|
|
Vol. LXI, No. 49
|
|
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
|
|
|
|
Vol. LXI, No. 49
|
|
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
|
ANNE WALDRON NEUMANN
Alexander Street
Member, Princeton Environmental Commission
OLIVIA APPLEGATE
Random Road
JAMES BARNSHAW, MD
Terhune Road
ELEANOR J. LEWIS
Linden Lane
JIM McKINNON
Edgerstoune Road
LOUIS SLEE
Spruce Street
PAM WAKEFIELD
Benefit Chair
CLAIRE JACOBUS
President
Friends of the Princeton Public Library
JIM WALTMAN
Executive Director
Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association
Susan B. Loew
Overbrook Drive
SHEILA BERKELHAMMER
Allison Road
To the Editor:
I’d like to thank all the visitors and exhibitors who made such a success of Saturday’s Green Home and Garden Tour, which was organized under the aegis of the Princeton Environmental Commission. I’d particularly like to thank Town Topics for helping publicize the event. One exhibitor estimated that three to four hundred people visited the home he had designed.
These numbers demonstrate how urgently area residents want to see, touch, and understand examples of green building and landscaping. We need and want to know how to do less harm and more good to the world we’ve borrowed from our children.
Unfortunately, green home and garden tours have been urgent for decades. But what people saw on this tour — environmentally responsible site development, water saving, energy-use reduction or renewable-energy production, a healthful indoor environment, and constructing with recycled materials while recycling construction waste — may become commonplace in another decade. Then tours like this will no longer be urgent.
ANNE WALDRON NEUMANN
Alexander Street
Member, Princeton Environmental Commission
Editor’s note: The following is a copy of a letter sent to members of Princeton Township Committee.
To the Editor:
Township Committee is contemplating changing the age 62-and-over zoning in the Princeton Ridge, an area known by everyone to be environmentally sensitive. Today it appears that Township Committee’s main focus is to create living space for a new age 55-and-over community at the Princeton Ridge. But what about the many 55-and-over residents who are contributing members of this community and built or purchased their homes along Harry’s Brook some 40 or 50 years ago? What about the 55-and-under residents who have purchased homes along this area to raise their families?
In an October 15, 2003 Town Topics article, titled “Township Residents Voice their concern over chronic flooding of Harry’s Brook,” Bill Enslin, then the Township’s deputy mayor, is quoted as saying when referring to the flooding situation along Harry’s Brook that “the area needs constant supervision to prevent further damage and that a stream corridor in a built-up community needs focus.”
Back in March and December 2004, Dr. Richard Olsson, chairman of the Princeton Flood Control Committee, wrote to many property owners and stated that “Based on Township topographic mapping it has been determined that your property potentially could have flood damage.” And the FEMA Flood Insurance Study of June 4, 1984 which is part of the 2005 Flood Mitigation Plan, stated that “Harry’s Brook drains hilly areas of relatively impervious soils; these conditions result in rapid runoff into Harry’s Brook.”
Four years later, since we first came before Township Committee to voice our concerns over chronic flooding, the rainwater runoff has only increased, the Township has not purchased land parcels to stave off over-development in the area, and all road drainage improvements are contributing to even more rapid runoff into Harry’s Brook.
For all of us who own homes in areas of relative impervious soils, any and all disturbances done at the Princeton Ridge will have a detrimental effect on the quality of our lives and the value of our properties.
OLIVIA APPLEGATE
Random Road
To the Editor:
Granted that Mr. Hillier’s proposal for 158 condos on the Princeton Ridge (north/west side of Bunn Drive) has a beautiful design for the wrong location, we must ask: how much acreage of the Ridge will Mr. Hillier’s development destroy with buildings and impervious cover? No one seems to agree — not Mr. Hillier nor Princeton Township Committee nor Township Planner Lee Solow. Township Committee is rushing with breakneck speed to pass a bad ordinance about acreage disruption while it lowers the age restriction from 62+ to 55+.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection stipulates that, in high-density developments like Mr. Hillier’s, not more than 30 percent of the tract can be dug up or ruined. Mr. Hillier has said he will raze 26 percent, but his “conceptual plan” seems more grandiose than that. And Township Committee is reviewing an ordinance that violates the NJ DEP stipulation by stating that “at least 8.5 acres of the tract [must remain] in an undisturbed state.” So Township would allow 50 percent of the tract’s 17.5 acres to be uprooted? Further, Mr. Solow has said that 60 percent can be developed (Township meeting, November 26). Why are Township officials so eager to ignore environmental safeguards for land that many of us believe should not be exploited at all? Is the idea of “Sustainable Princeton” introduced by Mayor Marchand barely a month ago just a fiction?
