Construction to improve the parking and traffic flow at Cranbury School will not be done for the opening of school and could take up to another year to complete.
By:Brian Shappell
Construction to improve the parking and traffic flow at Cranbury School will not be done for the opening of school and could take up to another year to complete.
That’s because funding for the project must be approved by two-thirds, or a 4-1 vote, of the Township Committee. The committee voted 3-2 on the bond ordinance, falling short of approval.
“We worked long and hard on this; I’m still scratching my head on what happened,” committee member Michael Mayes said. “We tried for three hours to come to a compromise. It’s disappointing.”
Both Greg Overstreet and Tom Gambino, who voted against the plan, said they were concerned that the timetable was rushed.
Mr. Overstreet said he was not satisfied with reports from two separate traffic consultants, including the one hired by the committee, Michelle Mackinnon of Killam Associates. He said the reports did not have enough numbers and hard facts to prove their suggestions for improvements were adequate.
Mr. Gambino had several concerns he wanted addressed at Monday’s meeting. Mr. Gambino wanted 14, 15-foot-high light structures, rather than the seven, 25-foot fixtures proposed. The smaller lights would be less of an eyesore to neighbors and pedestrians on Main Street, said Mr. Gambino.
Mr. Gambino also wanted to eliminate proposed parking spaces along the new access road and to add raised pedestrian walks to the plan to increased pedestrian safety.
The sticking point for the committee was the proposed lighting changes.
“The lighting is too big a sacrifice to make,” Mr. Gambino said. “I wanted an opportunity to voice one more time that I’m not satisfied with it.”
The committee and the school board have been trying to come to a consensus on construction, landscaping and circulation aspects of a plan expected to improve the parking lot adjacent to the Cranbury School.
The lot will be used by the Cranbury School and the township.
The process began two-and-a-half years ago when police approached the Board of Education to request that improvements to the lot be studied, according to school board President Joan Rue.
Proposed improvements include the construction of additional parking spaces where the school tennis courts are, the relocation of the current tennis courts, an access road to the lot from Park Place West and a separate project to improve sidewalks on North Main Street. The committee and school board had discussed creating a one-way traffic flow, with cars entering the area through a new access road on Park Place West, and exiting through School House Line, which would be made into a one-way, exit only road.
The suggestions were made by two traffic consulting firms, one hired by the committee and one hired by the school board, SchoorDePalma.
The changes also would create a more “pedestrian friendly” walking pattern from the new parking area and decrease traffic backups on North Main Street coming out of Schoolhouse Lane, currently the school’s only entrance.
The committee and school board were attempting to get the project completed and the changes implemented for the start of the 2000-2001 school year. Prior to the vote, Mayor Alan Danser announced that he and members of the school board, including Chief School Administrator Robert Bartoletti, thought that, regardless of the outcome, completion of the project would most likely be pushed into September or October.
In addition, the township recently received a $220,000 grant for the projects from the state Department of Education. The project is estimated is estimated to cost $275,000.
Despite the delay, the township will keep the money as long as the project is awarded to a contractor by April 2001, according to Township Engineer Cathleen Marcelli. Cranbury will receive 75 percent of the money from the DOT when it awards the project to a contractor, and the remaining 25 percent when the project is completed.
“We’ve got some time to figure out what to do with this,” Mayor Danser said.
By virtue of not passing the bond ordinance, the project will be delayed past the point where construction of the road and lot can be accomplished due to seasonal changes according to Mr. Mayes.
He said it was unlikely that a consensus would be reached in time to start construction and the project is not likely to be done while school is in session this year.
Ms. Rue was disappointed with the lack of consensus from the committee members and raised her voice during her response.
She said she had been under the impression that the school board and committee agreed to a plan several months earlier and that the school board had been accommodating to nearly every township request for property.
“I thought what was presented was what we agreed on,” Ms. Rue said. “We as a Board of Education negotiated what I thought was a plan. Every bit of the land the school owned, we now don’t own. We keep giving it to the township because you say you need it. Guess we’re the fools.”
Mayor Danser said he was disappointed and extremely surprised at the developments.
