Author Topic: Scientology Parking Study  (Read 5538 times)

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Scientology Parking Study
« on: July 05, 2009, 17:58 »
Woody Galloway, scientology's attorney for the rezoning application, had asked for a 60-day deferral in order to do a parking study.  Here is the result of that study.

I've received this from an anonymous source, and was asked to post it here specifically and keep it on this forum only for now*.  Soon it will become available to the public at large, through Sandy Springs, and at that time, I imagine it will be ok to let it out. 

The source is interested in reading our comments and analysis.

http://alley.ethercat.com/info/SandySpringsChurchOfScientologyParking.pdf

*yes, I realize we are being indexed by the search engines, and it may end up off this forum, but let's please honor the request ourselves.

   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline Stutroup

  • Supressive Person
  • Posts: 436
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2009, 19:06 »
Bad news D:

Quote
Based on the parking demand observations at the existing Dunwoody and Nashville sites, combined
with the projected size and operations of the Sandy Springs site, 81 parking spaces will be sufficient to
accommodate the anticipated parking demand for the 43,246 SF size and would also provide sufficient
surplus parking.

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2009, 19:16 »
Bad news D:

Quote
Based on the parking demand observations at the existing Dunwoody and Nashville sites, combined
with the projected size and operations of the Sandy Springs site, 81 parking spaces will be sufficient to
accommodate the anticipated parking demand for the 43,246 SF size and would also provide sufficient
surplus parking.

Well, of course the report is going to say that.  It was hired work by scientology and their lawyer, and that's what they wanted it to say.  It's up to us (and SS residents) to find ways to counter what's been said, vs. the actual data that was collected. 

   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline Lorelei

  • Hill 10 Situation
  • Posts: 895
  • I can haz ferret.
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2009, 19:18 »
Is SS hiring their own parking study?
"Once the foundation of a revolution has been laid down, it is almost always
in the next generation that the revolution is accomplished." -- Jean d'Alembert

The Human Wiki.
"I spend hours surfing the web for information, so you don't have to!"

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2009, 19:19 »
Is SS hiring their own parking study?

I don't think so.

Edit: New info.  Sandy Springs has essentially already done that when their staff said the applicant needed 148 spaces.

« Last Edit: July 05, 2009, 19:54 by ethercat »
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2009, 19:30 »
There is also some good info in the report for us, as protestors, so far as seeing the trends on attendance, that is, when members are most likely to see us.  ;)
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Raven

  • Guest
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2009, 19:54 »


Since they brought up Nashville do we get to introduce the videos of all the violence sci caused at the org opening in Nashville and how illegal it all was? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoQGI14EkSA&feature=PlayList&p=F98B7960F1D60869&index=2  I know its a side issue, but won;t this let us get to bring up all the violence they cause?


« Last Edit: July 05, 2009, 20:04 by Raven »

Offline mefree

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 4,369
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2009, 19:59 »
There is also some good info in the report for us, as protestors, so far as seeing the trends on attendance, that is, when members are most likely to see us.  ;)

Yep. Seems to be an overall downward trend from February. Too bad, SS is not doing their own study. We really need an opposing view with stats to back it up.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2009, 20:02 by mefree »
The ultimate authority must always rest with the individual's own reason and critical analysis.
-Dalai Lama

Offline Stutroup

  • Supressive Person
  • Posts: 436
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2009, 20:05 »
Since it says it was prepared for Galloway I would assume he footed the bill and found them.  Not SS

This.  Didn't the prior ruling say CoS had to pay for the survey?  I'll have to look through some stuff to see.

Also, note how the numbers are skewed with sometimes more than 2:1 average of people per car going to an org.  Now you know that is NOT families; rather carpooling, which I find plausible but not really very likely.

Raven

  • Guest
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2009, 20:06 »
i just edited it out what u quoted stu.  I read something wrong.

Offline Stutroup

  • Supressive Person
  • Posts: 436
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #10 on: July 05, 2009, 20:10 »
OK, I can change my post if you like ....

But going off the rest, I don't think it's a "Can we?" issue as much as "since they went there, so must we!" issue.

Raven

  • Guest
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #11 on: July 05, 2009, 20:11 »
no no don't change it.  I'm explaining I'm not as silly as what i just posted lol

Offline mefree

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 4,369
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #12 on: July 05, 2009, 20:18 »
Since it says it was prepared for Galloway I would assume he footed the bill and found them.  Not SS

This.  Didn't the prior ruling say CoS had to pay for the survey?  I'll have to look through some stuff to see.

