Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Time Extension topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board grants temporary-variance extension for 8 Valley Road until Aug. 1
Summary
The Princeton Zoning Board of Adjustment voted unanimously on Jan. 14 to extend a temporary D(1) variance that lets the owner live on-site during construction, moving the demolition deadline for the existing home to Aug. 1, 2026. The applicant said premature demolition would jeopardize financing; the board recorded a roll-call approval.
The Princeton Zoning Board of Adjustment on Jan. 14 approved a time extension for a temporary D(1) variance that allows the owner of 8 Valley Road to occupy the existing house while a new principal dwelling is built.
Applicant James Mogilever, who was sworn and testified, said construction began in November and the new home has reached the framing and roof stage; he requested moving the demolition deadline for the existing house to Aug. 1, 2026, so he can complete the new build and refinance using the new house as collateral. “If we prematurely demolish our home before the new house is ready … premature demolition risks our mortgage being pulled by the bank,” Mogilever said during his testimony.
Board counsel and planning staff explained the procedural deadlines under the Municipal Land Use Law and confirmed the town is holding a demolition‑performance check in escrow to cover the cost of demolition if the owner fails to act. The board asked questions about the applicant’s construction timetable, his role as the general contractor and whether his architect has a construction‑supervision contract; Mogilever said he and his architect communicate regularly and can provide additional details if requested.
After a brief public portion with no speakers, a board member moved to grant the extension to Aug. 1, 2026. Clerk Claudia conducted a roll‑call vote; recorded votes were unanimous in favor (Miss Chen: yes; Miss Colson: yes; Mr. Floyd: yes; Mr. Shriver: yes; Mr. Tenenbaum: yes; Mr. Dobkin: yes; Chairman Cohen: yes). The board noted that, if further delays occur, the applicant may return to request additional relief and that the board has granted similar extensions in prior cases.
The board did not attach additional conditions beyond confirming that the town holds funds for demolition and the applicant has posted a performance guarantee. The extension meets the five‑affirmative‑vote threshold the board’s rules require for this kind of relief.
The applicant thanked the board for its time and said he will work to avoid returning for another extension.
