Now, we have a graphic illustration of  just how misleading the number is.   The University’s site plan includes a slide showing the two proposed walkways for pedestrians, both significantly longer than 460 feet.

Note that the blue ADA walkway has to traverse a building that will block the current Dinky right of way. The University’s architect testifying at the 12/18 Planning Board hearing said he had not calculated the distance.  Dr. Kornhauser has calculated it at 1100 feet for a 141% increase in walking distance to the station terminus.   As for the downhill walk via the stairs, Dr. Kornhauser calculates that distance at 700 feet.    For the full analysis, see http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SaveTheDinky/WalkDistances2MajorVenues_v1.pdf

For those who drive to the Dinky or are dropped off, the picture is no better.  Auto commuters from town will have to navigate a new traffic circle at Alexander and University and then make a left turn into the plaza.  The proposed “kiss and ride” drop off areas are not adjacent to the platform.

Borough Mayor Yina Moore cast the only no vote.  Former Borough Mayors Reed and Trotman voted in favor. Moore would have endorsed the arts site plan while requiring the University to go back to the drawing board on the transit proposal. See coverage in Planet Princeton; Trenton Times;   Daily Princetonian; Town Topics.

In July, Borough Council passed a resolution opposing the plan to move the station stop.  The Township Committee did not follow suit and declined to support Borough efforts earlier this year to preserve the “straight shot” right of way to Nassau Street.  The Arts and Transit  site plan will narrow Alexander Street and University Place and place a traffic circle at University Place.  Some believe the plan will will preclude any light rail extension to Nassau, leaving bus service as the only option.

Nineteen members of the public were allowed to comment.    Board Chair Gail Ullman imposed a strict three-minute limit on comments opposing the plan but relaxed the rules for  supporters of the University.  Most public comment was critical. ”   Many objectors, including emeritus art history professor Gerda Panofsky, who read her Town Topics letter into the record, argued that the new transit plaza will be unsafe and not hospitable to seniors who walk to the Dinky.     Although the University has repeatedly claimed that the relocated terminus will be only 460 feet south of the current terminus, the University architect admitted that the circuitous gently sloped walking path planned to the train will be longer but was unable  to give actual figures at the hearing.  Professor Kornhauser has done the calculations:   The straight shot walk is 460 feet. The ADA 4.9% slope is 700 feet. The gentle slope, with the circuitous path, is 1,110 feet, for a 141% increase in distance.  For the complete analysis, see  http://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SaveTheDinky/WalkDistances2MajorVenues_v1.pdf.

A number of objectors mentioned the destruction of the legacy of the late Barbara Sigmund, who was Mayor in 1984  when the University purchased the Dinky and who helped design the “kiss-and-ride” drop off on  University Place.    Township resident Beth Healey said  Sigmund would “turn over in her grave.”

At Tuesday’s meeting, Planning Board member Julie Nachamkin  made the motion, seconded by Lance Liverman, to approve the University’s project, subject to conditions suggested by University attorney Richard Goldman that had not been shared with the public.   The text of the 45-page resolution, adopted on Wednesday less than 24 hours after the vote, is not yet available.

Updated December 22

Princeton Environmental Commission, 10/04/2012

The proposed  station is barely visible from the public street.

Below is our ad that was placed in the Town Topics before a previous hearing:

Town Topics ad from Wednesday, Nov. 27, 2012

Why is Governor Christie giving away a public right-of-way to a private institution?

In April, the Princeton Borough Mayor and Council  wrote to  Governor Christie and the New Jersey Transit Board of Directors seeking a formal public hearing on plans to relocate the Dinky.  The letter stressed the value of the historic Dinky to to the community, the value of its current accessible location, and the value of the straight shot right-of-way the public transportation easement provides for potential extension of service to Nassau Street.  The text of the letter follows:

To Governor Chris Christie and the New Jersey Transit Board of Directors:

As Mayor and Council of the Borough of Princeton, we value our walkable mass transit link to the Northeast Corridor, and we are committed to take whatever steps we can to maintain it. Accordingly, we respectfully request a public hearing on New Jersey Transit’s proposal to truncate rail service on the Princeton branch (the “Dinky”) and to prematurely abandon the public transportation easement for the station, rail line and parking lot that New Jersey Transit retained when it sold the underlying property to Princeton University in 1984.

This decision will have an adverse effect on pedestrian access to the Dinky. It should be made openly, in public, and on the basis of objective analyses. The easement and the transit right of way it secures constitute valuable public assets. They should not be given away to a private entity without the soundest public policy justification and any such transfer should be accompanied by adequate compensation.

As you know, the Princeton Branch rail line has been described by New Jersey Transit officials as one of its better performing lines. Retaining the service in its present location, connected to the center of town by sidewalk and adjacent to a public street, is in the public interest. The proposed move would marginalize the station and impose new impediments to both walkers and drivers – an additional street crossing and a steep slope for walkers and three additional traffic intersections for drivers. Creative solutions are available that would preserve the Dinky service in its current location while accommodating the University’s plans for its arts campus. As a fiduciary for the traveling public, we urge you to schedule a full public hearing so that such solutions can be explored in a context that gives proper weight to the public interest in sustainable and walkable mass transit.