The fact that Township officials are so profligate in permitting an excess of destroyed forest and so avid to deny the pertinence of NJ DEP stipulations should give every citizen reason to doubt their wisdom. Township Committee must pause to reconsider. No virtue can accrue to the passing of an imperfect ordinance about whose true acreage disruption the principals are still, after three months of negotiations, uncertain. We expect better from Township officials. If a pause for intelligent deliberations carries debate about the ordinance into 2008, Township Committee will gain praise for judicious deliberation.
JAMES BARNSHAW, MD
Terhune Road
To the Editor:
It has been repeatedly reported that Mr. Rivera, injured by Congo the dog, has received $250,000 from Congo’s owner’s insurance carrier. As a retired lawyer who handled such cases, I can state unequivocally that Mr. Rivera is not receiving $250,000 for the following reasons.
The check from the insurance company is made payable to Mr. Rivera and his lawyer. State court rules require that it be deposited in the lawyer’s trust account. Court rules require that all interest earned on all money in attorney trust accounts be paid to a special fund that supports legal services for the poor.
Because Mr. Rivera was injured in the course of his employment, his case is covered by worker’s compensation. All of his medical care is paid by his employer’s worker’s comp policy. For every day he is unable to work due to his injuries, Mr. Rivera receives a temporary disability payment from the worker’s comp insurance company. Temporary disability pays much less than his usual weekly wage, and therefore puts employees such as Mr. Rivera in a bad financial position because they have insufficient income to pay all their usual bills.
The worker’s comp carrier has a lien on the $250,000 equal to the amount they paid for Mr. Rivera’s medical care and temporary disability. They are entitled to full reimbursement for every penny they spent on medical care and temporary disability. Based on what has been reported, I estimate that the medical bills are at least $100,000 and possibly much more. There also is the temporary disability to be repaid. Mr. Rivera’s lawyer who obtained the $250,000 settlement also has to be paid from this money.
Mr. Rivera receives what is left alter the worker’s comp lien is paid in full and his attorney is paid. I estimate Mr. Rivera will be lucky to receive $70,000 of the $250,000.
ELEANOR J. LEWIS
Linden Lane
To the Editor:
I just returned from a weekend in Mathews County, Va. Like New Jersey, Virginia holds state and local elections in off-years. The contrast with Princeton was informative.
The election results:
State Senate: a Democrat.
State Assembly: a Republican.
Board of Supervisors: six candidates, including five independents; three independents elected.
Treasurer: six candidates, including five independents; an independent elected.
Voter turnout was over 50 percent in spite of a drizzly day. During the weeks prior to the election, there were several lively, well-attended candidates’ forums.
The people of Mathews may not be able to match either the income or education level of the average Princetonian but what they do have, which seems to be sorely missing in Princeton, is a citizenry interested in and participating in self-government.
Incidentally, the property tax rate is $0.58 per $100 of assessed value vs. $3.48 in Princeton Township. There is a price to be paid for indifference.
JIM McKINNON
Edgerstoune Road
To the Editor:
Good news: the renowned Open Space Institute (OSI) in New York has offered its support for local conservation groups striving to save endangered Princeton Ridge from Robert Hillier’s proposed 158-unit condo development. OSI, a successful bridge-financing group dedicated to helping save open lands, has acknowledged the environmental value of the Ridge and also its fragility. Everyone in the greater Princeton area should welcome this show of support. Individuals and groups can work together to build a coalition of buyers to save the Ridge if we contact our local environmental organizations to urge their participation in this project.
Less happily, Township Committee on November 26 was with some exceptions disinclined to consider any time extension that would allow the Open Space purchase option to gather steam. Why the rush? “Time is money,” Mayor Marchand said, urging deliberations at breakneck speed to change the ordinance from 62+ to 55+ so it could be passed on December 17 — a change so deeply flawed as written that it needs more than minor tweaking to save it from being illegal. A majority of Committee members appeared deaf to the repeated argument that Mr. Hillier’s plan is still proposed for the wrong place, territory that cannot risk further damage and should be down-zoned.
Time also is the opportunity to engage in intelligent deliberations. Environmentalists have urged that senior housing for genuine seniors be found elsewhere. If there is no better option than the newly drafted ordinance, then it is crucial that the overall footprint of Mr. Hillier’s plan be reduced to 30 percent of 17.5 acres (5.83 acres) as stipulated by NJ DEP. Township Committee currently permits Mr. Hillier wide latitude in sprawling his project over 9 acres, more than 51 percent of the site. The Princeton Environmental Commission should be invited to sit at the negotiating table and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification at the “silver” level should be mandated.
Township Committee appears bent on destroying the Ridge. Why doesn’t it show equal enthusiasm for Sustainable Princeton?
LOUIS SLEE
Spruce Street
To the Editor:
Princeton loves its Public Library. Last Friday night the community had a chance to demonstrate that love. The Friends of the Princeton Public Library held their Annual Benefit, and support was simply overwhelming.
The evening started at the Nassau Presbyterian Church with a talk by former Princeton resident and Pulitzer Prize winning author Richard Ford. Following the talk, a bagpiper led guests down Witherspoon Street to a magically transformed Library where dinner by candlelight was served.
