Planning Board also granted use variance that allows building to be used for professional or general business offices and approved design for house construction on vacant lot.
By Marianne Hooker
At its Feb. 12 meeting, the Pennington Planning Board heard initial testimony on The Pennington School’s plans for a new building that will serve as a campus center.
The board also granted a use variance for a property (which will allow the building to be used for either professional offices or general business offices) on South Main Street, and approved the design for a house to be built on a vacant lot on Sked Street.
The Pennington School Attorney Daniel Haggerty, who spoke on behalf of The Pennington School, requested preliminary and final site plan approval for a new campus center building, which would be located to the east of the main gymnasium. The area of the new building would be about 32,000 square feet.
Mr. Haggerty said the campus center is part of a long-range plan, which calls for the removal of three existing buildings: Enterprise, "J House," and the bishop’s office. This would allow the school to increase the amount of on-campus parking. A modular classroom structure would be used while the new building is under construction. The school has developed a stormwater management plan to accompany the proposed improvements. It includes an underground detention basin on the site.
Michael Farewell, of Ford, Farewell & Gatsch, said the campus center would provide better arts facilities for the students. It would include art studios and rehearsal and performance spaces for the theater and music departments. The new building is intended to be roughly symmetrical with the gym, and the two together will frame an outdoor courtyard to one side of the main quadrangle. Mr. Farewell said they hoped to strengthen the main entrance to the campus. Another goal is to create a more effective pedestrian link to West Delaware Avenue.
As part of the campus center project, Mr. Farewell said plans for circulation and parking at the school have been reworked. The new arrangement will create a safer loop, bringing the point of vehicular drop-off deeper into the campus. The school also plans to review the management of its athletic activities.
Anthony Cifelli, the school’s director of operations, said the school already has expanded a large athletic practice field to the rear of the property. The area in question will not accommodate any regulation fields, but it does provide enough space for a single team to practice. Since it will not be used for competition, the field will never have any lights, bleachers, or spectator facilities.
The board heard comments from members of the public. Caroline Woodward, who sits on the board of the neighboring Academy Court community, expressed concern about the effect of the planned changes on the Burd Street streetscape. The proposed arrangement for egress from the campus has merit, in her view; however, she asked the board to consider limiting turning movements to right turns only at the exit onto Burd Street.
Ms. Woodward also asked what provision there would be for tractor-trailers making deliveries to the campus. These vehicles sometimes park in front of the school’s power plant, an arrangement she considers unsatisfactory. She said the narrowness of Burd Street poses traffic problems in general.
Ms. Woodward also said the school’s parking plans call for a net gain of 30 spaces on campus. She asked about the need for these additional slots. She also inquired where on the site the dumpsters would be relocated. These are sometimes transferred before 7 a.m., which is in violation of the borough’s noise ordinance.
Erwin Harbat, who owns some property in Pennington Borough, asked what effect the proposed changes would have on the school’s need for fire protection and other municipal services. Mr. Harbat expressed concern about the effect of added expenses on the borough’s property taxes. He said Princeton University makes a substantial contribution in lieu of taxes to the municipal treasury. He suggested that the school take a similar approach, as a way of compensating the borough for the security services they provide.
Jack Sabatino, of 111 Laning, had some other concerns. He said he and his wife appreciate having the school as a neighbor. However, they would like the school to provide better screening from the lights in the nearby parking lot. He thought the 10 p.m. automatic shut-off time for the lights was later than it needed to be. Mr. Sabatino also expressed concern about the school-related traffic on Burd Street.
Suzanne Brookes, who lives at 310 Hale St., chided the school for its inattention to the neighbors. Ms. Brookes said the school cut down a large stand of trees adjacent to her property, so that one of the sports fields could be expanded. They provided no advance notice of this action, and made no effort to consult with the neighbors. She also said it is quite noisy when the field is in use, and their property has lost a lot of its privacy. Ms. Brookes showed the board before-and-after pictures of the area in question. She disputed the school’s description of the site as "lightly forested," and asked whether they had obtained the appropriate permits for removing the trees.
