REEXAMINATION OF THE TOWNSHIP'S MASTER PLAN (11/20)

[Guest]

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REEXAMINATION
OF THE TOWNSHIP OF CRANBURY’S MASTER PLAN

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on NOVEMEBER 20, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building (Old School), 23-A North Main Street, Cranbury, Middlesex County, New Jersey, the Cranbury Township Planning Board of the TOWNSHIP OF CRANBURY, pursuant N.J.S.A. 40:55D-89, shall hold a public hearing on the Third Round Housing Element and Fair Share Plan of the Township of Cranbury’s Master Plan, prepared by Marybeth Lonergan, P.P., Clarke Caton and Hintz. This notice is being published in accordance with N.J.S.A. 40:55D-13.

A full copy of the proposed Third Round Housing Element and Fair Share Plan will be on file at the office of the Planning & Zoning Administrative Officer, at 23-A North Main Street, Cranbury, New Jersey, and may be inspected during normal business hours: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing date for public inspection and copying at the Municipal Building during regular Township business hours and will be available for review on the Township’s official website at www.cranburytownship.org.

At the time of the public hearing any interested persons may appear and present any comments in support of, or in opposition to the Third Round Housing Element and Fair Share Plan. The Cranbury Township Planning Board may act on the Third Round Housing Element and Fair Share Plan at the closing of the public hearing on November 20, 2008, or may continue to another date.

Josette C. Kratz

Planning & Zoning Administrative Officer

http://www.cranburytownship.org/2008_Master_Plan_Re-Examination_Notice.htm

[Guest]

Anyone going?

[Guest]

Yep. And I hope others attend as well. Cranbury is worth preserving, and we all have a role to play in shaping its future.

[Jersey Dad]

I would like to thank everyone who showed up and spoke up in support of the neighbors of Cranbury Estates. Evidently, there is a great deal of institutional inertia determined to thwart change. For example, it is no surprise that the consultants who were paid to develop the plan were prepared to staunchly defend it, despite certain logical inconsistencies.

It was a little disappointing that some members of the board seemed committed to establishing an appropriate size for the development in the site planning process (next year) and then re-writing the plan, if necessary. It would seem more efficient to establish a more flexible range now in order to give the site planners a greater opportunity to arrive at an appropriate size without having to re-write the plan.

On the positive note, there is a great deal of community support for building a development at the 130 D Site that is consistent with the other CHA develppments in the village (29 units or less). I'm not a physicist (I leave the rocket science to my brother), but as I recall, the only way to overcome inertia is with pressure.

The Planning Board also mentioned they are seeking additional guidance from the TC before finalizing the plan. See you Monday.

JD

[Guest]