The application, which was approved at the Planning Board’s Sept. 16 meeting, calls for the demolition of three of the six buildings in the office park. The two buildings that have frontage on Princeton Pike and a third office building adjacent to them are slated to be torn down.

The Lawrenceville Development Group LLC will construct a three-story apartment building and a two-story mixed-use building in a development to be known as Canvas. There will be 204 rental apartments, to include 15% – or 31 units – to be set aside for affordable housing.

The plan calls for the two-story building to be built on the front part of the property on Princeton Pike. There will be 17,510 square feet of retail space and one apartment on the first floor, and 27 apartments on the second floor.

A three-story building that contains 176 apartments will be built at the rear of the property. It will wrap around two inner courtyards that will include a swimming pool, two fire pits and a barbeque dining area.

Additional amenities in the development include a dog park, a boardwalk, and cafe and lounge seating next to the two-story mixed-used building along the Princeton Pike frontage.

Project architect Stephen Schoch said there will be 93 one-bedroom apartments, 104 two-bedroom apartments and seven three-bedroom apartments. The 31 apartments set aside for affordable housing will be scattered throughout the buildings.

The development has been designed with sustainability in mind, Schoch said. The plumbing fixtures are low-flow, and all of the appliances are electric – including heat pumps to cool and heat the units, Schoch said.

The mixed-use building will have as many as 11 retail stores. The goal is to attract “experiential” retail stores, and will be treated as a place that people want to visit, he said.

The building will not look like a typical strip shopping center. It has been designed to make it attractive on both sides – the side facing Princeton Pike and the side facing the three-story apartment building, Schoch said.

Planner Paul Gleitz said the apartment development is a great transitional use between the residential developments around the corner on Franklin Corner Road and the office park and non-residential uses nearby.

“We are not plopping (residences) in the middle of an office park,” he said.

The 204-unit apartment development should add about 50 students to the Lawrence Township Public Schools, he said. It is not geared toward families, most of whom would want a yard for their children.

It is aimed at young professionals and empty nesters. They want amenities such as a dog park, a swimming pool and a gym, but not the maintenance of a home, he said.

Municipal Manager Kevin Nerwinski agreed. He is also the township’s Community Development director and sits on the Planning Board.

“We want to provide an opportunity for young people to stay (in Lawrence) and for older residents to stay,” he said. “This is what we want, and this is what the applicant agreed.”

During the public comment portion of the meeting, two residents said they supported the development. One of the residents said that spreading the affordable housing units throughout the buildings would reduce the stigma of living in an affordable housing unit.

The meeting, which begins at 7 p.m., will be held in the lower level conference room at the Lawrence Township Municipal Building.

The Lawrenceville Development Group LLC is seeking preliminary and final major site plan approval to demolish three office buildings and to construct 204 residential units – including 15% to be set aside for affordable housing – and 17,510 square feet of retail space in their place.

Of those 204 apartments, the developer’s plan calls for 93 one-bedroom apartments, 104 two-bedroom apartments and seven three-bedroom apartments spread among two buildings. There would be 369 parking spaces on-site and 17 parking spaces on an adjacent lot.

A two-story building is planned for the front portion of the property. It would have 17,000 square feet of retail space on the first floor and 28 apartments, most of them on the second floor. Amenities include a dog park, a boardwalk, and cafe seating and lounge seating.

A three-story apartment building that contains 176 rental apartments is planned for the rear of the property. It wraps around two inner courtyards that include a swimming pool, two fire pit lounges and a barbeque dining area.

The Community Impact Statement, which was included with the application, states that the development would likely attract a demographic mix of singles, young couples and families. It would be expected to generate about 50 students who would attend the Lawrence Township Public Schools.

The anticipated increase in student population should not affect the township’s existing public school facilities, which should readily absorb the expected student population without requiring any building additions or increase to teaching staff, according to the development’s Community Impact Statement.

The former Princeton Pike Office Park, which sits on 8.5 acres, was designated as a non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment by the Lawrence Township Council in 2023. The redevelopment plan grew out of a developer’s proposal to redevelop it into a mixed-use development.

The Princeton Pike Office Park consists of 275,000 square feet of office space in six office buildings. The office park was built in 1970. The application is focused on three of the six office buildings which total 105,000 square feet. Most of the three office buildings to be demolished are vacant.

