Hello all, For those not at the meeting tonight here is my wrap up (others feel free to add to it as I arrived late). The traffic testimony ended and the question of where to place the traffic light appears to be based on where the town wants it as the county seems to be fine with either plan and is expecting the town to do what is best for it. There were a few questions and comments most of which were answered by the applicant. The issues about soil removal appear to have to be addressed in the developers agreement, although that point is not currently clear and will be addressed at the next meeting. The next meeting will be October 16th (IT WAS TO BE NEXT WEEK BUT TOO MANY MEMBERS COULD NOT MAKE IT). Tonight ended early as testimony was complete and it was the board attorney's Birthday.
That is where we are at the moment, we expect a final conslusion to this process on October 16. The Planning board has several options before them - approve, deny, pend until they hear from the DEP, pend until they handle litigation. Regardless nothing matters without the DEP's appoval of the Highlands Exemption. This means that the planning board could declare the application approved but the applicant can not have complete approval until the DEP handles the matter of the exemption and issues it. Withdrawal of the exemption means they are back to square one on all fronts. There are hundereds of environmentalists watching this exemption and it is a sure thing it will challanged at the highest level IF ever issued.
In short this chapter is coming to an end, but this book has many chapters yet to be written.
There was a full room yet again tonight and as always it was great to see so many involved residents!
Have a nice night. Lisa
__________________
The truth wins out over slick PR and personal attacks.
The Christ Church Plan for the redevelopment of 140 Green Pond Rd is just too big for the area.
Rockaway Twp. nears vote on megachurch If planners OK application, they will then have to decide where to put a traffic light Tuesday, September 12, 2006 BY PAULA SAHA Star-Ledger Staff After nearly three years of testi mony for and against Christ Church's plans to build a megachurch in Rockaway Township, the planning board is poised to vote on the project next month.
The 5,000-member Montclair church wants to build a complex off Green Pond Road that would include a sanctuary for more than 2,500 people, a K-5 school and other facilities on the former Agi lent Technologies property.
The church's first hearing be fore the board was in December 2003, and its last could be Oct. 16, when the board is expected to vote on the application. In the past three years, the church's plans have undergone several revisions. Still, many in town believe the project will cause traffic nightmares and environmental damage.
"It's too big for the area," said Neil Svendsen, a longtime Green Pond Road resident.
The church, in the meantime, has filed a federal religious discrimination lawsuit against the township.
Last night, some 150 people crowded into the township council chambers for their last chance to cross-examine the church's traffic experts on whether and where a traffic signal should be installed on Green Pond Road.
The church has proposed three scenarios for traffic lights: putting a light on the Green Pond Road entrance, which would require the church to get an easement from the property owner opposite the church's driveway; putting a light at Green Pond and Meriden roads; or having no light at all and relying on a police officer, hired by the church, to direct traffic on Sundays.
The church's experts say there would be minimal lines at the Green Pond Road driveway be cause of a proposed deceleration lane for cars entering the complex. That idea would be to direct traffic continually onto a loop road on the property, thereby keeping the backup off of the main road, said traffic consultant Karl Pehnke.
Svendsen had trouble believing that.
"Can you imagine 1,600 cars, and there's not going to be a backup?" he asked after the meet ing.
Robert Andersen, who owns property on Green Pond Road, told the board last night that the project was "going to be a big burden on the businesses along there and the residents."
When told he could only make statements as to what traffic configuration he preferred, Andersen answered simply, "I don't prefer anything. I'd like it to go away, that's all."
If the application is approved next month, the planning board will make the final decision on the traffic light location. The board had initially planned to take a vote next week, but changed the date to Oct. 16 after some board members said they could not make the September date.
On Oct. 16, the church's attor ney will give her closing arguments. After that, the board will go into executive session to discuss the church's lawsuit against the township, said board attorney William Dimin. Members then publicly deliberate and vote, he said.
The church also is awaiting word from the state on whether it will get an exemption to build in the Highlands core, an environmentally sensitive area that includes the former Agilent site. Development in that region is limited by state law.
__________________
The truth wins out over slick PR and personal attacks.
The Christ Church Plan for the redevelopment of 140 Green Pond Rd is just too big for the area.
Vote set for Christ Church plan Rockaway Twp. planning board announces Oct. 16 date for building plan
BY ROB JENNINGS DAILY RECORD
Post Comment Read Comments
ROCKAWAY TWP. -- The planning board is expected to vote on Oct. 16 on the controversial Christ Church building plan, it was announced Monday night.
The announcement came as testimony in the case, which has spanned 33 months, was officially closed at Monday's planning board meeting.
Shortly before 10 p.m., board attorney William Dimin announced that testimony had concluded.
At the October meeting, board members will first discuss the case in closed-door session, which they are entitled to do given Christ Church's ongoing federal lawsuit against the township.
Members then will make statements in public and there will be a summation from church attorney Wendy Berger.
Notice of the end of testimony brought a murmur from the 120 at Monday's meeting, most of whom oppose the church plan.
Earlier, a few had accused board members of already having made up their minds in favor of the church.
During a break in the session, board chairman Mort Dicker said he had not decided how to vote.
Church pastor David Ireland said, "Like everybody else, we're waiting for it to come to a conclusion."
The board originally planned to meet again Mondaynight, but agreed to hold off until Oct. 16 because two board members would not have been able to attend and Berger needed more time to prepare her summation, Dicker said.
