To the Editor:

As a Princeton University Engineering School alumnus, I have carefully considered the pros and cons of moving the former Court Club across Prospect Avenue, turning it sideways, and tearing down three functional and historic Victorian houses.

My conclusion is that there are perfectly good alternatives that will satisfy the University’s understandable desire for a larger and more up-to-date physical facility for science and engineering. For example, the majestic Court Club building can be kept just where it is, as a part of the historic architectural row of eating clubs on Prospect Avenue. Its interior can be renovated for offices and meeting spaces with new construction out the back. This is exactly what the University did with an excellent result on Washington Road, when it retained the beautiful former Frick Chemistry Building. It is now the entrance to the Louis Simpson International Building.

The municipality’s planning staff opposes the current plan. Last week the Town’s Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously to recommend against it. more

To the Editor:

On June 17 the Planning Board will meet to vote on the University’s proposal to relocate 91 Prospect Avenue. Before that vote I hope members of the board would spend time exploring the Prospect/Fitzrandolph/Murray Place neighborhood. Because it is a neighborhood, a community of families who live here, day and night, all year round. And we who live here want it to stay as it is, a thriving corner of greater Princeton township.

I hope the board will see the neighborhood as worth preserving, old Victorian houses and all.

Marianne C. Grey
Murray Place

To the Editor:

We write with great concern about the University’s plans that will denigrate the Princeton Historic District and Prospect Avenue — a major public street — and we seek the help of the mayor and town Council in preventing this. The University’s proposed new Prospect Avenue entrance to its ES+SEAS development is detrimental to the public interest, and, as the Historic Preservation Commission unanimously recommends, the Planning Board should deny the University’s variance request.

We admire the University, but until its public presentation on May 27, the potential damage of its Prospect plan — just a 3 percent portion of the enormous 666,000 sf development – was generally unknown. The entrance violates National Park Service Guidelines by: 1) unnecessarily dislocating the former Court Club at 91 Prospect from Eating Club Row, out of the Princeton Historic District and off the National Register, to an isolated site across the street; 2) demolishing three perfectly viable and historically significant Victorian houses identified for preservation by the HPC and the Master Plan, and 3) erecting at 91 Prospect a new building and landscaping that will be incompatible with the historic streetscape.

In its report on a proposed municipal Prospect Avenue Historic District, named the Club Row Historic District in the Master Plan, HPC cited the houses as “part of the District’s visual and institutional history.” Notable scholars have lived in them, including Erwin Panofsky, “the most important art historian of the 20th Century,” and a “good companion” to fellow-refugee Albert Einstein. Indeed, the full history of the houses is yet to be discovered. more

To the Editor:

Recently, a polished but anonymous website has trumpeted opposition to a proposal for a pilot parking program developed by Princeton’s Parking Task Force. The website warns ominously about the introduction of “commercial parking” into Princeton’s neighborhoods. The fact of the matter is, though, that residential streets have always included parking derived from Princeton’s businesses.

Employees and customers — many of them, of course, residents of more distant Princeton neighborhoods — park on streets designated as two- or three-hour zones (such as Green and Quarry in the Witherspoon-Jackson neighborhood, Pine and Chestnut in the Tree Street neighborhood, and Hodge and Boudinot in the Western Section). They also park on unregulated streets, such as Lytle, most of Spruce, Moran, and Maple. In the most affected neighborhoods (primarily the Witherspoon-Jackson and Tree Street areas), residents are frequently crowded out from parking on their own blocks. There are other residential areas where, despite proximity to the downtown business district, visitor parking is effectively banned.

By allocating a limited number of spots for the use of downtown employees, the pilot proposal aims to lower the impact residents of some streets face from visitor parking. Including streets that currently bar visitor parking will help advance this goal. It’s important to keep in mind that businesses already pay a significant portion of taxes in Princeton and should share in public resources. No one owns the streets because we all do — residents and businesses alike. The task force seeks to distribute street parking more effectively in different areas of town while retaining the resource as a means of sustaining the vitality and convenience that benefits us all. more

To the Editor:

Years ago, my neighbors reached a compromise with Princeton Township for Smoyer Park, which can be noisy, but is an asset to the entire community. The recent downtown parking issue, like affordable housing and nearly every other item, requires compromise for the benefit of all.

Princeton likes to think of itself as an enlightened community, but too often we have the same divisive self-interest that exists throughout this country. There is a benefit to living in close proximity to the downtown, just as my neighbors have experienced the benefits of living near Smoyer Park even though it is particularly noisy on weekends.

