Princeton planning board approves Toll site plan for 29 Thanet Circle with conditions on parking, noise and landscaping

Princeton — The Princeton Planning Board voted 8–0 on June 4 to approve preliminary and final major site development for an application by Toll and J1 LLC at 29 Thanet Circle (Block 5502, Lot 5; Zone AH‑14; file P2525‑712P), subject to a set of conditions the board read and discussed point-by-point.

Chair Wilson opened the meeting and said the public comment period for this application had closed at the board’s previous meeting, so no public comment would be taken at tonight’s hearing. Nathan, planning staff, framed the board’s task as deciding the substance of conditions rather than “wordsmithing” final text.

Key conditions approved include a requirement that shared lane markings be centered in each lane; at least one EV parking space be ADA‑accessible; plan notation and signage reserving parking for affordable units; provision of 240‑volt rough‑ins in garages where feasible; the submission of all elevations and floor plans during compliance review; and revised fenestration (more windows) on end walls of certain buildings. "So just to lay the groundwork for the work that the board is doing...we're looking more or less at the broad strokes of the conditions," Nathan said as he began the review.

On EV accessibility, a staff wording read into the record required that "the DCA requires that an EV charging station must be handicap accessible" and that at least one proposed EV space must be accessible; the applicant signaled agreement. Jerry read the suggested staff language and later summarized noise-monitoring language: "It shall show how noise levels at the property line shall be monitored and comply with state and any other applicable regulations." The board agreed that the demolition and construction management plan must address off‑site impacts including noise and dust and that the plan would be subject to review and approval by the municipal land‑use engineer.

The board also required that garages not be used for storage in a way that impedes parking, with enforcement left to the HOA; it directed the removal of a proposed shed roof and conversion of one two‑bedroom unit into a three‑bedroom unit; and it required exterior materials for market‑rate and affordable units to be consistent across the development. Staff will review the final bedroom and income‑level unit distribution for compliance with UHAC and other statutory requirements.

Landscape and environmental protections were a focus. The applicant must conduct a site visit with the municipal landscape architect, arborist and a Governors Lane HOA representative to discuss screening and a potential permanent fence; final landscaping will be subject to the landscape committee’s review. Board members favored folding chemical restrictions into a principles‑based landscape management plan (native plantings, IPM, minimizing lawns) rather than listing banned products. The board also required that roofs be solar‑ready (conduits to the roof) and that exterior lighting be dark‑sky compliant.

Staff and the environmental commissioner asked the applicant to consider additional buffer or wetland protections and all‑electric appliances where feasible; the applicant said site and network constraints limit full electrification but agreed to consider buffer improvements in the landscape plan. Stormwater items and items raised by the stormwater consultant will be incorporated into the resolution, and the applicant must submit a November 2025 fire flow test and have plans reviewed by the fire official.

A board member moved to approve the application "pending all the conditions that we've just discussed," and Miss Nuka seconded. The clerk called the roll and eight members — Councilman Cohen; McGowan; Miss Nuka; O'Donnell; Miss Perlmutter; Mister Taylor; Miss Wilson Anderson; and Chair Wilson — voted yes. The motion carried 8–0.

The chair thanked members of the public and scheduled staff to incorporate the agreed changes into a draft resolution and findings of fact for final memorialization. The board noted the next meeting is scheduled for June 18, which may be canceled.

Authorities and next steps: the resolution will reference statutory and ordinance requirements cited during the hearing (including UHAC and municipal ordinance provisions) and the planning staff will circulate the marked resolution and findings to the applicant and attorneys for final comments before the resolution is memorialized.