By Jennifer Kohlhepp, Staff Writer
The Institute for Advanced Study’s faculty housing project has been rejected by the Delaware and Raritan Canal Commission, which the Princeton Battlefield Society considers a victory for history.
After a hearing that took about four hours, the Delaware and Raritan Canal Commission voted 3-2, with one abstention and one member absent, in favor of the application.
”Which means, the application, once again, did not pass,” Commissioner Ed Trzaska said. “There are seven members of the DRCC so four yes votes are required.”
Former Princeton mayors Chad Goerner and Phyllis Marchand were in attendance and briefly spoke in support of the application, which Mr. Trzaska also supported.
”I voted yes and really disagree with the no votes,” Mr. Trzaska said.
Vice Chairman John Loos and Commissioner Bruce Stout also voted yes while commissioners Mary Leck and Julia Cobb Allen voted no and Commissioner Mark Texel abstained.
The Institute for Advanced Study is a private, postgraduate center for theoretical research in Princeton. The institute proposed to construct seven single-family dwellings and two four-unit townhouses to serve as faculty housing for the campus.
Proposed construction includes a 24-foot-wide, 1,000-foot-long asphalt cul-de-sac, a sanitary pump station facility, five parking spaces, a low retaining wall, sidewalks and stormwater management structures. The project would result in approximately 1.96 acres of new impervious surface and disturb about 7.7 acres of land.
A statement released by the institute on Thursday said, “At yesterday’s meeting of the Delaware and Raritan Canal Commission, the commission did not approve the institute’s faculty housing project, although, in the vote taken, more commissioners voted for the project than against it. We do expect to continue to discuss the project with the Canal Commission, and we are confident of success in gaining the remaining approvals required for our project.”
The institute can amend its application and resubmit or it can challenge the DRCC’s ruling in court.
The DRCC has two main responsibilities. The first is to oversee and manage the Delaware and Raritan Canal State Park. The second is to protect the 400-square-mile watershed and its streams that feed into the canal, which supplies drinking water to 20 percent of New Jersey’s population.
The institute’s land is adjacent to one of the streams the DRCC protects and its associated corridor buffer. So, in addition to being approved by Princeton’s Planning Board, the institute’s project needs the DRCC’s approval as well.
”Our jurisdiction for ‘Zone B’ projects, which this one is, is very limited,” Mr. Trzaska said. “We essentially only have authority to assess stormwater dynamics and a project’s impact on the stream corridor, both of which are for protecting the quality of the canal’s water supply.”
He continued, “One of the reasons why I love this area is because of its historical importance, especially with regards to the American Revolution. I would love to see this land preserved and added to the Battlefield State Park, but we can’t ignore that fact that this is private land owned by the advanced institute. I voted yes on this application because it adhered to the regulations of the DRCC and passed our requirements.”
Bruce Afran, attorney for The Princeton Battlefield Society, which is a nonprofit volunteer organization dedicated to the enhancement, preservation and development of Princeton Battlefield State Park and surrounding lands, said the denial of the project application is an important victory for the battlefield.
”The institute cannot construct on the battlefield,” Mr. Afran said. “It would have to redesign its plan and start all over again.”
Mr. Afran said that since the DRCC has rejected this plan twice, the institute should respect the site’s environmental and historic qualities and abandon its housing project.
”They have a very difficult chance of ever building on this property,” Mr. Afran said. “It’s filled with wetlands protected by law, and there is no scientific solution to avoid injury to the wetlands on the site, and the property has so many historic regulations that protect it.”
Mr. Afran said the property is “important to the entire nation.”
”It is confirmed archeologically, and the institute admits this, that the right flank of the counterattack of the British took place on this very piece of property. The counterattack ran across this land. Miraculously, it’s never been built on, and you can see where it happened. It’s literally the site of one of the most important military events in the history of the world. To destroy it is just as horrific as destroying a piece of Gettysburg, and the institute, which is supposed to protect truth and knowledge, should want to preserve it not destroy it for the small gain of 15 houses.”
When asked what the society plans to do next, Mr. Afran said there are environmental issues the society “may reveal in other forums.”
”We will disclose that when we are ready, but, right now, the project is dead and can’t go forward,” Mr. Afran said. “It has enormous hurdles to overcome this defeat. My clients, the Battlefield Society, and thousands of people in the community want this project to stop. The institute has an endowment between $700 million and $900 million and can buy housing for faculty without any significant financial loss and has no reason to destroy this property. They should rejoin the community and abandon this project.”
Mr. Trzaska said he assumes this debate will go forward, and both sides will continue to argue with each other in court and before other bodies.
”This deeply saddens me,” he said. “The advanced institute is a fine organization with a noble pursuit and without a doubt so is the Battlefield Society. Instead of wasting so much money on this legal battle, the two sides should try to partner with each other and find a compromise — one that gives the institute its needed facility housing and expands/enhances the Battlefield State Park, whether it is with additional land or perhaps a small museum. It’s time for both sides to set aside their stubbornness and try a little collaboration. That’s my hope.”
