Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
▪
Cranbury School
▪
Cranbury Township
▪
Cranbury Library
▪
Cranbury.org
▪
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="fyi"]Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN http://www.cranburytownship.org/Redevelopment-Plans/FINAL_Cheney-Hagerty-Kushner_RdevPlan_10-30-15.pdf[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
Author
Message
info-rr1s
Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2016, 11:29 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
Can you elaborate on the "two purely affordable and special needs developments" that will cost millions, that you are referring to? If I hadn't read it here, I wouldn't know anything about it. There is almost no effort to disseminate information to the general public outside of this forum, so don't say this board is not important, and don't say you should go to town meetings either. It is difficult for some people to do that.
Attending meetings is not always feasible, but this info is being made available through traditional noticing, as the other poster said, and via the official township website. I go to the official documents on the township website to get info, rather than this forum. Issues presented here are often slanted. But, if you want to make a point, share an opinion, argue for/against something...then do attend a meeting or speak to a committee member.
anon-s6p5
Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2016, 7:14 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
The affordable units have been on agendas of both the TC and PB which are emailed out. Covered by the Cranbury Press which now is delivered to a lot of homes and also Tapinto.
You have Rt 130D which is on Rt 130 by Cranbury Estates and another property including special needs at the site where Paul's Auto is presently on Rt 130.
These are the developments required by state mandate.
The commercial properties on Cheney will not remain vacant forever and their taxes will be more than what is there today.
anon-0493
Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2016, 10:12 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
anon-sp0n wrote:
The new development at Old Trenton will generate tax revenue for the Township, not cause more taxes. The two purely affordable and special needs developments on Route 130 will cost Cranbury taxpayers millions (over time because they will finance it with bonds). But Cranbury was going to pay one way or another, it's not like we had a choice not do something.
If the new buildings remain empty, they don't have to pay taxes, just like warehouses that are empty.
Can you elaborate on the "two purely affordable and special needs developments" that will cost millions, that you are referring to? If I hadn't read it here, I wouldn't know anything about it. There is almost no effort to disseminate information to the general public outside of this forum, so don't say this board is not important, and don't say you should go to town meetings either. It is difficult for some people to do that.
anon-s6p5
Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2016, 6:22 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
You hit the key point.
The state in trying to fix their own mess has pushed all these unfunded mandates on the schools and town. At the same time they are taking away our revenues through energy tax receipt money.
The state has these giveaways to make special interests happy then place the burden on the towns and taxpayers.
anon-sp0n
Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2016, 5:08 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
The new development at Old Trenton will generate tax revenue for the Township, not cause more taxes. The two purely affordable and special needs developments on Route 130 will cost Cranbury taxpayers millions (over time because they will finance it with bonds). But Cranbury was going to pay one way or another, it's not like we had a choice not do something.
Why say "especially PHS"? It's not a disproportionate school expense compared to others or the state average and if would cost taxpayers far more to fund our own high school.
California has had property taxes fixed at purchase price (with very modest escalations) since 1978 and it has been terrible. It destroyed some communities and many school systems. And it creates massive inequity.
NJ property taxes are definitely a problem. Our are among the highest in the nation. But if you really want to fix it, it has to be done at the state level. Unfunded state mandates make up a huge potion of the school budget and some of the municipal budget. Christie made a big show early on in his term of laws to severely limit local municipal budget increases but did nothing to change these state mandates. As you can see, it had almost no effect. Municipalities had to cut local expenses to support the state requirements.
anon-88r5
Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2016, 12:31 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
anon-0493 wrote:
0qs34"-n931 wrote:
Absolutely INCREASE EXPENSE/Taxes and reduce Services---that said WITHOUT the Township Committee $$$ this cannot happen. Remember that next election or when the taxes increase due to "Library" expenses!
I'm already struggling with taxes. School tax, especially because of PHS, is the highest category on my bill, then local municipal tax, county tax, county open space tax, municipal open space tax, library tax! and these keep increasing so inevitably I will be forced out of my home. Long time senior residents ought to get at least some relief for school tax when their kids are no longer in school, so they can stay in their homes. The town needs to vote on whether they want or need a new library and the higher taxes that will come with it.
Unless you live in 4 Seasons then you benefit when you do sell your home from the quality schools and PHS relationship. This is why the same size home in Hightstown or East Windsor will cost you half the price.
I agree the state should consider how they could make taxes work for seniors, but the argument is that most seniors have had families and benefited when they were raising their children by having others pay toward the school.
