PRINCETON: Planning Board rejects a new right of way

By Victoria Hurley-Schubert, Staff Writer
   The Princeton Regional Planning Board rejected the idea of a new municipal right of way between the Dinky station and downtown because members found the concept inconsistent with the master plan.
   Members were also concerned that Princeton Borough’s ordinance only created a right of way in the borough and the township did not have a similar ordinance in the works.
   Planning Board member Marvin Reed said the plan was not consistent with the master plan because of the lack of the companion ordinance from the township to complete the rail line and the right of way.
   ”If we were serious about this, we would have to be considering two ordinances, one from the borough and one from the township,” he said. “It requires the township’s action.”
   The goal of the ordinance is to create a new right of way for transit from the existing Dinky station with a “straight shot” to Nassau Street. The right of way, which was bought in 1984 by the university when it purchased the station and buildings, will expire five years after rail service stops at the current Dinky station.
   The right of way is in jeopardy because university officials are seeking to move the station and train service 460 feet to the south to make way for a $300 million arts and transit project.
   Peter Madison, a Planning Board member, said a mass transit rail system between Princeton and Princeton Junction is supported by the master plan, but the plan is “silent” on any alignment or extension.
   He said the Memorandum of Understanding the borough, township and university signed last year provides an alternative extension, which is also consistent with the master plan. He did not want to make a decision on which right of way is the “preferred alignment.”
   Mr. Madison said the MOU presents a different alignment than proposed by the borough’s ordinance.
   ”If a lawsuit was initiated by the university, I would not want to be the one defending it,” he added.
   Mr. Madison was also concerned that any decision to acquire this right of way would place taxpayers in the consolidated Princeton in the position of having to pay for it.
   ”I don’t feel comfortable as a Planning Board member making a decision that puts the taxpayers of Princeton in a potential financial obligation,” he said.
   Borough Councilwoman Jenny Crumiller, who sits on the Planning Board and has been an advocate for preserving the right of way, explained the ordinance preserves the option, but does not commit money. That decision will be left up to the future governing body.
   ”In the future, we could decide we want to exercise eminent domain and purchase the land,” she said.
   She said the straight path to Nassau Street is more effective route and better for mass transit because it is shorter.
   Members of the public spoke in favor of the measure, offering reasons for their support.
   Township resident Virginia Kerr said the right of way is consistent with the master plan and urged the township to adopt a similar ordinance.
   ”The effort to preserve the Dinky is the highest form of environmental stewardship,” she said.
   ”I wouldn’t object to being taxed several thousand dollars for a three or five year period if that were necessary to reacquire the entire 2.4 acre tract to keep it as a public right of way for the public good,” said Peter Marks, a borough resident. “Those of us that are willing and eager to preserve the Dinky are willing to spend some money to do it. I don’t see it as a gift and I’m not trying to take something from the university.”
   Chip Crider said the people of Princeton have made this an issue about the Dinky and not about transportation.
   Borough Mayor Yina Moore said she was surprised by the Planning Board’s inability to understand its role to look forward and “we don’t even know where the MoU right of way is.”
   She said the board must consider alternatives that include doing nothing, looking at the straight line concept, other means or technologies or other alignments.
   ”Land rights are not single in dimension,” she said. “(The right of way) can remain flexible until either there is a technology chosen for the development of the site, co-development … We have many issues to consider beyond what the technology might be, but keep the options open by not restricting our alignments to to increase our accessibly to ensure sustainability of our community and our region.”
   Any ordinance passed now would not impact the university’s current proposal because the time of submission rule would make the measure ineffective. The application will have to be considered with the current zoning that is in place.
   To override the Planning Board recommendation, the Borough Council will need a full majority vote in support and detailed accounts of the reasons to overturn the decision, said Allan Porter, Planning Board attorney.