Unfortunately, the typical response now is to acknowledge a problem, but rather than compromise for the benefit of the entire community, react as a NIMBY.

Peter Madison
Snowden Lane

To the Editor:

As I write this, over 800 people have joined the petition at change.org/saveprospect urging the town Council to uphold our zoning laws and maintain the integrity of the Historic District on Prospect Avenue. In the 11 years that I have lived around corner from Prospect’s threatened homes, I’ve watched the destruction of the 19^th-century canal houses on Alexander and the planned destruction of the last of the Gothic Revival portion of the Princeton Museum. In the Prospect area alone, I’ve seen the tearing down of the Victorians at Olden and Williams, and the demolition of the early 20^th-century house at Olden and Prospect. University representatives claim the Victorians they are planning to demolish lack a “context” and are in poor repair. If they lack a context, it’s because the University is systematically removing that context. They are in poor repair because the University is not maintaining them – seemingly engaged in a practice known as “demolition by neglect.”

University representatives argue that the Prospect houses are not historic because they’re “not the work of a master” and weren’t homes to prominent people. While the latter is demonstrably false, history is larger than simply the study of so-called “masters” and elites. Indeed, many residents observe that the eating clubs are monuments to the privileged. If that is all they represent, then perhaps we should tear them all down. But these homes and buildings mean more than that to the community. For some of us, their age and rarity attracted us to this neighborhood; for others, they’re filled with memories (good and bad), but the community values them as they are. That is why the town created the current zoning. more

To the Editor:

One of the factors that the town of Princeton used to convince the then College of New Jersey to move here in 1756 was land, land for expansion. From its initial 4.5-acre lot 265 years ago, the University has grown to about 600 acres today, half on this side of Lake Carnegie and half on the other. While most of this expansion has been on empty farmland, much has been at the expense of existing buildings as described in great detail in Gerald Breese’s 1986 book, Princeton University Land. For example, only the cost of moving or reconstructing the First Presbyterian Church saved it from being demolished or moved like the houses which used to line Nassau Street to its right and left. More recently, the buildings at the corner of University Place and Alexander Road fell to the wrecking ball to make space for the new Lewis Center, and the Osborn Field House at the corner of Olden and Prospect was demolished for the new Maeder Hall.

Now the University seeks to demolish the three Queen Anne Victorians at 110, 114, and 116 Prospect in order to make way for the new ES+SEAS. As other town residents who spoke at the HPC meeting noted, this land accounts for 3 percent of a 15-acre project but has significant impact on this public (not University owned) street. The benefit to the greater community of the University’s project is difficult to see, while the detriment — more historic buildings destroyed and replaced by stretches of gravel and benches out of character with the broad lawns enclosed by stone walls and hedges that line the rest of the street — is obvious. In addition to the direct impact on the street, the number of Queen Anne Victorians in Princeton is small, and demolishing these three would make that number even smaller. more

To the Editor:

In May of 2021 the Parking Task Force was prepared, after several years of work, to present their final plan to Council and the town’s residents. They faced, and still face, complicated problems and competing viewpoints. In my opinion, for all of their work, in the end they have gone astray in some respects.

The lead sentence in the Town Topics article of May 12 [“Parking Task Force is Almost Ready to Present Plan,” page 1] was, “Thanks to new technology, the parking woes that plague different neighborhoods of Princeton could soon be eased.” That article made no mention of the costly changes the task force has in mind for PHS neighbors nor any details about the new technology being promoted to the town by Passport, the company that provides Princeton’s automated parking program, and their partner Genetec.

First I’ll react briefly to the task force’s view that parking in front of our own houses is “a luxury” and that residents of the affected streets must pay for permits for themselves, guests, and contractors who have to park longer than the allotted three hours. If parking on our neighborhood streets by employees from the Business District is considered necessary to help our town thrive, shouldn’t the cost be borne by the businesses who will benefit, not just by those who live on these affected streets? Parking by PHS students is a separate issue, beside the point of this letter. more

To the Editor:

Speaking to the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee on Friday, June 11, Attorney General Merrick Garland affirmed voting rights as a “central pillar” to American democracy, stating, “We know that expanding the ability of all eligible citizens to vote is a central pillar…. That means ensuring that all eligible voters can cast a vote; that all lawful votes are counted; and that every voter has access to accurate information.”

