if the land isn't protected already, then they have the right to build on it. considering there's a park right next door, the relevant preservation parties must have thought about purchasing the institute's land before the institute bought it (the story doesn't go in to the history of the parcel). But they didn't and the institute did. Now they want to build on it - tough noogies for the preservation society. And it sure seems like the institute already changed a lot about their plan to help mollify the preservationists.
1
I am somewhat conflicted about leaving large tracts of land empty as memorials to battles. The participants probably would see more sense in farming the land, putting it to good use, and if desired erecting a monument or plaque of some kind in memory. I was at a ball field opposite the Donald W. Wyatt Detention Facility, located in Central Falls, RI and discovered a plaque out in right field memorializing a massacre of settlers by Indians back in the colonial era. I was stunned and brought the plaque to the attention of the ball players who had been there many times and none of them were aware of the plaque or massacre. I thought more could have been done to memorialize the event but on the other hand a ball field was a good use for the land. I think the compromises made by the Institute for Advanced Study are good ones.
2
Our forefathers fought and died on that field. It shouldn't matter if it were 20 soldiers or 2,000 American troops. It is an important part of the battlefield which needs to be preserved and interpreted. The number of Revolutionary War sites is much less that Civil War sites. It doesn't make them any less important.
Sites such as this are National Historic landmarks and should be treated as such.
Sites such as this are National Historic landmarks and should be treated as such.
1
The IAS is too big for its big intellectual breeches and is in breach of faith to America. It should not be permitted to do this. It is a foul and wrong thing for the IAS to do and it must be stopped. That land belongs to history, to heritage,to me and to you and should not be blighted by the arrogance of the IAS, which was founded to respect thought and intellect, not to trammel and trample.
2
No-one who has taken the time to read the superb John Milner Associates' study: “Battle of Princeton Mapping Project: Report of Military Terrain Analysis and Battle Narrative” can reasonably doubt that the location where the Institute is hoping to build their faculty housing is indeed the site of a key portion of Washington's counterattack. Messrs Crackel and Peterson imply otherwise, but perhaps they have not had the opportunity to read the study in detail.
The Institute for Advanced Study should be acknowledged for some of the steps they have taken to address the historic landscape preservation issues. However, it remains very disappointing that a well-endowed academic institution of such international prestige, (and one with its own School of Historical Studies), does not apparently have the vision to see that it has an ethical imperative to protect this National Historic Landmark. They may argue that they have the law on their side, but they will certainly have lost the moral high ground if they continue with this misguided plan.
The Institute for Advanced Study should be acknowledged for some of the steps they have taken to address the historic landscape preservation issues. However, it remains very disappointing that a well-endowed academic institution of such international prestige, (and one with its own School of Historical Studies), does not apparently have the vision to see that it has an ethical imperative to protect this National Historic Landmark. They may argue that they have the law on their side, but they will certainly have lost the moral high ground if they continue with this misguided plan.
3
The Miner Report was commissioned with a predetermined conclusion and is the most absurd study of a Revolutionary War battle ever conceived. They have altered facts, numbers and positions to place Washington precisely on the Maxwell Tract. The silliest thing is the British line, depicted as a quarter of a mile long.
I'm puzzled about your thinking here. Apparently, and correct me if I'm wrong, you believe that this land should forever pristine and not suffer construction. You believe that the Institute should have known this when they purchased the land. In effect you believe that the private institute is some kind of charity? It's not. They likely bought that land for a pretty penny with the understanding that they could expand there. If you're suddenly going to change what can be done on that land, then you should figure out how to pay for that privilege.
This is private land likely purchased with the expectation that it would be built upon: Suddenly adding a tremendous encumbrance like what your suggesting, boy that sure would be nice of those land owners to just give away their land for preservation! But again, the land owner isn't some charity group, and there's no real reason why the land owner should do that
This is private land likely purchased with the expectation that it would be built upon: Suddenly adding a tremendous encumbrance like what your suggesting, boy that sure would be nice of those land owners to just give away their land for preservation! But again, the land owner isn't some charity group, and there's no real reason why the land owner should do that
1
Every state park or animal refuge is challenged eventually. Someone finds oil or some mineral, or a road needs to be built, or keeping it closed prevents jobs etc. That reasoning may have worked when chasing native Americans off of their land, but it does not fly today.
Just leave the park for history and visitors. Once developed, it is gone forever. If blame needs to be placed, blame whomever built the University so close to the battlefield park in the first place.
Just leave the park for history and visitors. Once developed, it is gone forever. If blame needs to be placed, blame whomever built the University so close to the battlefield park in the first place.
I notice a certain contradiction in some of the comments. On the one hand they want open space, on the other they deplore houses with plenty of open space around them,
2
I know this area well and used to walk often on both properties. I'm glad that the Institute has adapted its plans but it is still ridiculous to put single houses on a full acre of land each, especially in an "academic village." I live in a large house that sits comfortably on one-third of an acre in a historic neighborhood not unlike many neighborhoods in Princeton. It is far more conducive to "interactions" than houses that are spaced further apart, while still maintaining privacy and quiet. I think the Institute needs to revise its plans again to protect more of the greenspace. One acre lots are silly and wasteful given the location and historic context.
11
Please reread the article. The original plan called for 15 single houses on single acres. The new plan calls for town houses on a total of seven acres with more protection of greenspace.
2
I think that so far we haven't yet squandered nearly enough of our time and energy and resources on polarized confrontations. The partisan excesses in Washington aren't remotely sufficient to sate our appetites. Let's battle over EVERYTHING in every city, town and village across America! I doubt there is any question, federal, state or local, that can't be turned into a protracted debate, preferably ending up either in litigation or in interminable political adversity. In fact, just so we leave no stone unturned, let's argue about arguing!
