes are a significant issue. The loss of $631,000.00 is devastating. Coupled with the fact that the town will be required to provide services year in and year out while our expense’s increase so will our taxes, yet still no $631,000 + inflation.
At this point in the process we are attempting to ensure that this application is being heard by the proper board. Failure to have the application heard in the proper form does not help either side in this process. The “LAND USE” definition of “Church” is what is being questioned and testimony has been heard, more is to come. This application is in its infancy and suggestions that the town is attempting to “stall” are naive at best and simply meant to incite at worse.
This is the focus of VORT; suggestions of anything other are simply not true.
Trying to keep some people focused on the real and relevent issues is just a tad more difficult than herding cats! But thanks for the only too much needed reminder!
The traffic study clearly states that there are serious concerns regarding the westbound Rt. 80 ramp to Green Pond Rd. It states "the intersection will need improvement due to EXISTING weekday congestion"
This point is made several times in the traffic report. It clearly states that the needed improvements have NOTHING TO DO with any Christ Church traffic impact. This is a fact that can be clearly seen by anyone looking objectively at the study.
This point bears repeating: The Traffic Study's "serious concerns" ARE REFERRING TO EXISTING TRAFFIC, not traffic generated by Christ Church.
And as you will see, Christ Church weekday traffic will be LESS than a corporation's (at the Agilent site) weekday traffic. So for weekday traffic, Christ Church will actually EASE THE TRAFFIC BURDEN compared to a corporation that would locate there.
The traffic study numbers are summarized below. They clearly show that Christ Church weekday traffic IMPACT will be LESS than traffic generated by any corporation that would locate at the Agilent site. Christ Church will bring LESS traffic than Agilent, or any other company that locates there.
Below the weekday numbers are the Sunday numbers. The total impact of the Sunday traffic generated by Christ Church has been compared with the total traffic on lower Green Pond Rd. from a weekday rush hour. There will obviously be more traffic as a result of Christ Church on Sunday morning than without Christ Church, but since the current Sunday morning traffic numbers are almost nothing, the real impact can be seen by comparing Christ Church Sunday morning traffic with weekday rush hour traffic. This comparison shows that there still will be LESS TRAFFICgenerated by Christ Church than generated by normal weekday rush-hour traffic through lower Green Pond Rd.
WEEKDAY TRAFFIC NUMBERS
Agilent Corp. AM traffic per hour: 410 cars (350 in, 60 out)
Christ Church AM traffic per hour: 506 cars (315 in, 191 out)
Agilent Corp. PM traffic per hour: 410 cars ( 40 in, 370 out)
Christ Church PM traffic per hour: 199 cars ( 57 in, 142 out)
These numbers show that the school and administrative functions at Christ Church will create on average LESS traffic than a corporation that would occupy the site.
SUNDAY TRAFFIC NUMBERS
Christ Church:
8:00 AM service 1,306 cars inbound total
(these cars would be moving on Green Pond from 6:30 to 8:00 AM, and from 10:00 to 11:30)
11:00 AM service 1,208 cars inbound
(these cars would be moving on Green Pond from 9:30 to 11:00 AM, and from 1:00 to 2:30 PM)
Because all congregates would not leave at the same time, the total number of cars per hour would be less than 1000.
Compared to
Green Pond RD. WEEKDAY RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC:
AM Cars PER HOUR currently:
1,116 southbound
994 northbound
Total cars PER HOUR on lower Green Pond Rd. 1,810
PM Cars per hour currently:
1,008 southbound
1,037 northbound
Total cars PER HOUR on lower Green Pond Rd. 2,045
These numbers show that although Sunday traffic will increase because of Christ Church, there will still be significantly less traffic than on normal weekday rush hour on Green Pond Rd.
It is nice to see you are attempting to discuss the merits of the application.
Let me draw your attention to a few key items.
1. There are serious flaws in the traffic study submitted by Christ Church - the specifics of all of the flaws will be discussed in the testimony to the board and will be very clear to all.
2. The traffic studies done by the town and by other developers in the area show a significantly different picture than the one shown in the traffic support by Christ Church, again the specifics will be discussed in testimony to the appropriate board.
3. You clearly explain our concerns in your the begining of your post - there are already significant problems with the road. The addition of the amount of traffic that is expected is simply too much for the roads and community to take.
The flaw in the traffic study are obvious. It is based on one assumption and that is the number of members of the club. Ireland has no growth projections (and if you believe that one, I have a bridge to sell ya). The real numbers that need to be used based on my analysis from four different points on the compass are as follows:
25,000 members
If anyone wants to see some mathematical proof of this number, let me know and I will publish a document with a rigorous analysis for all to see.
What bothers me about this is twofold:
1. The number is greater than the population of RT and I object to this.
2. Ireland lied about this under oath which goes to the character of the man who wants to basically run our town. I object to this.
The above is my opinion and analysis alone. I am willing to support the number for anyone who wants to see the math. Some of it has already been presented on previous posts.
We all have read Ireland's own words and viewed his video about hopes for future mega-growth. No one is being fooled beside the local newsrags.
