PENNS NECK AREA EIS

February 9, 2003 Correspondence from John Roeder


From: John Roeder
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 9:11 PM
To: Jon Carnegie, David Parris, Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh, Alison Miller, Guy Pierson 

Subject: response on two new alternatives before EIS roundtable

Dear Jon:  

Because afterschool meetings and band practice limit the time I can spend at the EIS Roundtable on Monday -- providing we don't get snowed out -- I am taking this opportunity to respond to your invitation for us to offer e-mail feedback on the two new alternatives you sent out last week. They are, insofar as I can see, ST2 and ST3 of your sensitivity tests, the two alternatives that constrain the ESC, first to 2 lanes, then to none at all.  My understanding of West Windsor Township's position on this matter is that an ESC is absolutely needed, but that it be of only 2 lanes.  I fully and wholeheartedly support that position and have done so consistently in my participation in the EIS roundtable.  For example, when responses were gathered around the table to each alternative, I observed for each alternative that contained no ESC that it offered no relief to traffic congestion for Washington Road.

I am not surprised that your two additional alternatives are based on alternative D.  Indeed, I felt that your doing five of your six sensitivity tests on that alternative showed an inclination in that direction.  But I am appalled that one of the two new alternatives has no ESC at all.  Indeed, of all your five variations on alternative D, it has the most deleterious effects for traffic congestion on Washington Road.  Moreover, with its frontage roads, it creates a de facto cloverleaf intersection at Washington Rd. and Route 1, something that would speed traffic along Route 1 (which is really all that NJDOT is concerned about) while leaving the same traffic to travel on Washington Road and increase to God knows how much in the future. If we are going to stick to our goal to improve east-west traffic flow, we badly need an ESC to take some of the traffic presently on Alexander Road and Washington Road.

My concerns about the consequences of no ESC on Washington Road traffic derive from my residency in Penns Neck.  I also have concerns about alternative 2 and its absence of an ESC for the impact that will result on the Princeton Baptist Church OF Penns Neck, of which I am the Treasurer. Your own sensitivity tests led you to the conclusion of congested ramp roads and the possibility of needing to have frontage roads more than one lane wide.  Might this not be adding an additional surface Route #1 straddling a depressed Route #1 in the center?  How then would Route #1-in-a-cut provide a positive effect on the church in terms of noise abatement?   I also continue to raise the question of the cost of Route #1-in-a-cut and how, in this time of tight budgets, anyone will want to fund it.


For the lack of traffic congestion relief on Washington Road and its intersection of Route #1, I would like to speak strongly against your alternative #2 and any other alternative that does not contain an ESC.  (I am also opposed to an ESC that comes too close to Fisher Place as well, because I feel that this too would be deleterious to the Penns Neck Community.)   I am sending this e-mail because of the short time I can spend at Monday's meeting (and save the time that reading this will take) -- and I am sharing it with my fellow Penns Neck representatives and the elected West Windsor officials who are participating in the Roundtable.


Sincerely,
John Roeder
Second Penns Neck Alternate