Fackler Road site has traffic issues
By Lea Kahn, Staff Writer
A proposal to convert a single-family house at 22 Fackler Road, on the corner of Fackler Road and Princeton Pike, into a child-care center gained the township Planning Board’s approval by an 8-1 vote Monday night.
Nearly 40 residents turned out for the public hearing, as applicants Asim and Meliha Mufti sought minor site plan and conditional use approval from the Planning Board. The lone vote against the application was made by Planning Board member Philip Duran.
Child-care centers are permitted in the residential Environmental Protection-2 zone if they meet specific criteria, such as minimum lot size, minimum frontage on the road, building and parking setbacks, access to the site and parking lot screening. The application met all of the criteria.
Architect James Foran told the Planning Board that the exterior appearance of the house would not change, except for the relocation of an existing outbuilding on the property that would be attached to the house.
Inside the building, there would be three classrooms on the first floor and offices on the second floor. Two more bathrooms would be added, Mr. Foran said. Although there is a kitchen, there would not be any food preparation for the children.
Ms. Mufti, who operates two child-care centers in Hamilton Township, said the proposed day-care center would handle 50 to 70 children whose ages range from eight weeks old to 5 years old. It would be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Engineer Douglas Pelikan, who represented the applicant, told the Planning Board that while his client has suggested the enrollment could reach 65 or 70 children, it is most likely that the maximum enrollment would be 50 children based on the size of the septic field servicing the house. There is no public sewer.
Ms. Mufti said most of the children would be dropped off by their parents between 7 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. About 80 percent of the children would be picked up by 4 p.m., and the remainder would be picked up by 7 p.m. The facility would be staffed by seven employees, who would park in the 17-space parking lot that would be built on the east side of the house.
Audience members also raised questions about staffing and enrollment, but Planning Board Chairman Doris Weisberg replied that licensing issues are the purview of state officials. The board’s role is to ensure that the application complies with the Land Use Ordinance, she said.
”As long as this is a permitted use, that’s all we are allowed to judge (the application) on,” Ms. Weisberg said.
Although some audience members were concerned about the traffic impact, Planning Board attorney Neil Yoskin said the board does not have the authority to ask for a traffic study because the plan meets the five standards for the conditional use application. It cannot ask about traffic issues, he said.
When the meeting was opened for public comment, the residents many of whom live in the nearby Province Hill and Foxcroft subdivisions made it clear that they were unhappy with the prospect of the day-care center.
Everett Kline, who is the president of the Province Hill Homeowners Association, said the residents are not opposed to schools. The single-family-development is adjacent to the Princeton Junior School, and as a former teacher himself, he said he in favor of schools.
However, there are traffic problems on Fackler Road, Mr. Kline said. During the afternoon rush hour, cars waiting to turn onto Princeton Pike from Fackler Road are backed up past the intersection of Fackler Road and Teak Lane, he said. There is concern that cars attempting to turn left into the day-care center driveway would add to the traffic issues, he said.
Mr. Kline also attempted to present a petition bearing more than 70 signatures that requested that the Planning Board defer its decision until a traffic study could be conducted. While attorney Bruce Sattin, who represented the applicant, questioned the admissibility of the petition because not all of the signers were present, Mr. Kline replied that “this is the sentiment in the community.”
Linda Nowicki, who lives on Foxcroft Drive, expressed concern that impatient motorists might begin to use the streets in the subdivision as short-cuts to avoid the traffic congestion on Fackler Road. She also asked for the board to delay its decision until a traffic study could be made.
Jacob Roosma, who lives on Teak Lane, also expressed frustration with the potential traffic impact and the negative impact on property values. He asked the Planning Board to consider the impact of the plan on the quality of life for the neighbors because “it’s what you are here to defend.”
Mr. Sattin, the applicant’s attorney, did not dispute that traffic is a problem on Fackler Road, but the day-care center has not created the problem or affected it. He suggested that the residents’ argument that a day-care center is not appropriate for the EP-2 zone should be presented to Township Council, which approved the Land Use Ordinance.
A motion was made to approve the day-care center, with the condition that the plan should be revised to show six “banked” parking spaces added to the 17 spaces on the plan. The banked spaces would be built, if needed.
Planning Board member Philip Duran, before casting his “no” vote, said he agreed with the sentiment that the board should be able to consider an application’s impact, but it cannot legally do that. It makes the “whole concept seem kind of pointless. I don’t like it,” he said.
Board member Ian Dember replied that it must consider the law and that’s the reason for the frustration. He acknowledged that the existing traffic congestion on Fackler Road is a problem, but it is not part of the application before the board.
When Planning Board member Kim Taylor asked again if a traffic study could be required, township planning consultant Philip Caton said one could “presume” that the results of the study would be “bad.” This applicant is not responsible for the existing traffic conditions on Fackler Road, he said.

