Residents and members of the Borough Council are expressing their displeasure with conceptual plans that have been drafted by Monmouth County to help improve the flow of vehicles through an accident-prone intersection in Tinton Falls.
During the Tinton Falls Borough Council meeting on July 11, although the matter was not listed on the evening’s agenda, close to 200 members of the public attended the meeting.
Residents voiced their concerns about what they described as the county’s plan to create a commercial vehicle bypass through a scenic residential area of the borough.
Monmouth County officials have outlined two concept plans for intersection improvements at county Route 13A (Sycamore Avenue) and county Route 51 (Hance Avenue), and at the intersection of Sycamore Avenue and Hope Road, which is under the jurisdiction of Tinton Falls.
Sycamore and Hance avenues accommodate one lane of travel in each direction. Residents described the location as a high-volume traffic area that is prone to motor vehicle accidents.
According to the county, the injury rate that occurs from motor vehicle accidents at the intersection of Sycamore and Hance avenues is more than three times the state average, and has totaled $12 million in damages and personal injuries during the past 20 years.
Concept plans presented by county engineers call for the expansion of the roads to accommodate the number of vehicles currently using Sycamore and Hance avenues, and a projected increase in the number of vehicles that will use in the roads in upcoming years.
The first concept plan proposes the extension of Hope Road, upgrades to traffic signals, and an increase in the number of lanes in either direction of the targeted road.
The second concept plan proposes the construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of Hance and Sycamore avenues, upgrades to the existing traffic light at the intersection of Hope Road and Sycamore Avenue, and the expansion of the targeted roads.
The addition of lanes of travel on the targeted roads would require the acquisition of land from residential properties, according to public officials.
Borough Engineer Tom Neff clarified what he said are misconceptions that have been interpreted by residents who are opposing the preliminary site plans.
“There are no plans to take over Hope Road” he said in response to members of the public who expressed concern about the county assuming ownership of that borough road.
“I can assure you this board is not going to give them that damn road. That is our road and they’re not going to get it,” council President Gary Baldwin interjected during Neff’s comment.
Members of the public applauded Baldwin’s statement.
Neff said Hope Road will not be widened to include multiple lanes. He said Hance and Sycamore avenues will not be widened to accommodate the number of vehicles on those roads.
“They (the county engineers) know there is no room. They are not trying to come in here and put in a four-lane road. They know the borough doesn’t want this done,” Neff said. “Unfortunately, Sycamore and Hance avenues are county roads. We can’t restrict truck traffic. The purpose of (a county road) is to keep (commercial vehicles) off borough roads.”
Members of the council said the construction of a traffic light at Sycamore and Hance avenues may help reduce the crash rate, but said they do not believe that improvement by itself will remedy the congested situation in that area.
“Just a traffic light will not work,” Councilman Christopher Pak said. “We (the council members) want a different option other than the county’s two options. We realize more with safety needs to be done there (at the Hance-Sycamore intersection) and everybody in this room I think agrees with me.”
Members of the governing body said they are not in favor of either concept plan put forth by the county. Council members agreed the roads are problematic and need to be addressed, but said the “intrusive” nature of the proposed site plans is not ideal.
Residents also expressed concern about the roads becoming a cut-through route for vehicles that are traveling toward the former Fort Monmouth and the Monmouth Mall in Eatontown if proposed pending redevelopment plans are approved at both of those locations.
Residents said if the redevelopment plans are approved at the former neighboring military installation and at the regional shopping mall, more vehicles will choke Tinton Falls’ already crowded roads.
“I want (residents) to know we are all looking for a way to make this work for our town … lots of opinions are flying. A lot of statements are being made. The body of people up here (on the council) have nothing but the best interest for this town,” Councilwoman Nancyanne Fama said. “We are hearing everything. We are hearing you.”
In an interview, Tom Carrole, who has lived on Sycamore Avenue since 1971, spoke on behalf of his neighbors when he said, “The people of northern Tinton Falls object to the possibility the county’s road improvement plans will end up changing the residential character of Tinton Falls into a commercial area.”
Carrole said he fears Tinton Falls will become an area that is inundated with vehicles, both commercial and private, and that altering the roads will allow for further development in what he referred to as a scenic small town in Monmouth County.
Residents who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting said they fear that an increase in traffic on the roads will be the first step toward the “commercialization” of what they said is a state-wide epidemic that occurs in small towns.
Attorney Richard P. Lomurro, who said he represents several residents who are objecting to the proposed improvement plan, said he expects a resolution to be drafted and approved by the council which will assert the governing body’s disagreement with the county’s plan for this area of Tinton Falls.
“Saying we are going to back off and come back to the table, I thought I would hear something a little bit more from you guys,” Lomurro said in response to council members who said they object to the proposed improvements, but have not formally addressed their objection to county engineers.
Joseph Augustine, who lives on the west end of Sycamore Avenue, said, “I am constantly bombarded with traffic …. We are the county. We are the borough. We are the state … These properties belong to the people who pay the taxes. We are the county and we should be heard. I want to know if this project has anything to do with the development at Fort Monmouth.”
Baldwin, the council president, said an increase in traffic in Tinton Falls would be inevitable if proposed redevelopment for multiple uses is approved on the property that was formerly Fort Monmouth.
Sections of the one-time military base are in Tinton Falls, Eatontown and Oceanport.
“Governments will pretty much do what they want to do. Well, we’re a government and we don’t like that idea,” Baldwin said. “We want to do what we think is best for Tinton Falls. That’s all we’re here for.
At one point while residents were addressing the council, Fama sought to reassure them by saying, “We are not going to let them obliterate our town.”
Several residents who did not come forward to state their concerns in accordance with the council’s public comment procedures shouted their grievances regarding the county’s plan from wherever they were in the meeting room.
