New Superintendent Asks for Dialogue##M:[more]##
Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Victoria Kniewel and I serve as the superintendent of schools for the West Windsor-Plainsboro Regional School District. I am honored to have been selected to lead this excellent district.
As superintendent, I am looking forward to “connecting” with you through dialogue and conversation. I believe that through conversation and respectful discussion, we can build upon the strong foundation that has been established in WW-P.
Conversation is the cornerstone of any relationship, and in working with the PTAs/PTSAs and other groups, I will be available to engage in dialogue and conversation with you about the issue that is critical to all of us: the education of your children. Please don’t hesitate to write to me (victoria.kniewel@ww-p.org) to begin a conversation about a topic that is important to you.
I am proud of the WW-P School District. Please join me this year to “connect” and to build relationships that will have a positive effect on all of our students.
Victoria Kniewel
Superintendent
Redevelopment Not Panacea for Towns
The implications for West Windsor and Plainsboro are clear —costly planning efforts are vulnerable to judicial reversal if they try to assert eminent domain or take other action that elicits a lawsuit from a reluctant property owner or citizens group.
In recent newspaper articles concerning redevelopment designations in Plainsboro and West Windsor it is apparent the elected officials in both towns have not yet been briefed on what the New Jersey Supreme Court did on June 13 of this year.
In Gallenthin Realty v. Borough of Paulsboro the unanimous court struck down the borough’s “redevelopment area” designation of a vacant parcel for reasons that bear directly on their costly redevelopment efforts.
The court emphasized that the term “area in need of redevelopment” is a euphemism for the constitutional term, “blighted area.” As such, no property may be declared to “in need of redevelopment” unless it is blighted by the strict standards that hark back to the definition of “blighted area” as used in the 1947 New Jersey Constitution, which permits the taking of private property for redevelopment only if the property is blighted in fact, and not merely because of a desire to improve it, bring in more ratables, or boost the local economy.
What then does it mean for property to be blighted? The Supreme Court went out of its way to describe the characteristics of blight which we summarize as follows:
First, a property must be in a seriously degraded condition that is spreading to surrounding areas;
Second, the process of “decadence” must be trending downward and not readily “arrested” by operation of market forces;
Third, there must be substantial factual evidence in the record to support the designation.
The court also described what blight is not: It is not property that can be better utilized, or made more productive or more modern or upgraded to yield more ratables. Because of the serious consequences of a blighted area designation — notably, eminent domain taking of private property for transfer to private redevelopers, but also including the granting of long term tax abatements, and enacting bond issues not subject to local referenda — a desire to improve the properties and the community cannot substitute for a genuine blighted area finding.
Finally, it is critical for local officials to consider what the lower courts have done in just three months since Gallenthin was handed down: In five of six known cases from around the state — Lodi, Maplewood, Newark and Camden — the courts have applied Gallenthin to strike down blighted area designations made before the Gallenthin holding because they fail to meet the Gallenthin standards.
The implications for West Windsor and Plainsboro are clear: Since they used the “redevelopment area” designations based on pre-Gallenthin reading of the law to obtain greater control over development or to implement a “vision” for community improvement, their costly planing efforts are vulnerable to judicial reversal if they try to assert eminent domain or take other action that elicits a lawsuit from a reluctant property owner or citizens group.
What then should these towns do?
First, they must step out of their pre-Gallenthin bubble and recognize that any redevelopment designation based on the oft-expressed desire to use the blighted area laws to improve property, enhance ratable or generally not to eradicate blight but to upgrade areas of their communities is subject to judicial reversal.
Second, they should refocus their redevelopment efforts on the tried and tested methods of redevelopment that are not so vulnerable: Rezone properties in accordance with new master plans, improve the local infrastructure, and beautify the area to attract desired investment, and the like.
R. William Potter,
Peter D. Dickson
Editor’s note: The writers are Princeton-based attorneys.
Sound Planning Still Needed In Junction Area
Good land use planning for West Windsor’s 350-acre “Area in Need of Redevelopment” requires a comprehensive review. We believe that our Township has a wonderful opportunity to create a new land use ordinance (redevelopment plan) that will benefit residents and will contribute to alleviating the area’s obvious infrastructure and traffic problems. By undergoing a comprehensive review, all residents will be able to evaluate whether the new land use ordinance is superior to the current As of Right zoning.
We do not subscribe to the thinking that all we need to do is put up a parking garage and clean up Route 571. While we agree that those things need to happen as top priorities, the reality is that there are significant infrastructure and traffic issues that also need to be addressed initially through design with an accompanying financial analysis. The cherry-picking of a couple of popular ideas should not replace the sound broad goal of comprehensive planning.
We are committed to a process that will lead to significant public presentations and discussion about the possibilities for a well thought out redevelopment plan that is reflective of our community’s desires. The main goal is to produce an improved land use ordinance that is fiscally prudent, viable, and which can be realized through the advantages of a formal redevelopment plan.