Sincerely,
Mayor and Council

Paul Wyckoff, New Jersey Transit’s Chief for Government and External Affairs,  responded    in a June 11, 2012 letter to Mayor Moore.  He reiterated NJ Transit’s position that it has “a contractual obligation to relocate the station some 460 feet to accommodate the University’s Arts/District.”  He claimed that NJ Transit is not required to hold a stand-alone public hearing on station relocation “because service is not being eliminated.”  ”The station location,” said Wyckoff, “is merely being slightly adjusted.”  Wyckoff then noted that the public had had a chance to voice its views at  the Historic Sites Council meetings on its NJTransit’s track removal application.  He also stated that station relocation was discussed at the  Princeton Regional Planning Board meetings on the University’s arts campus  zoning application.  The full text of the letter can be found at this link.

In response to a request from Borough Council in  2011, New Jersey Transit stated in a letter to then-Mayor Mildred Trotman that it would “perform an analysis of station relocation after  the University’s plans move beyond the conceptual stage. . .”  To date, that analysis has not been forthcoming.

This Application is unusual because  NJ Transit seeks to dismantle a functioning historic site.  After a relatively brief presentation,  Thomas Clark, the NJ Transit representative,  turned the mike over to Bob Durkee, Princeton University’s Vice President of Public Affairs.  Mr. Durkee  devoted most of his time to a slide presentation of historic buildings on the campus, beginning with Nassau Hall, to show that the University is a good steward of historic buildings.  Both Mr. Durkee and Mr. Clark reiterated the claim that the 1984 sales agreement gives the University the right to relocate the station southward and away from the existing historic platform and buildings.  Mr. Durkee seemed to say, in fact, that the 1984 contract gives the University an  unlimited  right to ask NJ Transit to move the terminus .  He noted, however, that in the Memorandum of Understanding with Princeton’s governing bodies, (MOU) the University agreed not to make another move away from the town center so long as heavy rail service continues.

Borough Mayor Yina Moore, along with Council members Jenny Crumiller and Jo Butler, informed  the panel  that Borough Council opposed the plan to relocate the Dinky.  Mayor Moore shared a resolution passed by Council on the issue, Borough Council Resolution, and explained that–apart from the loss to the community of a significant historic asset– the plan does not represent sound transit policy.    Jack May  and Phil Craig, both officers in the New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers,  made statements opposing the move on the grounds that it would have negative effects on service and on the environment because of its predicted effects in increasing automobile traffic by decreasing pedestrian access. Click link for NJ-ARP website.  Al Pap, speaking for Ross Capon, President/CEO of the National Association of Railroad Passengers, NARP, urged the Council to deny the Application as well, noting that it seems “especially short-sighted” at a “time of increasing rail ridership nationwide.”    StatementforNARP.

At least nine members of the Princeton community, many who are members of Save the Dinky,  spoke to urge the Council to deny the request.  A powerpoint presentation showing the history of the Dinky and tranportation issues raised by the application can be found at this link: Kornhauser presentation.  Virginia Kerr, a member and attorney speaking on behalf of STDKY, urged the council to deny the application as premature and on the grounds that NJ Transit had failed to demonstrate a public benefit that would justify destroying this historic asset.  Only one public commentor, a local advocate of Personal Rapid Transit systems, spoke in favor of the University plan to relocate the terminus.

The Princeton branch is one of those rare historic places that still serves its historic function.  It enjoys a ridership of over 2,000 trips a day and has been described by NJTransit in an appearance before Borough Council as “doing better than the system overall.”   The station complex was placed on the state register in the spring of 1984 and on the federal register in the fall of that year as part of a thematic nomination for operating passenger railroad stations in New Jersey.   The  state nomination documents note that the Princeton station is in “virtually original” condition and that the branch is significant, in part,  because it is an “integral part of the townscape.”  When the University bought the land in late 1984, it  bought a Princeton historic resource with great utility and presumably did so to protect and preserve the resource.

Ironically,  NJ Transit’s case for removing the tracks and prematurely abandoning the public transportation easement rests on the 1984 agreement.     Save the Dinky and others have argued for months that the agreement gave the University the right to ask for  only  one southward move of the terminus–a move from the northern to the southern half of the existing platform.   This move was made sometime in 1988 or after.  When the University bought the property in 1984, the terminus was next to the passenger station at the north; now, as all can see,  it is next to the freight station on the south.   New Jersey Transit’s Application stated  that the proposed arts complex development–which includes a proposed access road to the Lot 7 garage–was “permitted” and “anticipated” by the 1984 agreement.  However, the Lot 7 garage was not built until the year 2000. See Lot 7 Garage story.   The donation for the arts complex was first publicized in 2006.  See Lewis donation.