4
Plenty of room in Trenton for the building. Not a far of a drive at all. I get gas in Trenton once a week while out running errands. Trenton could use the project...this is an understatement. The land historic or not should be left open. Enough building in the area.
7
You think they could recruit faculty and guests if they made them live in Trenton? Wow.
3
Heh, Princeton and Princeton Junction are filling up, it's only going to be a matter of time before student housing for Princeton Univ and College of NJ start popping up in Trenton. Temple (UPenn and Drexel's neighborhood use to not be all that great either) seems to manage to recruit decent students and faculty..sure Princeton and IAS can figure it out.
The opportunity to help Trenton should have been advanced when Merrill Lynch built their corporate offices in Plainsboro and Hopewell. Or when Mercer Medical moved from Trenton to Hopewell. Trenton's problems are ignored
1
The land should be protected. The original plan of building 15 houses in 15 acres is huge, and even the new plan of 7 in 7 still is a big area. You are talking about housing people that won't live in NJ for over 5 years. These people travel and move constantly. They should build a facility, sort of like a city style dorm building to house them. You do not need to give these people nice houses with nice areas, you do not need to provide them with their own private village. They are already isolated from regular professors and other scholars.
I think the history value of the land, accurate or inaccurate, matters.
I think the history value of the land, accurate or inaccurate, matters.
4
Having spent 3 years at IAS starting in 1964, I can safely report this person has no idea what he is talking about. With a few exceptions, the permanent members were usually around participating in seminars and most of them could be found at tea. Most of them never leave once appointed.
8
Nothing against this article (which is well-written and informative), but it's just one more case study about the way of the modern world, in which:
1. Open spaces are losing interminably to overpopulation
2. Developer interests always trump Homeowners' and Preservationists'
The meadow and natural skating pond behind my parents' house was untouched through the '70s, my formative years. By 1985 -- midpoint of the decade that kicked off The Age of Greed -- a shopping center and parking lot had done in that Good Earth. This is how it is all over America.
It took 225 years for the U.S. population to reach 300 million. Today, just 10 years after some coddling innocent set that dubious mark, we've added 20 million more to our insatiable litter.
Within 50 years, inquisitive and archival types will come across this article and chuckle about the holier-than-thous who'd actually cared about something so trifling as "preserving land." And then they'll ask, "What the hell was the Battle of Princeton?"
1. Open spaces are losing interminably to overpopulation
2. Developer interests always trump Homeowners' and Preservationists'
The meadow and natural skating pond behind my parents' house was untouched through the '70s, my formative years. By 1985 -- midpoint of the decade that kicked off The Age of Greed -- a shopping center and parking lot had done in that Good Earth. This is how it is all over America.
It took 225 years for the U.S. population to reach 300 million. Today, just 10 years after some coddling innocent set that dubious mark, we've added 20 million more to our insatiable litter.
Within 50 years, inquisitive and archival types will come across this article and chuckle about the holier-than-thous who'd actually cared about something so trifling as "preserving land." And then they'll ask, "What the hell was the Battle of Princeton?"
7
Faculty housing? Really? Bury history for faculty housing? Princeton area has plenty of housing available for faculty.
I think I'll relocate a few spotted owls from the northwest to the site. Then they will never be able to develop the battlefield!
I think I'll relocate a few spotted owls from the northwest to the site. Then they will never be able to develop the battlefield!
2
History is written by the winners.
Why are we Americans so fascinated by war? Perhaps because we have had so few battles (except for the Civil War) take place on our soil? We have National Parks and Monuments for every skirmish it seems. Can you imagine if Afghanistan or Serbia had an historical park for all of its bloodletting?
Tony Horwitz wrote a superbly funny and unfortunately true novel about the South with “Confederates in the Attic.” As Horwitz toured the South gathering info for this book he asked a Park Ranger at Fort Sumter what was the strangest question he had ever received. The Ranger said that an American tourist asked him “Why is it so many Civil War battles were fought in National Parks?”
Is it REALLY necessary to set aside land for every battle? No wonder our Pentagon budget keeps going up year after year....”muricans love war!
Why are we Americans so fascinated by war? Perhaps because we have had so few battles (except for the Civil War) take place on our soil? We have National Parks and Monuments for every skirmish it seems. Can you imagine if Afghanistan or Serbia had an historical park for all of its bloodletting?
Tony Horwitz wrote a superbly funny and unfortunately true novel about the South with “Confederates in the Attic.” As Horwitz toured the South gathering info for this book he asked a Park Ranger at Fort Sumter what was the strangest question he had ever received. The Ranger said that an American tourist asked him “Why is it so many Civil War battles were fought in National Parks?”
Is it REALLY necessary to set aside land for every battle? No wonder our Pentagon budget keeps going up year after year....”muricans love war!
3
We sold our house in Princeton on Nassau in the mid-1990's for about $400k, and now it would sell for over a million. Faculty members, even at the Institute, may need subsidized housing to live in the borough these days.
1
But they don't need one-acre lots.
3
Bulldozing history?
Burying the past?
Princeton has seen too much development in past 50 years.
I am for #OpenSpace.
Burying the past?
Princeton has seen too much development in past 50 years.
I am for #OpenSpace.
9
The Institute has plenty of area to develop without using this land. I run around their campus and in the beautiful woods behind often. Their buildings are very spread out. All you have to do is run a mile further to see Princeton's campus density to know that this is about ego and not about actual highest and best use of space.
