To the Editor:

After listening to the Planning Board meeting held virtually on November 9, I am writing to not only highlight concerns of the Master Plan, but also to express my confusion and disappointment with the purpose of the forum.

As many residents did, I too participated in the public input process leading up to the draft Plan’s actual publication on October 30. I also read the draft Plan, all 237 pages, in the 10 days provided. Upon review, the priority of the Plan is undoubtedly focused on allowing for growth by easing land use zoning to allow for significant incremental density — primarily focused in the neighborhoods within, or abutting, the former Borough. What I heard in the far majority last Thursday, however, highlighted many other priorities by residents, some of the very same themes I heard in abundance at the Listening Sessions. Themes that have been minimized in the draft, or wholly ignored. How will the dramatic increase in density accommodated by this Plan impact our already congested schools, an issue that will become even more apparent after the Shopping Center housing is complete? How will a new school(s) be funded? What about the accompanying demand on emergency services and infrastructure such density will bring? Where is the Land Use Goal included that looks to protect our treasured neighborhoods, including our historic districts, ensuring development is compatible in scale and form?

Affordable housing requirements notwithstanding, when were the residents of Princeton asked whether or not we are in support of exponentially increasing the density of our town? I don’t recall a public referendum on any ballot asking us if we were agreeable to transforming our community to what will essentially become a city. Surely the opportunity to provide public comment at last week’s meeting, once we finally could review the tangible recommendations included, was intended to validate that the Planning Board’s direction aligned with the will of the residents? But that is not what transpired at all.

After four hours, where the aforementioned concerns were raised in the majority, the chairwomen indicated the only edits they would consider were factual errors, as opposed to any real directional change in the Plan itself. The only exception seemed to be a commitment to hopefully entertain input from the town’s own Historic Preservation Commission, which the meeting served to highlight was blatantly ignored.

Instead, it was reiterated that the Plan would not change zoning overnight, even telling us to “calm down.” Specific zoning ordinances to come would be voted on by the Council. Do they consider residents so naïve to not understand that a town’s Master Plan is a record of public policy, to which future zoning ordinances, and variance requests will look towards for guidance? That means the profit-driven developer purchasing the lot next door to you, ordinance or not, will refer to the Master Plan’s intentions as justification for approval. The town Council should immediately intervene, listen to their residents, and rework the plan to reflect a more balanced approach to growth.

Maggie Depenbrock
Nassau Street