ABRAM GABRIEL
Terhune Road
DANIEL A. HARRIS
Dodds Lane
LEXI GELPERIN
Member, Princeton Water Watch
Princeton Borough Historic Preservation Review Committee
(2 Letters)
CRAIG H. MUHLHAUSER
Library Place
JEROME KURSHAN
Random Road
To the Editor:
When the downtown library and Spring Street parking lot were under construction in the summer of 2003, many of us were concerned about access to the new library in congested downtown Princeton. We voiced our concerns in letters and in a referendum drive for a branch library in the Princeton Shopping Center.
Marvin Reed, then Borough Mayor, went on the record in July 2003 with a letter to both Town Topics and the Princeton Packet, stating, "Parking charges will remain the same as the old Park-and-Shop lot and, as before, library patrons will be able to have their parking ticket validated for up to two hours of free parking."
His response certainly sounded like an honest commitment from the appropriate public official, and it played a part in allaying our fears about the downtown location.
In January 2007, library patrons were greeted with signs saying that parking validation would end in February. Perhaps coincidentally, soon after this policy went into effect, Borough Council acknowledged plans to increase parking fees at the Spring Street lot by 50 percent. What happened?
From news reports we have learned that there never was free parking at the Spring Street lot. Instead of a simple, free two-hour parking arrangement between the library and the two municipalities, a deal had been struck whereby the Township subsidized the Borough for the use of the lot by Township residents. The Township scuttled this arrangement when the Borough insisted that instead of 2/3 of the parking subsidy (based on the percentage of funds contributed by the Township for the library itself), the Township should pay 80 percent, because 4/5 of those parking to use the library live in the Township. So now, without the two hours' free parking, public library users who don't live within walking distance must pay an extra users fee.
Fighting over who pays the "subsidy" for library users is the wrong approach. The library was built by and belongs to both the Township and the Borough. Access should be equivalent. The Borough, not a private entity, owns the Spring Street lot. At this point there should be no subsidy; parking for library card holders should simply be free for two hours.
Why aren't the library and Township Committee advocating on behalf of library users and Township taxpayers? The Borough government should keep in mind that it is part of an interdependent Princeton community. Borough Council needs to start acting like a good and responsible neighbor, not like the greedy landlord of a local parking lot. The Township does not charge parking fees for use of its public parks and playing fields. Who knows, given enough opprobrium generated by the Borough's behavior, and enough political will, a library in the Township, with the concomitant loss of two thirds of the downtown library's funding, could become a reality.
ABRAM GABRIEL
Terhune Road
To the Editor:
The good news from the Princeton Township Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting on February 28 is that Morgan Estates has been denied permission to build a 96-unit complex on one of the last undeveloped lots on Princeton Ridge. Princetonians should commend the members of the Board who voted not to allow the massive disruption to land, habitat, and water flow that construction would inevitably have entailed and, not incidentally, voted to protect from flooding the people and properties already situated in Governors Lane.
The Board listened carefully to area neighbors and to expert testimony concerning damage to regionally significant forests and wetlands. They understood the virtual certainty of increased flooding in Harry's Brook, a body of water that has always posed dangers to adjacent property, as indeed the Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association has counseled various Township committees since 1987. Counsel for Morgan Estates, in summation, exhibited a lackadaisical attitude to downstream flooding and potential destruction of property that was appalling.
Despite the ongoing need for appropriate housing for seniors, we must be thankful that an important chunk of still-natural environment has been wisely preserved. We must also hope for the continued wisdom and commitment to a holistic mode of planning on the part of Zoning Board members, the Princeton Environmental Committee, Township Planning Board, and Township Committee as we move forward, with informed prudence, in the evaluation of future site plans.
Stewardship of land and an awareness of the complexity of ecosystems, including human participation therein, must be essential guiding concepts. Some "territories" truly demand to be preserved. Otherwise they will rebel. We must expect revolt if we permit the metaphoric human "footprint" (concrete and asphalt, for example) to plunk or clomp down in the wrong place. Any future surveys of Princeton Ridge will more than justify the wary foresight of those who voted against the application to build on delicate ground.
DANIEL A. HARRIS
Dodds Lane
To the Editor:
A group of dedicated Princeton University students have a solution to New Jersey's water quality woes: stewardship. We are members of the group, Princeton Water Watch, and we need your help.
We have found Princeton's streams lacking in aquatic life. We generally find large numbers of pollution-tolerant bugs indicating poor water quality. Last spring, we found a large dump site in the woods by one stream, indicating the level of neglect our waterways receive. Though trash is relatively easy to pick up, we're seeking systemic change for a long-term solution.
Last week, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection released a report about New Jersey's water quality known as a 303(d). The report says that the Millstone River and Stony Brook, which join to become Lake Carnegie, contain high levels of phosphorous and silt.