Save the Dinky, along with several individuals, has a pending lawsuit seeking a judicial declaration that the 1984 contract does not permit another relocation of the terminus.  The issues in this litigation bear directly on the issues before the Council.

Members of the Historic Sites Council  asked Mr. Clark if NJ Transit would end passenger service to the Dinky station anyway, even if they do not receive permission to lift the historic easement.  He said no.  Passenger service will continue.

Moving the terminus is likely to decrease pedestrian use of the train.  It could be the tipping point that finally ends the life of the Princeton branch as a train service and  paves the way to replace it with a Bus Rapid Transit system.   STPD continues to hope for a win-win solution in which the University modifies its design to preserve the Dinky terminus in its current location.     See letter of Anita Garoniak of December 2011, posted on STPD website at this link.  There is no discernable public necessity for turning  a functioning historic train station into a museum piece.    The loss cannot be mitigated by placing an interpretative display in a new station near a parking garage.   The display will show not what we have lost through past neglect but a piece of living history that we have willingly given up.

Dinky Track Removal Application (pdf)
Supplement to application regarding removal of public easement (pdf)

This review will take place on Thursday, February 16. 2012, at 10 a.m. in the DEP Public Hearing Room, lst Floor, 401 East State Street, in Trenton. The Dinky track removal is now the FIRST ITEM on the agenda. Please note that the previously posted agenda does not have the correct order. For the revised agenda, see http://www.nj.gov/dep/hpo/2protection/hsc_agnda_2_16_12.pdf

The good news is that the state, at least, recognizes that the proposal to move the Dinky terminus will erase a significant piece of Princeton’s history by severing the station buildings from the terminus. If you value Princeton’s history and would like to see the University develop its arts complex in a way that preserves its history, this is a meeting that you should attend

Download New Jersey and National Registers of Historic Places – Mercer County

See the listing on page 8:
Princeton Railroad Station (ID#1742)
University Place
SR: 3/17/1984
NR: 9/29/1984
(Thematic Nomination of Operating Passenger Railroad)

Note that the application makes no mention of community opposition and it claims that the track removal and the removal of the easement are necessary for the campus expansion.
Borough Council Resolution Against Moving the Dinky

Note also that NJ Transit has no factual basis, other than the University’s assertion, for the claim that the project will alleviate traffic congestion. The University ignored the impact of shifting Dinky-related traffic from University Place onto to Alexander Road.

David Goldfarb

Longtime Princeton Borough Councilman David Goldfarb used his goodbye speech last night as an opportunity to criticize Princeton University for underfunding the town and using threats to advance the school’s agenda.

It was quite the swan song, and one more reminder that Goldfarb has always  marched to his own beat and been an independent thinker on the council.

“After 21 years, I’m retiring from the Borough Council for health reasons,” Goldfarb said at the start of his speech. “I’m fine, as far as I know. It’s my fellow Democrats who got sick of me.”

“Still, one never knows what’s around the corner, and I’d like to leave with a clear conscience,” he said. “I know that I have annoyed, angered, offended, and disappointed many people in this room and many other residents, staff members, and elected officials. I apologize, and I ask for your forgiveness.”

Then Goldfarb said he wasn’t quite finished annoying, angering, offending, and disappointing.

“I’d like to devote some of the few minutes that I have left to that non-profit educational institution across the street that shares the name of our town,” Goldfarb said. “During all of my time on the Council, its leaders have been unfailingly cooperative and responsible while asking for nothing in return other than to be treated fairly. Its students have devoted many hours to a large number of good causes in the community, and only a tiny fraction of them attract the attention of our police department or bother their neighbors. I’m speaking, of course, of the Princeton Theological Seminary.”

Goldfarb said the town is fortunate to have such a fine institution in the community, adding that the rest of the community would do well to adopt the seminary’s community values.

“I wish I could honestly say the same of Princeton University, but I can’t,” Goldfarb said. “With financial resources that dwarf those of virtually all other colleges and universities in the world, Princeton University still demands that the residents of our town subsidize it. On top of that, its president threatened to reduce its inadequate contribution in lieu of taxes if the town didn’t comply with the University’s wishes.

“When President Tilghman presented us with her ultimatum last year, we should have called her bluff,” he said.  “Instead, the leaders of our town capitulated, emboldening the University to make similar threats in the future. I hope that the town and the University will work together to restore the mutually respectful relationship that we enjoyed under prior University administrations.”

Goldfarb suggested a commitment from the university to leave the Dinky in place would be a good place to start.

“Finally, I’d like to thank the residents, my present and former colleagues, and the Borough employees for their many kindnesses over the years,” Goldfarb said. “Those who have thanked me for my service should understand that I did it because I enjoyed it and that I’m now content to leave the work to others. I congratulate Mayor Trotman on her retirement from office, and I wish everyone a happy and successful new year.”