KYLE P. BURKE
Church Street, Kingston
V.P., K.P. Burke Builders, LLC
BARBARA PURNELL
Edgerstoune Road
Crafters' Marketplace Chair
To the Editor:
I am writing in response to a letter entitled "More Than 'Conscience of Developers' Needed to Protect Our Neighborhoods" (Town Topics, October 12). In it, the authors, whose residences adjoin the rear of our property under development, paint a grim picture of a developer running rampant, insensitive to the community and concerned only with the bottom line.
To begin, they charge that they were deceived during an informal neighborhood meeting I held with them and other neighbors in June. Second, in regard to the magnitude of the tree removal, they claim "... the woods have been devastated ... much of the natural beauty of the property has been laid waste." Finally, they suggest "the significant deforestation of the property" will worsen existing drainage problems on the north side of the lot. In conclusion, they call for a re-hauling of zoning laws and building code to prevent such events in the future.
Of 71 trees that measured ten inches or more in diameter on the property, we felled 16, four short of 20, the number approved by both the Princeton Shade Tree Commission and the Carnassa Park residential association. In light of such figures, this woods can hardly be described as "devastated." Further, the authors failed to mention that I informed them during our June meeting that 1) we would plant between 30 and 40 trees on this property, and 2) a number of these trees would be placed to increase privacy.
At the suggestion of other neighbors, I altered the plan to pipe runoff directly into the storm drains, instead of into an existing drainage ditch they said became overwhelmed during storms.
The authors' concerns are understandable; however, instead of voicing their opinions during the periods of review by both the Shade Tree Commission and the Carnassa Park residential association, they have limited themselves to an incensed letter to the editor. Also, they live in houses built on land that was once, undoubtedly, "lovely woods" cleared for development, yet feel justified accusing others of doing the same.
I agree with the authors in that development represents a serious threat to our community. Every large, Toll Brothers-style development that goes up in the area hurts our business, as it reduces open space, increases traffic, and at the end of the day makes Princeton a less attractive place to live. As a small, family business that has been building here for over 30 years, we have a vested interest in this town. We buy two to three 50-year-old ranch houses a year and tear them down, which spares virgin land from development and increases property values. We use traditional styles and finishes; you will never see vinyl on a K.P. Burke home. Frankly, it is hard to understand how we constitute a threat to Princeton.
KYLE P. BURKE
Church Street, Kingston
V.P., K.P. Burke Builders, LLC
To the Editor:
On behalf of the YWCA Princeton, I want to thank everyone who contributed to the success of our recent Crafters' Marketplace held at Educational Testing Service on November 19 and 20 -- the many dedicated volunteers who gave so generously of their time, talent and hard work; ETS for being so accommodating and generous; and the hundreds of patrons who came through the doors to shop and support this event.
Proceeds from Crafters' Marketplace go directly to the YWCA Princeton's Pearl Bates Scholarship Fund. For 31 years this fund has helped make the programs and activities of the YWCA accessible to all children and adults wishing to participate.
Community support of this event helps us open doors. Thank you one and all.
BARBARA PURNELL
Edgerstoune Road
Crafters' Marketplace Chair
Editor's Note: The following is a copy of a letter to Township Mayor Phyllis L. Marchand and the Township Committee.
Dear Mayor Marchand and other members of the Township Committee:
We, the undersigned residents of Overbrook Drive, write in order to make clear our strong, united opposition to the proposed installation of sidewalks on one or both sides of our street. Adding sidewalks to Overbrook Drive will not solve a safety problem, it will damage the feel of the neighborhood, and it will divert much-needed public funds from other more deserving projects. We urge your Committee to plan for improvements to the roadway without imposing the needless, destructive, and expensive option of sidewalks.
We appreciate the time that you and the members of the engineering and public safety staff spent at the neighborhood meeting on November 1. We hope we made it clear that we all acknowledge the need for resurfacing Overbrook Drive, which has been neglected for too many years. Some of us prefer overlayment to full reconstruction, and some object to using Belgian bricks for curbing, but we all agree that the road needs resurfacing. We concur that speeding and excess traffic are big problems, and we support a broad, community-based effort to solve them. And we applaud your decision to direct the Engineering Department to ameliorate the problems with drainage.
We believe there is no compelling safety reason for the construction of sidewalks on this particular 1,500-foot stretch of roadway. Unlike many sections of Snowden Lane, Overbrook Drive does not have schoolchildren competing with cars or exposing themselves to vehicular danger. Sidewalks are already in place where they are needed, on the roads leading directly to Littlebrook School.
Destroying green areas to make way for more sidewalk paving, whether blacktop or concrete, contradicts the Township's commitment to maximizing green space for all who live here. Tearing up grass for sidewalks will serve no clear public purpose, and it will irrevocably mar the character of our neighborhood.
We are opposed to sidewalks in our neighborhood for financial reasons as well. Many of us are retired senior citizens who can ill afford further tax increases. Our tax bills are projected to rise already without this unnecessary expense. Adding sidewalks where they are not needed also adds to the financial burden on all Township residents, and we believe that money would be better spent solving real community problems.
We urge you to direct the Engineering Department to devise a plan for the resurfacing of the road that does not use sidewalks, on either side of the street. The version of the Princeton Community Master Plan dated October 2, 2003 (the only version currently available on the internet) in fact shows no proposed sidewalks for Overbrook Drive. We hope that your Committee will respect the judgment of the overwhelming majority of the residents of Overbrook Drive in deciding how to proceed.
We ask that, first, sidewalks be removed from the project description for the resurfacing of Overbrook Drive. Secondly, we ask that before any plans are put out for bidding, the resurfacing of Overbrook Drive be discussed in a public meeting of Township Committee in which the concerns of residents be given full consideration. Third, we ask that the public meeting of the Township Committee to vote on the final plans be scheduled for January, since many of us have commitments out of town during December.
DAVID AND KATE MECHANIC
Overbrook Drive
SUSAN and HAROLD LOEW
Overbrook Drive
ANDREW LAZARUS and DONNA TEMPEL
Overbrook Drive
GISELA and CHARLES ALLEN
Overbrook Drive
NANCY and ANDY BRAUER
Overbrook Drive
IHAB and MYRA MAHANA
Overbrook Drive
DINA and MIKE SHAW
Overbrook Drive
PAUL and CHERYL HORAN
Overbrook Drive
DEBRA and BRIAN HOFFMAN
Overbrook Drive
MARY E. ROBBINS
Overbrook Drive
RUTH WEDELICH and JACQUELINE MUNDY
Overbrook Drive
PHIL and PAULA BERG
Overbrook Drive
LYNN and JOSEF SILVERSTEIN
Overbrook Drive
WEI Y. and STEPHEN F. TEISER
Overbrook Drive
MARK ETTIN and MARSHA HEIMAN
Overbrook Drive and Snowden Lane