Members listened for more than an hour at its July 22 meeting as opponents of the proposed redevelopment plan staked out their position against it and proponents made their case for it. Many of the opponents live on Edgehill Street and Hibben Road, which border the property.

The 4.8-acre site was deemed a non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment in 2018, following a study of the property by the Princeton Planning Board at the request of the Princeton Council.

A redevelopment plan prepared by planning consultants Kyle McManus Associates was released on July 1, nearly seven years after the property was designated as a non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment.

In the interim, three buildings on the property – Tennent Hall, Roberts Hall and Whitely Gymnasium – have been demolished. A house at 92 Stockton St., which belongs to the seminary and is included in the redevelopment area, was preserved.

The redevelopment plan sets aside 20% of the 238 apartments for affordable housing. They would be deed-restricted for 30 years. It would be up to the Princeton Council at that point to extend the deed restriction.

Opponents of the proposed development were upset at the perceived lack of input. They were also upset about the density of the development, as well as traffic and stormwater impacts.

Jane MacLennon, who lives on Edgehill Street, said Princeton is well known for its historical significance and the role that it played during the American Revolutionary War, and for Princeton University.

“Princeton survived the Battle of Princeton,” she said. “Now, it feels like we are fighting the battle for Princeton.”

The proposed redevelopment of the seminary property is the most recent attack, she said.

The 56-foot-tall apartment buildings would tower over the homes on Edgehill Street and Hibben Road, MacLennon said. There would be a lack of privacy. Any attempt to “urbanize” the town is poor stewardship by town officials, she said.

Hibben Road resident Patrick McDonnell said that while the neighbors are not opposed to affordable housing per se, they are the ones who are most affected by the proposed development.

“We asked for three years to be part (of the discussion),” he said. “You talked to the developer and his team for three years, and we get three stinking minutes.”

Public comment at the Princeton Council meetings is limited to three minutes per speaker.

Supporters of the redevelopment effort said there is a need for more housing – both market rate apartments and affordable apartments.

Nate Myers, who lives on Prospect Avenue, said that if the Princeton Council does not accept the project in which a local developer worked with the town in good faith, there is a risk that the property would be sold to a bigger developer who might try to build a larger development.

Responding to criticism of the project, Myers said that “we can be better than this. It is our privilege to live in this town and it should not be just ours.”

Fighting against affordable housing is an “accidentally” selfish act, Myers said.

“It is knocking down the ladder behind us. It is keeping all the benefits of our town to ourselves. (Redevelopment) is an opportunity for 200 new people to benefit from aspects of the town that we value so strongly,” he said.

Valley Road resident Jeffrey Oakman said there is a need to offer more housing – as a national matter, a state matter and a local matter. Oakman lives near the Princeton Shopping Center and the new apartment developments constructed by AvalonBay Communities and WinnCompanies.

“We need more housing of all kinds, especially in a place like Princeton (so) people can have access to the quality of life and the amenities that we all enjoy here,” he said. “To our credit, the town is actually building housing.”

As the Princeton Council members prepared to cast their votes after the public hearing, they each said they supported the ordinance and the redevelopment plan.

They also responded to some of the comments made by the residents.

Councilman David Cohen said that the apartments would reduce commuter traffic by providing housing for people who work in town and cannot afford to live in Princeton.

The development would be designed so that most of the vehicles entering and exiting the development would do so on Stockton Street, he said. Steps have been taken to limit the traffic on Hibben Road.

Councilwoman Eve Niedergang said the Princeton Council’s decisions are made in the best interests of the community at large.

“To insinuate that because we disagree with you that we do not have the best interests of the town in mind is really distressing,” she said.

Niedergang cautioned that if the project does not go forward with proposed developer Herring Properties, another developer would step in. There would still be a 20% set-aside for affordable housing, but there could be an increase in the overall number of apartments, she said.

Councilwoman Mia Sacks said the development is not a cookie-cutter design and will be very expensive to build. The development will include underground parking spaces, for instance. Those spaces can cost $40,000 to build, she said.

The neighbors are fortunate that they are getting this project and not some of the others that are being built in other parts of town, Sacks said.

The neighbors may not like the development, but the Princeton Council does not deal in the realm of the ideal, she said. The Council deals within the framework of reality and the choices that are open to it.