On Tuesday, June 8, I had the privilege and opportunity to participate in this pillar of democracy as a citizen poll worker for one of the voting districts in Princeton. As this was my first time serving in this role, it was extremely insightful to witness a slice of the voting process from the inside, beginning with attending a two-hour poll-worker training session a few weeks ago, to picking up the supplies and documents at the Municipal Clerk’s Office for my assigned voting district before dawn on Tuesday morning, assisting with voting procedures throughout the day through the closing process, and then returning the supplies and secured documents and provisional ballots to the Clerk’s Office late Tuesday evening. Woven through all of this is an intricate web of voting rights and ballot security laws and procedures with checks and balances, all to ensure that this “central pillar” of American democracy stands, right here in Princeton and throughout Mercer County and New Jersey.

Furthermore, I would like to express gratitude and praise for all those individuals in the Mercer County Board of Elections office and their colleagues throughout New Jersey who worked together to implement our June 8 primary, as well as the numerous other citizen poll workers who stepped up to make this election possible. Especially praiseworthy was the master board worker (citizen board worker with over 10 years of poll worker experience) who patiently worked with me, as a first-time poll worker, along with those at other polling districts throughout the day.

As a final note, if you are interested in serving as a poll worker for the General Election in November, you can sign up now at pollworker.nj.gov. Most of all, if you are eligible, be sure to register and VOTE.

Collene Mildes
Meadow Woods Lane, Lawrence

To the Editor:

After over a year in “hibernation,” the Bryn Mawr-Wellesley Book Sale recently held a pop-up children’s sale to get books out of storage and into the hands of local families and classrooms. The event was held in partnership with the Princeton Shopping Center, which made space available to us and helped with marketing. It is this kind of support from our business community that helps local nonprofits thrive. We are grateful for their support and enthusiasm. 

Kathryn Morris
President, Bryn Mawr-Wellesley Book Sale
Witherspoon Street

To the Editor:

I routinely walk “into town.” Mostly I visit Princeton’s town center as a pedestrian. But in considering the plans for Witherspoon Street, I urge the public and Town Council members to listen to and support the town’s merchants who will be most impacted by any changes to the Witherspoon streetscape.

Our merchants are a precious resource and the life blood of downtown Princeton. The many already-vacant storefronts cause me to be concerned about the vibrancy and vitality of the downtown. It induces me to put aside my own aspirations for a more pedestrian-focused carbon neutral town and instead listen to and support the specific needs of the merchants.

I urge Council members to do the same and support the wishes of the merchants. Do not be blinded by aspirational goals no matter how laudable. Remain focused on the very practical needs of keeping downtown Princeton alive. Please support Princeton’s merchants.

Joseph H. Weiss
Leigh Avenue

To the Editor:

I applaude Carolyn Rouse’s succinct analysis of zoning issues related to the Harry’s Brook watershed, but also applying to other parts of Princeton [To Manage Stormwater Issues, Put a Moratorium on Variances That Increase Impervious Surfaces,” Mailbox, June 2]. I also agree with Ms. Rouse, and all our neighbors on Wheatsheaf Lane, that, along with the flooding problems created by construction of over-sized houses, there is also a legitimate concern about the architectural character of the street: every house on the Lane, all mid-sized, is different, individually cared for, and most are occupied by families with school-age children who walk or bike to nearby schools.

Also, we know that size affects property taxes. As they spike, the older Princetonians (of whom I am one) are prompted to move out of town — “zoned out.” That is, I believe, regretful. We too add to the diversity of our beloved community — we contribute, attend concerts, buy books in the Labirynth, and volunteer.

Do we want Princeton to reverse to the colonial past of stark division between the mansion streets of the rich and a few clusters of “affordable” neighborhoods for the poor?

Joanna Clark
Wheatsheaf Lane

To the Editor:

It’s as though Leighton Newlin has been preparing for this opportunity for a lifetime. Leighton grew up in Princeton — in the very neighborhood in which he now lives.

After graduating from Princeton High School, Leighton moved to Pennsylvania to attend Lincoln University, an HBCU. Following graduation from Lincoln, the entrepreneurial Leighton founded a haberdashery in Boston and opened and managed two stores. He then partnered with an iconic athletics brand and launched concept stores in California, Massachusetts, and New York, where he learned valuable organizational skills in order to successfully navigate a large multi-national corporation.

