To: Cedar Grove Zoning Board and Township Council

Stop Overdevelopment in Cedar Grove

Coptic Building Expansion will pose Traffic, Safety and Environmental Issues to Cedar Grove, Montclair and Little Falls residents, and must be denied.

Why is this important?

To protect the residents in the area of the Safety, Traffic and Environmental issues (Peckman River Flooding and contamination) inherent with the Coptic Building Expansion Proposal.

"Please help stop intrusive overdevelopment of Cedar Grove off of Bradford Avenue. 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 Cedar Grove, Montclair and Little Falls residents.

1. Excessive traffic and safety issues: The proposal is for buildings totaling over 40K square feet and will include: a larger building 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. There is only one way in and one way out of the neighborhood for over 43 single family homes and the Bradford bath and Tennis Club. Bradford Ave is already heavily trafficked and Essex County has identified the intersection at Crestmont as a safety concerns as well as other 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 (100 seats).

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 Cedar Grove and 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 (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 Cedar Grove and Montclair. Further, we are concerned that animals with a substantially changed habitat will seek coverage down hill in Cedar Grove and 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.

While we pride ourselves in being an inclusive community, we also pride ourselves on maintaining the safety of our residents and characteristics of our neighborhoods. The proposed development is simply too large for the plot of land that will be used, and would pose an extreme detriment to the local community, greater 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 Cedar Grove Concerned With Overdevelopment