AvalonBay Redevelopment Approved by Planning Board

Editor's note: Updated to include response from Avalon Bay.

The AvalonBay redevelopment proposal was approved by the Princeton Planning Board Thursday night. 

The proposal calls for razing the former hospital building on Witherspoon Street and building 280 apartment units, 56 of which will be affordable housing units, with rents ranging from $310 to $1,088 a month according to AvalonBay chief attorney, Rob Kasuba.

“Could there be a better fit? I suppose there could be,” said Planning Board member Marvin Reed. “But I think that this process on this most recent application shows that we’re getting a better fit.”

In a statement, Jon Vogel, vice president for development at AvalonBay, thanked the Princeton community for its input and hard work and announced that the company would be making a donation the Princeton Arts Council as a way to provide local works of art in the project.

“Although the approval process has been long and arduous, the extensive community input was a major factor in all of the significant revisions to the site plan.  This input resulted in a plan which has been better received by Princeton and its residents.  Our engagement with residents and local officials on the issues that mattered to them has made us even more enthusiastic about being part of Princeton. 

“We’re definitely looking forward to becoming an integral part of Princeton.  As a first step in that direction, we will be making a donation to the Princeton Arts Council.  The donation will be earmarked towards providing quality public art on the Avalon Princeton site in one or more of the publicly accessible open spaces that we will create," he said.

As part of the approval, 13 percent of the affordable housing units will be made available to residents who qualify as “very low income.” In addition, 37 percent of the units will be available to low-income residents, and 50 percent will be for middle-income residents.  

Board member Mildred Trotman seconded the motion, saying, “I think this final design is a much–improved design…Comments which the public reported on concerned me very much in the beginning, and I’m happy that the application has agreed to change some of those, particularly the distribution of affordable housing units, which are desperately needed in this community.”

The approval came with certain conditions, primarily concerning the permeability and accessibility of the complex, as well as environmental and design concerns. Kasuba spoke extensively about the compromises that the developers had made to meet the board's recommendations, many of which, he claimed, they were not legally obligated to make.

AvalonBay appealed the Planning Board’s original rejection of its application in December and the board entered into a consent order in April to stay litigation while the developer drew up a revised plan. Had the board rejected the new application, AvalonBay would have been able to proceed with litigation against the board.

Among the concerns voiced by the board were environmental recommendations made by the Princeton Environmental Commission. According to Planning Director Lee Solow, AvalonBay had addressed four of the six recommendations made by the PEC. 

Planning Board member Jenny Crumiller raised concerns that the site’s soil should be tested for contaminants since a number of chemicals, such as mercury, had been used at the now-vacant hospital building. Kasuba argued that since there was no evidence of contamination, the developer was under no legal obligation to perform a soil examination.

Permeability of the complex was one of the major issues cited by the Planning Board when the original application was rejected. Kasuba pointed to changes made in the proposal such as adding a park open to the public, the incorporation of public art, and a playground for toddlers. 

Board member Cecelia Birge submitted the only dissenting vote, though she thanked the board for avoiding the litigation that would have continued had the application not been approved.

"It’s a tough vote for me," said Birge. "I cannot bring myself to vote for it because I do not believe this is consistent with what is envisioned on this site...In terms of the big checklist issues, in terms of preserving the historical character of the town and the neighborhood, in terms of the environmental issues that impact everyone int own, I don’t think the applicant has done enough to win my vote."

Jenny Crumiller spoke about the project as both a planning board member and a former resident of the community near the hospital site. 

"This application culminates the hospital's decades-long problem with the neighborhood," said Crumiller, who ultimately voted to approve the proposal. "I think the new neighbors will help invigorate the businesses at that end of town and I look forward to welcoming them into the community."