After five years of debate over the fate of the Dinky train station, Princeton Borough Council last week passed an ordinance that will allow Princeton University to proceed with plans for a $300 million arts and transit neighborhood. Should the measure receive final approval from the Regional Planning Board, the University will move the terminus 460 feet to the south as part of the plan.

The Council voted 3-2 to approve the measure at its December 6 meeting. Voting for the proposal were Kevin Wilkes, Barbara Trelstad, and Roger Martindell, while Jo Butler and Jenny Crumiller voted against it and David Goldfarb recused himself because of his affiliation with the law firm representing the University. The ordinance had been previously approved by Township Committee for the section of the parcel located in the Township.

Several community residents offered their views during the public comment segment of the meeting. The plan was called “ludicrous” by Princeton professor and planning expert Alan Kornhauser. “People have worked hard to find a win-win over the last five years,” he said. “It is amazing that this project basically hasn’t changed from the University’s perspective in five years. The University has found a way to say no to all the suggestions.”

Borough resident and historian Clifford Zink said moving the Dinky would be “really bad urban planning,” adding that the zoning would have been passed years ago if the move were not part of the plan. Taking the station from its present location on the street to a site off the public road is a bad idea, he said. “You are certainly going to diminish the experience and diminish our town, losing this transit center we’ve had for a hundred years.”

Kip Cherry, Township resident and professional planner, urged Council to vote against the ordinance and said the University’s claim that it has a right to move the station should be challenged.

Speaking in favor of the ordinance, Arts Council of Princeton director Jeff Nathanson said the project “would fulfill the promise of Princeton being a cultural destination. It would be a whole new ball game for us.” David Newton, vice president of Palmer Square Management; Melanie Clarke, executive director of the Princeton Symphony Orchestra; Raoul Momo, local restaurant owner; Joann Mitchell, President of the Board of McCarter Theatre; and Dorothea von Moltke, owner of Labyrinth Books, were among those who voiced support for the plan.

Also in favor was Lori Rabon, general manager of the Nassau Inn and a member of the board of directors for the Princeton Regional Chamber of Commerce. Ms. Rabon read a letter in support of the project signed by Chamber head J. Robert Hillier, [a Town Topics shareholder]. “For the first time in 51 years, we are going to take a position in favor of the University,” she said of the letter, which cited the plan’s economic benefits for the region.

While the Council members who voted to approve the ordinance are in favor of plans for the arts complex, their decisions seemed motivated more by the idea of moving forward than enthusiastic endorsement. None were in favor of moving the Dinky station.

“It’s bad public policy to move the Dinky in terms of global warming, transit policy, development, and community relations,” said Mr. Martindell. “That said, we have to play the hand we were dealt.” Mr. Martindell added that while discussion and healthy discourse can be a good thing, the time has come to take action. “It makes sense to move forward because of the benefits of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which includes improvements to transportation,” he said, referring to the agreement signed by the University, the Township, and the Borough. “We have the ability to work with the largest single stakeholder in the town, and to have good relations with the State, New Jersey Transit, and Princeton Township.”

Mr. Wilkes said he and Borough Engineer Jack West had met with New Jersey Transportation Commissioner Jim Simpson and New Jersey Transit director James Weinstein that morning. They assured him, he said, that they intend to support the continuation of the Dinky and the possible long-term transit goals that are mentioned in the MOU. He is trusting the University to keep its word about “staying at the table” through studies of transit issues.

“It’s a shame that it took five years for us to get to this night, but a lot of hard work had to be done to get the issues resolved,” he said. “The issue of the train, larger resentments that had built up over time, the issue of the growth of downtown, issues related to university expansion — it has taken a while to paddle through the complexity of issues. While we may not have arrived at a solution that is ideal for everyone, we have arrived at a point where we can advance and move forward.”

Ms. Butler said that while she supports the arts, she has issues with the University, specifically that they have not negotiated a new voluntary payment (PILOT) agreement with the Borough. “Rather than working together, the University will be rewarded for their bad behavior,” she said.

Ms. Crumiller said that by approving the ordinance, they “would be making the biggest public policy mistake ever made by the Borough Council.” The University’s assertion that it will not build the arts project unless it can move the Dinky is “holding the arts hostage to the Dinky. It’s a calculated strategy to divide and conquer.”

The fact that people will have to walk further from town to reach the relocated terminus and negotiate stairs up a steep incline will discourage people from using the train, she added. Instead of being located on the road, the new station would be behind buildings, “like a strip mall.” She also questioned projections by University representatives that attendance at McCarter Theatre will increase under the plan.