Princeton Zoning Board Nixes Mixed-Use 255 Nassau Street Plan

Princeton Zoning Board members Louisa Clayton, Richard Kahn, Penelope Baskerville and Sara Segal, with municipal officials at front, at the meeting on Wednesday night when they rejected the 255 Nassau Plan. (click to expand.)

Princeton Zoning Board members Louisa Clayton, Richard Kahn, Penelope Baskerville and Sara Segal, with municipal officials at front, at the meeting on Wednesday night where they rejected the 255 Nassau Plan. (click to expand.)

If you were thinking about renting one of the 15 proposed apartments envisioned as part of a plan to redevelop the Crossfit gym at 255 Nassau Street, it’s time to start making other plans. On Wednesday night, the Princeton Zoning Board of Adjustment unanimously voted to deny the use variance required for the plan to move forward.

The site has special zoning, which had been negotiated following extensive discussion among neighbors, and was approved controversially as one of the last acts of the former Princeton Borough Council. Nonetheless, the developer sought further modifications to the zoning, which they claimed were necessary to allow redevelopment.

The Zoning Board disagreed. Chairman Richard Kahn spoke first, and stated that the developer could develop the site in many ways without the variance, and that there was no compelling case to change the existing zoning. Several board members expressed concern about changing the zoning so soon after the last bespoke zoning had been agreed. Others expressed concern that a new curbcut onto Nassau Street, as proposed by the plan would impede pedestrian movement in the area.

Latest rendering of proposed 255 Nassau redevelopment. (Click to expand.)

Rendering of the proposed 255 Nassau redevelopment, which was rejected by Princeton’s Zoning Board (Click to expand.)

Keeping a parking lot in front of the building and adding a new curbcut bugged many local residents. Current access to the site is through a side driveway, which is owned by Princeton University. The University attorney testified that they were prepared to offer the developer a license to use the driveway for up to 60 years, with potential extensions, but would never grant a permanent easement. The developer claimed that this was not satisfactory because the property could potentially be cut off from the street at some point in the future. In support of this idea, the developer’s attorney, Rosalind Westlake pointed out that the property had previously had its own curbcut access onto Nassau Street, which had been cut off some time in the past.

Board member Michael Floyd said that the testimony from the Princeton University attorney had convinced him that there was no hardship that justified granting the developer a variance. Most members of the public present were jubilant that the application was denied. The proposal, like the AvalonBay proposal at the former Princeton hospital site, was controversial, with competing claims about what the true wishes of neighbors were.

For now, the owner is stuck with a site they can’t develop, because the site plan approval was contingent on the zoning being changed. That’s good news if you like Crossfit, but bad news if you were hoping to see new apartments in Princeton to satisfy intense market demand and offer a new potential housing option for some of the 22,000 people who drive into Princeton every day to work. Ironically, at the same meeting, the Zoning Board approved a variance at 276 Mount Lucas Drive which neighbors fear will become a McMansion. The approval of this variance and denial of 255 Nassau shows that Princeton zoning is far more favorable to big, expensive single-family homes than it is to multi-family units which moderate-income people might be able to afford.

Optimistically, the developer will come back with a new improved, more pedestrian-friendly plan that still offers 15 apartments. On the other hand, they may try to get a bastardized version of their current site plan through the Planning Board without variances, while at the same time applying to NJDOT for the curbcut that nobody wants. The worst case scenario is a legal battle like what kicked off at the hospital site earlier this year, and continues now, months later. Time will tell if the Zoning Board’s decision was a good call for Princeton or not.

Are you pleased that the Zoning Board tossed out the 255 Nassau Street application? Or do you think they missed a golden opportunity to add walkable, affordable housing? Leave your comments using the box below!

Zoning  Board decision

This entry was posted in Affordability, Complete Streets, Density, Princeton, Real estate, Smart Growth, Traffic, Walking, Zoning and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Princeton Zoning Board Nixes Mixed-Use 255 Nassau Street Plan

  1. Wow says:

    What is the land currently zoned for and why doesn’t the current plan fit the bill? It seems a shame for the land to be underutilized – surely a Crossfit and residential units could coexist. I wonder what leads to a curb-cut being cut off?

  2. Pingback: Princeton PhD Students Let Down By University, Town Housing Policies | walkableprinceton

  3. Pingback: Princeton Battlefield Development Shows The Cost Of Opposing In-Town Density | walkableprinceton

  4. Pingback: First Look: 255 Nassau Street ‘Plan B’. | walkableprinceton

  5. Pingback: More Details About 255 Nassau Street ‘Plan B’ Mixed-Use Development | walkableprinceton

  6. Pingback: Forty-One Residents In Six Downtown Princeton Apartments? We’re Not Surprised. | walkableprinceton

  7. Pingback: Princeton Planning Board Approves Mixed-Use 255 Nassau Street Plan | walkableprinceton

  8. The problem with building so much ‘new affordable’ housing is that often it is not affordable for normal people! I think they really need to go back to the drawing board before building any more.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s