The unnatural amount of silt is a direct result of development and we need to compensate for this rather than ignore the problem. When rain falls on impervious paved surfaces like roads and rooftops, there's nothing to slow it down. Thus the rain flows quickly and in large quantities, carrying soil with it. The answer is to slow the water down and allow it to flow through the least expensive water filter around: dirt. Trees do us a favor by holding dirt in place, so we can plant more trees and vegetation around our streams to provide a buffer between urban pollution and our water.
What can we do about high levels of phosphorous?
Before using fertilizers and pesticides on lawns, homeowners should think about whether the benefits are worth the long-term environmental cost. Unabsorbed fertilizer flows into our streams and creates a harmful cycle of algal blooms that depletes oxygen levels and threatens aquatic life. There are non-toxic ways to improve lawns, and the Princeton Environmental Commission can provide information about organic lawn care.
If each of us does her or his part, we can create a ripple effect of positive change.
We welcome community members to become environmental stewards with us through stream monitoring, river cleanups, and environmental education. To get involved, please visit our website at www.princeton.edu/NJh2o. We would really appreciate the help.
LEXI GELPERIN
Member, Princeton Water Watch
To the Editor:
As members of the Princeton Borough Historic Preservation Review Committee (HPRC), we are writing to clarify the work of our committee and the role of historic preservation in Princeton.
The residents of Princeton are fortunate to live in an area rich in history and with buildings and neighborhoods of great architectural quality. The Borough itself is home to seven National Historic Landmarks as well as seven other historic properties and four historic districts listed on both the New Jersey and the National Registers of Historic Places. In addition, the King's Highway Historic District runs through Princeton between Lawrenceville and Kingston. This extraordinary legacy reflects more than three centuries of our community's growth and change. It is a legacy that continues to be enriched by current and contemporary building projects.
The role of the HPRC is to foster the preservation of these historic sites and districts for the education, pleasure, and welfare of the people of Princeton. The makeup of the HPRC is prescribed by ordinance and includes professionals with expertise in architecture, history, planning, and historic preservation. As with every Borough committee, each of us has been appointed by the elected members of Borough Council.
We are an advisory committee and assist the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Adjustment in reviewing applications involving exterior alterations to or demolitions of properties within the Borough's historic districts. Standards for reviews are contained in the historic preservation ordinance. Routine maintenance, repairs, repainting, landscaping, and in-kind replacement of deteriorated building elements are not subject to review. HPRC reviews do include a consideration of a project's visual compatibility with the buildings and streetscape of the local historic district, but they do not presume or require an adhesion to a particular architectural style.
Since its formation in 1985, the HPRC has surveyed historic sites in the Borough and made recommendations on preservation issues in the master plan. It has also helped prepare nominations for listing on the New Jersey and National Registers of Historic Places as well as Borough ordinances establishing local historic sites and districts. The process and criteria for establishing historic districts, including the setting of boundaries, are set forth by ordinance. The process may be initiated by property owners within the proposed district, as it was in the case of the founding of the Bank Street Historic District.
It is the role of the HPRC to inform any group interested in establishing a historic district of the tasks involved in doing so. Once residents agree to proceed with an application for designation and on a map of the proposed district, a survey of the exteriors of each building in the proposed district must be completed. The HPRC reviews this document for Borough Council and the Council considers its advice when voting on the proposed district.
The benefits of historic districts are well-documented. Studies have shown they provide safeguards against over-development and increase property values over time. In addition, properties in historic districts can qualify for certain federal tax benefits, and the proposed New Jersey Historic Property Reinvestment Act would provide state tax credits for their substantial rehabilitation.
Historic preservation can even be an important tool in limiting truck traffic. A major argument made by the mayors of Princeton in their letter to the Department of Transportation seeking the removal of Routes 206 and 27 from the network for heavy trucks is that the route runs along the King's Highway Historic District and through or by the historic properties and districts noted above. Historic preservation is not only important; it is integral to the historical identity and to the continued development, growth, and prosperity of our community.
JEANNE PERANTONI, Chair
JANE FAGGEN. Vice-Chair
NORA KERR, Vice-Chair
KATHLEEN ABPLANALP
JAMES CONSTANTINE
WILLIAM HOWARD
CECELIA TAZELAAR
KIRSTEN THOFT
REGAN TUDER
Princeton Borough Historic Preservation Review Committee
To the Editor:
I watched the televised February 27 Princeton Borough Council meeting. I heard appeals of various members of the John-Witherspoon community to name the square adjacent to the new public library the Albert Edward Hinds Plaza. I heard Council members say there was no process in place for naming places and things after beloved community members. I also heard the Mayor say that she did not favor naming places and things after people though her knowledge of Mr. Hinds made this seem worthy of consideration. One member even suggested that a formal name was not necessary. He indicated that if community members just start calling the square Albert Hinds Plaza, the name might just catch on. Still another suggested that the Plaza was too small a tribute. It should be a bigger tribute, like a building dedicated as a youth center. Of course no such building has even yet been conceived. It was mentioned that for obvious reasons, other names including Einstein and Madison seemed more appropriate. Councilperson Wendy Benchley did hold her ground and seemed to be the only one willing to commit to such a move. The discussion went long and hit a stalemate before it was decided that this would be an ongoing agenda item until there is a revelation on how to proceed.