Also, note how the numbers are skewed with sometimes more than 2:1 average of people per car going to an org.  Now you know that is NOT families; rather carpooling, which I find plausible but not really very likely.

I think it is safe to assume some dishonesty in the submitted statistics.
The ultimate authority must always rest with the individual's own reason and critical analysis.
-Dalai Lama

Raven

  • Guest
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #13 on: July 05, 2009, 20:34 »
Does it take into account people visiting the bookstore or randomly visiting to get info on sci. Cause if so I missed it.

Also, without restriction the building to stop cos from adding in all their other front groups in the building or renting out office space to other entities this study means very very little. 

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2009, 21:00 »
Too bad, SS is not doing their own study. We really need an opposing view with stats to back it up.

Sandy Springs did do their own study in the beginning; I don't think it was as extensive as what Galloway had done with counting cars and members, but that's how they came up with the 148 spaces figure they had in the beginning.

I had edited that into my post above, but I guess people had already read it and didn't notice the edit. That'll show me how to forum, I guess.  :D

Since scientology's practice of "religion" is primarily one-on-one counseling (this is the phrase Galloway used), it's not likely that people will be carpooling like people would in a more traditional setting, with families arriving together to attend a group service.  Also, scientology's "counseling" is so expensive, how likely is it that multiple people in a family would be having counseling at the same time?  In my experience, the only time we've seen people arriving together is when there's an event of some sort.

   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2009, 21:23 »
Does it take into account people visiting the bookstore or randomly visiting to get info on sci. Cause if so I missed it.

I didn't see anything about that either, and according to the space usage numbers we got, they definitely have planned for a big presentation area on the first floor; it says "Display area 3226 feet2" which is bigger than the chapel.  Shouldn't parking be based on the number of people who will fit into that space?

And there's 565 ft2 for "Reception and public book sales" that's separate from the bookstore (1059 ft2).  I don't understand how it can be disputed that they will have members of the public (non-members) coming to the building, and yet Galloway would have us believe that there are only the people doing classes who will be there.

Quote
Also, without restriction the building to stop cos from adding in all their other front groups in the building or renting out office space to other entities this study means very very little.

Yes, if they decide to bring in CCHR which is now in a rented building, Applied Scholastics which is in a residence now, World Literacy Crusade which is also in a residence, WISE headquarters, and who knows what other of their front groups they might bring in, along with their associated workers, there will be more people in the building than the Dunwoody facility has.  And if I were in their shoes (thank God I'm not!), I would bring in any one of those who currently has to pay rent to eliminate that cost, as well as any that operate out of a residence, just to give a better first impression or lend more credibility to them. 
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline SocialTransparency

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 1,326
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2009, 11:28 »
Page 3 of the Kimley-Horn and associates "Parking evaluation" is based upon and i quote,

" BASED UPON CONVERSATIONS WITH CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY PERSONNEL, THE PEAK PARKING DEMAND FOR WEEKDAY AND WEEKEND WAS DETERMINED".

Based on the historical information on this particular so-called religion, i hope the city council and local citizenry can see thru this attempt @ swaying in what THIS posters opinion is a fair and reasonable demand, made via code compliance by the City of Sandy Springs, its findings on the need for (148) total parking spaces.

It is also this posters belief the City of Sandy Springs Planning/zoning commissions findings are both fair and unbiased. The hiring of ( Kimley-Horn and assoc. ) by Dillard and Galloway, while an honorable effort on behalf of the so-called Church of Scientology should not be misconstrued as also being unbiased. It is this posters opinion, the findings of the City of Sandy Springs zoning/planning commission , supersede any potentially biased finding had by any entity hired ( Paid for) by the zoning variance applicants agents. This issue MUST be looked @ as to what is equal and fair to ALL the local citizenry. Not just those whom seek this zoning variance!

To use as a comparison, the C of S property in Nashville Tennessee makes no applicable sense to this poster. Nashville, its population and the location of the scientology property has no bearing when doing said comparison with the population and location/codes of Sandy Springs Georgia.

Sandy Springs zoning/planning commission has deemed the SS property/owner needs  @ a minimum(148) parking spaces for the approval of the applicants zoning variance.

This poster believes the city of Sandy Springs has applied proper protocols in coming to this minimum (148 ) parking space decision.

This poster would like to point out, that these (148) parking spaces are the (MINIMUM) requirement @ this time, in regards to the buildings current zoning occupancy and end use.