10
"In the Battle of Princeton, however, only a few dozen men were killed."
That's not a battle, that's a skirmish.
That's not a battle, that's a skirmish.
5
No, the Battle of Princeton was one of the toughest fought battles of the Revolution; while the numbers were small, there were more officers killed in a matter of minutes than battles like Monmouth that lasted all day. Princeton was hardly a skirmish, and Washington himself was on horseback between two fires and miraculously was not killed- the history is clear on this point.
1
Wait, are you telling me Washington won a battle? Doesn't seem to have been much of a battle, and Washington began an American tradition of exaggerating the number of enemy killed.
Princeton has to put its act together. First, the militants demanding the University detachment from the memory of Woodrow Wilson -- a move that only attests to their ignorance of the history of societal relationships. Now, a housing plan for as historical battlefield.
Next may come calls for the erasure of the names of Aaron Burr Sr and Jr from Princeton's history: the former, because some may object to his religious beliefs in the 18th century; the latter, for wanting the become an emperor of the lands West of the Mississippi and from Mexico to as far North as he could get.
Next may come calls for the erasure of the names of Aaron Burr Sr and Jr from Princeton's history: the former, because some may object to his religious beliefs in the 18th century; the latter, for wanting the become an emperor of the lands West of the Mississippi and from Mexico to as far North as he could get.
1
The university deserves the Woodrow Wilson School.
1
The Institute for Advanced Study is in the town of Princeton; it is not part of the university.
3
I understand that the earlier proposal for housing units has been modified to reduce the footprint of the new housing by including townhouses. But 7 houses are still being proposed on I acre each. Is this really necessary? The argument seems to be that some faculty members have to live far away from campus because of the high costs of housing in the vicinity of the campus. Is the answer to this in building houses to accommodate them on what amounts to estate sized lots, probably costing more than a million dollars each?
8
The Institute should consider a more dense housing plan on its original site---over there by the Princeton Golf Course.
3
Save the battlefield, it is part of New Jersey's unique heritage. There is plenty of open space in nearby Lawrence and Hopewell Townships. Place the proposed buildings there. Work out a deal with the municipal governments. I am sure there is wiggle room for everyone.
5
the article plainly states that the parcel in question is next to the battlefield's state park, so it's not part of the existing park. Also that entire area evidently could be viewed as part of the battle, yet there's obviously tons of construction done these last few centuries. There is already a park to commemorate the battle; this parcel is private land, probably bought with the idea that some development would occur. Yet everyone here seems to forget that chunks of land in princeton can be expensive, and insisting that the owner not be able to build on it would severely reduce the cost of this lot.
1
The "Saw Mill Road" of this study is a misnomer. The name was never applied to a supposed path leading from town to the Quaker Meeting House, but appeared on a deed of 1772 in reference to a road along Stony Brook leading to a small mill house. A later historian, Samuel Stelle Smith, misinterpreted the deed and called the supposed back road "The Saw Mill Road." The authors of the Milner Report totally butchered local history, identifying roads from 1777 by walking around and picking and choosing what they thought would support their conclusions. Never mind many of the features did not exist until the 19th or 20th century.
4
This is an absurd controversy, Someone wealthy enough should pony up whatever is needed to bribe Princeton away from the land, then purchase it as a national preservation site. Then, land not currently belonging to Princeton could be purchased nearby, developed as faculty housing for Princeton and just given to them.
Is it necessary to fight over EVERYTHING?
Is it necessary to fight over EVERYTHING?
9
The story doesn't mention the Civil Trust offered 4.5 million for the tract. But the IAS has millions more, that's a pittance to them.
4
It's the IAS, not Princeton uni, or anything associated with name.
Talk about honoring the dead, when Einstein died, he was very specific, that no statue be built in his honor.
A statue was built in his honor, despite his wishes.Even in death,
he didn't get what he wanted.
Talk about honoring the dead, when Einstein died, he was very specific, that no statue be built in his honor.
A statue was built in his honor, despite his wishes.Even in death,
he didn't get what he wanted.
1
Where is this statue? There is one in Washington, and a bust near the old borough town hall, but none at the Institute.
The problem with the Battlefield Society is they commissioned the study with the predetermined conclusion that Washington's stand took place on the spot where the housing is to be built- the study is totally absurd. In the meantime the Thomas Clarke House, where General Hugh Mercer died, is in shambles. Washington's Stand occurred in the current park, but the site of the first part of the battle was wiped out by the Mercer Road (Princeton-Trenton Turnpike in the 1800s) and then by the IAS housing built in the late 50s and early 60s. The report, called the Milner Report, is a fairy tale, plain and simple.
5
I have visited battlefields of the American Revolution and the American Civil War across the country. One of my favorites is Surrender Field, Yorktown where the British General Cornwallis' Army surrendered after the combined assaults of French and American troops. The war continued fitfully for a little bit but that surrender ended the British invasion. If you've ever visited just that singularly famous battlefield it is beyond inspiring. The redoubts of the British are still there. Along roads you can picture the American and French forces manning their guns and planning the assault of the redoubts.
What we take away from those battlefields is that the war, the men and history is real. Two great armies faced off and only one was victorious. The sheer size of the battlefields at Yorktown are impressive. Valley Forge is another such field of history. The encampments tell the story of a new Republic struggling against all odds just to survive.
There is no need whatsoever to intrude upon and slowly diminish our great history by piece-meal destruction of the battlefields of the past.
