To the Editor:

Affordable housing units in AvalonBay’s new plan appear not to be equitably distributed throughout the development. AvalonBay must correct its error or shortsightedness before the Planning Board holds hearings on the application. The corporation should announce appropriate corrections to the public.

Fully 68 percent of the affordable units (38 out of 56) are located on the two bottom floors. 27 percent (15) face north towards the concrete garage (Site Plan, sheets A-101 through A-104); the garage is barely concealed by trees for only part of its length (Landscape Plan, sheet 6). Residents in these northerly units will be in the darkest segment of the development — disturbed by traffic, illuminated by car headlights at night. The dark view from windows was indicated by Tom Karman, speaking for AvalonBay at the first public showing of plans on 5/22/13, when he euphemistically called the street-level walkway between Building 1 (which is an enclosed cube) and the garage a “shade garden.” No affordable units face the more desirable (because private) interior courtyard of Building 1, called a “back yard for residents.”

Furthermore, no affordable units are now designated for any of the three detached townhouses (12 units, 4 in each). Of the 9 percent of units (5) located in Building 2, whose south side opens onto the public park, none has direct access to the park (sheet A-101).

Current plans should be revised. Tenants in affordable units must not be penalized because they cannot afford market-rate units.

Princeton culture does not sanction denial of equal access. AvalonBay has an obligation to redistribute the affordable housing units, voluntarily, before all members of the Planning Board and municipal staff insist on this change. COAH practices require that affordable units be located in such a manner that the income level of tenants cannot be recognized by a glance at their doorways or, indeed, their income “floor.” Affordable units should be indiscernible from market-rate units.

While such a redistribution may chip a little from the enormous profit AvalonBay may gain, the corporation must honor its public image and the values it stands for. Indeed, their 2011 Sustainability Report states, “AvalonBay employs a diverse base of associates and does not tolerate discrimination or harassment” (page 19). The company should practice in Princeton what it mandates in its own workplace community. Respect for all tenants requires no less.

Jon Vogel, an AvalonBay vice president for development and this project’s manager, needs to do for affordable housing distribution what he has done for “green building” in this development — EnergyStar certification with demonstrated compliance with LEED Silver for Homes (“and maybe more,” he said on 5/22/13), rain-gardens, and the possibility of using grey water (as at Copperwood, the LEED-Silver development on Bunn Drive).

I commend these measures (though more should be done, particularly in salvaging materials from the old hospital). Heeding the claims of social equity requires equal attentiveness.

Jane Buttars

Dodds Lane