Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Residents tell board proposed 83‑unit development near two schools would worsen traffic, safety
Summary
Multiple residents urged the Piscataway board to ask the township for a comprehensive traffic and school‑impact study before an 83‑unit Macedonia development proceeds, saying current drop‑off and pick‑up areas are already strained and emergency access could be compromised.
Several Piscataway residents used public comment time on April 27 to urge the school board to press the township for a full traffic and school‑impact study of a proposed 83‑unit development on Macedonia property that would sit blocks from Kanakamak Middle School and Martin Luther King Intermediate School.
Sayed Ahmed told the board the project, sited between Ludlow Street, Highland Avenue, Deborah Drive and Roosevelt Avenue, is “just a few 100 feet away from our schools” and warned parents’ current drop‑off and pickup patterns would be further disrupted. “Adding more vehicles into these narrow streets will create an even unsafe environment for student walkers,” he said, and asked the board to urge township council to require a comprehensive study before the project moves forward.
Elizabeth Pavinski, who said she lives at River Crest Drive, described seeing a car end up in her front lawn during morning drop‑off and said Witherspoon Street already has drivers who run stop signs and rarely respect the 25‑mph limit; she said adding roughly 100‑plus cars would be unsafe for small children who walk to school.
Andrew Morris said the plan to place an 83‑unit, three‑story affordable housing building half a block from King School and one block from Kanakamak would add “over a 100 cars” and called the project too large for the location. Tammy Jackson and Carol Saunders, longtime residents, described increased speed and congestion in the neighborhood and asked the board to investigate and convene additional community engagement.
Board president acknowledged the concerns on the record and said the board would “take that into consideration” and may issue a formal statement at a later date; no formal board motion on the development was taken during the meeting.
What residents asked for: repeated requests that the board urge the township to require a traffic study, an emergency‑access analysis and a school‑impact assessment before approvals proceed. Several speakers also encouraged building smaller or fewer units that would be more compatible with the existing suburban neighborhood.
Next steps: Board members said they heard the concerns and would consider them for future action but did not announce an immediate formal request to township officials at the meeting.
