Change for West Property eyed

[Cranbury Press]

Change for West Property eyed
Land would be designated for active and passive recreation
Thursday, August 14, 2008 4:00 PM EDT
By Davy James, Staff Writer


CRANBURY — Township Committee members and the Board of Education discussed a proposal that would designate the remaining 24-acre balance of the West property for active and passive recreation use only, during a Board of Education Meeting Tuesday.

Committeewoman Pari Stave told the board that the change is designed to protect the land, which is adjacent to The Cranbury School, from development and is a recommendation from the township Environmental Commission.

”The Township Committee agreed with the Environmental Committee for protecting the West property from any development other than recreational services,” Ms. Stave said.

However, the school board expressed concerns that the designation could limit its options should a future need for expansion arise, which could lead to the state forcing Cranbury to consolidate with another district.

Township officials have said in the past that a portion of the property could be used for school expansion.
The ordinance was introduced at a Township Committee meeting on Monday. A vote on the ordinance is expected at the next committee meeting on Sept. 8.

The West property totals 58 acres, a portion of which has already been preserved. Passive recreation on the site would include activities such as bird-watching and hiking, while active recreation includes activities such as baseball and soccer.

The township purchased the West property, which lies south of the Cranbury School, for $1 million in 1994.

”This property was purchased for open space preservation and possible school use if need be,” said Councilman Wayne Whittman. “It was basically purchased to prevent housing from being placed on it.”

The Board of Education expressed numerous concerns regarding the change because of the constraints it would put on any future expansion of The Cranbury School.

”Our concern is that if the land is designated for recreation then we won’t be able to add on to our current building,” said school board President Joan Rue on Wednesday. “We’re asking that they designate some of that land to the Board of Education. By limiting us, that is saying to the state that we have no room to expand should the need arise.”

School board member Wendy Patella said she feared that limiting future expansion would make consolidation with a larger district more likely.

”The state is looking for any excuse to consolidate smaller districts and this would give them one more excuse to argue that we don’t have the space to accommodate our students,” she said.

School board members also are concerned that enrollment could grow because of change to how affordable housing requirements are determined.

”It’s great to preserve land but we need to reach a compromise to save a lot of heartache in the future,” said board member Kevin Fox. “If enrollment increases in the future, the state can say we need to send our students to other districts. That would change the Cranbury School as we know it and that would be a terrible tragedy.”

School officials said the threat of consolidation in the future could cause the school to lose its identity.

”In consolidation, you lose the community feel of the school because you combine with other districts and lose the unique properties that exist,” said Chief School Administrator John Haney. “We feel the Cranbury School is a special place because of our unique and varied offerings. It’s a small town atmosphere where we get to know all of the parents and students individually. All of those factors combine to make a high achieving school. We’d just like to have the flexibility should we need to expand.”

Ms. Patella said consolidation could mean a loss of control over the school.

”Parents would lose control because they won’t have a say in where their kids go to school anymore,” she said.

Ms. Stave told the board that the committee had not considered some of the points that were raised and she would take their viewpoints back for further discussion. She said the committee and board have always worked together and she hoped they could reach a compromise.

http://www.packetonline.com/articles/2008/08/14/cranbury_press/news/doc48a48c57ee829055132819.txt