“I’ve never been in a situation before where we haven’t been willing to argue our opinions but let majority rule,” Mayor Danser said. “I thought we had a productive meeting and compromised on a lot of issues. I was disappointed when it was all for naught.”
That’s because funding for the project must be approved by two-thirds, or a 4-1 vote, of the Township Committee. The committee voted 3-2 on the bond ordinance, falling short of approval.
“We worked long and hard on this; I’m still scratching my head on what happened,” committee member Michael Mayes said. “We tried for three hours to come to a compromise. It’s disappointing.”
Both Greg Overstreet and Tom Gambino, who voted against the plan, said they were concerned that the timetable was rushed.
Mr. Overstreet said he was not satisfied with reports from two separate traffic consultants, including the one hired by the committee, Michelle Mackinnon of Killam Associates. He said the reports did not have enough numbers and hard facts to prove their suggestions for improvements were adequate.
Mr. Gambino had several concerns he wanted addressed at Monday’s meeting. Mr. Gambino wanted 14, 15-foot-high light structures, rather than the seven, 25-foot fixtures proposed. The smaller lights would be less of an eyesore to neighbors and pedestrians on Main Street, said Mr. Gambino.
Mr. Gambino also wanted to eliminate proposed parking spaces along the new access road and to add raised pedestrian walks to the plan to increased pedestrian safety.
The sticking point for the committee was the proposed lighting changes.
“The lighting is too big a sacrifice to make,” Mr. Gambino said. “I wanted an opportunity to voice one more time that I’m not satisfied with it.”
The committee and the school board have been trying to come to a consensus on construction, landscaping and circulation aspects of a plan expected to improve the parking lot adjacent to the Cranbury School.
The lot will be used by the Cranbury School and the township.
The process began two-and-a-half years ago when police approached the Board of Education to request that improvements to the lot be studied, according to school board President Joan Rue.
Proposed improvements include the construction of additional parking spaces where the school tennis courts are, the relocation of the current tennis courts, an access road to the lot from Park Place West and a separate project to improve sidewalks on North Main Street. The committee and school board had discussed creating a one-way traffic flow, with cars entering the area through a new access road on Park Place West, and exiting through School House Line, which would be made into a one-way, exit only road.
The suggestions were made by two traffic consulting firms, one hired by the committee and one hired by the school board, SchoorDePalma.
The changes also would create a more “pedestrian friendly” walking pattern from the new parking area and decrease traffic backups on North Main Street coming out of Schoolhouse Lane, currently the school’s only entrance.
The committee and school board were attempting to get the project completed and the changes implemented for the start of the 2000-2001 school year. Prior to the vote, Mayor Alan Danser announced that he and members of the school board, including Chief School Administrator Robert Bartoletti, thought that, regardless of the outcome, completion of the project would most likely be pushed into September or October.
In addition, the township recently received a $220,000 grant for the projects from the state Department of Education. The project is estimated is estimated to cost $275,000.
Despite the delay, the township will keep the money as long as the project is awarded to a contractor by April 2001, according to Township Engineer Cathleen Marcelli. Cranbury will receive 75 percent of the money from the DOT when it awards the project to a contractor, and the remaining 25 percent when the project is completed.
“We’ve got some time to figure out what to do with this,” Mayor Danser said.
By virtue of not passing the bond ordinance, the project will be delayed past the point where construction of the road and lot can be accomplished due to seasonal changes according to Mr. Mayes.
He said it was unlikely that a consensus would be reached in time to start construction and the project is not likely to be done while school is in session this year.
Ms. Rue was disappointed with the lack of consensus from the committee members and raised her voice during her response.
She said she had been under the impression that the school board and committee agreed to a plan several months earlier and that the school board had been accommodating to nearly every township request for property.
“I thought what was presented was what we agreed on,” Ms. Rue said. “We as a Board of Education negotiated what I thought was a plan. Every bit of the land the school owned, we now don’t own. We keep giving it to the township because you say you need it. Guess we’re the fools.”
Mayor Danser said he was disappointed and extremely surprised at the developments.
“I’ve never been in a situation before where we haven’t been willing to argue our opinions but let majority rule,” Mayor Danser said. “I thought we had a productive meeting and compromised on a lot of issues. I was disappointed when it was all for naught.”