Princeton Zoning Board OKs Jugtown Redevelopment with Conditions After Parking Debate

The Princeton Zoning Board of Adjustment approved variances Feb. 22 to allow a scaled, three-story redevelopment at 344 Nassau Street that preserves the adjacent historic Horner House but requires multiple deviations from the AHO2 zoning standards.

The project’s applicant, developer Daniel Barsky, presented an amended plan that keeps the existing historic building largely intact and places a modest new building to its side and rear. After testimony from the project’s architect, engineer and planner — and sustained questioning by board members about parking and unit layout — the board voted to grant use and bulk variances and a design waiver, with conditions intended to protect affordable-unit access and neighborhood character.

The board’s planner, Craig Rancamp, said the amended design advances the AHO2 goals by conserving the historic resource and creating a reasonable residential yield. “The whole point of this amended approach ... is the preservation of the historic building,” Rancamp told the board, urging that the trade-offs on parking and setbacks be weighed against gains in preservation and design.

Architect Marina Rubino described the building as deliberately modest and responsive to neighbors’ input. “This architecture is about building community,” she said, explaining that the existing structure will remain untouched and that the new massing will avoid overtopping or connecting to the Horner House.

Board members pressed the applicant on on-site parking and off-site lease commitments. The plan provides seven on-site stalls beneath the building (two EV-capable, one ADA-accessible); the applicant said EV credits increase the effective parking count in staff calculations. Several board members voiced worry about the small number of stalls, month-to-month lease language for some off-site parking and how affordable tenants would be prioritized for spaces.

Chairman Cohen summarized the board’s concern during deliberations: “I do have concerns about the number of cars,” he said, adding that those operational questions would be addressed in conditions attached to the approvals.

What the board approved

- Use variances to allow the proposed mix of uses and the separate new building, approved by roll call. - Multiple bulk variances (setbacks, building separation, parking setbacks, compact-space percentage) and a design waiver to permit a 20-foot drive aisle instead of 24 feet. Most votes passed 6–1 or 5–2; one notable dissent came from a board member who repeatedly cited parking and circulation concerns.

Conditions and next steps

The board attached several written conditions to approvals: the applicant must comply with the town staff memos and third-party approvals; the board will condition any final approval on the governing body’s confirmation about which bedroom-count rules under the state’s Uniform Housing Affordability Controls (UHAC) apply; and the applicant agreed to assign on-site parking spaces and to reserve at least one on-site space for each affordable unit when feasible. The board also required a historically sympathetic aluminum picket privacy fence (rather than a solid PVC fence) and facade protection measures where vehicles could approach building walls.

Public comment and neighborhood compromise

Neighbors and the community group Save Jugtown, who earlier opposed the original, larger proposal, spoke in favor of the revised plan after weeks of negotiations with the applicant. Don Denny of Save Jugtown said the new design “preserves the Horner House unchanged” and that the locally developed compromise yielded a plan the group supports. Several residents urged the town to more actively address recurring traffic violations at the Nassau–Harrison intersection.

What remains unresolved

The governing body will need to confirm whether the project’s two affordable units must be two-bedrooms or if one must be a three-bedroom under UHAC. Staff said state UHAC changes issued around December require the town to update local affordable-housing regulations by mid-March; municipal counsel recommended that the board condition final approvals on the governing body’s authoritative determinations and any necessary third-party approvals.

The board closed the hearing with a set of final votes and asked staff to draft a formal resolution that captures all of the conditions and the technical revisions needed for final compliance.