By Maria Prato-Gaines, Staff Writer
CRANBURY — Land preservation has been a long-standing tradition in Cranbury and in the midst of an election season, it seems to be a topic both local candidates are well versed in.
Republican nominee Win Cody and Democrat nominee John Ritter are both staunch supporters of land preservation, but differ in how they would plan for the future.
Both are seeking one, three-year seat on the Township Committee. Incumbent Republican Wayne Wittman is not seeking re-election.
Mr. Cody said keeping the “small town” feel of Cranbury and maintaining its layout of farmland is key to Cranbury’s identity.
Not only does it prevent congestion from housing and traffic, he said, but it is also essential to long-term financial planning.
”Preservation is also vitally important because of (the Council on Affordable Housing),” Mr. Cody said. “By preserving farmland we’re potentially reducing our future tax increases as the town will not need to provide services and affordable housing for land that is not developed.”
Mr. Cody said he would like to see as much property west of Route 130 as well as the Rejay’s farm on Plainsboro Road preserved.
”This is land where most of the residents of Cranbury live and having preserved land in that area is ideal,” he said. “Open space in New Jersey is precious and we should try to save as much as possible.”
Although Mr. Cody said he thinks the township should continue to aggressively find open space funding, it’s apparent that county and state funding has become a limited source.
The township’s next step should be to assess the areas that are critical and develop a preservation plan that would determine the location and usage of these potential properties, he said.
”Within the last few years Cranbury had a recreation plan which amended the town’s Master Plan,” he said. “I feel we should consider a complete open space review with extensive public review and discussion.”
While township officials lead this process, Mr. Cody said resident input should play a significant role as well.
”Once the plan is developed a referendum for a bond funding open space preservation should be placed on the ballot for Cranbury residents to vote upon,” Mr. Cody said.
”While I personally think open space preservation is important, since it is potentially a large amount of money, it is up to the residents to decide.”
The bulk of preserved land should be used for farming and recreation, he said, provided the public recreation aspect does not represent increased cost to taxpayers, without their support.
Mr. Ritter, on the other hand, said that although it is tempting to have a referendum, he would expect elected officials to receive community input, weigh the various options and objectively make the best choice for the community.
”It is also expensive to hold referendums, particularly when they don’t occur on a regular Election Day, and often there isn’t enough time to hold referendums on critical issues,” he said. “If the referendum is held on a day other than a major election day, it is likely that precisely the same set of people who would show up for a large meeting on an important issue will turn out to vote on an off-cycle referendum.”
Unlike other issues in town, Cranbury residents have time and again shown their support for preservation, he said.
Residents understand that through land preservation they will reap the economic and environmental benefits as well as ease the pressure on the school systems, Mr. Ritter said.
”The concern on all our minds is how we can finance the up front investment that will preserve land and our quality of life, reduce pressure on the school and high school, and avoid the future uncovered costs that new housing development brings,” he said. “COAH affordable housing costs are potentially very large and may raise property taxes to a level that many of us cannot afford; yet it makes sense economically and for so many other reasons to invest in preserving our farmland and open space. We have to find every way possible to reduce preservation costs to Cranbury through county state and private funding sources.”
Mr. Ritter said the Master Plan has set out reasonable parameters for potential open space properties, and particularly appreciates that many of the already preserved farms border one another, keeping with Cranbury’s historically rural roots.
But although Mr. Ritter praises many of Cranbury’s preservation efforts he said there are a few flaws in the system.
”The only concern I’ve heard is the pace at which this happens,” he said. “We need to actually talk to everyone who has a piece of property (now) and see who would be interested in preserving. Then if someone gets an offer (from a developer) they don’t have to try to understand the alternative.”
Cranbury’s devotion to preserving it’s high quality farm land has also made it a more desirable place to live and increased the value of local homes, Mr. Ritter said.
”The Cranbury community understands the importance of preserving farmland and open space and the value of the preserved land,” he said. “Our quality of life is apparent every time we walk down the road to the school soccer fields; and look out over the preserved farms; or walk along the stream in the Cranbury Brook Preserve.”

