When West Windsor Council candidate Kristin Epstein proposed building a train station and a lake on Howard Hughes Corporation’s property at the July 26 planning board meeting and again at the recent council debate, I was more than a little surprised. These are both interesting ideas, but they are highly impractical for a number of reasons.
When West Windsor Council candidate Kristin Epstein proposed building a train station and a lake on Howard Hughes Corporation’s property at the July 26 planning board meeting and again at the recent council debate, I was more than a little surprised. These are both interesting ideas, but they are highly impractical for a number of reasons.
First, the train station. The Hamilton and Princeton Junction train stations are six miles apart. Another station on the Howard Hughes site would be almost exactly three miles from each of these stations. Amtrak, which owns the right-of-way, and NJ Transit, which operates the commuter line, have absolutely no incentive to build stations a mere three miles apart. Even construction of the Hamilton station was the result of heated political and demographic pressure over several decades. If her suggestion is to move the Princeton Junction station to the Hughes site, it is even more impractical. Amtrak has even less incentive to spend the tens of millions of dollars required to make such a move and Princeton would fight to retain the Dinky connection. Moreover, moving the existing station would have significant impact on housing prices near the station.
And what incentive does Hughes have to give up a large section of its property for a train station with extensive parking areas? Their premise is that their self-contained village would eliminate the need for such long distance commuting. Construction of a train station on this property is a clear non-starter for all parties concerned.
Then there is the lake Ms. Epstein proposes on the HHC site. What are its benefits? She claims that it would serve as a catch basin for the periodic flooding experienced on Washington Road and other areas. However, these areas are two to three miles from the most northerly section of the Hughes site and are also about 30 feet lower.
The floodwater would have to be pumped uphill over this long distance. Solving our flooding problems this way would require a major civil engineering project which would take years of planning and millions of tax dollars, an unlikely investment.
Ms. Epstein would probably claim that a lake would help beautify the Hughes site. True enough, but Mercer Lake is a mere two miles away. Then there is the issue of money. A lake would not generate any income for HHC, which, after all, is a business corporation, and it would not pay taxes to West Windsor. All around, this too is an impractical proposal.
The qualities I would seek in our elected representatives are experience, in-depth knowledge of community issues, and practical approaches to the real-world problems West Windsor faces. I do not believe Ms. Epstein’s proposals demonstrate these qualities.
— Paul Murphy, West Windsor
