At the end of the April 19 redevelopment workshop, the table leaders were invited to tell the room about the comments, questions and concerns that came up during their discussion of the proposal. ##M:[more]##
Read the article on the Redevelopment Workshop.
Read the Mayor’s response to questions raised following the workshop.
Greg Strawn, Table 8: We thought this would generate an increased amount of traffic on route 571. We thought that the tax revenue surplus was based on assumption. We questioned the wisdom of adding all the office space when we already have empty office developments near the train station. The major issue we had was with realigning Alexander Road. It’s going to create a freeway on Sherbrooke. The development already suffers from people cutting through there to avoid traffic on the main road.
Grayson Ferrante, Table 11: We wondered who would want to live in the residential buildings surrounding the power station. Everybodly loved the bowl. We felt there needs to be more public space. We felt that a 7-story building would be acceptable, but it should be stepped back so it’s not so imposing. It seems that the bypass and Route 1 improvements are important to the project and we’d like to see those get pushed for politically.
Charles Philips, Table 15: We wondered if our primary schools would be too full with the schoolchildren brought by this project. Would that require more bussing of kids to the schools in Plainsboro? We thought the bowl was a great idea. Some people thought there should be retail included in there. Someone said you could put the ticket office in the tunnel. There was some concern with the safety in parking garages, and whether all of it would attract criminal elements. We wondered what would be the cost of the extra policing. The majority of our group was okay with 1,”000 housing units.
Steve Decter and Richard Eland, Table 14: Some thought the connection of Sherbrooke to Alexander was hard to conceptualize. We thought that if you’re discouraging left turns into it, then at least add a right out. We thought it would be counterintuitive to make people zig zag to get out of there.
Some people didn’t like the plan, but remember that some residents didn’t like the idea of the Acme being built there, either. Many people thought the parking on the east side of the tracks should be for West Windsor residents. There were some general concerns over the 1,”000 housing units. They felt there was too much housing and they don’t know how to deal with it. Not everyone agreed. There was the question of the figures for taxes and revenue. Tax rebates might be given to encourage lesees at the beginning. Was that factored into the projections?
David Siegel, Table 9: There were a number of different concerns at our table. We took a poll on whether you would want this plan, as is, with no changes, and the clear consensus was “No.” This plan depends on that bypass being built. If it isn’t done, the traffic will be too much for Washington Road to handle. There were complaints about the process, that it wasn’t so much an open process as it was that we were being asked to pick choices off a menu. If you’re doing that give us choices between different scales, instead of just different layouts.In the short term, how is this going to improve things? Some of us might not be here when it’s all finished. Why should the township be paying for parking structures for non-West Windsor residents?
Jim Burke, Table 13: Our giant concern is the transparency of the project. We are heartened to see the financial information tonight, but we wonder if those figures are too optimistic regarding the revenue this project will generate. We thought the bowl, the connection under the train tracks was brilliant, but we wondered whether it needs to be 80 feet wide. The talk about housing got people pretty fired up. The majority felt the units should have to be owner occupied, otherwise it could spin out of control. There was concern that the school children generated by this project would create the need for more teachers and more schools.
Marshall Lerner, Table 5: 14 of 14 people at the table were opposed to the realignment of Alexander Road. People thought townhouses in this area are a great idea, and people liked the connection of 571 and the town green. Some people liked the idea of a garage condominium, and six people said they would spend $20,”000 for a parking spot here, whether they commute or not. Six were in favor of having 1,”000 units, and five were against. We were not comfortable with the $19 million contribution by the township to NJ Transit for parking for non-residents.
Anthony Zioli, Table 10: How will the pedestrians cross Route 571? Will there be more lights? We were ok with the station connection, but we also wondered whether it has to be 80 feet wide. We thought there could be reduced housing, and it would still support the retail. Everyone was okay with the mixed use area south of the Dinky train tracks.
Jen-Ping Wang, Table 3: We were concerned about the Alexander Road to Sherbrooke connection. This could be a treacherous and dangerous intersection. We liked the idea of the bowl, but we wanted it to be well-lighted, and dry, and we thought both sides of the wall can be used as space for art. We thought it would be important to make some of the housing affordable for township employees. We had some concerns about the height of the 7-story office buildings. The format of this workshop is not conducive to discussion. We find it limiting that only one person at each table speaks.
Alison Miller, Table 7: We like this plan much better than any of the previous plans. We still think the overall project is too much. It’s important for Acme to continue to exist for the people in the Gables who depend on being able to walk to a food store. The reaction to the plan for Route 571 was overwhelmingly positive. We liked the concept of the bowl. We liked the feeling of linkage between the sides of the tracks, so it feels more like two halves of the same place.
Susan Abbey, Table 4: Our group included a West Windsor police officer who said the 571 strip would create pedestrian problems. He said he was concerned about how people would cross the street in that area. There was a feeling that the retail would bring in more crime, and like with Nassau Park, we would need more police officers. We didn’t like the seven story office buildings, we were concerned that that might make it look like Metropark. In general we thought the whole thing should be scaled down. We wondered what happens to the tax base if the offices are vacant?
Jennifer Macleod, Table 2: The consensus is that we really like this plan. We like the connectivity, the walkability, and we were unanimous in liking the bowl. There were concerns about the traffic pattern. We whought if Vaughn Drive meets Route 571, it’s an invitation to all kinds of problems. We though the project should include a walk along the Millstone River. We were concerned with the housing next to Windsor Walk. We thought it looked monolithic and dense.
David Millrod, Table 16: Overall, people were in support of the project. How much can we control about what type of retail is included? For the housing, we thought there should be more of a blend. we thought that we could use the bowl to display art, and that the arts council should help to line the walls.
Ruth Potts, Table 12: Everyone was either for the plan or neutral. With a plan we can control what our destiny is, and what a developer can do. With the Alexander Road and Sherbrooke connection, we thought the layout was perfect, it’s a good layout of sidewalks and crosswalks.
Ursula Shulzycki, Table 6: We think this is a fabulous design that fixes up an ugly area. We would like to be provided a more detailed traffic flow analysis. We were concerned with the height of all the development, ans whether it would work in concert with the suburban nature of the township. What will be done to ensure the green spaces are not taken over? How many cars per housing unit would there be? We thought the financial projections assumed that the units would be 100 percent sold and occupied.
Sandy Shapiro, Table 1: We wanted to see some computer simulations of the traffic flow. We thought that putting a fire substation near the train station would not be enough. We don’t have fire equipment high enough to reach a seven story building.
