all right we ready to Okay this historic preservation commission meeting is being held on April 15 2025 at 7 p.m Statement of adequate notice pursuant to the Sunshine Law Adequate notice in accordance with the Open Public Meeting Act NJSA
10:4-6 was provided on January 28th 2025 of this meeting's date time and place The agenda was mailed to the Cranberry Press and Home News Tribune posted on the Township Bulletin board and mailed to those requesting personal notice and filed with the municipal
clerk Roll call and volunteer hours please Miss Ryan Uh here six hours Mr Guyire here three hours Mr H here five hours
Miss Marlo here two hours and Miss Verini here one and a half and a half okay Mr Christopher is here We have a quorum chair Thank you Good evening Um we're going to start
with applications and I am now going to recuse myself Um and so um Mr Guyire is going to handle the application The application is HPC246-25 15 Prospect Street
Okay right one Okay So let us know what you're planning How you doing um I am uh Steve Bolasano I'm here representing the applicant uh Kevin Golasano who is my brother Uh I'm
my I'm a Prospect Street Um I could tell you a little bit about the project It is was originally submitted as a minor application because it is such a small building that can't be seen from the street Um it is a 9 by3 shed to store personal items and
firewood And you can see the attached zoning approval and site plan for the location just in the far back corner of the property Not visible from the street in the rear corner and uh small non-permanent garden structure Um there's no foundation Uh it is smaller
than most backyard ch children's playsets Um so it is a proposed roofing material is a corrugated metal roof with a ridge vent Um there are no windows Uh the doors are integrated into the uh
siding which is a vertical roughson wood plank uh door with black hardware Um the siding is a vertical roughson wood planking It's got wire cloth metal screening for ventilation um and some corugated metal at the base for
resiliency Uh it is stained uh brown so that there won't be any peeling on it It'll just be uh restained if needed Um submitted the site plan showing the location Uh it was approved by zoning uh 10 ft from the rear side and
rear property line uh a view from the street even even closer from the street than the street Um showing that you really can't see where the structure is behind vegetation and that's in without this vegetation having leaves on it that will leaf out and you'll won't even see
you'll see it even less Um the some additional notes um just mentioned that not visible from the street in winter or summer Uh the second part would be that it's located in the rear corner about 10 feet from the southern and western property lines Uh the southern adjacent
neighboring lot is fully screened and buffered pool and patio So no visibility from that side and the western adjacent lot is a tree farm Um yeah So any any questions anyone have any questions about
this seems pretty straightforward Should we just go to a vote okay I guess Gina will do a roll call Or do we need a motion or just I'll motion to approve
second All right All right Roll call for the HPC application 246-25 Uh Mr Guyire yes Mr Hull yes Miss Marlo yes And Miss Valerini yes Okay thank you Motion passed
Thank you Yeah you're back on Since I'm chair I want to go out of order So on the agenda I'm going to skip ahead to identifying slashd designating historic
sites outside the village district Um and the the item of discussion is a fireside chat with the Cranberry Historical and Preservation Society Uh the topic is the 1860
farmhouse on 147 Plainsboro Road So um does someone want to approach do you want to take turns or talk in tandem well I'd like to kind of present a letter and the documents that
we will be presenting to Tam committee next Monday night your joint meeting Hopefully provides information that we'll be able to share So I'll uh give you the letter after and any any of my uh fellow chips members that want to
come up and Okay go further Can you uh for the record sure Mark Powski uh chair of the historic preservation committee of Cranberry Historical and Preservation Society Thank you Uh as you know the uh owners of the property located at 147
Plainsburgh Road known as the Dancer House is requesting that the township grant permission to demolish the house Their reasons as stated in their email of February 21 2025 is that their structural
engineering reports state that quote "It would be best to demolish the existing structure and build a replica to the same specs." We totally disagree and wish to highlight several issues The assertion
that a replica can replace the original building is not correct Cranberry is not a Williamsburg with replicas of original buildings If other property owners made the same assertion that a replica would be better
than restoration then many of the buildings and houses in the village and the farmland buildings that surround it would not exist today and Cranberry would not be quote the best preserved 19th century village in Middle Sex
County Other properties that have undergone restoration efforts in lie of demolition include the museum on East Parkplace the Hes Farmstead on Prospect Plains Road the Grist Miller's House on South Main
Street the Holland House on Cranberry Station Road and the 1713 East Jersey College of Cottage on Old Trenton Road The property in question was purchased by the current owner in
2022 At the time of the purchase they should have been aware of the deed restriction regarding the preservation easement about the house They should have had a professional engineering inspection evaluation completed at the time of purchase and as any prospective
purchaser of the home would do Therefore they should have known about the condition of the house when they purchased it The house sat dormant for two years when they had inspection reports prepared by two structural
engineers in 2824 For the two years since the purchase nothing was done to prevent the further deterioration and we can only assume the owners hoped that the house would be quote demolished by
neglect In October of 2024 Chips presented a letter to the township committee regarding our concerns about the building and we requested that action be taken by the township We are not aware that anything
was done in that regard Quoting now from the deed restriction consent to demolish shall be granted in exceptional circumstances such as in the event of excessive structural damage to or
