Board wary of temple's parking accommodations
Applicants say Hindu sect will rarely assemble in large numbers
BY CHRIS GAETANO
Staff Writer

SOUTH BRUNSWICK - The township Zoning Board continued to deliberate on a Hindu temple proposed for Route 27 in Kendall Park during the Jan. 25 meeting.

The temple is being proposed by an organization called Bharat Sevashram Sangha of North America, which is described by the applicant's attorney, Rosalind Westlake, as "a form of very traditional Hinduism." If approved, it would be the only temple for that particular sect in all of New Jersey. At the moment, a single house, where the monks live, sits on the parcel of land where the temple would be.

According to the applicant's engineer, Julia Algeo, the temple will occupy 6,904 square feet in total, with a total capacity of 150 people. There will be 59 parking spaces and a stormwater basin toward the front edge of the property. According to Westlake, the temple will have a main floor for religious services, a mezzanine above that would have classrooms, and a 5,000-square-foot basement that would have a kitchen and bathrooms.

Hearings for the application began during the zoning board's Jan. 11 meeting, but because it was very late at night, it was decided that they would continue discussion during the Jan. 25 meeting. During this meeting, the board heard testimony from the applicant's engineer and traffic engineer, as well as from Swami Amarnath Ananda, who answered questions on the temple's potential comings and goings.

Echoing concerns brought forward during the last meeting, board members expressed worry regarding the growth of the temple, wondering whether there would eventually be traffic and noise problems down the road, especially given that it would be the only temple for that particular sect in the state.

"A lot of my concern is you're so new and now you wish to grow," said board member Harvey Levine.

Many of the concerns seemed to spring from cultural misunderstandings about the religion the temple would service, until board member Bharat Patel explained that the facility would function more like a monastery than a church as typically understood in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Ananda tried to put the remainder of traffic and noise concerns to rest through his description of what the temple's everyday activities would be. For example, he noted that while the temple has an informal membership of some 250 to 300 families, they do not all come at once for services like a Christian congregation might. People tend to simply filter in and out instead. He used morning prayers between 5:30 and 6:30 as an example.

"Morning time, nobody comes. ... Morning time, I don't expect anyone. In the evening, I might expect some visitors, especially Monday through Friday," said Ananda, noting that evening services tends to draw, at most, 35 to 40 people.

He also noted that he didn't expect there to be a lot of people showing up for the classes, despite the classes being open to the public. He said that the six classrooms, where things such as yoga, meditation, philosophy and Sanskrit will be taught, will probably draw about 10 people between 7-9 p.m.

This being the case, board members questioned why such a large space was needed and why things such as a dining hall was necessary.

"What concerns me is, looking at the floor plan and listening to what the swami says about numbers, why do you need such a huge dining hall?" asked board member Barry Nathanson.

Ananda said that the larger space was desired in order to accommodate devotees during a number of annual festivals that would be held there. He said that previously, they had needed to rent a tent to celebrate their holidays outside. It was noted later on that moving the festivities inside would actually reduce noise. This led Nathanson to express worry if a lot of people show up at once, people might start parking in the streets.

"There's really no other place to park," said Nathanson.

Ananda said that during the major holidays, people tend to trickle in and out, instead of everyone arriving in one large mass. He said there was one holiday where large numbers of people would show up during the day and about nine others where a medium-size group would visit.

During traffic engineer John Jahr's testimony, it was said that the temple will not adversely affect traffic because its primary use is during off-peak hours. However, an issue was raised by the board that the stormwater basin was too close to a proposed bike path, but moving the basin back would not be advisable. After much discussion, in which the board made it known it would probably not grant relief regarding that variance, it was suggested that the applicant think of a new placement at the next meeting.

"There's an uneasiness in waiving that requirement," said board Chairman Marty Hammer.

The board is expected to hear the remainder of the testimony from the architect and planner, as well as open the application for public comment, on March 1.