Cameras were rolling as people left the meeting, many with disgusted looks on their faces. It seems that any recognition of the contributions made by African-Americans in Princeton is still hard to come by. Shirley Satterfield fought long and hard to convince the Historical Society to include the neighborhood in its walking tours. She recruited me as a tour guide. The Robeson family left town in shame. It was over 60 years later when Princeton named a street, building, and a monument in his name.
Mr. Hinds, too, is worthy of some small recognition. He certainly made the journey on behalf of a town. In his 100+ years he witnessed reconstruction, a depression, segregation, two world wars, Jim Crow, Korea, civil unrest, civil/voter rights legislation, Vietnam, and Iraq. For over 100 years he contributed to the well-being of one place Princeton, his hometown. He witnessed gentrification of the John-Witherspoon community and as pointed out by former Mayor James Floyd, he helped save what is left of the community. On the Zoning Board, his focus was in preserving the flavor and richness of Princeton for all Princetonians. The community only requests a small plot of land be named in his honor. Whole streets in our neighborhood are named MacLean, Margerum, Witherspoon, John, Franklin, Green, Lytle, etc. I'd say these people spent little or no time in Princeton, contributing very little to enhance the quality of life we all now enjoy. It did not take an act of Congress to names those streets, and the Albert Edward Hinds Plaza should not take one either.
J. SWAIN
Lytle Street
To the Editor:
As a former resident of the Witherspoon/John neighborhood and an appreciative beneficiary of the late Albert E. Hinds' legacy of friendliness, hospitality, and inclusiveness, I urge naming the library square for Mr. Hinds without further delay. This act would be a fitting honor for his century-long devotion and positive contribution to the entire Princeton community.
At the Borough Council meeting of February 27, many eloquent citizens expressed their support for such a measure. Sadly, only one council member had the gumption to support the proposal while other members suggested further review or alternative, half-hearted ways of honoring Mr. Hinds.
One council member said that she had heard that Mr. Hinds was a Republican, but when she met him found him to be very nice. The essential implication of this off-handed remark is that Republicans don't qualify for commemoration and therefore the proposal should be dismissed.
It's a good thing this type of thinking wasn't prevalent when they built the Lincoln Memorial, minted the penny, and named the local highway. With his keen sense of history, I'm certain that Mr. Hinds would have appreciated the irony.
LINDA M. SIPPRELLE
Nassau Street
Editor's Note: The following is a copy of an open letter to Borough Mayor Mildred Trotman and the members of Borough Council.
To the Editor:
My wife Ann and I are residents of Princeton, and live at 94 Library Place. We firmly support the proposed action for the Historic Preservation Designation of this neighborhood.
It has been an unbelievable surprise and spectacle to witness the acrimony, misunderstandings, and myths that many in this area have propagated in opposition to this proposal. People in this neighborhood are closing their minds to historic preservation based on inaccurate information, inflamed rhetoric, and lame assertions about the protection of individual rights.
Booklets proposing such positions and requesting our support have been dropped off at our door without the courtesy of a conversation.
While I respect their right to express their opinion, I think it is important for the Borough to make sure that the facts are clearly understood and the myths are dispensed with in a prompt manner.
It should be very clear to everyone on both sides of this argument that the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not give owners the right to use their property in a way that harms the rights and welfare of others. The value of a property is not only limited to the improvements made by the owner, but also the labor, investments, and care of the neighboring owners.
In this age of the "me generation" and "individual rights" above the rights of others, I think we clearly have emotion and the threats of litigation of a few attempting to thwart what is best for the Borough of Princeton.
I am confident each of you have much more insight as to the intent, the merits, and true value of this proposal to be intimidated by such a minority of opinion and thought.
CRAIG H. MUHLHAUSER
Library Place
To the Editor:
We seem to have a new buzz word in the language: Sustainability. The dictionary is not much help in elucidating its meaning as the word has currently been reinvented. Matthew Hersh gave a pretty good definition (Town Topics, January 28). He cites The Princeton Environmental Commission's "Sustainable Princeton initiative which aims to meet current needs without placing a burden on future generations." Unfortunately that is so broad it could mean everything or nothing. It reminds me of President Bush's reinvention of the word "surge" to refer to troop buildup.
Why not say what you mean? In that case the motive may have been to avoid words with a more negative connotation. But for "sustainability" we have plenty of acceptable words that are more meaningful. For example, "environmental conservation" or "alternative energy."
Perhaps the aim is to cover the waterfront and be as broad as possible. If so, how about "world preservation?"
JEROME KURSHAN
Random Road