Nowhere has there been discussion on the future ability of this C of S property to handle growth and expansion. Or its impact on the local businesses and or citizens. THAT is a major point not being addressed. To approve this zoning variance will, in the future be both costly and problematic to you the citizens and business owners of Sandy Springs whom will bear the brunt of the costs from both a financial and quality of life point of view.

I hope the citizens of Sandy Springs Georgia do view the comparative study of the Nashville scientology property with that of the proposed Sandy Springs scientology property with a very wary and inquisitive eye.

The two properties and locations have zero in common. Therefore the Kimley and Horn parking study/comparison is moot!

 

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2009, 18:38 »
Page 3 of the Kimley-Horn and associates "Parking evaluation" is based upon and i quote,

" BASED UPON CONVERSATIONS WITH CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY PERSONNEL, THE PEAK PARKING DEMAND FOR WEEKDAY AND WEEKEND WAS DETERMINED".

Based on the historical information on this particular so-called religion, i hope the city council and local citizenry can see thru this attempt @ swaying

I hope so too, because scientology is not exactly known for their honesty, and there is plenty of documented history of this, as shown on this page of Ray Hill's excellent site, Lying: a Scientology practice.

Quote
To use as a comparison, the C of S property in Nashville Tennessee makes no applicable sense to this poster. Nashville, its population and the location of the scientology property has no bearing when doing said comparison with the population and location/codes of Sandy Springs Georgia.

I agree that it makes no sense to include info for Nashville - Nashville as a city is different from Atlanta, the people of Nashville are different from Atlanta's people, and most importantly, the zoning regulations in Nashville are different from those in Sandy Springs.  It will be interesting to see what our friends in Nashville have to say about the numbers produced in this study, however. 

Quote
Nowhere has there been discussion on the future ability of this C of S property to handle growth and expansion. Or its impact on the local businesses and or citizens. THAT is a major point not being addressed.

You are right on this.  The only mention of growth I have heard is Galloway saying at an early meeting, "Now they do intend to grow."  Galloway is careful to emphasize that the "Church" of Scientology of Georgia is small, yet on the Atlanta Ideal Org website, there are at least 250 people who donated money to buy this building, and that doesn't include those who didn't donate for whatever reason, and those who have become members since the donations were gathered and the building bought in 2005.  Where are those people who donated now?  Will they not want to attend services in the building they put their money into? 

Back to the parking study, here are my observations:

It says:
"... the parking field used by the Church of Scientology is a shared parking area that is also used by the office uses noted above. However, due to the time  periods where parking demand was observed, these office uses were closed."

"Field observations performed on June 18, 20, and 21."

Weekday, 8:00 PM - 30 people  22 spaces
Saturday, 4:30 PM 18 people 16 spaces
Sunday, 11:00 AM 15 people 14 spaces
Sunday, 2:00 PM 21 people 20 spaces

This hardly seems like a scientific assessment.  The times do not include weekdays, only one weeknight (Thursday) and only 4 samples were taken.

In the study, it says, "Based on field observations during the peak parking demand, a parking demand rate per square foot was determined."   How coincidental that peak parking demand is at a time when other offices in the Dunwoody location were closed.  How convenient that it made counting the cars easier.  /sarcasm

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Side note:  Scientology places great importance on "stats."  Once a week, on Thursday at 2pm, they are required to turn in their "stats" for the week.  "Stats" are expected to increase from one week to the next, and never to fall.  In the past, there were great efforts made on Wednesday to raise the "stats" for the week, so staff wouldn't be penalized for lower stats than the previous week.  I'm not positive, but Thursday night attendance may be lower than other nights, for instance, Wednesday night, just before Thursday "stats" day.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

The number of people per space used range between 1.36 and 1.05.  At the highest occupancy demonstrated per car, once they have 111 people, they will have used up the 81 spaces.  The study says there are about 100 currently active members.  This will require 73 of the total spaces at a vehicle occupancy of 1.36 and 95 spaces at a vehicle occupancy of 1.05.  Taking the mean figure, will require a total of 98 spaces for the current number of members, at their current rate of vehicle occupancy.  Mr. Galloway has said that the Church of Scientology intends to grow, and indeed, their websites indicate this as well.  What will happen when they do grow?  As it is, with the low occupancy per car, there are barely enough spaces for the current number of members if they  attend at the same time, as, surely, they will at some time.

The Nashville figures show a higher occupancy per car than the Dunwoody figures, ranging between 1.71 and 2.06 per car. 

