Poll: Do You Support the Proposed Berkeley Aquatic Club Facility?

It's no secret that the Berkeley Aquatic Club's proposed 51,000 square foot facility is still causing a stir among local residents on both sides of the aisle.

To bring any residents up-to-speed who may be unfamiliar with this issue, in late 2011, after months of controversy, the Berkeley Heights Town Council voted 5 to 1 against allowing any alteration to the original contract with Warren Township, putting a halt to the BAC's plans. 

Berkeley Heights and Warren Township have an agreement that allows new residential structures in Warren Township to access the Berkeley Heights Sewage Treatment Facility, but not commercial structures. 

The proposed BAC facility would be a commercial enterprise.

The five Berkeley Heights Town Council members who voted against altering the original agreement said that if they changed the agreement, it would ultimately not be in the best interest of Berkeley Heights residents because it would limit the township's own plans for future commercial expansion.

Residents in the immediate area of the proposed building claimed the facility would substantially increase traffic on Hillcrest Road and create a hazardous situation. Residents also claimed Emerson Lane would be used as a short cut and for overflow parking that would negatively impact the homes on the Lane as well as other streets in the neighborhood. 

They also claimed that the installation of the facility would substantially reduce their property values. 

Other residents in favor of the facility claimed that allowing the BAC to tap into the Berkeley Height's sewage treatment facility would bring in much needed revenue to offset taxes.

Before Council members voted in December of 2011, Patch asked Berkeley Heights residents if the Council should allow the proposed Berkeley Aquatics Club to access township sewer lines. Among those who voted, 1,190 said "yes" while 131 said "no." See the results here.

Last week, Beckerman Public Relations, which is representing the BAC, distributed a press release to inform the community that the BAC and its supporters intend to gather enough signatures through a petition drive to put the issue of increasing the sewer capacity allotted by Berkeley Heights to a public vote.

According to the press release, once the BAC has collected enough signatures, they will submit the petitions to the Township.

If the Council continues to refuse amendments to the agreement, the Township will then designate a date for a special election, according to the release. Voters in Berkeley Heights will then have the opportunity to decide whether the agreement should be amended to provide the BAC with the capacity needed for its new facility.

Several residents reacted negatively to the BAC's voter initiative drive and left a number of comments that can be viewed here.

According to a Sept. 20, 2012 report in the Independent Press, Mayor Joe Bruno said he received a number of phone calls from residents, complaining that BAC supporters were taking a “strong arm approach” with circulating the petitions and were not taking no for an answer.

However, Jim Wood, the founder and president of the BAC, told the Independent Press that their volunteers conducted themselves in a courteous and appropriate fashion when engaging with members of the public.

Since the BAC's voter initiative drive was announced, Patch received a couple Letters to the Editor, including one from Emerson Lane resident Denise Foy, who says the BAC's proposed facility will negatively impact the quality of life for local families if the facility is built in any residential neighborhood.

Karen R. Freudenberger, a 36 year resident of Emerson Lane, also submitted a letter stating her reasons why residents should not sign petitions for the BAC's voter initiative drive.

New Providence-Berkeley Heights Patch will continue to provide additional updates about this issue.

Do you want to make your voice heard? 

We are accepting all Letters to the Editor regarding this proposed facility and petition drive, whether you are in favor of it or not. Send your letter to Caitlin.Mahon@patch.com and I'll publish it on Patch.

—MaryLynn Schiavi contributed to this report.