Princeton Planning Board recommends redevelopment designation for Westminster Choir College site

Christopher Collie, a licensed professional planner with Topology, testified April 16 that the two parcels comprising the former Westminster Choir College campus meet the statutory tests for designation as a non‑condemnation area in need of redevelopment, and the Princeton Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend that the mayor and council accept that finding.

Collie told the board he had prepared a 50‑page preliminary investigation, supported by roughly 100 pages of appendices and photographs, and said the report focuses on three pervasive conditions: water damage, lack of accessibility and failing heating/cooling systems. "My position is that yes, it does," Collie said when asked whether the study area meets the criteria for designation.

The consultant said Taylor Hall and a number of other buildings show evidence of extensive steam and water damage and that, by his method of counting any building with observed water damage toward its full building area, buildings representing about 84% of the campus square footage show some degree of water‑damage evidence. "We find that 84% of the overall building in the square footage is a building that has water damage in some capacity," Collie testified.

Collie also testified that accessibility features are broadly missing: only two campus buildings have elevators and many doorways, exits and circulation paths are not readily usable by people with mobility impairments. "About 87% of [building] square footage in the study area lack accessibility features as we've defined it in this report," he said. The presentation described an obsolete shared boiler system with one boiler offline and the other deficient, and argued that the three issues together create conditions that tie to statutory criteria A (substandard buildings and unwholesome living/working conditions) and D (improvements detrimental to health, safety or welfare).

Board members and counsel emphasized that the planning board's decision is limited in scope. Joe Maraziti, speaking for the municipal counsel, told the board the role before it was narrowly statutory: to decide whether substantial evidence supports a finding that the area meets the criteria. If the council accepts the board's recommendation, the next step would be preparation of a redevelopment plan, which would set zoning, uses and any financial tools the municipality might seek to deploy.

That procedural clarification mattered to several residents who addressed the board during the public comment and cross‑examination period. Joshua Zinder, an architect and nearby resident, urged the board to prioritize adaptive reuse: "Just because a building is damaged and neglected does not mean it is not worthy to restore and rehabilitate and valued for its historic architectural presence," he said. Other commenters asked how Collie calculated the statistics, whether currently occupied performance spaces would be displaced (staff said designation would not itself displace current users), and whether the town had performed a pre‑purchase inspection before acquiring the site.

Collie explained his methodology when questioned: he counted an entire building's square footage toward the campus total if he observed water damage in that building, and he pointed to appendices and photographs that document building‑by‑building conditions rather than room‑by‑room square‑foot calculations. He also acknowledged that some campus facilities — notably the newer Cullen Center and other performance spaces — are in good condition and continue to be used by arts groups.

After public comment and additional board discussion, Linda Schwimmer moved the resolution recommending the two parcels — 27 Franklin Ave (block 7301, lot 1) and 101 Walnut Ln (block 31.01, lot 105) — be designated a non‑condemnation area in need of redevelopment and submitted to the mayor and council. The motion, seconded by board member David O'Donnell, passed on a unanimous roll call vote of those present: Mr. Bottingham; Councilman Cohen; Mayor Freda; Mr. McGawan; Miss Na; Mr. O'Donnell; Miss Schwimmer; Mr. Taylor; and Chair Wilson.

What comes next: if the council accepts the board's recommendation (the council is expected to consider the recommendation at its next meeting), the municipality would typically commission a redevelopment plan and a public engagement process to decide which buildings are candidates for adaptive reuse, what uses would be allowed, and whether any municipal or private financing tools will be offered. The board and staff repeatedly emphasized that designation is a statutory step that does not itself change zoning, authorize demolition or permit eminent domain (the municipality already owns the property).