IAS Housing Opponents Outline Their Case

The Institute for Advanced Study has a legal right to build only six houses on land adjacent to Princeton Battlefield Park, opponents say.

They are also concerned about the Institute’s alleged incorrect wetlands delineation, lack of archeological studies on the parcel, concern about how quickly the screening trees would grow to full height and why the Institute hadn’t saved more money to purchase neighboring properties.

Thursday’s hearing before the Princeton Regional Planning Board was the third in as many months devoted solely to the Institute’s proposal to build 15 faculty homes on land it owns next to the Park. Faculty housing would sit on six acres of land, permanently preserving 60 percent of the tract as public open space.

Founded in 1930, the Institute fosters research into fundamental problems in the sciences and humanities. Some of its renowned faculty members have included Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer.

The Institute was once able to buy up neighborhood homes as they became available near the residential campus, but Institute Director Peter Goddard says real estate in the area has simply become too expensive.

The latest planning board hearing was initially billed as an opportunity for public comment, but nearly three and a half of the four hour hearing was devoted to arguments by the project opponents, led by Princeton attorney Bruce Afran.

Opponents argue that it is crucial to preserve the property, pointing to those who claim the land in question was the site of Gen. George Washington’s counterattack and first victory against the British during the Battle of Princeton in 1777.

“It is not the intention of historic preservation to save every blade of grass on a battlefield,” said Glenn Williams, a senior historian at the U.S. Army Center of Military History and also a trustee of the Princeton Battlefield Society. “It is the intention of historic preservation to save the historic acreage of a historic battlefield.

“You’ve all heard it called the 10 crucial days of the American Revolution. The battle fought here was the tenth of the 10 crucial days, the culminating point of the 10 crucial days happened on the IAS property and nowhere else,” Williams testified.

Russell Smith, vice president at Hopewell Valley Engineering in Pennington, testified that the Institute did not adequately take into account the required setbacks and unusable areas before presenting its plan.

“The end result of that (our analysis) produced six buildable lots,” Smith said. “Six dwelling units that could be built in this cluster.”

Under cross examination, Smith admitted that his calculation was based on his interpretation of Princeton ordinances, an interpretation that differs from that of Princeton developer Robert Hillier, who designed Institute’s plan.

Deciding which interpretation is correct will now be up to Princeton’s planning staff and planning board.

There was time for three members of the public to address the board. All spoke in favor of the Institute’s plan.

Princeton resident Thomas Fulmer said no human remains have been found on the Institute’s parcel, yet objectors want to obstruct the right of property owners to use their land. The IAS proposal offers more public space adjacent to Battlefield Park and moves the tree line 200 feet back, he said.

“It is sad to contemplate how much visual appeal of the battlefield could have been enhanced through interpretive signage, pathways and interpretive signage and the like had the Princeton Battlefield Society spent the money for such facilities rather than for attorneys fees,” Fulmer said.

The hearing is scheduled to continue on Feb. 16.