After more than six hours of reviewing changes made by community groups and residents to the draft redevelopment plan for the Princeton Junction train station area, the West Windsor Township Council voted 4-1 to introduce it in ordinance form. A public hearing and vote are scheduled for Monday, March 23.
The meeting was billed as a final work session to cap the process, which evolved over a series of workshop meetings this fall, in which the council crafted and rearranged language for the plan, which was originally submitted by RMJM Hillier in October. The council sent the plan to the Planning Board just before the end of the year, and the board finished its report, including 100 recommendations for changes to the plan, on January 29 — about a month ahead of the state-mandated 45-day review period.
But because the board faced public criticism from groups like the West Windsor Bicycle and Pedestrian Alliance, who said that the board did not spend enough time considering and addressing their concerns, the council decided to hold the work session to review the language with these groups — the Environmental Commission, Parking Authority, WWBPA, New Jersey Transit, and the Friends of West Windsor Open Space (FOWWOS) — before introduction.
Planning consultants and attorney Gerald Muller, who sat with the council during the workshop session to go over the Planning Board’s recommendations as well as the community groups’ concerns, emphasized that township officials could make changes to the plan as the process moves forward, even after it is adopted. “It is amendable,” said Council President Charles Morgan.
Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh also said that when the township gets to the stage of recruiting developers, which will be decided by the council and not the individual property owners, a financial analysis would be done, and that the plan would be dependent on the conditions at the time and would allow for changes.
Among the recommendations from the Planning Board was the idea to delete the clause that would require all of the residential units to be for-sale units. Councilwoman Linda Geevers took issue with this suggestion. Leaving the clause in would “make the area less transient,” she said. “I’m looking for people to live here and be committed to West Windsor.”
The plan calls for a total base number of 487 housing units. All together, the redevelopment area is projected to have 220,”287 square feet of retail space and 840,”538 square feet of office floor area, as well as 200,”000 square feet of parking and other uses. The plan also sets up 10 zoning districts.
Councilwoman Heidi Kleinman, however, said she does not like “zoning that excludes one group or another.” Township Planner John Madden explained to the council that the board felt there should not be language that is too restrictive in the plan especially given fluctuating market conditions.
Geevers suggested keeping the “for-sale” language but providing exceptions in which mandating for-sale units would be “impractical,” as would be the case for a project like Project Freedom to be built in the area under such a clause. Located on the Maneely tract off Old Bear Brook Road, project Freedom is a non-profit organization that develops barrier-free housing to enable disabled individuals to live independently. The council voted 3-2 to keep in the language with the exceptions, with Kleinman and Morgan voting against doing so. Muller and township officials also went through many changes proposed by the organizations who had submitted documents in writing to the council beforehand.
The maps in the draft plan showed a transfer of development rights of the conference center and a portion of the offices up to 137,”000 square feet from the Sarnoff Woods area to an area closer to the train station in District 6, a move meant to preserve as much open space in the woods area along the Millstone River as possible. However, members of the Stony Brook- Millstone Watershed Association said they felt the portions of the development being proposed for the transfer would instead fragment the forests and harm the wildlife. “Preservation of these woods is important for the whole state, and once it’s gone it’s gone,” said Joan McGee, of the Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association, who told the board that while transfer of development rights is an option, there are many others they could consider. “Preservation of District 10 is imperative.”
Kevin Appleget, of the township Environmental Commission, suggested the council try to move as much of the approved development of the Sarnoff tract closer to Princeton-Hightstown Road as possible, rather than having it at the center of the forest.
Madden also agreed with the suggestion, saying he would like to see the development plan moved closer to Washington Road. He said the GDP is a placeholder for development, and that wording could be included that suggests the development be moved closer. “It would be closer to the train station,” he said. “It increases the value of their office buildings.”
The Environmental Commission and other community members also asked that the redevelopment plan specifically indicate that the 50 percent set aside for open space be a number that is based upon developable land, excluding the environmentally constrained areas, which would have to be kept as open space anyway. However, township officials said that the clause would be hard to defend in court.
WWBPA Suggestions. With regard to the WWBPA’s proposals, the council accepted most of the changes proposed by the alliance as it related to crosswalk and sidewalk access in the redevelopment area. One example was the strengthening of the crossing on Wallace Road at Scott Avenue. The WWBPA suggested narrowing the Scott Avenue roadway to allow for sidewalks and lighting between Wallace and Alexander Road.