In response, Mr. Haggerty said the school had not broken any laws in cutting down the trees. He apologized to Ms. Brookes on behalf of the school, and offered her the card of Mr. Cifelli.
Stephen Cusma, who lives at 107 Laning, said he would like to see a more detailed landscaping plan. He asked the school to provide an adequate buffer between the homes on Laning and the lights of vehicles on the school property. Like Mr. Sabatino, he suggested that the school reconsider the timing for the lights on the parking lot. He said he, too, was concerned about the traffic on Burd Street. At present, it is hard for two cars to pass there when another is parked along the side.
Borough Council member Robert Di Falco asked whether the school planned any change in the direction of traffic on the campus. He was told there would still be a one-way entrance from West Delaware Avenue. However, the plans for the Burd Street parking lot would allow both entry and exit.
Mr. Flemming asked whether nonprofit groups from the community would be able to use any of the new campus facilities. Mr. Haggerty said this would be addressed at next month’s meeting. As the hour was late, he asked that their application be continued until March. Board chairman Winn Thompson said the Environmental Commission might have some comments on the school’s plans, and he hoped to get feedback from the streetscape committee as well.
145 S. Main Richard Willever Jr. owns the building at 145 S. Main. The property in question was originally built as a Methodist church. It has been used in recent years as a dentist’s office and a law office, and the present tenant is Profit Center Design Solutions. Mr. Willever said he received approval from the borough when the present tenant moved in. However, the change of use has since been contested by a neighbor.
Mr. Willever said the office is used from Monday to Friday during normal business hours. The number of employees varies from four to seven, and there are relatively few visitors. The second floor of the building houses a two-bedroom apartment. The site has more than enough on-site parking to meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Willever said the mix of offices along Main Street is part of what gives Pennington its special character.
Board member Jeanne Donlon said the building has much less traffic than when it was a dentist’s office. Zoning officer John Flemming said screening has been the only issue he has been aware of with this property.
During the public comment period, the only person to testify was William Marder, who lives next door at 147 S. Main. He said the present tenants of the building have been good neighbors. However, his family experienced problems with parking and litter when the previous tenant occupied the building. These problems caused the quality of life for his family to deteriorate. Mr. Marder said some employees of the present tenant stay in the building beyond normal working hours.
Mr. Flemming said another neighbor wrote a letter complaining about the insufficient buffer of landscaping around the subject property. However, this neighbor’s house is quite far from the property line, which should lessen the degree of inconvenience somewhat.
The other person to testify was Richard Willever Sr., the applicant’s father. He said there have been doctors’, dentists’, and lawyers’ offices on Main Street for years, and the borough has taken it all in stride. He asked the board to refrain from being unduly restrictive, and said they should permit such professionals as allowable tenants.
The board voted to grant a use variance permitting professional offices and general business office use on the subject property. For business office use, the following conditions will apply: normal hours of operation will be on weekdays, between 8:30 and 5:30; there will be no more than eight employees; visitors to the premises will come by appointment; except for a sign, there will be no outside evidence of the type of use; there will be no external changes to the building; there will be no on-site parking of vehicles with a company logo; any changes of use must be approved by the board.
441 Sked Street Michael and Ronnie O’Connor received subdivision approval on Dec. 11. The approval allows them to divide their present property in two, thereby creating a second buildable lot. At the December meeting, the board asked the O’Connors to reconsider some elements of the design they proposed for their new home.
Mr. O’Connor said they had arrived at a new plan for the building. Unlike the previous design, this plan would not require any variances. The house would be a one-story building with a front-facing gable and a detached garage. Mr. O’Connor showed the board some examples of other houses in Pennington where the peak of the roof faces the front. He also presented an exhibit showing the streetscape around the subject property.
During the public comment period the design for the house was endorsed by two neighbors, Bill Hutchinson and Darrell Foster. The board voted 6-1 to approve the proposed design. Board and Borough Council member James Lytle cast the dissenting vote, saying he still was concerned about the orientation of the building.
IN OTHER BUSINESS, the board adopted resolutions of memorialization to formalize its approval last month of applications by Mercer Mutual Insurance and Sandra Counts.