Regarding the comparison to other churches who have petitioned for zoning variances: Mr. Galloway has said that the Church of Scientology's practice consists of individual one on one counseling more so than members attending Sunday services, therefore the other parts of the building will be used more heavily than a church which primarily practices via Sunday services, with some limited attendance at classes.  This would be a justification for requiring additional restrictions on the Church of Scientology, which are not required of
other more traditional churches. 

There are 24 auditing rooms and 11 course rooms.  Auditing rooms are the areas for one on one counseling, and will usually have 2 people occupying the room when in use.  They could be considered as classrooms.  Other churches which have petitioned for partial use as classrooms have been required to have 2 spaces per classroom.  The potential is there for 48 spaces to be used by the auditing rooms, and 22 spaces per classroom, a total of 70 spaces at the rate previously required for other churches with classrooms.  The renderings on the Atlanta Ideal Org website show a much larger occupancy planned for the classrooms, though:



Then there is the matter of 20 staff, which has not been addressed.  These 20 people have to have somewhere to park as well. 

Ex-members who have been on staff have said that they were expected to work everyday, from morning until late night, unless they held another job to make ends meet (with scientology staff pay being so notoriously low).  My experience with my x-friend,  before he disconnected, was that he spent almost every waking hour working at the org; even on holidays, he went to work after spending a couple of hours visiting with his parents and me. 

So these staff members will be occupying parking spaces round the clock as well. 

One thing I would mention about the Nashville study is this.  The building in Nashville is 38,000 ft2 according to the study, and services 500 active members.  We are told that the number of active members in the Atlanta area is 100, yet they have purchased a 44,000 ft2 building.  We can only assume that this means they intend to grow by at least 400 more members, or else why would they have bought such a large building?  To rework my figures above, with 500 active members and vehicle occupancy as demonstrated in the study, that would require 367 spaces at an occupancy of 1.36 per car, and a whopping 476 spaces at an occupancy of 1.05!

   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Raven

  • Guest
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2009, 18:55 »
as a side note an open records request was submitted today.  To be thrifty I did it with email and not registered mail.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2009, 18:59 by Raven »

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Re: Scientology Parking Study
« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2009, 22:19 »
A lurker requested this be posted:

Quote
C of S paid for this parking study because they did not agree with the City of Sandy Springs' "conclusion of findings" staff report.  The forum readers need to carefully read 2.0 the Reason for Evaluation.  They next need to read Table 1 which is the parking required by the City of Sandy Springs.

The City of Sandy Springs is saying they need parking for the sanctuary, classrooms and offices.  Mr. Galloway is arguing that this is an unfair application of parking standards because the City of Sandy Spring parking requirements for places of worship are 1 parking space per 3.5 fixed seats in the largest assembly area or 1 space for 30 SF in the largest assembly area.  The city has decided to apply different parking standards to C of S because the applicant has basically said they operate a little different than a normal church and they gave him the opportunity to refute their findings.

You will see how he has also attached some previous church petitions from Fulton County showing the 1 space per 3.5 fixed seats or 1 space per 30 sf. of largest assembly area.  The fixed seat ratio would not apply to C of S because they have no fixed seating.

The citizens of Sandy Springs HOAs may need to look at getting some conditions entered in prohibiting meetings/classes, etc. of WISE, CCHR, Applied Scholastics, World Literacy Crusade, etc.  That will just generate more traffic.  It is too late to get these in for the Planning Commission meeting but not for the Mayor and City Council.

Are there any other organizations besides WISE, CCHR, Applied Scholastics, World Literacy Crusade that might move into the building?

There are a lot of front groups.  Literally hundreds. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Scientology_organizations
http://www.lermanet.com/frontgroups.html
http://home.snafu.de/tilman/prolinks/
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/themagazine/vol14/scientology/front-groups.shtml
https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Index_Online_Research_Materials_-_Scientology_Front_Groups

The best bet would be to exclude any organizations other than the "church" itself, and specify something like "no branch religious organizations, no secular businesses or charitable organizations, or any other organizations affiliated or which does business with WISE, ABLE, Way to Happiness Foundation, Religious Technology Center, Church of Spiritual Technology, or any organizations, businesses, or groups that license or legally use the trademarks, service marks, or any parts of L. Ron Hubbard Technology.
(A lawyer or at least a more legally-minded person than me may need to come up with the actual verbiage.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Technology_Center
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Spiritual_Technology

   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions