Toll proposes 85‑unit townhome redevelopment at Thanet Circle; board raises stormwater, parking and accessibility questions, hearing continued

Toll NJ1 LLC presented a preliminary and final major-site application on May 7 for 29 Thanet Circle (block 5502, lot 5) to remove a vacant office building and build 10 townhouse buildings with 85 units (68 market-rate, 17 affordable) under the AH14 affordable-housing zone.

Alex Stoall, Toll’s senior land-entitlements manager, described the project as the result of extensive refinement and municipal collaboration and said the AH14 zoning was crafted to enable the redevelopment. The civil engineer described site constraints: an unnamed tributary that flows to Harry’s Brook branch two, three conservation easements that contain flood-hazard areas, and sloping topography that funnels stormwater toward the tributary. The applicant proposes a stormwater program that includes five pervious‑pavement filter/detention basins, an upgraded bio‑retention basin, and modifications of an existing detention basin. The team said models show post‑development runoff rates will not increase compared with existing conditions.

Project highlights and key data presented by the applicant:

- 85 total units: 68 market-rate, 17 affordable (part of Princeton’s fourth‑round obligation). Affordable units are clustered in Buildings G and H; several affordability and unit‑mix questions remain to be addressed. - Parking: 146 garage spaces and 40 surface spaces (186 total). The AH14 parking table and on‑site counting yield a required minimum of 153 spaces and the applicant calculates compliance; staff raised concerns about distribution of visitor and accessible spaces between the eastern and western portions of the site. - Trees and landscaping: the plan anticipates removing ~180 trees and replanting roughly 202 trees in the landscape scheme; the applicant agreed to correct the count to meet the municipal requirement of 204 replacement trees. - Stormwater: applicant’s engineer described pervious pavement basins, a bio‑retention basin and upgraded existing basin; both municipal and applicant engineers noted the tributary and repairarian buffers and emphasized protections during construction.

Board professionals and members pressed the applicant on several areas: the exact NJDOT/dedication history for other projects (in the Wasco item), timeline for the board surveyor’s review for the earlier item, and — for the Toll proposal specifically — stormwater compliance under the 2.5‑acre small‑green‑infrastructure rule, construction‑period protections for the tributary, pedestrian and bicycle circulation connecting the two halves of the site, parking distribution and the location of ADA/accessible spaces relative to accessible affordable units, and the final architectural treatment for buildings not yet fully shown in plans.

Jim Purcell (municipal engineer), Joe Scopian (stormwater consultant), Victor (traffic reviewer) and other municipal consultants identified areas that need clarification or additional detail: final meets‑and‑bounds and survey signoffs; stormwater O&M manual; pedestrian safety to the playground; accessible‑parking proximity to ADA units; confirmation of replacement‑tree accounting; and details on trash pickup logistics (private hauler vs. municipal). Traffic consultant Corey Chase testified the project generates modest peak‑hour traffic (an estimated 48 PM‑peak trips) and does not materially degrade the analyzed intersection (Thanet Circle/Terune Road) under the cumulative scenarios included in the study.

Several board members asked for revised drawings and clarifications before the board acts. The applicant agreed to provide additional architectural plans for all building types, clarify meets‑and‑bounds and survey timing, adjust accessible parking placement if needed, resolve the tree‑replacement count, and supply a stormwater facilities operation-and‑maintenance manual.

Outcome: the board did not take a final vote on the Toll application. The hearing was continued to the board’s next regular meeting on May 28 for follow-up testimony and for municipal professionals to review revised materials. The applicant and staff indicated they will exchange updated materials before that date.

Next steps: applicant to submit detailed architectural drawings for all buildings, a corrected replacement‑tree schedule to reach 204 replacement trees, an O&M manual for stormwater facilities, clarified ADA/visitor parking locations, and construction‑period protections for the tributary; municipal professionals will review and circulate comments to the board ahead of the May 28 continuation.