July 3, 2013
page1

MIXING IT UP: A view of the townhouses at the corner of Franklin Avenue and the eastern access to the parking garage, which is part of AvalonBay’s revised proposal for a rental community at the former home of the University Medical Center of Princeton. The new design calls for five buildings instead of one. (Rendering by Tangram 3DS)

AvalonBay brought its revised plan for the former Princeton Hospital site back to the Planning Board last Thursday. With greater permeability, five buildings instead of one large edifice, a scaled-down swimming pool, and other adjustments, the developer is hoping to gain the approval of the Board, which rejected its initial plan last December.

The developer sued the Board and the town to reverse that decision, but a settlement was worked out to allow for a revised proposal. The Board must approve the reworked plan if AvalonBay has met their legal obligations, attorney Gerald Muller said in his opening remarks.

The hearing was the first of four to be devoted to the proposed 280-unit rental development. The next meetings will be held July 11, 18, and 25 at the Witherspoon Hall municipal building. Members of the community have been especially vocal on the issue since AvalonBay was first contracted to purchase the site on Witherspoon Street in 2011.

Just before last week’s meeting, representatives from Princeton Citizens for Sustainable Neighborhoods (PCSN) and members of the property service workers union 32BJSEIU held a rally outside the municipal building to protest AvalonBay’s proposal. As rain began to fall, some 30 protesters gathered to complain that the newly revised proposal is too similar to the original. Among the speakers were local residents Shirley Satterfield, Kate Warren, and Alexi Assmus.

During the public comment period at the end of the meeting, union representative Ben Bennett expressed concerns about AvalonBay’s fire safety record over several objections by the developer’s attorney that the comments were inappropriate. When the Board decided to hear Mr. Bennett out, he told them that he wants a public safety monitor on the construction site. He said that a fire at an AvalonBay construction site in Edgewater 13 years ago destroyed the project along with nearby single family homes. But Mr. Muller advised the Board that they should disregard Mr. Bennett’s testimony because it was not relevant.

Earlier in the evening, the Board heard from PCSN attorney Rob Simon on some of the organization’s objections to the plan before listening to reports from the Site Plan Review Advisory Board (SPRAB) and the Princeton Environmental Commission (PEC) about the revised proposal. Both groups recommended approving the plan, but with several conditions based on design standards and other matters. Increased bicycle storage, better distribution of the 56 affordable housing units throughout the complex, and the adoption of food waste composting were among SPRAB’s recommendations. The PEC agreed with those suggestions, adding that the potential contamination of the former hospital site be addressed, more energy-efficient windows be used, all appliances be Energy Star certified, and only native and adaptive plantings be used in the landscaping.

PEC member Wendy Kaczerski also suggested that AvalonBay treat the property as a green building site, making it an example of how a construction project can be done. “The PEC wants to commend AvalonBay for all the green improvements it intends to make,” she added. “They’ve come a long way.”

The public first heard about AvalonBay’s revised proposal at a community meeting in May. The plan calls for 24 studio apartments, 104 one-bedroom units, 120 two-bedroom apartments and 30 three-bedroom units. Building heights will be lower than in the original plan, and range from two to five stories. On the Franklin Street side of the development, three townhouse buildings with stoops and porches are in the design. A garden walk separates the largest building from the main parking garage.

Affordable housing units are in the two largest buildings as part of the plan. A public road will cut through the development, and a public park, larger than in the original plan, will be on the corner of Witherspoon Street and Franklin Avenue. “The new plan responds to comments from 2012,” said Jon Vogel, the AvalonBay vice president now in charge of the project. “Permeability was a main theme.”

—Anne Levin

 
April 25, 2012

Princeton Regional Planning Board concluded last week that developer AvalonBay’s request for increased density in the rental complex they hope to build at the site of the University Medical Center at Princeton conflicts with the master plan. Their 9-1 decision not to endorse the proposal was sent to Borough Council, which was to consider the zoning ordinance at its meeting last night, after press time.

The Planning Board’s vote came at the end of a four-hour meeting April 19, packed with residents of the neighborhood surrounding the hospital site. Most were opposed to AvalonBay’s request. While some welcomed developer Ron Ladell’s announcement, midway through the meeting, that the company was withdrawing its request for fewer affordable housing units in exchange for higher density, they still registered concerns.