Library Director Leslie Burger and the Library Staff worked hard and happily with the Friends Council and Benefit Committee to make 390 guests welcome. In a sense, it was it was one more reminder that being in the Library is being in our home.
The Quintessentially Princeton Auction was unlike any other and guests left with exciting opportunities, holiday gifts, and one of a kind collectibles. The Library Store was open, giving guests an extra opportunity to take home unusual toys and treasures. The funds raised by the Friends buy books, DVDs, CDs, and audio books as well as sponsor extraordinary programs and valuable staff development.
The Friends thank each and every one of you who encouraged, supported, participated in, and showed up on Friday. You made your love for the Library abundantly clear.
PAM WAKEFIELD
Benefit Chair
CLAIRE JACOBUS
President
Friends of the Princeton Public Library
To the Editor:
Princeton’s Master Plan wisely urges “guiding growth away from environmentally sensitive areas and clustering building in suitable locations.” But the plan, a blueprint for the community’s future that is required under state law, is seriously undermined by Princeton Township’s zoning ordinances which provide for intensive residential and commercial development on key portions of the Princeton Ridge.
For decades, the Ridge has been known as one of the most environmentally sensitive areas of our region. According to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, the area’s mature forests provide habitat for several species of wildlife whose survival in our state is endangered. In addition, due to the Ridge’s geology and slopes, past developments there have been blamed for flooding in Princeton.
In recent years, other towns in our area have adjusted the zoning of their ridge lines to limit development to no more than one house per 8, 10, or 15 acres and they maintain aggressive land preservation programs targeted to those areas. In sharp contrast, six years ago Princeton amended its zoning to approve high-density housing in several locations on the Princeton Ridge — seven dwellings per acre on the Bunn Drive tract that is currently under consideration.
Circumstances have changed significantly since 2001 and it’s time to modify Princeton’s zoning to better protect the Ridge and to preserve more of the Ridge’s remaining natural lands as open space.
The Open Space Institute and the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, two well-respected and successful land preservation organizations, have agreed to help the Watershed Association investigate land preservation opportunities on the Princeton Ridge, including the Bunn Drive site. Those interested in helping us preserve the Princeton Ridge should contact the Watershed at watershedwatch@thewatershed.org.
JIM WALTMAN
Executive Director
Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association
To the Editor:
PROUD OF PRINCETON?
I am very proud of my town, which has been home to my family since 1965. I am proud that we value the environment not only of our own backyards, but the greater area in which much open space has been dedicated. We value the protection of endangered and threatened species such as the box turtle, Cooper’s hawk, barred owl and nationally sensationalized domestic pets. We seem to have a very creditable record in that regard.
I wish I could also be proud of the value my town places on its older citizens. We have exported these former contributors to Montgomery, Cranbury and Monroe Townships, to name only a few. Those places long ago discovered the economic viability of age-restricted communities. But it would be fitting if seniors could enjoy contemplating the wonderful sites they have helped to create here in town in the years when they are retired and can fully appreciate the wonders of nature. Hopefully, the term “environmentalists” (which we certainly ALL are in greater or lesser degree) can include senior citizens (whether that means persons 55, 62 years of age, or older) under its protective cloak. Princeton currently has an opportunity to express pride in its seniors by supporting a project that makes a reality of preservation. Mr. Hillier’s proposed project on Bunn Drive should not be viewed as a threat but rather as protection of a long neglected species. Don’t send more of our taxpayers to outlying communities.
Susan B. Loew
Overbrook Drive
To the Editor:
One area in which Princeton can be justly proud is the provision of affordable housing for its citizens, despite the erroneous claims to the contrary in a letter to Town Topics published November 28.
There are over 700 low- and moderate-income rental units available for seniors and families in Princeton Borough and Township under the auspices of the Borough Housing Authority, the Borough Affordable Housing Board, and Princeton Community Housing, a private, non-profit corporation.
Through the efforts of the Borough and the Township Affordable Housing Boards, 149 sale units exist for purchase by low- and moderate-income seniors and families.
What Princeton does not have is any market-rate senior housing. People who purchased modest homes here years ago have been blessed by the incredible appreciation in the value of their properties and do not qualify for any kind of “affordable” housing. In most cases they will easily afford the Hillier development’s prices. Their only option now when they want to downsize is to leave town.
Furthermore, under New Jersey’s Council on Affordable Housing regulations, provision of affordable housing by developers is mandated, not optional. Whether Robert Hillier or another developer builds market-rate housing on Bunn Drive, construction of affordable units is required under the law.
Too many parcels of land on which market-rate senior housing could have been built have slipped away. There is little undeveloped land left in Princeton to build the kind of housing that could stem the exodus of our best and our brightest. Let’s not let this last opportunity disappear, too.
SHEILA BERKELHAMMER
Allison Road