National developer AvalonBay went before the Princeton Planning Board on Thursday seeking permission to build a 280-unit residential development at the old Princeton hospital site on Witherspoon Street.
By Philip Sean Curran, Staff Writer
National developer AvalonBay went before the Princeton Planning Board on Thursday seeking permission to build a 280-unit residential development at the old Princeton hospital site on Witherspoon Street.
Thursday’s hearing, the first of four scheduled between now and the end of July, represented the second time since October that Virginia-based AvalonBay had come looking for approval to develop the property. This version of the project differs from the old one in some key respects.
Unlike the proposal the Planning Board rejected in December, this project has the residential units located in two larger buildings and three smaller ones as opposed to all 280 units in one. The plan calls for mostly apartments with 12 town houses located in the three buildings fronting Franklin Avenue.
Also, the project is more permeable with the addition of two streets, and the amount of open space has increased, the developer contends.
”The new plan responds to a lot of the comments from 2012,” said AvalonBay Vice President Jon Vogel in his testimony to the board.
AvalonBay, the contract purchaser of the property, decided to have Mr. Vogel be the public face of its revised project rather than company Vice President Ronald S. Ladell, who handled the one that was rejected.
The proposal calls for having a piazza between the two larger buildings; the bigger of the two, at 219,378 square feet, is square shaped and has an outdoor pool in the middle. Critics, however, contend AvalonBay is still seeking to build a “gated” community that will dwarf the surrounding neighborhood.
Kate Warren, a trustee of Princeton Citizens for Sustainable Neighborhoods, said prior to the meeting that she would prefer a project with “at least” 20 fewer units. She said there’s “too much density” in that spot.
Ms. Warren’s organization, a nonprofit that has raised more than $50,000, fought AvalonBay last year and is doing so again. The group had its attorney, Rob Simon, at the hearing, and plans to call witnesses in the case.
The board got through listening to testimony of some of AvalonBay’s consultants before wrapping up after 11 p.m. The next scheduled hearing is July 11, followed by two more after that on consecutive Thursdays.
Toward the very end of the hearing, Ben Bennett, a representative of 32BJ Service Employees International Union, got up to raise concerns about fire safety at other AvalonBay sites. The union, which represents food service employees at Community Park School, has said AvalonBay needs to hire a public safety monitor.
The board ultimately let Mr. Bennett speak, despite repeated objections by AvalonBay’s lawyer. After he was finished, board attorney Gerald J. Muller told board members to disregard Mr. Bennett’s comments since they were not “relevant.”
Prior to the meeting, opponents of AvalonBay protested on the plaza of Witherspoon Hall.
Resident Shirley Satterfield said the developer would bring “congestion” to the town and people from other communities “who just are waiting to live in Princeton because of our name and our history.”
She said the developer’s “luxury” apartments would not be affordable for many of the people living in the surrounding neighborhood.
Of the 280 units proposed, 56 of them would be marketed as affordable housing.
”So why would one continue to try and fit a square peg into a round hole that it wasn’t meant to accommodate? Doesn’t make much sense, does it?” asked John Street resident Bernadine Hines.
AvalonBay sued the town and the Planning Board earlier this year to reverse the December decision rejecting its project. Town officials and the developer worked out a settlement that allowed AvalonBay to submit a revised proposal, while the lawsuit was put on hold. Due to tight time restrictions, the normal review process by the town was speeded up.
Earlier in the week, Mayor Liz Lempert dismissed a notion that the Planning Board hearings were a mere formality.
”It’s not any different than any other Planning Board application,” she told reporters. “I’m not going to prejudge what the Planning Board’s going to decide.”