Whatever it takes the preservationists must stand fast. These battlefields, Princeton, Saratoga, Yorktown, Bunker Hill, Trenton and the rest are a monument to history that we must always respect, preserve and make accessible to future generations of Americans. When we visit these sacred grounds the lives lost there have real meaning. The sacrifices were not in vain and not forgotten.
What we take away from those battlefields is that the war, the men and history is real. Two great armies faced off and only one was victorious. The sheer size of the battlefields at Yorktown are impressive. Valley Forge is another such field of history. The encampments tell the story of a new Republic struggling against all odds just to survive.
There is no need whatsoever to intrude upon and slowly diminish our great history by piece-meal destruction of the battlefields of the past.
Whatever it takes the preservationists must stand fast. These battlefields, Princeton, Saratoga, Yorktown, Bunker Hill, Trenton and the rest are a monument to history that we must always respect, preserve and make accessible to future generations of Americans. When we visit these sacred grounds the lives lost there have real meaning. The sacrifices were not in vain and not forgotten.
19
I have taken my kids to the Princeton Battlefield, and most heartily agree. The open space lends to contemplation and deep reflection. Contrast the battle sites of Trenton where natural urban development has largely buried the resonance of history.
2
howcanwefixthis nyc
Thank you! If you'd like to take your kids to another inspiring battlefield I encourage you to visit Gettysburg. If you get to see the re-enactors on July 4th that is also inspiring. My favorites are Yorktown, Gettysburg, Fort William Henry and Crown Point / Fort Ticonderoga. There are many more but these make you stop and reflect. Our American history is real. Many courageous people suffered and died for us. We must honor them and the heritage they built for us.
Thank you! If you'd like to take your kids to another inspiring battlefield I encourage you to visit Gettysburg. If you get to see the re-enactors on July 4th that is also inspiring. My favorites are Yorktown, Gettysburg, Fort William Henry and Crown Point / Fort Ticonderoga. There are many more but these make you stop and reflect. Our American history is real. Many courageous people suffered and died for us. We must honor them and the heritage they built for us.
1
Save the battlefield. It is for all Americans - now and always - to visit and ponder.
Housing? Really?
Housing? Really?
4
I don't live there anymore, but I used to. There is PLENTY of development everywhere else. Leave the battlefield alone. Enough is enough. I hope the preservationists keep working to keep this away. It's a great tax base already! What the heck is the Council thinking about?
8
To add insult to injury- IAS doesn't pay taxes to Princeton or its schools. People come from all over the world and Princeton taxpayers pay for their children to be educated.
2
I was lucky enough to spend a year as a visiting scholar at the Institute. While I understand some of the concerns of opponents, I also think this is an important, relatively low-impact development that will help sustain and foster the Institute's unique character. Moreover, the land where Einstein, Godel, Panofsky, Geertz and many others worked has some claim to being pretty special, if not sacred.
6
Einstein, Godel, etc. did their famous work elsewhere. The Institute is famous (or notorious) for senior faculty with glorious past accomplishments who did comparatively little there.
3
Not true Jonathan. Stored program computers were developed at the Institute. The Langlands program was and is centered there. It is a center for Homoyp[y type theory as well as string theory and M-theory. Marston Morse wrote his famous book, Calculus of Variations in the Large, at the Institute.
And so on.
And so on.
4
I meant homotopy type theory.
While both sides seem to have plausible arguments, the 8000-plus acres of his own Mt. Vernon plantation would seem to indicate that Gen. Washington did like his elbow room.
1
He was a farmer before the war and after his presidency; one needs land to farm.
1
As a former one-year member of the IAS, I'd like to say that the principle of the physical proximity of scientists, scholars, artists, and other intellectuals lies at the heart of IAS identity. It's what makes this institution such an exciting, fruitful and thriving intellectual center. The development of the more or less contiguous plot of land will honor that identity as has not been possible in recent years. The nearby "protected" lands of the Institute are a beautiful forest with many paths that is open to the public as well as to Institute staff, members and faculty. I've walked the forest as well as that field many times and I think this is a terrific idea. Now if they could only preserve the current, brilliantly designed, dining room!
7
I know and like the Institute too, but there's no need for single houses on one-acre lots. Look at the many beautiful historic neighborhoods in Princeton with large houses on lots that are measured in feet, not acres. I don't begrudge them building housing but they could shrink the footprint a lot and preserve more greenspace as well as a close-knit neighborhood atmosphere by making the lots much smaller.
2
You would think the compromise to this matter lies somewhere in the Institute's 800 acres. Is there not a land use exception to allow some housing on the campus that doesn't infringe on the spirit on having no "development" on the three-quarter portion of the Institute that is set aside for preservation?
2
It's really sad that yet another piece of American history is about to be destroyed for tawdry faculty housing. The Institute for Advanced Studies should be ashamed of itself. I commute 45 minutes to work, can't cosseted faculty members of the institute do the same? Why - of all places - do they have to live on what is very likely a key part of the battlefield? Princeton has already seen way too much development over the past 50 years. Up until around 1960, it was actually possible to imagine what it was the landscape was like in 1777. Try doing that now. And every chip away at historical places and structures makes it easier to destroy the next one.
9
Build, build, build, pave, pave, pave. Its what makes New Jersey "Joisey". I remember, when I was growing up there, one of the oldest churches in Newark was permitted to pave over its adjacent historic cemetery and turn it into a commercial parking lot. And the parking lot has since been turned into the site of the Prudential Sports Arena. When the choice is between preservation of open space and history, vs development, development usually wins.
I am glad I left my native State years ago. Its not the Garden State. Its the "unmitigated greed" State.
