Town may raise cost of historic district proposals

The suggested addition of a $3,000 escrow for historical district proposals and a change in the definition of "historic site" in the Princeton municipal historic preservation ordinance have sparked consternation among local residents.

The ordinance is a legal document that outlines the rules regarding the preservation and maintenance of historic districts.

When Princeton Borough and Princeton Township merged in January 2013, their respective historic preservation ordinances were merged as well. The first set of major changes to the consolidated ordinance were proposed at a Princeton Planning Board meeting on Oct. 2.

Municipal staff suggested an additional $3,000 escrow for applications to create historic districts in addition to the current one-time $100 application fee. Escrow is money used in the case of incurred costs.

Residents such as Kip Cherry, the Vice President of the Princeton Battlefield Society, spoke out at the meeting against this change. Cherry said that it would essentially make the proposal of historic districts “prohibitive for the public.”

Princeton municipal historic preservation officer Christine Lewandoski noted there were serious discussions about the costs associated with creating new historic districts, noting the escrow money would address the costs of having a consultant or an attorney.

A lettersent to the planning board by Historic Preservation Commission chairperson Julie Capozzoli last month stated the escrow would cover increasing administrative costs. It would also ensure proposals meet ordinance guidelines.

The Commission, a volunteer organization with nine members appointed by the local town council, is tasked with reviewing applications for proposed historic districts in Princeton.

The Commission and Planning Board also proposed thatthe definition of a “historic site” include the additional words: “provided that such are listed in the Princeton Master Plan.” This would be a marked shift from the State Municipal Land Use Law that currently defines a historic site as “any real property, man-made structure, natural object or configuration or any portion or group of the foregoing of historical, archaeological, cultural, scenic or architectural significance.”

Capozzoli said the Planning Board suggested the change in the definition of a historic site and thatthe council could also review a historic site application even if the site were not listed in the town's master plan.

Commission Attorney Ed Schmierer, the legal counsel for the Historic Preservation Commission, said they felt the definition they selected was appropriate for the Princeton community. However, John Heilner of the Human Services Commission and the Chair of the Immigration Subcommittee, said he did not see these changes as necessary. Heilner, who was involved in the proposal of a historic district near Library Place, said they spent over $20,000 of their own money getting the research together.

“Now, if you add another $3,000 on top of that, you know, it’s a lot of money,” Heilner said.

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

He said he was not opposed to a modest application fee, but considering that most citizens propose districts for the benefit of the town, the escrow would be a difficult sum to procure.

“[These changes] place two deterrents in the way of establishing historic districts,” Heilner said.

These changes, if accepted by the town council, would pose a threat to the proposed historic district of Jackson-Witherspoon Street. Former Princeton Township Mayor Jim Floyd noted the area was traditionally called “African Alley,” because local African-Americans were relegated to the area in a time of segregation. He explained that the increased cost would be a burden on the residents filing the application and that the stricter definition of historic site could prevent the Jackson-Witherspoon Street district from being approved.

“It has become one of the most vulnerable parts of town,” he said, with developers looking to expand Palmer Square into the Jackson-Witherspoon neighborhood.

Floyd said he ultimately believes this issue transcends fees and definitions.

“Some people, some groups, some entities, use the historical designation as an indicator, simply to preserve a way people have done things," he said. "Sometimes that has merit, but seldom in my opinion does it have merit when it denies the human right for other people to exist and live.”

Floyd added that while he does not shun development, he does believe in maintaining areas of historical value and allowing people to continue living in these areas.

“You don’t have the right to deny anyone else their choices,” he said.

The proposed ordinance will be reviewed by the municipal code subcommittee, after which it will be forwarded to the town council for a public hearing. A final vote is likely next year.