Amendment to the Land Use Element of The Master Plan: Roue 130 Corridor

[anon-0n06]

Amendment to the Land Use Element of The Master Plan for Cranbury Township: Roue 130 Corridor
http://www.cranburytownship.org/master-plan/Draft_MP_Amendment_2-4-13.pdf

The February 21, 2013 Planning Board meeting agenda has been posted.
http://www.cranburytownship.org/pb_agendas/2013/PB_agenda022113.pdf

[guest130-617n]

The entire premise of amending the Master Plan appears to be that since no development has occurred on Route 130 in the past few years since the zoning was last amended, then we need to make open up the zone to a greater number of potential uses.

The proposed change would permit development on Route 130 along the lines of what we see in East Windsor, Robbinsville and South Brunswick. The uses that would NOT be permitted are few and far between.

So, three points to ponder:

1. Is the premise correct? Is the reason Route 130 in Cranbury has not seen new development in the past 2 years because the permitted uses are too restrictive. Or, more likely, is it that the commercial development market has completely tanked. Lets be honest. Route 130 in Cranbury has not seen new applications because the market stinks. Lets allow the zoning to continue and see what happens when the market actually recovers.

2. Regardless of the market, do we want to open Route 130 in to such widespread commercial uses, and have it be no different then East Windsor and Robbinsville? If so, why? Of course, we cannot restrict Route 130 and declare that nothing can be developed, but lets be smart about it. Changing the plan several times in only a few years is not prudent. We need to decide what we want Route 130 to look like, NOT simply permit any development that the current lousy commcercial market brings to our doorstep. To that end, what efforts has the Town expended to market Rt. 130 with its current zoning? None of which i am aware. Yet, somehow, it is quickly concluded that the zone is too restrictive?

3. A justification in the proposed master plan change is that it will bring new ratables. But, no mention is made of the need for more police, first aid, fire and other services. Chasing ratables is a dangerous game. And the cost of muncipal services, pensions etc are only going to increase.

Finally, where did this new plan come from? who asked for it? has there been discussion at the Township Committee or Planning Board meetings that has occurred?

Cranbury has a preserved Village (National Historic District), and much preserved farmland. That did not happen by accident. It occurred because of good planning, and prudent well thought out decisions. Lets bring those same qualities to bear when we look at Route 130.

[Village 2 U-7485]

This is written as a response to Guest 130-617n. All in all, the posting is thoughtful. The three points are well reasoned. Those considering the Master Plan amendment should consider them seriously.
However, the item labeled "finally" should be the first item investigated. Let's reveal: Where and when did this proposal come from? Who are the parties most affected and benefited by the proposed Route 130 changes?