I am glad I left my native State years ago. Its not the Garden State. Its the "unmitigated greed" State.
11
"The institute has all the approvals it needs — from Princeton’s planning board, the State Department of Environmental Protection and the Delaware and Raritan Canal Commission."
The flag-waving nutjobs from the battlefield preservation society have used their money and time to fight the institute at every one of these steps in the process- and lost. The historical facts are not on their side, nor is legal precedent. For those commenters complaining of the institute pursuing a vanity project, look instead at these dilettante "historians" wasting the state of New Jersey's money and time.
The flag-waving nutjobs from the battlefield preservation society have used their money and time to fight the institute at every one of these steps in the process- and lost. The historical facts are not on their side, nor is legal precedent. For those commenters complaining of the institute pursuing a vanity project, look instead at these dilettante "historians" wasting the state of New Jersey's money and time.
11
My husband, Chris Wren, played a central role for the Battlefield Society in earlier days of their resistance. Sadly, he passed away suddenly in the prime of his life so he can't defend the people who make up the Society from your malicious attacks. But trust me, he and the others he worked with were as far from dilettante historians as you could find. They were decent, sincere, intelligent and thoughtful people who refused to be bullied by the more powerful and wealthier Institute. Shame on you for castigating these fine people.
1
Yes, whenever will someone stand up to the bullying of the fat cats at those not-for-profit academic institutions? Those tyrants with their book learnin' will be saying history is based on facts next!
2
Next up -- the Alamo to be torn down for the highest skyscraper in the world.
This doesn't sound like "Advanced Studies" to me, just the same old ones.
5
Universities like to encroach on cityscapes and, too, on landscapes that should remain historic areas. New York University is eating up Greenwich Village; Columbia spreads itself all over the upper Upper West Side. Brooklyn College destroyed the beautiful vista of its campus from the west in order to put up a gym.
Cornell is always digging and building. And so it goes.
It's partly because they have a lot of money. Tuitions are astronomical in part because the government gives loans which allow the schools to keep raising tuitions. And so they keep expanding and building.
Funny except that many middle-class families have a hard time getting those loans and don't qualify for scholarships.
Cornell is always digging and building. And so it goes.
It's partly because they have a lot of money. Tuitions are astronomical in part because the government gives loans which allow the schools to keep raising tuitions. And so they keep expanding and building.
Funny except that many middle-class families have a hard time getting those loans and don't qualify for scholarships.
13
The Institute for Advanced Study "is an independent, postdoctoral research center for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry" with NO students.
You seem to be confusing it with a university that is located about a mile away. Or perhaps the Theological Seminary, also located in that same town.
You seem to be confusing it with a university that is located about a mile away. Or perhaps the Theological Seminary, also located in that same town.
7
Well, Coco, it was s general musing on the habit of gargantuan building that obsesses our places of higher learning (and institutes associated with them).
The Institute buildings are far from gargantuan. You should visit sometimes.
2
I've driven by the "battlefield" frequently and it looks like any old field, so all the fuss is lost on me. Next they'll be claiming that Washington slept there.
7
"Any old field....."
3
Step out of your car, and take a moment to contemplate what happened there. Visit the unmarked graves at the far end of the site and give thanks to those who died fighting for the liberties you enjoy.
3
A state or local agency needs to use eminent domain to grab the site before the clueless elitists from the "Institute for Advanced Study" further wreck it.
The way eminent domain works control and ownership of the property is seized by court order first, and all that the former property owner gets to argue about is the dollar value of the land taken.
This would clearly be land taken for a public purpose, a historic battlefield site.
I wish that now that Gov. Christie is back from a campaign trail he would use his administration's eminent domain powers to follow through on his prior snide remarks about liberal intellectual elitists in Princeton, NJ. Let's watch and see what he does.
The way eminent domain works control and ownership of the property is seized by court order first, and all that the former property owner gets to argue about is the dollar value of the land taken.
This would clearly be land taken for a public purpose, a historic battlefield site.
I wish that now that Gov. Christie is back from a campaign trail he would use his administration's eminent domain powers to follow through on his prior snide remarks about liberal intellectual elitists in Princeton, NJ. Let's watch and see what he does.
11
The Institute is a *residential* community of world-class scholars. The visiting scholars live on the campus and at present the faculty live in houses within walking distance of the Institute, and like the visiting scholars, are required to work on campus, take lunch in the communal dining room, and generally to be around. With the cost of houses and real estate taxes going sky high, I doubt new faculty can afford to live in the swank neighborhood next to the Institute. Commuting from across Rte 1 is not the point. Think monastery and you'll get closer to the Institute's zeitgeist. That is the land (which they happen to own) that is available to them to build on. It is the logical solution to their problem.
17
It may be a "logical solution" but short-sighted and ugly one. NJ has so little undeveloped land left, it would be criminal to build on what little is left. Nothing, absolutely nothing, can equal the beauty and peace this land brings. There is no price on this.
20
Not with single houses on one-acre lots, it isn't. That's hardly a "village". I know this area and property well. They should build a cluster of houses on a much smaller footprint.
1
Dean there are plenty of estate in Prince with 10 acres or more. O guess that O.K. if you're rich, but not if you are smart.
For all its many contributions to learning, in this case, the Institute is essentially acting like a high-handed developer in pushing a vanity project, and offering only token modifications as PR window-dressing. History (and nature) are irreplaceable! Buildings could be erected elsewhere, even if not necessarily in the Institute's preferred site!
Universities and cultural institutions are increasingly demanding the need to spread like octopuses, anywhere they want, in pursuit of their grand master-plans, even into public spaces and historical areas. They're really lost their collective way!
