Proposal would cut Fisher Place off from Route 1 and create a new road to the north
By: Molly Petrilla
WEST WINDSOR In a case of history repeating itself, angry residents again came before township officials Monday night to voice their concerns about Sarnoff Corp.’s renovation and expansion plans.
When Sarnoff representatives approached the Planning Board in 2002 with a general plan to expand their facility to 3 million square feet, residents claimed certain improvements were unnecessary, and they did not receive adequate notice of the meeting.
Leftover sparks were re-ignited Monday night when council members approved a resolution to support Sarnoff in closing Fisher Place which is directly adjacent to the company’s main entrance and opening a new road in its stead.
Based on the proposal, the traffic signal at Fisher Place and Route 1 would be removed, and a permanent cul-de-sac would be created on Fisher Place. In addition, a newly created access drive named "South Driveway," located slightly north of Fisher Place, would be built. It would be connected to a temporary Route 1 jug handle as well as a deceleration lane and traffic signal.
According to Township Engineer Jim Parvesse, the change is meant to protect Fisher Place residents from the traffic increases that will inevitably occur as Sarnoff continues to expand its facilities.
During the public comment, several residents asked the council to remove the Fisher Place resolution from the agenda and delay it until a later date.
Fisher Place resident Pete Weale called the resolution "grossly premature," while Guy Pierson, who also lives on Fisher Place, requested reassurance that South Driveway wouldn’t become a de facto bypass to Route 1.
Later in the meeting, when the council began to discuss the resolution, several angry residents raised their hands or shouted out comments, only to be reminded that they are not permitted to participate in council deliberations.
Councilwoman Heidi Kleinman asked her colleagues several times to re-open the issue for public discussion, but Councilman Charles Morgan said he questioned "whether this is the right time or the right forum" for such input.
Councilman Franc Gambatese, who cast the lone "no" vote on the resolution, said he wanted an opportunity to speak with Fisher Place residents before approving the resolution.
But other council members agreed that residents would have ample opportunity to comment on the changes, since the resolution in question merely allows Sarnoff to apply for a concept and design permit through the state Department of Transportation.
If the DOT approves the conceptual design, Sarnoff representatives will appear before the Planning Board at a public meeting to present a site plan for its first phase of development, and the council will have to pass an ordinance officially closing Fisher Place. In addition, Sarnoff Attorney Kevin Moore said Sarnoff will hold "several informational hearings."
Mr. Parvesse added, "The residents will still have several more bites of the apple."
In addition, council members added two amendments to the resolution, one stating that Sarnoff will be responsible for all costs associated with the road change, and another requiring that residents within 200 feet of the facility receive 20 days’ notice rather than the usual 10 when the site plan is slated to go before the Planning Board.
Based on Sarnoff’s initial proposal to the Planning Board more than four years ago, development would be phased and take place over a 20-year span. In the first phase, 450,000 square feet of office space would be constructed on the west portion of the facility, and 900,000 square feet of development would occur in the second and third phase. By the end of the process, the 332.5-acre property would contain 19 buildings and 8,783 parking spaces.

