LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, Feb. 20
By:
There is no need for Route 92
To the editor:
Route 92 has been on the books since 1928. Over the years, the location of this road has been pushed northward by various towns that did not want it or the traffic in their areas. Some of those towns are the very towns now complaining about South Brunswick, Kingston, Montgomery, Franklin et al fighting the current alignment.
It is important to note that Route 92 is not a free highway it’s a toll road, elevated 15 feet, with approximately seven overpasses and a 500-foot bridge (over McCormick Lake) in its 6.7-mile length. It will fill or destroy thousands of acres of wetlands and threatens a major underground aquifer recharge area.
The cost to build Route 92, which has been estimated at $500 million to $750 million, does not include wetland mitigation and, to date, no wetland mitigation plan has been put forth.
The primary reason for Route 92 is to drive traffic into Forrestal Center. One exit ramp leads directly into the back parking lot. Is it surprising then, that Plainsboro and the Princetons support this alignment? Certainly not. If Forrestal Center thrives, Plainsboro’s tax base grows. If Forrestal Center thrives, Princeton University (owner of Forrestal Center) earns more revenue. Public funds and sensitive wetlands should not be sacrificed for a private driveway into a corporate park.
As for needing east-west roads in the area: Route 522 in South Brunswick is an east-west road. It’s also free, by the way, which is something that Route 92 will not be. Route 133 is a free east-west roadway (and is a part of the original Route 92 alignment). Scudders Mill Road/Dey Road is also a wonderful (free) way to get from Route 1 to the New Jersey Turnpike. Do we really need a fourth road here one that will charge a fee, no less?
Assemblyman Bill Baroni and Sen. Peter Inverso have taken the necessary, and very welcome, steps to de-authorize the construction of Route 92. It is not necessary for them to wait until the latest iteration of an environmental study is completed. The federal Environmental Protection Agency has thrice said no to issuing permits to fill and destroy thousands of acres of wetlands. Why is a fourth opinion necessary for our legislators to begin the steps to stop Route 92 and the sprawl it would attract?
Cathy Dowgin
Friendship Road
South Brunswick
Route 92 would destroy quality of life
To the editor:
Last week, Sen. Peter Inverso and Assemblyman Bill Baroni held a press conference in South Brunswick to announce that they have proposed legislation to eliminate state approvals that would allow the New Jersey Turnpike Authority to spend over $400 million to build a 6.7-mile piece of toll road across wetlands and open space in South Brunswick and a corner of Plainsboro Preserve.
These legislators listened to the cries of their constituents, and have responded.
This proposed road would have a huge negative effect on the quality of life in Central Jersey. How could a 6.7-mile stretch of road make such a difference? It would bring increased traffic through a rural, environmentally sensitive area, the largest remaining parcel of open space in Middlesex County. Water quality, both surface and drinking water, would be reduced with significant negative impacts on the watershed area. Wildlife would be threatened by significant habitat disturbance, and possible species lost.
According to the Turnpike Authority’s projections, this road will generate over 10,000 car trips and 1,200 truck trips onto over-taxed, accident-prone Route 1. This would affect the health and safety of every traveler in the area through increased air pollution and traffic congestion. Historic villages like Kingston and Rocky Hill would be threatened by increased traffic and congestion on roads not geared for the fast pace Route 92 would promulgate.
The beneficiaries of this roadway would be Princeton University and Forrestal Center. The losers would be all the rest of us financially, environmentally and socially. The $400 million should be used to improve existing roadways, not create another that would add 12,000 cars a day. The farmland should be preserved as farm preservation, not lined up for potential development. Wetlands are vital to the availability of clean water, as well as being the home of wildlife.
Join us in this effort to maintain our current quality of life. Write and call your leggislators in support of this proposed legislation Senate bill 854 and Assembly bill 1957.
Nancy Carringer
Kingsland Circle
Monmouth Junction
Non-native plants can harm ecosystems
To the editor:
The week of Feb. 23-27 is National Weed Awareness Week. The "weeds" that we are concerned about are non-native invasive plants. Non-native invasives are plants that have been introduced from other places and reproduce rapidly, spreading over large areas of the landscape.
As your readers plan their landscaping, the Contemporary Garden Club of Princeton, the Dogwood Garden Club of Princeton, the Garden Club of Princeton and the Garden Club of Trenton ask that they consider not using the following: Norway Maple, Tree of Heaven, Garlic Mustard, Japanese Barberry, Oriental Bittersweet, Crown Vetch, Autumn Olive, Winged Euonymus, Common Privet, Japanese Honeysuckle, Tartarian Honeysuckle, Purple Loosestrife, Phragmites, Japanese Knotweed and Multiflora Rosa. These are the 15 non-native invasives in New Jersey identified by the Garden Club of America.
A few alarming facts:
In all areas within New Jersey, other than in the Pine Barrens, non-native invasive species threaten the continuation of nearly all of our native flora, from forest trees to shrubs and wildflowers.
Overabundant deer are destroying our native plants’ ability to resist an alien biological invasion. In most cases, deer prefer to eat our native plants, leaving the invasive plants more room to flourish.
Reduced numbers of native plants leads to disruption of natural ecosystems, leaving less food and shelter for native wildlife and insects.
Native plants help keep our water and air supplies clean, by acting as filters and purifiers.
There are no quick fixes here. We urge readers to visit the federal Web site for more information (www.invasivespecies.gov). Another good source of information is Bowman’s Hill Wildflower Preserve (215) 862-2924 or www.bhwp.org.
We hope that your readers will help us to control these particular "weeds" and to foster the continuation of our native plants by using them in their gardens.
Sophie Glovier
Co-Chair, Conservation Committee
The Garden Club of Princeton
Drakes Corner Road
Princeton
Deplorable conditions found at pet store
To the editor:
My Sunday morning trip to PetsMart to buy cat food was ruined by disturbing images. While checking on the cats up for adoption, I was very concerned by the filthy conditions, lack of water and, in many cases, lack of food in the cages. Although I was told otherwise, it was apparent that the feces-laden litter pans had not been cleaned in some time. One cat in a cage could never produce that much feces overnight. Two cats had diarrhea very badly and lay down on their soiled towels. Some cats did not even have a towel or cat bed to give them comfort in their metal cages.
If the volunteers are not available, where are the PetsMart employees at the Nassau Park store? How can they take part in this animal abuse by not seeing to the welfare of these cats? If an individual kept cats in these sordid conditions, they would be fined for animal abuse. How can this store claim to be an advocate for animals yet harbor these deplorable conditions?
Perhaps other concerned individuals can join me in demanding that PetsMart drastically improve these conditions and get the West Windsor Health Department to routinely inspect the premises.
Bonnie Randall
Farrell Avenue
Ewing