And I also wish the article has explained the statement:
"The institute’s 800-acre campus — nearly three-quarters of which is protected from development"
Protected by who/what? Why more "protected" than an historical site?
Universities and cultural institutions are increasingly demanding the need to spread like octopuses, anywhere they want, in pursuit of their grand master-plans, even into public spaces and historical areas. They're really lost their collective way!
And I also wish the article has explained the statement:
"The institute’s 800-acre campus — nearly three-quarters of which is protected from development"
Protected by who/what? Why more "protected" than an historical site?
22
The three-quarters (589-acre out of 800) of protected land is the Institute Woods. Here is a link that explains more about the nature preserve than what the article provided. https://www.ias.edu/about/institute-lands/refuge
The statement below is taken directly from the webpage of the link I provided:
Over the decades the Institute has provided land to help establish the nearby Princeton Battlefield State Park. In the early 1950s, the Institute leased land to the State to increase the size of the park, and in 1973, it conveyed thirty-two acres to the State to enlarge the size of the park by 60 percent. In 1959, the Institute donated the former Mercer Manor monumental portico that now stands on the Battlefield north of Mercer Road, commemorating the common grave of unknown American and British soldiers killed in the Battle of Princeton in 1777.
The statement below is taken directly from the webpage of the link I provided:
Over the decades the Institute has provided land to help establish the nearby Princeton Battlefield State Park. In the early 1950s, the Institute leased land to the State to increase the size of the park, and in 1973, it conveyed thirty-two acres to the State to enlarge the size of the park by 60 percent. In 1959, the Institute donated the former Mercer Manor monumental portico that now stands on the Battlefield north of Mercer Road, commemorating the common grave of unknown American and British soldiers killed in the Battle of Princeton in 1777.
By George, no building! The Institute should be shamed into changing their plans. History counts, beauty and truth too.
12
I would recommend letting the Civil War Trust do its thing - rustle up matching money and buy the missing pieces of the battlefield. just because a lot of the battlefield has been lost is no reason to develop over more of it. If anything it would strengthen the strong case for preservation f what is left. Perhaps a land exchange with the Institute could be arranged?
10
As a supporter of the Civil War Trust, the nation's largest battlefield preservation organization, and a group that has saved 41,000 acres of American battlefields--a nationwide entity the reporter dismissively characterizes as a "non-profit that advocates preserving battlefields"--I can assert, with conviction, the Trust would not for a second spend its precious donor resources on marginal land wherein doubt exists that a battle was fought, thereupon. Put bluntly, if the Trust's top-drawer historians--having no other agenda than fact-finding--have concluded General Washington's brave troops charged over acreage whereupon the Institute for Advanced Studies wishes to build "faculty housing," then there is no doubt in my mind as to who is right, and who is wrong. Truth be known, the Institute has lamentably joined the ranks of some commercial developers who, owning historical land, then seek to minimize its historic significance once they reveal grandiose building plans. Shame on the Institute! Let's reject their crass development intentions and rather pay homage to all soldiers and Marines who fought at Princeton! And as a former Marine, I would remind all fellow Marines that at Princeton, the Marine Corps fought its first land battle--a matter of no small distinction!
48
Well, a good way to ties this up for years is to an archaeological dig of the acreage being proposed fro development.
Unlike Europe, the United States is not blessed with historical sites going back beyond 400 years. Here is an opportunity to preserve a historical site. Even on Long Island, where there is high population density, a great deal of land has been put aside fro historical preservation.
Funny, I live in a 96 home town home community, and is on no more than two acres. The point is they are are taking far more land then they need. What are they going to build McMansions?
Of course, think tanks march to a different drummer. Their main concern, is not the research, but how much money they can get to run the institute. The dirty side of science in America. There is no such place as an institute where you come and do your own thing.
Unlike Europe, the United States is not blessed with historical sites going back beyond 400 years. Here is an opportunity to preserve a historical site. Even on Long Island, where there is high population density, a great deal of land has been put aside fro historical preservation.
Funny, I live in a 96 home town home community, and is on no more than two acres. The point is they are are taking far more land then they need. What are they going to build McMansions?
Of course, think tanks march to a different drummer. Their main concern, is not the research, but how much money they can get to run the institute. The dirty side of science in America. There is no such place as an institute where you come and do your own thing.
6
My first question...What can I do to help? Especially, when it comes down to our gallant U.S. Marines fighting there.
2
An archaeological dig was conducted in 2015, here is a link to the interim report.
https://www.ias.edu/files/pdfs/Final%20Interim%20Report%20-%20IAS%20Facu...
https://www.ias.edu/files/pdfs/Final%20Interim%20Report%20-%20IAS%20Facu...
Having grown up in Princeton and played on the Battlefield and roamed the woods surrounding the Institute for Advanced Study as a kid I say please don't do this. It will destroy a space that should remain open. Make the Institute scale back their plan so that they leave the Battlefield untouched.
50
This article is blatantly pro-development and heavily biased. You pay scant attention to archealogical surveys that prove heavy fighting occurred on this piece of property, and present this as preservationists trying to hold up a presitiguous educational institute. "In the Battle of Princeton, however, only a few dozen men were killed." A quote from the article, which is a flat out lie, given that anywhere from 43-144 men were killed outright at Princeton, with many hundreds more wounded. You should be ashamed.
33
If the number killed was 43, "a few dozen" would be an overstatement. 43 to 60 dead would be completely consistent with "a few dozen." Where does the 43 - 144 range come from?
