Mosque Will Do No Harm
I write in support of the Institute of Islamic Studies’ application to build a relatively modest sized mosque and community center on Old Trenton Road in West Windsor. Although I live in Cranbury, my home is close to the proposed location and I travel that road daily.
A previous letter, “Study the Costs of Mosque Approval” (The News, March 18), listed several concerns with the project including traffic, water run-off, and the loss of a potential tax ratable. It is my understanding that the peak hours of use of the proposed facility will be Friday, 1 to 2:30 p.m. and Sundays, hardly times of heavy traffic on Old Trenton Road.
As a former member of the Cranbury Zoning Board of Adjustment, I know that impervious coverage and water drainage are issues that are carefully and routinely addressed in any request for land use variances.
As to the loss of a tax ratable, this is the case for any religious institution, school, and tax-exempt nonprofit organization. Indeed, in contrast to the previous letter writer’s negative comments about “religious sects’ entitlements,” such land use applications are considered by New Jersey land use case law to be “inherently beneficial” and are only required to prove they do no harm.
I would think that West Windsor Township, given its rich community diversity, would welcome any well-designed project that accommodates a growing faith-based population of any tradition.
Peter Wise
Cranbury
Make Sure Mosque Gets Fair Hearing
I attended the zoning hearing for the proposed mosque on Old Trenton Road on April 7. It was very well attended (overflow situation), and generally well run. A significant portion of the audience were residents from the “Elements” housing complex that abuts the property. They were represented by a lawyer/spokesperson at the hearing.
A portion of the hearing was devoted to the public being able to question the witnesses — mosque officials, a civil engineer, a traffic engineer, and an architect. The problem was that the “Elements” lawyer dominated this period. Instead of asking questions of the witnesses, she spent most of her time pontificating on the law and the matter at hand.
During the few occasions when she posed questions, they were clearly out of the scope of the testimony being presented. For example, she grilled the witnesses not just about designing the facility for the mosque, but also making design provisions for hypothetical events that could occur in case the mosque passed into some unknown use in the future! Of the seven religious establishments in West Windsor that have previously been granted zoning variances (six churches and a synagogue), no one has posed such questions.
The board tried on a couple of occasions to modulate her, but were clearly too intimidated.
The hearing is to be continued on Thursday, May 5. I implore the board to make sure they conduct a fair hearing, one in which other members of the public are able to comment, and that these comments are relevant to the question at hand, specifically, whether a D-1 variance should be granted.
They also need to ensure that if the “Elements” lawyer wants to make long-winded lectures about the law during the public question period, she needs to be sworn in as an expert, and the public should have a right to question her.
Sabbir Rangwala
West Windsor