Some of those advantages include priority assistance and financial aid from the state for the Vaughn Drive connector road and for brownfield remediation on the site of a possible new parking garage. The Township would also be able to control the phasing of any development under an approved plan.
We are encouraged that at the last Council meeting all five members of the Council reaffirmed their commitment to the process of creating a redevelopment plan. The commitment is clear and we will all work together to produce a plan that is based on the consensus of our entire community.
In an effort to move the process forward, Council unanimously approved our recommendations for guidance to the Planning Board, as it will actively fulfill its directive to prepare a redevelopment plan. The critical scale and scope issues that so many of us have wanted to discuss with the professional consultants since the June 4th meeting will finally occur.
Through the informative discussions that will take place at the Planning Board level, we are confident that intelligent decisions will be made so that an appropriate redevelopment plan is recommended to the Council for consideration and a vote. For now, we hope that all of you can join in on the exploration and analysis of conceptual ideas. The bundling of the best conceptual ideas will lead to a well supported conceptual plan. In the end, we believe that it is important for the Township to control any future development and not the developers.
Linda Geevers, Heidi Kleinman
Members, West Windsor Council
Pedestrians Need Help At Station Area
The following letter was originally sent to West Windsor Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh in June, 2006.
I am writing to report on the dangerous conditions for pedestrians at the intersection of Route 571 and Cranbury/Wallace Road. Specifically, the intersection lacks a crosswalk on the north side. Adding a crosswalk here would make the intersection significantly safer for the many people who cross daily on the way to and from the Princeton Junction train station.
I know this from experience. Living on 15 Cranbury Road and commuting to Manhattan on weekdays from the train station, each workday I cross Route 571 twice by foot. Using the north side of Cranbury/Wallace Road (the side on which I live), I have the convenience of a paved sidewalk. However, walking across 571 is downright dangerous.
Here’s why: This part of the intersection lacks any indication that it’s a pedestrian crossing. There’s neither a pedestrian-crossing light nor signage, nor are there even pedestrian-crossing lines painted on the road. Moreover, in the winter and for much of fall and spring, most commuters cross in darkness, because in those seasons one often walks to the station before sunrise and returns after sunset. Consequently, motorists turning right from Cranbury Road onto 571-North, or left from Wallace Road onto 571-North, often fail to notice a pedestrian’s presence in the intersection.
The situation is further complicated by those motorists who actually notice pedestrians but willfully ignore their right of way and swerve around them or just cut them off. With no lights, signs, or painted markers to assert my presence on the north crossing of 571, I am wrongly perceived by some drivers as an obstacle and nuisance in their path.
Granted, there is a crosswalk on the south side of the intersection, but it only underscores the intersection’s inadequacy for pedestrians. Strangely, no sidewalk leads to the existing crosswalk on the south side. It is senseless for there to be, on the south side, a crosswalk without sidewalk and, on the north side, a sidewalk without crosswalk.
As I see it, the most immediate problem with the intersection is the lack of a crosswalk across 571 on the north side. The best solution would be to install a full crosswalk with crossing lights, white stripes on the road surface, reflectors along the stripes, and bright yellow pedestrian-crossing signage.
Joshua Waterman
Cranbury Road
Editor’s note: For information on the October 9 walk in this area sponsored by the West Windsor Bicycle and Pedestrian Alliance, see page 17.
Illegal Signs Are Annoying to All
At the October 1 West Windsor Council meeting, when more than 50 illegally placed signs were brought into Council meeting room A (with more than 50 more left outside the room in the building’s atrium), the intent was to bring home the message to Council, once again, the issue of illegally posted signs within the Township.
This same action was brought to Council one year and five months ago with the result being an immediate press release from Mayor Hsueh speaking to the Township’s tough new stance on illegal signage. (www.westwindsornj.org/press_release_062206.html).
When the meeting was scheduled to begin at 7 p.m., Council began filling the room and taking their positions on the dais. Councilman Charles Morgan entered the room, viewed the ring of illegal signs enveloping the walls and promptly stated that he would not take part in the evening’s meeting as long as the signs remained in the room.
At first I believed he was joking, but it soon became clear he was serious and did not want to take his seat at the head of the room as long as those “embarrassments,” as he called them, remained in the room.
Mr. Morgan then left the building, leaving the meeting without a quorum. The meeting was in limbo for a little more than an hour and finally came to order when Linda Geevers was called in from home to fill in for the absent Mr. Morgan.
Aside from the obvious inconvenience it placed on the residents who were in attendance and had presentations planned, it was behavior completely unbecoming an elected official. To refuse to attend a scheduled Council meeting based solely on the basis that you do not like the material presented (regardless of the method presented) is comparable to the behavior of a spoiled child who does not like some event that has transpired and picks up his toys and stomps home.