The elephant in the room here is the quality of housing to be build and were the money is coming from. Be more specific on this subject; somehow I smell a hidden agenda and a rat.
9
Must we really save every piece of land where something famous occurred? We'll soon run out of land.
8
You're in Florida, so I can tell you're clueless, because virtually every square inch of Florida above swamp level is covered in roads and buildings. New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania are full of vacant land.
7
We will soon run out of heritage. Buildings can be built anywhere; battlefields are there to stay.
2
The battle of Princeton was part of a pivotal series of battles that changed the course of our history. Monuments such as this are touch points that help to remind us who we are and what we believe in.
To me "something famous" would be Trump, and far, far from the same thing.
To me "something famous" would be Trump, and far, far from the same thing.
In the 1950s we used to fly kites, picnic and roll hula hoops down to the giant oak tree at the Battlefield. Mercer Oak is long gone and we are growing old. Unfortunately some of us have not grown up. I suppose none of us will know for certain where Washington crossed the Delaware, or all the places where he slept, and people now don't want to stick their fingers in the holes from battle at Drumthwacket as we did. It is ironic that so many Americans interested in history travel the world to visit sites of battles, while at the same time willingly destroying our own heritage.
43
There is a tendency to relocate...even reshape history in that town.
2
Princeton needs to respect the nation's battlefield sites, the residents of Princeton, NJ, and its own place in the scheme of things.
A respected university, Princeton is engaging in corporate overreach. I hope the opposition scores a victory.
A respected university, Princeton is engaging in corporate overreach. I hope the opposition scores a victory.
13
The Institute for Advanced Study is separate from Princeton University. Two different organizations, though a few scholars have had one foot in each, like Einstein. This land fight does not involve the university.
3
This is America. Money sits up front, history takes the back seat, as we careen down the bumpy cash corridors of contentment.
4
One commenter described this land as "unused", as if that in itself is not a thing worth cherishing, historical value notwithstanding. Sad commentary, and sad state of affairs in Princeton.
14
Well, looking satellite view on Google maps it looks like it might be being farmed - odd mowing lines. So it's being used somehow.
Great to see a republican be anti-development and also, apparently, seeing value in the Clean Water Act, even if it doesn't apply here.
2
It's really unclear why – based on accounts in this article – "25 full-time faculty members" require a housing complex with a footprint essentially equal to the entire Institute itself; or why it has been designed to be so spread out, as opposed to closely circling the main campus. Regardless of the exact position of the battle, one might have thought – given the historical importance of the area – that the Institute for Advanced Study would have gone out of their way to direct the architect to do a very space-efficient design that barely encroaches upon the battlefield. It seems that a mixture of ego, ignorance of (or disinterest in) efficient design, and a dash of hubris has created a completely idiotic situation that the Institute could have not only avoided, but made into PR opportunity by doing a compact design around the campus that met everyone's goals. This just makes the leadership of the Institute look unprofessional, lacking in foresight and arrogant.
55
“frequent opportunities to personally interact, either intentionally or by chance.”
It is their land - it is legal - it passed zoning - it is rational.
Other than the irrational and magical - that are the only hoops that need traversing.
It is their land - it is legal - it passed zoning - it is rational.
Other than the irrational and magical - that are the only hoops that need traversing.
6
The residents of the houses on one acre will likely only interact when they roll out their garbage bins to the end of the driveway.
Could the Institute not reduce its administrative functions and staff to make room for housing in existing buildings?
What a shame to suburbanize even more of New Jersey, especially in a lovely oasis like Princeton.
Could the Institute not reduce its administrative functions and staff to make room for housing in existing buildings?
What a shame to suburbanize even more of New Jersey, especially in a lovely oasis like Princeton.
6
History must move aside to make room for the entitled.
15
Once you build on open historical green space it is more or less gone. It is extremely difficult to take eminent domain and tear down structures after buildings have been built. Let us discuss and reflect on why or why not the preservation of battlefields are important to us now and for future generations.
28
I grew up in and have spent ~80% of my life in Princeton. My parents and grandparents have lived there since the 50's. This is not a new story; the Institute has been playing this game for years, slowly developing more and more, encroaching on not only the Battlefield park, but also the swath of old growth forest (one of the last remaining forests of its kind in the northeastern US) that surrounds the Institute.
Please don't get me wrong; I think the Institute does incredibly valuable work, and is one of the many world-class institutions that makes me feel so fortunate to have grown up in Princeton. But this is by no means a "critical need," especially not one that would justify the desecration of not only hallowed land as some regard it, but a public space (which are becoming rarer and rarer in the ever-increasing trend towards privatization) that is beloved by the local (and no-doubt outside) communities.
I am sympathetic to the Institute's point of view, but ultimately I side with the people; the residents of Princeton are overwhelmingly against this development, and for good reason.
Please don't get me wrong; I think the Institute does incredibly valuable work, and is one of the many world-class institutions that makes me feel so fortunate to have grown up in Princeton. But this is by no means a "critical need," especially not one that would justify the desecration of not only hallowed land as some regard it, but a public space (which are becoming rarer and rarer in the ever-increasing trend towards privatization) that is beloved by the local (and no-doubt outside) communities.
I am sympathetic to the Institute's point of view, but ultimately I side with the people; the residents of Princeton are overwhelmingly against this development, and for good reason.
100
As someone who lived in Princeton for the past 21 years, I find your contention that "the residents of Princeton are overwhelmingly against this development" complete nonsense. Most support it (as evidenced by letters to local newspapers)-- and for good reason: the institute has been very good to the town, pledging not to develop large swaths of green space, allowing residents to use the woods etc. And the development makes sense and is being done carefully. The problem here starts in part because the Institute has been way too accommodating over the years, donating land or selling it on the cheap (some to create the park), to the point that local groups like the Battlefield society now think they have rights to private property.