“I am proud to announce that the request to reduce the affordable percentage from 20 to 17.3 percent is being withdrawn,” said Mr. Ladell, who is AvalonBay Communities’ senior vice president. “We are happy to provide 20 percent at the increased density of 324 units that will result in 65 affordable on-site units. This has never been done in Princeton. It would set a precedent both in Princeton and throughout the state.”

AvalonBay is under contract to buy the hospital site. They plan to demolish the seven-story building and build rental apartments. Market rate units, including studios to three-bedroom apartments, would have rents from $1,600 to $3,200 per month.

Resident Joe McGeady told the Board that the master plan’s provisions for retail, a playground, and other public areas should be retained and the zoning should not be changed. “A great opportunity is slipping through our hands,” he said. “The plan has minimum open space on Witherspoon. The town deserves better. I would hate to see us miss this chance and settle for the ordinary because an ordinance that is inconsistent with the master plan was allowed to pass through the planning board.”

Borough resident Alexi Assmus said the original number of 280 maximum units for the 5.6-acre hospital site, arrived at after numerous public meetings, was “a big compromise on the part of the neighborhood. The compromise was made in order to allow the hospital to sell the site for a higher price than if the rezoning had required a much smaller number of units. A smaller number of units would have been in keeping with the neighborhood character of single family houses.”

Raising the number of units after a contract has been signed “is bad business and is unfair to the community and to the numerous other potential buyers who are eager to redevelop the property,” Ms. Assmus added (see letter on page 10).

Some in the packed meeting room spoke in favor of the request. Borough Council President Barbara Trelstad said the extra density proposal was smart growth, serving working people who could otherwise not afford to live in Princeton. “The average home in Princeton costs $453,000. A down payment of $90,000 is significantly out of reach for most working class folks,” she said. Ms. Trelstad added that AvalonBay’s plan for usable front porches “puts eyes on the street.”

Also in favor was Sandra Persichetti, executive director of Princeton Community Housing. “Over 500 families are waiting for an affordable apartment,” she said, urging the Planning Board to take action. “We hope people learn from the past that endless conversation is not in anyone’s interest,” she said. “We do not want to see abandoned buildings and blight at the site. The project is acceptable to us as long as it is built in a timely fashion …. I urge you to think about those living in substandard conditions who don’t have a home to go to tonight.”

Grace Sinden, a founding member of Sustainable Princeton, said Princeton Borough should require or promote the idea that the developer adhere to the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design [LEED] standards rather than Energy Star, which AvalonBay prefers for this development. “Energy Star applies to household appliances and light bulbs,” she said. “Municipalities do not value it as highly as LEED.”

Representing the Site Plan Review Advisory Board [SPRAB], member Bill Wolfe cited concerns about the scope, style, and design standards for the complex. “SPRAB would prefer an open development, more in keeping with the neighborhood,” he said, adding that a possible compromise would be to make open space at the rental complex more accessible to the public. The “monolithic floor plans” could be broken down to vary story heights and lessen the mass, he said. “SPRAB believes LEED is applicable and should be recommended,” he said, adding that the Board is “emphatically opposed to the density bonus.”

Board member Bernie Miller said he had concerns about the lack of retail in AvalonBay’s plan. “It makes the development less inclusive,” he said. Mr. Miller also said that the figure of 280 was arrived at after careful negotiations with neighbors. “I have difficulty supporting a higher number even with the offer of providing a 20 percent affordable set-aside,” he said. “If we can’t invoke LEED standards, but perhaps if the developer stood up and said he would volunteer …. I wonder why he is not stepping forward and saying he will volunteer.”

The only member of the Board to vote in favor of the request was former Princeton Borough Mayor Mildred Trotman, who lives in the neighborhood of the proposed development. She said she had no problem with the increased density idea, and added that AvalonBay is exceeding open space standards as well as other issues. “The more I look at this, the more I think the impact on the community will be minimized compared to what is there now,” she said.

At the meeting, the Board did endorse some of the developer’s requested zoning changes including installing signs, adding a leasing office, allowing some loft apartments, and adjusting an internal lot line.