The WWBPA had been advocating a bicycle and pedestrian plan that included bike lanes on every road within the redevelopment area. At the planning board level, Davies said it would not be possible to include on-street bike lanes in every scenario. He came up with a concept for an off-roadway bike/multi-use trail running from the Sarnoff connector road to Washington Road, and then following Vaughn Drive from Washington Road to the Dinky. In the area of the existing Vaughn Drive, Davies had said that putting on-roadway bike lanes would require the removal of the parking spaces currently located there, and designate those streets as curbed streets with bike lanes designated in the shoulder area. That would have resulted in the removal of 250 parking spaces. Instead, he had suggested extending the off-roadway bike/multi-use trail into District 6, as he was proposing for the area near the Sarnoff connector. This would also allow the township to save the street parking on Vaughn Drive.
At the council level, Davies also told the council that to have bike lanes along the Main Street in the promenade area would require dimensions that are too tight, since the road is 40 feet wide and the promenade is 75 feet. Further, he said, the two-way flow creates traffic calming. The WWBPA, however, proposed a one-way traffic flow around the promenade. “If there’s a two-lane straight shot, there’s going to be too many pedestrian-vehicle conflicts,” said Ken Carlson, the WWBPA president, who suggested creating a design for the promenade that would be similar to that of Palmer Square in downtown Princeton.
Still, Davies told the council that creating a specifically designed bicycle and pedestrian plan was really supposed to be done during the site plan review process, after a developer comes in with a proposal.
“We have no business trying to design this at this point,” he said, an opinion he had at the Planning Board level. However, “to us, this is a design guideline, and it’s important for the town to make it now,” Carlson said.
Morgan suggested including the bike and pedestrian designs proposed by the WWBPA as an “appendix to the plan,” with a clause stating that these issues “must be addressed at the Site Plan Review Advisory Board” level when the time comes.
Kleinman said that the council has made it very clear what it wants the promenade to encompass, and she was “looking for something that describes that.” She said she wanted to be able to hand a developer something that specifically “this is what the promenade is. She suggested including a map designed by the WWBPA that shows the promenade with one way on either side with parking, and with the bicycle and pedestrian network, but suggested the engineering of those plans could come later.
Council debated whether or not to include the recommendations into an appendix or make the changes outright in the plan, since it had the ability to go back later and make amendments. Councilman George Borek said that “if Gary comes back to us three years from now and says this is not feasible,” it could be changed. “We do have the ability to make something here that’s right.”
Muller suggested the map the WWBPA drafted could be used as an illustration. The council voted unanimously to make the changes to the map to include the suggestions, including the proposals for Scott Avenue. Council chose to remove the street that was depicted as passing through the promenade.
Parking Authority Suggestions. One of the biggest concerns of the Parking Authority was that “we really believe the parking authority, in conjunction with New Jersey Transit, should be exempt from all design standards required in the redevelopment plan,” said Andy Lupo, the chairman of the authority. He argued that if NJT comes into the township and does not have to go through the process at the Planning Board level, but is looking to work with the township to come up with workable solutions, it will make matters much easier. Besides, since NJT is a state entity, “they can do what they feel makes the most sense,” regardless of the zoning set forth by the township in the redevelopment plan because it is immune to local zoning.
Lupo said NJT, as well as the parking authority, have indicated that it is not looking to build a parking garage on Wallace Road. Lupo also said that the parking authority has “concerns with height; we have concerns with the retail,” referring to design standards that may not be feasible when it comes to parking garages, he said. “We’re just trying to show unity,” he said, adding that it would enhance NJT’s willingness to work with the township.
Morgan suggested including language that would avoid using the term “exempt” and instead state that “design standards as it relates to parking garage shall be made cooperatively.” Council voted unanimously to accept this change.
FOWWOS Suggestions. The main concerns from FOWWOS had to deal with the Sarnoff Woods, which were addressed earlier in the meeting. The only issue remaining was the stormwater management plan, which FOWWOS “strongly recommended” be part of the plan. Muller, however, said he did not know how it was possible to design stormwater management plans when specific information on the buildings and impervious coverage is unknown. Council voted to specify that a developer in each respective district would have to develop stormwater management plans.