Perhaps honor the people who died by honoring what they fought for? Property rights maybe?
Moe info : https://www.ias.edu/about/faculty-housing
Perhaps honor the people who died by honoring what they fought for? Property rights maybe?
Moe info : https://www.ias.edu/about/faculty-housing
7
What you describe is called "buying votes".
1
The fact that you think property rights are, or ought to be, the highest American value speaks volumes about your priorities and your judgement.
2
It has been said that if the Statue of Liberty was in NJ developers would melt it down for pennies and put a hotel/condo/roller coaster on Liberty Island. How true. The Institute and Princeton U are very rich, let them buy land nearby or in town for the housing or put it on the adjacent golf course.
59
The Statue of Liberty IS in New Jersey (at least by any intelligent reading of a map).
13
It IS in NJ.
2
The problem is that New York claimed 'riparian rights' to the high tide of the western edge of the Hudson River (and Upper New York Bay) during Colonial days. After the USA was established and NY was 'just' a state, the border was shifted to the middle of the Hudson River and a 'best guess' estimate of the middle of the Upper NY Bay to where the Verrazono Bridge now stands (the Narrows). Same with the Lower Bay. Bedloe's Island (now Liberty Island) was clearly on the New Jersey side of that boundary. But, when in 1886 (or thereabouts) the Statue of Liberty was installed, the Federal Government (or the Post Office) decided that Bedloe's Island would have a Manhattan Post Office Address. So, ever since Bedloe's (or Liberty) Island and also Ellis Island would be 'defined' as part of NY. Since they were both Federal territories and there was no practical effect, there has been no change. It is only important when people want to 'blame' New Jersey for things that did not even happen. There were not battle fought on either island. Harrumph.
1
Nice that they scaled back the development plan, but not sure why they still need 7 houses on an acre each. If you want more interaction among faculty, build only townhouses so they're actually closer to each other.
61
Preserving open space in that rapidly developing area should be a higher priority than "saving" every last square foot of a 250-years-past battle site. It seems the Institute for Advanced Study is doing exactly that. Cutting down on commuter traffic and sprawl, which adjacent faculty housing does, preserves the character of the area more than a few extra acres of largely-ignored state park.
15
And when some local Ivy League institution wants to build housing and classrooms on Bunker Hill (aka Breeds Hill) for an off-site institute, will you support construction on another "250-years-past battle site"?
13
They have other land within their campus that they could use. Look at how dense Princeton University land is with development, and yet they have preserved much open space, too. They demonstrate far more intelligent planning. The institute property that has already been developed is barely in use by comparison.
Maybe they should consult with Donald Trump. He is an expert on Revolutionary war sites. He will probably build another golf course on it after he becomes president. He could call it Trump's Revolutionary Country Club. Or as the members refer to it. The Rev.
12
There are times when historic preservation trumps new housing. This is one of those times.
66
The institute's insistence that this particular site is a critical need is nothing more than instituted hubris. I've been out and around the Princeton area, many, many times. There's plenty of land all over and around the area, on both the east and west side of Rt 1 for faculty housing.
69
I haven't lived in Princeton in a few decades, but Google Earth shows there is plenty of space right by the Institute, on Olden Lane south of Einstein Drive! The Institute could build cluster houses and townhomes there, right off Olden, with a tree buffer between them and the Institute. The insistence on one-acre lots is ridiculous, especially if the purpose of the housing is to facilitate interactions and an "academic village."
2
How typical that even this should come down to "honor our past somewhere else."
31
Why does accommodating endless population growth trump (no pun intended!) every other value? NJ is already the most densely populated state, an ugly tangle of highways and strip malls. Enough already.
47
If you get away from the major southwest/northeast thoroughfares - e.g., turnpike, northeast corridor - NJ is a pretty state.
The part that makes this a little interesting is that the Institute is the pro growth entity. It's motto - Beauty and Truth.
Meanwhile, across town at the University another interesting affair. President Eisgruber condemned police conduct concerning one of his professors. Turns out a body cam worn by the arresting officer shows the officer to have had the patience of Mother Teresa. The professor is a scofflaw who had been driving without a license for some time. So far, the Presidrnt has refused to apologize. To do so would be politically incorrect in his fiefdom.
Stay tuned.
The part that makes this a little interesting is that the Institute is the pro growth entity. It's motto - Beauty and Truth.
Meanwhile, across town at the University another interesting affair. President Eisgruber condemned police conduct concerning one of his professors. Turns out a body cam worn by the arresting officer shows the officer to have had the patience of Mother Teresa. The professor is a scofflaw who had been driving without a license for some time. So far, the Presidrnt has refused to apologize. To do so would be politically incorrect in his fiefdom.
Stay tuned.
22
Your generalization of NJ as ugly demonstrates you don't know the state very well. And coming as you do from a state as ugly as Florida largely is, I wouldn't point fingers either.
19
Whatever the boundaries of the Battle of Princeton are, David Hacket Fisher, mentioned in the Times' article, is the leading living historian on the subject. His reexamination of the battles at Trenton and near Princeton, as contained in his book "Washington's Crossing," is the definitive work on those New Jersey confrontations.
It also documents the development of Washington-the-General as a guerrilla fighter -- which won us the Revolutionary War.
It also documents the development of Washington-the-General as a guerrilla fighter -- which won us the Revolutionary War.
7