He returned to Princeton 24 years ago to be near his aging parents and began serving on the board of the Princeton Housing Authority, where he has been chair for the past 19 years. He also serves on the boards of the Witherspoon-Jackson Neighborhood Association, the Witherspoon-Jackson Historical and Cultural Society, and The Paul Robeson House. Twenty four years is long enough to pass through several economic downturns and it’s when Leighton learned to make difficult decisions as to where to best use the ever-shrinking federal funding. It is where he learned that, while there are always important projects to address, a balance must be found between that which is wanted and that which is needed. more

To the Editor:

I applaud the really hard work of Princeton Council, board, and commission members. They are tackling the difficult issues of Princeton’s future. Street parking rules is the topic of the day. We are hearing a lot of attacks on the Parking Task Force’s proposal to change parking rules on municipality streets, but we are not considering that two other issues make some change necessary.

Bicycling is an activity that Princetonians of all ages enjoy or rely on. It is not my activity of choice, but it is a healthy part of town life, and no town the size of Princeton can claim to be safe, environmentally conscious, or progressive without building bicycle lanes into the infrastructure. A casual walk down Wiggins or Hamilton Streets will show the tension between cyclists and speeding cars, despite narrow, painted bike lanes, or the tension between the less brave cyclists and pedestrians on the narrow sidewalks. Hamilton-Wiggins is an important artery that cyclists should have safe access to — there is no other through street between Nassau Street and Valley Road. It needs protected bike lanes, and why not some traffic calming features. But this requires the removal of parking.

The second issue is the reimagined Witherspoon Street. A central one-way, pedestrian-friendly street with space for outdoor dining and the ability to close it for festivals is nice, but requires the removal of prime parking spots. The traffic flow issues that result from this plan may also make drivers’ search for other available downtown parking spots more difficult. more

To the Editor:

The Princeton Community Democratic organization invites the public to attend a special panel discussion on property taxes on Sunday, June 13, at 7 p.m. on Zoom. Property taxes fund both government services and education in New Jersey, which has the highest average property taxes in the nation. A panel of experts will discuss the history of property taxes in New Jersey and whether there are better ways to fund government and education.

The panel, moderated by PCDO Program Chair Tim Quinn, will feature Marc Pfeiffer, senior policy fellow and assistant director of the Bloustein Local Government Research Center at Rutgers University; Brandon McKoy, president of New Jersey Policy Perspective; and Kamolika Das, state policy analyst for the Washington, DC-based Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

We are pleased and honored to be hosting such a distinguished panel of experts and this promises to be a fascinating discussion of a crucial issue. All are invited to attend. Information on how to attend will be posted on the PCDO website, princetondems.org, on the evening of the program.

Afsheen Shamsi
President, Princeton Community
Democratic Organization

To the Editor,

I sit on the board of directors at HiTOPS, and I wanted to express my gratitude to the local organizations that coordinated last Saturday’s Princeton Community Pride Picnic held at the YMCA. To the staff and volunteers at Princeton Public Library, Princeton Family YMCA, the Arts Council of Princeton, Princeton Civil Rights Commission, McCarter Theatre Center, Corner House Behavioral Health, and of course, HiTOPS – THANK YOU!

It was a beautiful, well-planned event and thrilling to see so many smiling and engaged people from the Princeton area celebrating Pride. It was particularly heart-warming for me to see many young people in attendance. At HiTOPS we know that communities who embrace diversity in all its wonderful rainbow colors will foster strong and healthy young people of all identities. Princeton is an incredibly welcoming, inclusive, and diverse town, and I am proud to be a Princetonian.

Leanne Hunter
Chair, Communications
HiTOPS Board of Directors

To the Editor:

Last Wednesday, I tuned into a neighborhood meeting given by the University about their new East Campus plan, a large project extending north and east of the football stadium. I had heard a little about it, but thought it mostly impacted a number of parking lots and the Ferris Thompson apartments.

After the presentation, though, I had a hard time sleeping. I learned that this project is so vast (nearly 15 acres!) that it would sprawl even up to Prospect Avenue — and incredibly, that the University is planning to demolish three Victorian-era houses I’d always found delightful, and which have added charm and warmth to the Prospect neighborhood for so many years.

What’s more, they are planning to move one of the beautiful Eating Club manors from its current location next to all the others, and sandwich it between an apartment building and a parking garage.

In its place, I learned, the University is proposing to add a discordant, modern Engineering complex with 250’ of exposure along the length of Prospect, shattering the visual continuity and forever altering the feeling and atmosphere of this grand, historic avenue. more

To the Editor:

Princeton University’s application for a variance from zoning regulations for 1) moving the historic Court Clubhouse at 91 Prospect Avenue out of the National Register Princeton Historic District; 2) demolishing three graceful Victorian-era houses at 110, 114, and 116 Prospect; and 3) constructing a new pavilion at 91 Prospect that will be incompatible with the Historic District should be denied by the Historic Preservation Commission at its hearing at 3 p.m. on June 7 and by the Planning Board at its hearing at 7:30 p.m. on June 17.

