To: Robert D Jackson (Mayor), William L Hurlock (Ward1), Robin Schlager (Ward2)
Stop intrusive overdevelopment impacting Montclair
Victory! The creator of this petition declared the campaign a success. You can still sign the petition to show support.
Please help stop intrusive overdevelopment of Cedar Grove off of Bradford Avenue above Wards 1 and 2. Your help is urgently needed! The Cedar Grove Zoning Board is nearing a final vote on a disturbing application by the Coptic Church Diocese of North America that requires significant overdevelopment. The property is on lots 400 and 402 on the corner of Woodstone Drive and Bradford Avenue in Cedar Grove. If approved, the development would require 18 zoning variances for excessive building size, parking, building height, stadium like lighting, fences and wall height. In addition, the proposal will require significant blasting or pile driving and will have environmental and potential flooding implications for Montclair residents. While there are existing properties in this location, they are smaller in scale and height, are hidden from Montclair view, and required only 3 variances. As Montclair Residents, our concerns with the new proposal are:
1. Excessive traffic and safety issues: The proposal is for buildings totaling over 40K square feet and will include: a larger church with approximately 400 seats and extra room to stand, 8 classrooms, office space, open space, retail space, a kitchen, a papal residence, and on and off site parking spaces. Bradford Ave is already heavily trafficked and has dangerous intersections: at Highland Ave, where bikers and joggers try to cross, and where Bradford turns onto Upper Mountain, an intersection with significant congestion and a very treacherous narrow turn. This will get worse as many of the members are and will continue to be from out of town. Please note, traffic flow and safety concerns were the primary reason for a denial by the Cedar Grove Planning Board in 1992 for a much smaller development.
2. Skyline views and integrity of neighborhood character: The proposal includes excessive building height in stories and in feet as well as excessively bright and tall lights that will be highly visible from the top of the hill. One version of the plan proposes that the tallest portion of one building will be 65’ from basement level to the most visible top. The building will appear even taller and more prominent due to being built at high elevations. Many of the residents of Montclair purchased properties near Bradford due to the natural surroundings with proximity to the City. If approved, this development will become a prominent characteristic of the neighborhood rather than the natural surroundings that drove our original purchase of properties in the area.
3. Blasting / Pile Driving and related impact: The proposed development requires excavations in excess of 20’ below ground surface and into bedrock adjacent to wetlands in an area of thin soil coverage (per Langan Engineering and Environmental Services report presented at Zoning Board Meetings). We are concerned about the noise pollution from blasting and/ or pile driving and the stability of home foundations for houses that are built into the adjacent rock in Montclair. Further, we are concerned that animals with a substantially changed habitat will seek coverage down hill in Montclair. According to the same Langan report, “Almost half (46.5%) of the transition area (to wetlands) will be lost or disturbed and 24% will be totally replaced with building and pavement.”
4. Runoff and related flooding issues: The application does not address adequate plans to address runoff into a tributary of the Peckman River in Cedar Grove, which already has flooding conditions, nor does it address potential impact to Montclair and Little Falls.
We pride ourselves in maintaining the safety and characteristics of our neighborhoods. The proposed development is simply too large for the plot of land that will be used and would pose more detriment to the local community than the benefit it would provide. As quoted from a report by Langan Engineering and Environmental Services: “It appears as though (the applicant) has chosen to use as much land as they desire, ignore the impacts, and then request a waiver and variances.”
Please help stop or constrain this proposed intrusive development. While we do not oppose development, we oppose one that requires 18 variances and impacts the quality, integrity, and safety of our neighborhoods.
Thank you for your consideration!
Sincerely,
Citizens of Montclair Concerned With Overdevelopment
1. Excessive traffic and safety issues: The proposal is for buildings totaling over 40K square feet and will include: a larger church with approximately 400 seats and extra room to stand, 8 classrooms, office space, open space, retail space, a kitchen, a papal residence, and on and off site parking spaces. Bradford Ave is already heavily trafficked and has dangerous intersections: at Highland Ave, where bikers and joggers try to cross, and where Bradford turns onto Upper Mountain, an intersection with significant congestion and a very treacherous narrow turn. This will get worse as many of the members are and will continue to be from out of town. Please note, traffic flow and safety concerns were the primary reason for a denial by the Cedar Grove Planning Board in 1992 for a much smaller development.
2. Skyline views and integrity of neighborhood character: The proposal includes excessive building height in stories and in feet as well as excessively bright and tall lights that will be highly visible from the top of the hill. One version of the plan proposes that the tallest portion of one building will be 65’ from basement level to the most visible top. The building will appear even taller and more prominent due to being built at high elevations. Many of the residents of Montclair purchased properties near Bradford due to the natural surroundings with proximity to the City. If approved, this development will become a prominent characteristic of the neighborhood rather than the natural surroundings that drove our original purchase of properties in the area.
3. Blasting / Pile Driving and related impact: The proposed development requires excavations in excess of 20’ below ground surface and into bedrock adjacent to wetlands in an area of thin soil coverage (per Langan Engineering and Environmental Services report presented at Zoning Board Meetings). We are concerned about the noise pollution from blasting and/ or pile driving and the stability of home foundations for houses that are built into the adjacent rock in Montclair. Further, we are concerned that animals with a substantially changed habitat will seek coverage down hill in Montclair. According to the same Langan report, “Almost half (46.5%) of the transition area (to wetlands) will be lost or disturbed and 24% will be totally replaced with building and pavement.”
4. Runoff and related flooding issues: The application does not address adequate plans to address runoff into a tributary of the Peckman River in Cedar Grove, which already has flooding conditions, nor does it address potential impact to Montclair and Little Falls.
We pride ourselves in maintaining the safety and characteristics of our neighborhoods. The proposed development is simply too large for the plot of land that will be used and would pose more detriment to the local community than the benefit it would provide. As quoted from a report by Langan Engineering and Environmental Services: “It appears as though (the applicant) has chosen to use as much land as they desire, ignore the impacts, and then request a waiver and variances.”
Please help stop or constrain this proposed intrusive development. While we do not oppose development, we oppose one that requires 18 variances and impacts the quality, integrity, and safety of our neighborhoods.
Thank you for your consideration!
Sincerely,
Citizens of Montclair Concerned With Overdevelopment
Why is this important?
Many of the residents of Montclair purchased property off of Bradford Avenue due to the natural surroundings and low building profiles. If approved, this development will significantly change the characteristics of the neighborhood and would pose traffic, safety, and environmental issues.