Make no mistake - this is a shrewd and calculated person who has visions of an enormous Mega-Campus and all that goes along with it. He does not give a d@mm about the impact to our local infrustructure or environment, period. Can you say ambitious? You bet.
This fight will be a long haul, with a future court date I am sure...batten down the hatches folks!
quote: Originally posted by: Lisa Salberg "It is nice to see you are attempting to discuss the merits of the application. Let me draw your attention to a few key items. 1. There are serious flaws in the traffic study submitted by Christ Church - the specifics of all of the flaws will be discussed in the testimony to the board and will be very clear to all. 2. The traffic studies done by the town and by other developers in the area show a significantly different picture than the one shown in the traffic support by Christ Church, again the specifics will be discussed in testimony to the appropriate board. 3. You clearly explain our concerns in your the begining of your post - there are already significant problems with the road. The addition of the amount of traffic that is expected is simply too much for the roads and community to take. Thank you, Lisa"
Been away awhile, and missed a great post. Thanks for the details of the traffic proposal. I quoted the above to ask for some details on what "flaws" there are? B/c unless the numbers above are way way off (and in my experience a professional firm is never way off - they merely tilt "Reasonably" toward one side or the other), it seems that there is no traffic impact to complain about that won't exist no matter who moves into the Agilent site.
One major point that seems very telling is that improvement of the GPR/RT80 interchange is already required. That is fascinating, and should alleviate much concern over Church growth, as the improvments can take this into account (along with providing for increased traffic due to commercial building along that corridor).
There's no 5,000 person company going to move there; there are bulk standards they have to go by, and an office building to fit 5,000 employees would have to be either huge in land coverage, or go "up", in which case there are limits as well (45 feet, is it?).
I don't know particulars but it seems as though space requirements for an office worker would be considerably more square footage per person than for a church attendee. Does anyone know the specifications on that?
Regardless, like I always say, companies pay taxes and employ people.
Not to mention the fact that traffic would be going AGAINST the direction the rest of us would be driving, hence, no great delays on our commute down the hill to work.
Unless of course we work at the new company--5 minutes from home! In which case my commute, for one, would be GREATLY decreased.
Karen, the traffic study numbers refer to Agilent's traffic, not a 5000 person corporation.
My experience with professional firms of all kinds comes from negotiation and mediation of numerous disputes and contracts. In the vast majority, while firms will make assumptions that are favorable to their employer, they do not make such assumptions if they are not reasonable in the context of their profession. Firms that do not do that do not stay in business long.
Craig, seriously, you are the best thing going on this board. Not sure I often agree with the "so funny" poster, but with respect to you, I must say I do. You are truly a laugh riot.
W/r/t your post, here is how 25,000 is included. The traffic report (based on information above) states pretty clearly that the impact of the church, at its present size, will have no greater impact than was existing with Agilent. So, upon move-in, there will be no additional impact. HOWEVER, even w/o the church (or Agilent, or another business) the RT80 interchange needs to be improved. This is a project which is required whether the church moves in or not. Thus, when the plans are made to improve the interchange they should anticipate church growth.
I understand that you do not want your roads improved in this manner, b/c you have clearly stated your feelings about having the church near you at all, but that is really too bad. Green Pond road is, on balance, a commercial road, one taht is becoming increasingly so, and that is in the long run a great thing! Feel free to move to Pa - I hear they have some cow pastures you'd like out there!
Forget the interchange. Who is going to pay to widen the two lane portion of Green Pond Road to accomodate the bottleneck when 25,000 people try to negotiate to the club on sundays?
Yup, you go it. Us who live here in RT. I asked Ireland if he would be willing to pay for this. He said "nope!". Well, **** him.
The widening of that road will require the condemnation of about 25 homes and business on the left side of the road going north not to mention the blasting of the cliff. It takes a lot of nerve to expect us to pay for his impact on us. It shows what the man is really made out of - - - it is as transparent as optical grade glass.
Move to Newark where the land is free, the infrastructure is there, and you might do some good for your congregation.
quote: Originally posted by: Curious "Karen, the traffic study numbers refer to Agilent's traffic, not a 5000 person corporation.
Curious,
First of all, using Agilent's numbers are, from a traffic planner's point of view (yes - I've spoken to one) meaningless, because Agilent is no longer there.
I believe the planner hired by the church predicted a 1% background growth for Green Pond Rd - hardly a believable number and from my sources, lower than what is typically used.
The CC plan also neglects to factor in growth for CC. Does it include the numbers from already approved, but not built projects (it needs to)?
The CC report also has people arriving starting at 6:30 in the morning, with a very nice even spread until 8:15AM. Very convenient to smooth out the traffic load, but not realistic.
Please don't expect VORT members (I am not one) to make any comments about traffic studies. They will make them at the appropriate forum - the planning board meeting. Why would they make comments now that might reveal their information to CC and it's supporters? The reports will all come out in due time, assuming of course, that we reach that phase at the pb meetings (school issues or a move to the board of adjustments might preclude the information ever needing to be brought to light).