All three components of the University’s proposed development on Prospect Avenue violate National Park Service policy for historic districts and buildings, and will irrevocably damage the iconic streetscape of 15 historic eating clubs and three Victorian houses that is unique to Princeton. The University’s rationale for doing this? — to attract and retain top faculty. Many of those faculty will no doubt be appalled by the University’s overreach on Prospect. Everyone in town admires the University and wants it to be as successful as possible, but at the expense of town and campus history? Its proposed plan for needless destruction and intrusion on Princeton’s most distinctive street is a bridge too far, and yet another damaging encroachment into a residential neighborhood. more

To the Editor:

I am writing to urge the town to designate the western end of Prospect Avenue as a Local Historic District. Part of this neighborhood is currently on the National Register of Historic Places, but unfortunately, that does not seem to be enough to fully protect it.

I’ve lived in Princeton for half my life, much of which I’ve spent studying or teaching aesthetics, art history, language, and literature at the University I love. Every day for some two decades, I’ve relished walking, running, or riding up Prospect Avenue, taking in the charm of the Queen Anne Victorians to the right, and the grandeur of the 19th and early 20^th century Eating Clubs to the left. As I’ve climbed the hill to the University, the historic character of these buildings has helped me transition to a community committed to the life of the mind and service. I understand why some have called our majestic Prospect Avenue the Champs-Élysées of Princeton.

In recent years, I’ve noticed that the Queen Anne Victorians have not been well tended to; the paint has been left to chip and the exteriors have fallen into some disrepair. Since the University has tremendous financial resources for new construction projects, I’ve wondered why its building managers have not better cared for the structures already under their charge. more

To the Editor:

Six years ago, I enjoyed the privilege of having a letter published in this newspaper (“Spike in Tear-Downs Offers Princeton Sustainability, Affordability Opportunity” July 29, 2015) arguing for a more significant and proactive policy to address the trend of teardowns in Princeton. I expressed then and still believe that while teardowns will happen, and McMansions defy any legislation that night curb them the overall community should benefit more from their overall effect on the makeup and image of Princeton. Specifically, I hoped that our local government might follow the example of other U.S. towns on teardowns and impose a fee for such actions in the form of a water hookup or other connection fee that would then make more money available for such causes as affordable housing. Had our elected officials enacted such a policy, Princeton’s coffers by now would have gained millions of dollars from such fees. Nothing happened.

Two years ago, Zoning Officer Derek Bridger called for efforts to “slow down and de-incentivize teardowns on substandard lots.” Changes in zoning arose in Council discussions at that time. Nothing happened.  more

To the Editor:

I want to address the mayor and Council’s current proposal for expanding street parking availability in Princeton’s in-town and near-town neighborhoods. The proposal reserves spaces for downtown employees and creates new parking by removing the overnight parking ban and adding new permits for residents.

As a former Princeton Council member for 10 years, I know firsthand that requests for parking from employees and residents are often tinged with desperation and stories of hardship. Council members may believe their plan achieves a measure of social justice for low-paid workers and for those who live in modest homes that lack driveways or whose driveways accommodate only one car. I disagree with that in terms of both residential and commercial parking. 

A parking spot for one’s car is a cost of owning a car. Employee parking is a cost of doing business.

When considering providing new parking spaces for residents, it is important to understand that houses with no driveways have lower purchase prices and pay lower taxes than houses with plentiful parking. In other words, these residences are more affordable. Adding new parking spaces will increase their price and their taxes.  more

To the Editor:

I appreciated Mr. Rodrigues’ Town Topics letter of May 19 [“Build More Housing to Solve Princeton’s Parking “Problem”], connecting the ongoing parking discussion to another important ongoing discussion: affordable housing.

I grew up in Princeton and moved back in my mid-20s to care for an ill parent. I made $35,000 a year at a local nonprofit, while my partner made under $10/hour while getting a professional degree. Three years later, we now both work for the town’s public institutions, giving back to the community that raised me. But we moved out of town because of the lack of affordable housing.

In Princeton, we struggled to find housing to share with friends in similar situations — wanting or needing to live in Princeton but unable to afford more than a room in a shared house. Part of the issue was the high rent, and part of it was the preference of landlords to rent to traditional families or Princeton PhDs. more