Around 30 people came out to Monday night’s Township Committee meeting to discuss proposed ordinance 5-13-18 that would create a permitting process for temporary activities in the community.
By Nicole M. Wells, Special Writer
CRANBURY — Around 30 people came out to Monday night’s Township Committee meeting to discuss proposed ordinance 5-13-18 that would create a permitting process for temporary activities in the community.
According to a copy of the ordinance, it would give the governing body the authority to issue temporary activities permits to ensure that sporadic, seasonal or infrequent activities are regulated and operated in a lawful manner.
According to Committeeman Jay Taylor, the ordinance stems from the Cranbury Farmers’ Market.
When the organizers of the farmers’ market came to the committee for approval, there was no clear process, Mr. Taylor said.
The township’s attorney advised the committee at the time to adopt an ordinance to streamline the process, for both the farmers’ market and other events like it.
Although the ordinance may have stemmed from the upcoming farmers’ market, the discussion at the meeting was focused on another seasonal event: the annual Christmas Spectacular light shows that occur nightly throughout the holiday season at 128 N. Main Street.
Homeowner Keith Shaw is scheduled to run this year’s shows at 6, 7 and 8 p.m. every night from Nov. 29 to Dec. 31, according to the light show’s website.
The shows are put on as a way to raise money for charity, according to the website.
Last year, donations totaled $6,870.56 and the money was donated to He Cares, We Care Food Pantry of Princeton Alliance Church.
According to a source that did not wish to be identified, many of Mr. Shaw’s neighbors find the Christmas display to be a nuisance, especially because of the number of people it draws to the neighborhood.
People coming to see the shows allegedly park on Mr. Shaw’s neighbors’ front lawns, block their driveways and create an unsafe environment for drivers, the source said.
The lights flashing through their windows into their homes are also allegedly disruptive.
Residents’ reaction to the proposed ordinance Monday night was mixed, with some people in favor of it, some against it, and some unsure of why it was necessary.
”If the proposed ordinance would help to put a stop to what has become an untenable safety issue, in violation of neighbors’ rights, then I urge you to rewrite it, making the amendments that you suggested, in order to adequately address the concerns that were mentioned,” resident Elizabeth Silverman said.
Committee member Jay Taylor suggested amending the ordinance so that prior to coming before the Committee, the applicant’s request be reviewed by the police, fire, first aid, zoning, board of health and construction departments.
”This way we have the opinions and recommendations of our key departments prior to approval,” he said. “Otherwise we’re left trying to guess what we and the applicant may need to consider.”
Brian Wiseman, a neighbor of the Shaw’s, said that no one has the right to tell them to change their Christmas display.
”As a citizen of the United States, and a veteran of the U.S. military, who understands and cherishes our guaranteed rights of freedom of religion and speech under the First Amendment of our Constitution, I take issue when I hear that one neighbor has a problem with another’s Christmas light display,” Mr. Wiseman said.
Mr. Shaw also addressed the committee and said he supports the ordinance and the Committee’s adoption of it.
”This ordinance, as far as I’m concerned, did not apply to me from day one,” he said. “So for people who think that it does, it’s a Christmas display and I have a Constitutional right to do that.”
The issue, according to resident Steve Silverman, is not whether people like the display but whether it bothers other people in the neighborhood.”If I decided to change my house into the Cranbury Soup Kitchen, and didn’t make any money from it, would that be fair to my neighbors?” Mr. Silverman asked. “They love their house because it’s in a residential neighborhood and I’m turning it into something that’s no longer residential.”
A number of residents said that the ordinance should be amended or redrafted to more clearly spell out what it intends to do and how it intends to do it.
Committee members and residents both agreed that a cooling off period needs to happen before further action is taken on the ordinance.
It was unclear whether the Committee would continue amending the current ordinance or redraft it entirely.