Any study like the one CC did, is based on a series of given conditions to the firm that did the report. It was not based on a real-time field survey. That type of study can have many inherrant flaws if the conditions given are not accurate. For example if I use a former company's total number of employees and say they all arrive within a half hour of 8am, that makes for a large traffic surge at that time. If I more accurately point out that the company's employees were divided between 2-3 shifts and they all were allowed to use flex time besides that smoothes out the peak. The same way as if I say that a large percentage of my 8am church attendees arrive up to an hour and a half early and many arrive up to a half hour late that also smoothes out that peak. It takes just a little bit of common sense to know that someone with at least a half hour drive from the Montclair area wouldnt be leaving at 6am to attend an 8am service each and every Sunday.
This message board has recieved a great deal of attention today in the local press. I am adding to this post for clearify a few issues.
Voices of Rockaway Twp. does not own this message board. The board was started by a Rockaway Twp. resident who wished to discuss issues of concern to Rockaway Twp.
I am one member of Voice Of Rockaway Twp. and I post on this board to discuss issues that are of concern to Voices of Rockaway Twp., specificly issues surrounding the application for the re-development of 140 Green Pond Road.
Other people post about whatever they wish to post about.
A major issue facing the residents of Rockaway Twp is the application for re-development of 140 Green Pond Road. Therefore it is not surprising that many of the postings here are about this subject matter.
The article in the Daily Record today was careful to only show one side of the story. There has been some significant debate on this board over religion. A Jewish posters views were very specificly discussed in the article while other posts by those with Christian beliefs, that have been viewed by some on this board to be "extreme", were not mentioned at all. The question of who goes to "heaven" and who goes to "hell" has caused a great bit of energy here on this message board. I would suspect that the answer to this question will not be found on the internet.
Rob, Please show the entire picture, not just the one that you think may sell papers. It would be nice if you corrected the misconceptions your article has set forth.
Let's remember this is about the Application for the purchase of 140 Greenpond RD. Taxes, Traffic, Infrastructure, Environment, Not about religion or race.
I was asked a question 2 weeks ago at the Baseball Parade "Kim are you an Athiest or a Racist?" My response was
"I am Lutheran" (although I was thinking that this had nothing to do with the applicaiton)
I am sorry that CC members feel that is what we and RT are about. Maybe it is time that they get to know who we are and what our concerns are truly about.
Let's take a moment to think honestly how this can be acheived.
The fact that the initial post on this thread by Lisa Salberg has been given Top Priority by the administrator of this forum clearly shows who is in control of this board.
Mrs. Salberg claims that VORT doesn't "own" this forum.
Your spin doctoring will no longer work here...it has been explained very clearly why this topic is at the top of the heap here in our free speech forum. Mabey you should consider starting a CC free speech forum to share feelings with like minded persons...
WA WA I wanna a sticky... I WANT I WANT... I want to rant about religion (even though it has nothing to do with the attempted destuction of this town!)
Good Grief. We are not going to take your bait. The board was started by yet another one of those pesky Rockaway Residents who cares about the community they live in.
UMMM Yeh they support the opposition to the CC application - so do ...well...EVERYONE I know in town... So YES it is an issue of major concern to the town. Give it up and move on we have had enough of your BS
You know, one of these guys has a good point--is there a way, if there were to be a compromise, to make sure that it was adhered to?
It seems like, by crying "RLUIPA" these organizations can get away with an awful lot...
It would really stink if we worked hard toward a compromise (as if the church would accept a compromise that would be appropriate with this township), and then they made more expansions later...
I wasn't trying to say that under no circumstances would a compromise work but I think we need to be EXTREMELY cautious about it. It's better to approach this thing with our eyes wide open than hope for the best and regret it later. It may be tempting for the politicians to go for the compromise idea if they don't expect to be in office when the day of reckoning comes and the megachurch files for expansion because "things have changed and they never anticipated so many people needing religion", or whatever.
At a minimum we should be able to satisfactorily answer the following questions:
1. would we be in a better position later than now to defend a suit to allow expansion given the fact that we would no longer have the $630,000 of agilent tax revenues and Marci may no longer be available?
2. do we believe that the reverend will not attempt to circumvent an agreement given his financial abilities and desire to grow?
3. do we trust the reverend to not now or in the future reevaluate the needs of his following and deem it necessary to provide drug abuse counseling, couciling for exconvicts on probation, etc. next to a new school?
4. would the town be willing to defend itself against a suit in the future at its own cost? (I seem to recall some complaining about having to pay for police at the hearings which is much less costly)
5. could the church expand with even part of the property via a parking garage and adding more stories?
These are the questions that have entered my mind about the wisdom of a compromise. I'm sure there are others.
Why does the daily record make a front page story over one man's opinion posted on an internet site instead of covering the real story of traffic, infrastructure, environment, etc.? It seems the answer is simply to stir things up and sell papers. Hopefully our leaders will not be influenced by this type of "journalism".
But thanks for the only too much needed reminder!
