Preservation ordinance still on hold

Preservation ordinance still on hold
BY KENNY WALTER Staff Writer
The Long Branch City Council has once again pushed back the introduction of its historic preservation ordinance.

The ordinance was on the agenda for introduction at the April 28 meeting, but the council agreed to postpone the introduction until May 12 so the wording of the proposed ordinance could be refined.

The historic preservation ordinance, initially proposed by Councilman Brian Unger in 2007, aims to protect historical structures in the city by creating a Historic Preservation Advisory Commission that would review the potential effect of development and permit applications on designated historical sites. It also would implement regulations to prevent the demolition of historical structures and regulate the preservation of historical structures and sites. The ordinance had been expected to be introduced at the Feb. 24 council meeting, but Unger requested that sections be rewritten to strengthen the role of the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission.

The City Council. discussed the ordinance during the April 28 workshop session.

Dr. Frank Esposito, Kean University distinguished professor, and Mark Aikins, the city's attorney on this matter attended the workshop.

The council unanimously decided to push back the introduction of the ordinance mainly because some of the language needed to be taken out. Councilwoman Mary Jane Celli was absent .

One of the points of confusion was whether the ordinance would create a historical district, which would involve a greater level of protection.

Aikins cleared up some of the confusion.

"This ordinance does not create a historical district, but it does allow for future historical districts," he explained.

According to Unger, there is general agreement that language about historical districts needs to be taken out of the proposed ordinance.

Esposito was impressed with the ordinance but suggested that modifications need to be made.

"It is a step in the right direction, but it needs some revision," Esposito said, "including downsizing and elimination of reference to a historic district. At this point, it may attempt to do too much."

Esposito added that much of the ordinance is useful and that he supports the creation of a commission to oversee the process.

The ordinance would establish an advisory commission that would compile an inventory of historical sites and structures in the city that could qualify for historical preservation.

The Historic Preservation Advisory Commission would be responsible for determining which properties are eligible for national and state historical preservation designation. Also, the advisory group would advise the Planning and Zoning boards on any application for development involving a historical structure, site, etc. The boards would refer to the commission any application for development, demolition or relocation in historical districts or on historical sites.

The commission would consist of seven members who would serve for four-year terms and two alternate members,

"The creation of the commission would keep a watchful eye on this issue," Esposito said. "The opt-out clause, the linkage of the commission to the Planning Board, and the criteria for designation of both historical and architecturally significant properties are some of the things I liked.

"It just needs to be a more concise document," he added.

The proposed ordinance defines historical properties as any buildings, structures, sites, objects or districts "that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship or association (excluding those located in a redevelopment area) that are: of particular historical significance to the city by reflecting … cultural, political, economic or social history of the nation, state, county or community." Also included are those that are associated with historic personages; sites of historic events; have distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of architecture or engineering; or representative of the work of an important building designer, artist, engineer, or architect.

The commission would hold public hearings on designating a site or property.

One concern expressed by the administration is that the lists of historical buildings in Long Branch contain several churches.

"Most of the buildings on the lists I've seen are churches," Schneider said. "I don't think I want to be in the business of regulating churches." he said.

Esposito explained that an updated list of historical buildings would need to be created if the ordinance is adopted.

"Another issue discussed at the meeting was safety issues involving some of the older buildings.

Council President Michael DeStefano and Councilman David Brown said there are safety issues that aren't addressed in the ordinance.

"Who maintains them?" DeStefano asked. "Sometimes some things like this can become more burdens than anything else."

"An individual home, just because it's here 100 or 200 years, doesn't mean it should stay," Brown said. "Especially if it's a fire hazard."

The ordinance would regulate only designated sites that require a permit from the city or an application for development to the Planning Board. t

There is also an opt-out clause, allowing owners of historical structures to opt-out of the historical designation. That is something that hasn't affected other communities with similar ordinances, Esposito said.

"Hopefully most will opt in to historic preservation," Esposito said. "That has clearly happened in other communities, such as Pitman, Cape May, Ocean City and Maplewood. The opt out is there to allay any fears that this will lessen the rights of property owners."

At the April 28 regular meeting, the council also introduced the proposed $47.8 million municipal spending plan

The budget was introduced by a 3-1 vote, with Unger voting against introduction and Celli not present.

According to Mehlhorn, the proposed budget is an increase of about $2.8 million over last year's approved $45 million budget

The tax rate would increase by 2 cents, to 59.6 cents per $100 of assessed valuation.

"That equates to about $100 more a year for the average home assessed at just under $500,000," according to Mehlhorn.

Unger was not satisfied with the proposed plan. He said that he would still like to make some cuts, possibly eliminating some administrative clerk positions, including one of the mayor's secretaries, which would save about $49,000 a year.

He also suggested cutting $100,000 in fees paid to the city's labor counsel.

Unger also pushed to have about $45,000 allocated to allow City Council meetings to be televised.

According to the City Clerk's Office, the public hearing on the budget is tentatively scheduled for May 26.

Contact Kenny Walter at

kwalter@gmnews.com.


No Flash Detected
Click here to enlarge



No Flash Detected
Please download the latest version by clicking below:

Get

Advertisement for Brock Farms