Photos were shown during the meeting to clearly illustrate the issue and handed in to Council. A copy of Mayor Hsueh’s press release from June, 2006, was also handed in to Council for review.
The true “embarrassment,” as Mr. Morgan put it, is that after one year and almost a half, there has been minimal action taken by the Administration on this “quality of life” issue.
I am surprised and shocked that an elected official can exhibit the behavior I witnessed that night. The ring of signs might have been unsightly and unbecoming decor for a Council meeting, but they are also unbecoming decor for the roadways of the Township.
The difference between the two is that instead of Charlie Morgan seeing the signs, and having a tantrum and going home, the motorists and residents who have been viewing these signs for years and years have no choice but to live with it until action is finally taken to remedy the issue.
Mr. Morgan has control over his behavior and can choose his actions accordingly. The residents have no control over the signs posted on the roadways. Perhaps a more dignified way to handle the issue presented last evening would have been to take his seat, either address the issue head on or ignore it and hold the meeting as scheduled.
Instead, he called much more attention to the issue at hand through his behavior and eventual departure. I might indeed owe Mr. Morgan a thank you for calling more attention to the issue.
Mr. Morgan owes the residents and attendees an apology. He also owes the residents and property owners immediate attention (as does the rest of Council and the Administration) to this festering issue.
Michael Ranallo
The writer is a Trenton resident whose mother and grandmother own homes on Harris Road in Princeton Junction.
Plainsboro Church ‘Builds Together’
As co-chairpersons of the Habitat for Humanity Committee of the Queenship of Mary Roman Catholic Church in Plainsboro, we submit this letter to publicly acknowledge the volunteer efforts of all the parishioners who recently completed the construction of a Habitat house in East Windsor for a family in need. As part of the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the parish, and with the leadership and spiritual guidance provided by the Very Reverend Robert Medley, pastor of Queenship of Mary, the parish built the house entirely through volunteer parishioner efforts, within a record time of four and one-half months.
In partnership with the Millstone Basin Area Habitat for Humanity, over 300 parishioners donated their time to do the actual construction work, which took place largely on weekends throughout the summer. Another 100 parishioners worked on other vital aspects of the building effort, such as fundraising events, obtaining supplies, and providing food for the volunteer builders. Through these efforts, the house was recently occupied by a family in need who was selected to own the house and who contributed over 300 hours of sweat equity to their new home’s construction.
Our parishioner volunteers ranged from seasoned construction and architectural design professionals to those who had no experience but who were willing to take direction on whatever needed to be done. Adult volunteers also worked with the youth to build storage sheds and birdhouses for the house and for two other Habitat houses on the same block.
Throughout the construction, the sense of commitment among the volunteers was obvious and contagious and enabled us to succeed in our parish’s goal of building a decent home for a family in need; this goal was in keeping with the theme that our parish chose for our year-long celebration of the parish’s 25th anniversary — “In Him, you are built together.”
We would especially like to thank the following parishioners who served as chairpersons:
Fran O’Connell and Ann Jackman, Volunteer Coordinators; Henry Wieck, Children’s Projects and Sheds; Myriam Radia, Publicity; Kathy Troy, Supplies and Donations; Laurie Quinlan and Regina Finn, Events; Karen Izzo and Eileen Zysk, Food; Connie Persico, Family Nurturer; William Gittings, Building Coordinator; Vincent Colonna, Family Selection; Maureen Johnson, Prayer Leader.
Linda Principe
Richard Johnston
Dutch Neck School’s Happy Ending
In the fall of 2006 the Dutch Neck School began construction on a new six-classroom addition. Renovations were also begun throughout the building. Structural changes were made in some of the smaller group instructional spaces while heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems were upgraded.
On behalf of the Dutch Neck PTA Executive Board, I’d like to thank everyone who made it possible for the Dutch Neck School to open on schedule this year:
Our principal, Scott Feder, and former assistant principal, Dan Umstead, who oversaw the construction project, working unceasingly to maintain a sense of order for both children and teachers and to anticipate and address safety concerns. They even turned the construction project into an educational opportunity for the children. As the project reached its culmination this summer and we welcomed a new assistant principal, Jeanine Heil, Scott and Dan continued to manage the process responsibly.
Our teachers who, in spite of all the distractions last year, pushed ahead with their jobs teaching our children. They understood that they could not move back into their classrooms until the very last moment, working long hours over the summer as well as over Labor Day weekend to make sure they were ready to greet their new students on the first day of school.
Our main office staff who, working out of borrowed classrooms this summer on days peppered with power outages, plumbing malfunctions, and other inconveniences, continued with their day-to-day operations.
Our custodial staff, led by Rich Golding, who managed a mammoth moving and storage project while overseeing additional grounds duties generated by the construction.
The many central office administrators who worked vigilantly with Scott Feder.
You all deserve a resounding round of applause.
Allegra D’Adamo
President, Dutch Neck PTA
