Another Warehouse ?

[anon-8q1n]

[anon-r672]

What. You mean that is a street? I thought it was the new bike lane that I can ride to crockadeli. Or are they trying to put me out on Rt 130 where I can ride my bike and waive to the trucks as they go by.

[anon-opr0]

All your sarcastic conversation with yourself aside, this is nothing new. Bikes have always had the right to share the roads. And have around here for years. Adding signage to draw attention to what was already true harms no one. Especially since so many motorists seem clueless about the basic rules of the roads.

[anon-p0q2]

Seems like a TC member is upset. The bike lane is silly. It is in the middle of the road and painted every 10 feet as though people are goldfish and can’t remember. Not to mention spilled white paint all
Over a new road. It serves no purpose other than for the Mayor in an election year to say I did a bike lane. One end stops at Old Trenton Rd. the other is a narrow bridge. Even if you say fine go across it the road still ends at 130 which is far from a bike safe rd. Are bikers really going to be like kids and just ride back and forth? This isn’t a bike lane type road and even in campaigns this road was never raised as one for a bike lane. Nor do people see the large bike groups that go through town on that road.

People are making fun of it because it is so weird and wasteful. That the TC is so bike lane must do and eager for any win that they can’t see it is funny and yet concerning at the same time.

[anon-1qq3]

Bicyclists need to obey the rules of the road, weather there is signage or not. I think the town needs to have the company come back and repair signs and move them over to the side of the road where they belong.

39:4-14.1 Rights and Duties of Persons on Bicycles.
Every person riding a bicycle on a roadway is granted all the rights and subject to all of the duties of the motor vehicle driver.

39:4-14.2, 39:4-10.11 Operating Regulations.
Every person riding a bicycle on a roadway shall ride as near to the right roadside as practicable exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction. A bicyclist may move left under any of the following conditions: 1) To make a left turn from a left turn lane or pocket; 2) To avoid debris, drains, or other hazardous conditions on the right; 3) To pass a slower moving vehicle; 4) To occupy any available lane when traveling at the same speed as other traffic; 6) To travel no more than two abreast when traffic is not impeded, but otherwise ride in single file. Every person riding a bicycle shall ride in the same direction as vehicular traffic. In New Jersey, the law states a bicyclist must obey all state and local automobile driving laws. A parent may be held responsible for the child’s violation of any traffic law.

[Denied-s00s]

https://centraljersey.com/2022/07/05/cranbury-zoning-board-denies-variance-relief-for-proposed-warehouse-facility/

Denied though I sense a lawsuit coming.

[anon-rqq5]

[And what?-s00s]

And what?

[anon-n5s1]

I don’t see any way the ruling would be over turned in court. It follows the Masterplan and zoning.

What I do have concerns with is Mr. Nissen saying he was torn and would have see. It differently 3-4 years ago. As a long time Zoning board member I would have expected him to honor the Masterplan. Mr. McGovern I think also should have honored the Masterplan.

Having people willing to put individual views above the Masterplan is how you create issues.

[anon-p3o1]

I can see this a few years from now when people are saying, man I wish they let that small warehouse be built. Instead, now we have ________. Be careful what you wish for.

[anon-o41s]

Seems like the A/C is not working and people here are getting a bit stupid. Oh wait. It's Cranbury.info. Nevermind

[anon-p0q2]

[anon-p3o1]

Not saying the master plan is totally wrong but Cranbury today is not Cranbury 40yrs ago.
With warehouses to the right and left, tell me what the issue would be. Maybe they’ll put up another strip mall instead. Then they’ll be complaining complaining again.

[anon-n420]

Tha Masterplan is reviewed and updated every 10 years most recently a few years ago. Putting a strip mall or warehouse on 130 has never been a consideration nor should it be.

[anon-rs1o]

[anon-n51p]

I agree. Where is the focus on 130?

The Cranbury circle has been in the plans since the 1980’s. I remember Dave Cook presenting plans about a fix 10 years ago. Now it is planned to be completed in 2027-29. But the TC is claiming victory for it despite there having been multiple meetings of the same type in the past. I am sure in 2027 whoever sits on the TC will claim victory too. Yet 130 will be ignored.

I only remember one time in the last 15 - 20 years when we thought it was being fixed. The state came in and TC members said it was going to be done. Then nothing.