Christ Church, which has granted a series of extensions for a vote, agreed to a one-month extension through the end of October, Dicker said.
Afterward, in the municipal building parking lot, Ireland conferred privately with fellow church members and supporters.
Earlier at the 8 p.m. hearing, the board heard testimony and questioning from about a dozen residents on the proposed traffic light on Green Pond Road at the proposed church entrance.
"It's going to be a big burden," said Robert Anderson. Asked if he would prefer a traffic light in a different location, Anderson said, "I don't prefer anything; I'd like it to go away."
Dicker said the board was strongly leaning toward a traffic light, because it might be hazardous to have a police officer directing traffic. He said a traffic light might have been necessary, even if Christ Church was not in the picture. He cited the growth of the township from 4,000 people a few decades ago to nearly 25,000 today. Monday's hearing was the 31st on Christ Church's building plan, which is highlighted by a 2,512-seat sanctuary and private K-5 school. The first was on Dec. 15, 2003.
Hearings are proceeding despite a federal lawsuit filed by Christ Church in April 2005 and a review by the state Department of Environmental Protection of a key Highlands law exemption.
DEP granted the exemption to Christ Church in 2004 but is reconsidering it in response to a state appellate court ruling stemming from a Rockaway Township legal challenge.
__________________
The truth wins out over slick PR and personal attacks.
The Christ Church Plan for the redevelopment of 140 Green Pond Rd is just too big for the area.
1. Wouldn't that turnoff that cc is referring to be located on RT property? Is it not awfully assumptious that we will just give them that property to use? What compels us to do that? Sell it for 50 Million bucks, maybe:, give it to them, no way in hell.
2. Wouldn't putting a lane on RT property right next to a C1 stream fundamentally violate the rules of decent environmental behaviour? Isn't that stream supposed to be protected wiithin 300 feet? Are we going to build a lane right next to the stream because this thing is a church?
3. It is more clear that their mouthpiece Whinney, is no longer a cc christian. Guess he converted back to Judaism since his comments are nowhere in site for a few months now and the nj.com board has been clean lately.
Speaking with an engineer for a project I am working on the subject of ingress and egress came up, at which point we started talking about the development of 140 Green Pond Road and how the traffic light pattern will adversely affect the flow of traffic along Green Pond Road.
The basics are quite simple, according to their expert on traffic flow we can expect an additional 800-1000 vehicles for each service held at Christ Church. Each car between 12-18 feet long, but for ease of mathematical equations I've rounded them off to an average of 15 feet long (average vehicle per edmunds.com web site). With a deceleration lane of approx. 200 feet long being built on the northbound side of GPR that will hold 16 cars at any given time. Now times that 15 foot long car by the 800-1000 vehicles that will be arriving at roughly a 15-25 minute interval. That is right folks, that is 12,000-15,000 feet worth of automobiles. With a mile being 5280 feet long, that is 2-3 miles worth of vehicles if you stack them up end to end (let us not forget the speeed limit on GPR and the safe traveling distance required by law between each car for every 10mph they are traveling). Now back to the discussion of traffic flow, with a 90 second interval for the proposed traffic light as reported by the CC hired traffic engineer, and approx. 750-800 feet to the parking structure, we can clearly see that there will be at least a 1 mile traffic back up from the entrance of 140 Green Pond Road southbound towards RT80 on the northbound side of GPR for at least 45 minutes prior to the start of services on any given weekend. How is this so, well, if you figure that with the normal traffic flow of GPR on Sunday plus the addition of 800-1000 extra automobiles and an average of 7-8 cars a minute being able to traverse the entrance of 140 GPR during that time, that it will take approximately 90-120 minutes for all of those cars to safely enter and find parking spaces within the paved parking area. Of course this does not factor in any people dropping off and picking up congregates, children, etc which would actually slow the process down even further. After the first service is over and the congregates are leaving while new ones will be arriving, the traffic congestion doubles for a period of at least an 1.5 hours to almost 2 hours of stop and go traffic. Again, I did not take into account the merge when GPR goes from 2 lanes down to 1 a 3/4 of a mile before the proposed deceleration lane.
I'm just sorry that I did not have this conversation before last nights meeting, as I would have loved to hear their traffic engineer confirm what I was saying on the record. Maybe since GPR is a county road, a certified letter to their DOT and the state DOT is in order. Guess we'll see what they have to say when I clean it up a bit more and explain it to them in greater detail. Let them go back and decide whether this engineering plan works or not and what the effect of it will be on GPR.
MrBill, I think there will be worse egress traffic. Only 2 ways out. Left on GPR, or Left on Meridan to Left on GPR. Traffic lights may make it safer, but won't stop the back-up of cars. They will need 2 hours to clear the lot for the second show. Have Boonton Township and Mountain Lakes been notifed of this? It would only be a matter of time before they figure out the back roads to Rt 80 East and back them up as well. Does anyone remember when rt 80 was closed for almost a month and cars where taking the backroads? There was actually a traffic jam on old beach glen road during rush hour. Is that what our Sundays will come down to? I dont think so......
I hope the PB is smart enough not to make a hasty decison when a traffic plan is non-existant at this point.
The only vote on the board that I have confidence in is Sceusi's. The rest of those folks seem to be a bunch of sheep and will probably follow the recommendation of Dimin who will recommend the legally cautious and politically correct one; after all, Dimin does not even live here, so what is it to him? He gets paid the same either way.
