PRINCETON: State board wants more information on university plan

By Victoria Hurley-Schubert, Staff Writer
   Princeton University’s plan to build a $300 million arts complex and move the Dinky station will chug along while the Historic Preservation Office of the Department of Environmental Protection gathers more information about the project.
   During a hearing on Feb. 16 in Trenton before the state Historic Sites Council, a meeting room full of people listened intently to NJ Transit’s application to abandon 460 feet of an easement at the Dinky station to make way for a new station and university arts complex.
   The Historic Sites Council, which is part of the Historic Preservation Office, is reviewing NJ Transit plans, not Princeton University’s. As a private entity, the university is not subject to review. Because it is a private project, the DEP only has a say on the easement, which is public, said Richard Goldman, a municipal land use lawyer with Drinker Biddle & Reath, Princeton University’s attorney.
   University officials “will try to engage with the Site Historic Preservation Office,” said Mr. Goldman, “We will try and be helpful and provide additional information to answer their questions; there was a lot of incorrect information put out by the folks that spoke. We want to make sure they have all the facts and an accurate record for the decision.”
   The complete station complex consists of two buildings, a canopy, platform and track that were constructed in 1918, said Daniel D. Saunders, administrator of the Historic Preservation Office of the Department of Environmental Protection.
   The Historic Sites Council only has a say over the early termination of the easement itself, which will automatically end five years after train service ends.
   ”The only question before them is can NJ Transit terminate its easement earlier than what will automatically happen?” said Mr. Goldman. “Will they allow the easement that keeps the rails in place — that won’t be used or can’t be used because they won’t connect to the new service. They have to decide whether they would approve the early termination of that easement. Once that termination happens, there is no more public involvement in the project and no more oversight by the Historic Sites Council.”
   A decision by the council cannot stop the project, it can only impact the timetable the build out occurs with the existing station buildings, which are slated to be remodeled into a restaurant and cafe.
   ”That’s the only part of the plan it affects,” said Robert Durkee, vice president and secretary of Princeton University, who spoke before the board on Thursday to explain the project and how the site will be transformed. “The only impact it has is when we can renovate the existing buildings.”
   If the Historic Sites Council approves the early termination, the abandonment of the easement could not take place until alternate transit service is in place, said Mr. Goldman. There could be a short period of time where bus service is offered as the new rail service is completed.
   If the Historic Sites Council does not approve the early termination, the project will continue, except the old rails and station building will sit unused for five years as the university waits for the easement to expire as per the requirements contained in its original legal contract.
   ”I think what gets lost in this discussion is that it’s privately owned land, said Mr. Goldman. “The university bought that land to save the Dinky in 1984.”
   After the public testimony, Historic Sites Council board member Margaret Nordstrom tried to clarify the matter and understand the university’s thinking.
   ”What possessed you to do this, where is the money coming from to pay for it and why are you moving this forward without the support of the mayor and council?” she asked. “What are you thinking here? I really don’t get it.”
   Tom Clark of the NJ Transit office of government and community relations said the 1984 contract gives the university the right to move the station and there is agreement between NJ Transit and several legal opinions the station can move, despite disagreements on the local level.
   ”NJ Transit has no position on getting involved with arguments of local government,” he said. “We are here to work with entities that want to help preserve the Dinky right of way and its existence. We believe this project will help bring riders to the Dinky, keeping it a good service for many years to come.”
   Area residents were given the opportunity to speak during for three-minute comment periods.
   Sheldon Sturges, a Princeton Township resident, spoke about encroachment and how the project could be built in a different way to maximize the public transit aspects.
   ”The Princeton Branch is public transit,” he said. “An extremely wealthy private development is using all its guile and all of it’s political might to remove this very public, much needed, much revered, most sustainable public transportation further from the center of the community.”
   Peter Weale of West Windsor, who attended a NJ Transit meeting held on Princeton’s campus on Feb. 9, said the project is shortsighted.
   ”We get no do-overs,” he said. “I don’t understand the focus of what this is all about … with a $17 billion endowment and a $1.5 billion operating budget, (the university) is inebriated with a voracious appetite for development and you are seeing it manifested right here.”
   ”The university has never presented Plan B,” he said. “They have more money than God … I’d like for them to present what their alternative is,” he said. “(The project) looks like a bad uterus. Tell it for what it is.”
   Jack May of Montclair, vice president of the New Jersey Association of Rail Passengers, said no public hearing has been held by NJ Transit on the controversial project, and it has not been approved by NJ Transit’s board nor has not gone through due process at NJ Transit.
   Philip Craig of Upper Montclair, director of the New Jersey Association of Rail Passengers, comes to Princeton by train and said the project is legally deficient because it filed a false and misleading application. He also accused the university of trying to sidestep federal laws and the DEP has no authority to usurp the federal government and they are acting against public interest.
   ”Princeton has a lot of people who use all their spare time and are driven to put their finger in the university’s eye,” said Chip Crider, a borough resident. “All the time they say they are going to waste walking 460 feet they could have spent at these meetings.”
   He said there have been many contentious local meetings and the DEP shouldn’t be sucked into a local issue. He said the tracks and the components that are being argued over are not original.
   A draft recommendation by the council — passed around before the meeting — would authorize the track removal project with the several conditions. First, prior to the work, Historic American Building Survey quality documentation will be performed to record the current appearance of the station complex and its physical setting.
   Next, NJ Transit shall promote public awareness of the history of the Princeton railroad station. This would be achieved through the installation and permanent maintenance of interpretive displays with text and photographs at the new station to present the history of the station and the Princeton Branch, in particular, and its relationship to the town and the university.
   Finally, the track shall not be removed until the service is terminated and the connection work for the new track has commenced. NJ Transit will not fully abandon the easement until new transit service is in operation.