Some states have tax systems where the home value is set at the time of purchase which I tend to like.
People keep saying higher taxes with the library. The only way the taxes increase with a library is if the TC provides additional funding. They declined to do so last year, so why would they change their mind?
If one looks at Liedtke the taxes generate more income than expense in aggregate. It remains to be seen what the new development will do. There are houses, but also commercial properties.
anon-0493
Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2016, 7:58 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
and P.S. Taxes will increase because of the new redevelopment too. Anyone want to make a prediction?
anon-0493
Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2016, 7:55 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
0qs34"-n931 wrote:
Absolutely INCREASE EXPENSE/Taxes and reduce Services---that said WITHOUT the Township Committee $$$ this cannot happen. Remember that next election or when the taxes increase due to "Library" expenses!
I'm already struggling with taxes. School tax, especially because of PHS, is the highest category on my bill, then local municipal tax, county tax, county open space tax, municipal open space tax, library tax! and these keep increasing so inevitably I will be forced out of my home. Long time senior residents ought to get at least some relief for school tax when their kids are no longer in school, so they can stay in their homes. The town needs to vote on whether they want or need a new library and the higher taxes that will come with it.
anon-s6p5
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 9:55 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
The bagel barn was limited. The property owner would not allow a grill and to do the business they wanted the grill was a necessity.
From a historical perspective shops used to go up onto S Main. The Hutchinson house was a store, there was a boot shop and carriage shop, a movie house, and of course the still operating inn.
I wonder if people complained when these stores went out of business. That N Main business was ruining S Main business. From a historical perspective these new shops are actually following the old town history.
anon-0493
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 8:48 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
Let's be honest about one thing, if a new library is built, it will NOT create a traffic problem. No one but the kids and a few seniors use the library now, and a new building won't change anything except to increase expenses and decrease services.[/quote]
If that is the case, then WHY DO WE NEED A NEW LIBRARY?
0qs34"-n931
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 8:37 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
Absolutely INCREASE EXPENSE/Taxes and reduce Services---that said WITHOUT the Township Committee $$$ this cannot happen. Remember that next election or when the taxes increase due to "Library" expenses!
anon-5658
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 4:03 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
anon-0493 wrote:
Tastefully done development? I don't agree with that at all, and it feels like the whole project has been shoved on us. If we can't fill storefronts we already have in town, why would we expect to fill new ones? Cranbury couldn't even keep the Bagel Barn in business. And now we're stuck with this development and with the new library project too. Maybe TC should insist on the library being built over there to get some practical use out of these new high rise office buildings instead of messing up our school fields and causing more traffic in the parking lot.
Let's be honest about one thing, if a new library is built, it will NOT create a traffic problem. No one but the kids and a few seniors use the library now, and a new building won't change anything except to increase expenses and decrease services.
concerns-rr1s
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 4:00 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
Did you express any of your concerns at a planning board meeting, or committee meeting?
anon-0493
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 3:57 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
Tastefully done development? I don't agree with that at all, and it feels like the whole project has been shoved on us. If we can't fill storefronts we already have in town, why would we expect to fill new ones? Cranbury couldn't even keep the Bagel Barn in business. And now we're stuck with this development and with the new library project too. Maybe TC should insist on the library being built over there to get some practical use out of these new high rise office buildings instead of messing up our school fields and causing more traffic in the parking lot.
anon-sp0n
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 3:40 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
anon-q3s8 wrote:
My point is, if people aren't shopping downtown, why do we think they'll shop in this newly developed area? What happens if it's not sustainable? We'll just have more empty buildings on main st.
That is the opposite of the question you should be asking. First, this isn't a huge commercial development, it's room for up to 3 businesses fronting Old Trenton. And even if they remained empty it would arguably still be an improvement over the crumbling ruins there now. But back to your original question, the real issue is not whether these remain empty but whether they will make it harder for the Main Street businesses and landlords. This location will have it's own parking right behind it. It will still be close enough to walk to from the Village but more accessible by car and right across from a public park. There is also a lot of non-local traffic along Old Trenton during rush hours that would potentially patron the right business along their commute route. Many locational advantages over Main Street.
anon-q3s8
Posted: Wed, Apr 20 2016, 1:13 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Redevelopment Plan - FINAL PLAN
My point is, if people aren't shopping downtown, why do we think they'll shop in this newly developed area? What happens if it's not sustainable? We'll just have more empty buildings on main st.