A plan to remove the two kiosks on Nassau Street has drawn pushback from some residents, who claim that the kiosks play a vital role in free expression in the community.
The Princeton Council unanimously agreed at its Oct. 28 meeting to remove the kiosks, which anchor Nassau Street at Witherspoon Street and at Vandeventer Avenue – but whether they would be replaced has not been decided.
The kiosk removal is part of the proposed Nassau Street streetscape project, which is a makeover of Nassau Street between Chambers Street and Moore Street. It envisions new sidewalks, curbs, benches and landscaping.
The kiosks have been in place since the late 1980s. They were built to house a pay telephone booth and newspaper racks. They are now home to fliers advertising everything from concerts to lectures to lost pets.
But a handful of residents spoke up at the Princeton Council’s Nov. 12 meeting to urge the council to reconsider removing the kiosks. They said the decision to remove them was made without public input.
Lucas Frye said the kiosks’ removal has been suggested several times, and each time there has been “serious pushback” from residents.
Frye said the earlier streetscape designs for Nassau Street showed the kiosks in place. The plan to remove them now was done without sufficient input.
“I think you are going to see a lot of people upset that the Princeton Council is acting this way,” he said. “It does not seem to follow the democratic procedure.
“These are vibrant community spaces. There are no plans to replace them. Removing them without that plan seems ill-advised and premature.”
Anna Konvicka dismissed Princeton Council members’ comments that the kiosks are an eyesore. The issue of aesthetics is subjective, she said.
“The kiosks have great cultural importance for our community and I am extremely concerned that the decision was made without sufficient input from the community,” Konvicka said.
Kira Gousios agreed and said the kiosks play a role in the community as an expression of free speech and community organization. Removing them presents a significant loss for many residents.
Claims about the kiosks’ environment impact – the papers that fall to the ground and litter the area after a storm – and that they obstruct pedestrians on the sidewalk have not been substantiated, she said.
Hunter Akridge said that replacing them with electronic screens likely would have a negative environmental impact. He said he would like to see a data-driven evaluation of the plan to remove the kiosks.
“It seems like the decision-making process centered around various sorts of aesthetic justifications without bringing in community input or doing a substantive evaluation,” he said.
A timeframe for the kiosks’ removal has not been set yet.