partial destruction of the building Financial hardship shall not constitute an exceptional circumstance." unquote Neither of the structural engineers reports indicate that the building is not structurally sound but
it would cost less to replace it than restore it Quoting from the report of one of the structural engineers we would also like to note that most buildings in the shape of the one in question can be salvaged and
restored It will take a desire and financial commitments We request historic preservation commission and the township committee deny the request to allow demolition of the structure required by the deed
restriction They have not provided proof of quote exceptional circumstances as required by the deed restriction We also request that the township take positive action as required in section G of the deed restriction The terms of the
easement have been violated and township quote may bring proceedings in court to require the restoration of the facades to the condition and appearance required under the easement Continued no action by the
owner will lead to quote demolition by neglect The township must take positive action now to save this historic house And we're attaching the email from the owner in 2025 portion of the structural
engineering report that I quoted and a portion of the deed uh restriction with paragraph B and G highlighted So hopefully that will give you enough information to hopefully side with the point of not to demolish the house And I
know a lot of my fellow board members will be here to provide additional information Thank you so much for your attention See you all Monday night Present the same information to the tenant Thank
you Uh Mr Burkowski is this letter already provided to the township besides us like to be submitted to town in night of the meeting and one board member but yes one one board
one committee member does have a copy as well Okay So we will provide it same Okay Thank you Thanks so much Thank you very much Uh would anyone else like to speak sorry just to expand a little bit on uh what Marcus said and it's Steve Golano
Prospect Street um to throughout the structural reports where this it's discussed or assumed that a better product is to replace the building which is said a couple of times you know the better
product is under what criteria and the criteria that has to be followed in this is the secretary of interior's guidelines and the requirements that are set forth in the deed uh as as it really states in the deed that that's required um the better product is a historic
building the better product is not a new building so uh anything that needs to happen to this house to repair it can be repaired and done in the in to following those guidelines Uh there's as Mark said
there's nothing in here that states that this building is falling down or h is in imminent danger of falling down Uh it to to the contrary actually in multiple locations uh lays out ways of fixing the interior um ways of fixing the structure
uh and points out many many points where the foundation is does not appear to be in bad shape um where where most of it cannot be reviewed because uh you know they haven't removed interior finishes which in some cases were called gypsum
with cracks in them when really they're all plaster And the l the really the lack of plaster cracking in on the interior should point to how well the building is held up over time when it's it's funny to see
um more modern standards of building construction uh referenced as to why this building is not going to hold up when it's already held up for over 150 years And it should and and uh there's a reason
for that It's because of uh two things and it's why it's on the state historic preservation offices um list of historic properties and has a designated number behind it and as all this process of
whether the house is historic or not is a done done deal It is a historic house It is has protections on it Um and they were very well aware of it So the uh historic preservation office of the state of New Jerseys has determined that this is in 2004 that the main house and
its surrounding land is eligible for listing on the national register of historic places both under criteria A which is events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our past as well as criteria C which is architecture distinctive
characteristics of type period and method of construction So there's a reason this method of construction is still standing is because it was built a certain way by with a certain material and uh and is is significant So just
pointing I wanted to point that out as to uh you know their hesitance initially too with with um with having to repair and replace inkind replacement of deteriorated wood
elements repair and replace inkind of other wood elements and other in other portions But the any financial portion of this is different than anything that would happen in in the district or in the buffer zones for any of the other
buildings because this has that additional deed restriction on it which puts the additional level level of protection in place And I just want to say that all this was done in 2004 by the town with the township committee
requesting guidance from HPAC which was the historic preservation advisory committee board at the time Um who who has uh who had submitted a full list of uh an
a description of the building and the layout of the building um and why it's significant and the it's contributed to the deed language that states that that that um Mark also talked to earlier So um just wanted to
point those couple things out There are there are other examples in this in the structural reports um talking about the cost to restore the building will rival and most likely exceed cost of new construction Well it doesn't say that it can't be restored and it's it's
impossible for it to be fixed It says that it just will rival the cost of and then p the the purchasers of this property knew looking at the deed language that that was not going to be consideration and they have to follow these guidelines So it's it's really a
matter of I mean I know I understand why the town would need to um hear the applicants and receive an applicant's request but um I'm actually a little surprised that there's even going to be a hearing about
it because it's so cut and dry There really isn't anything to discuss at the April 28th meeting as far as a work session as far as new plans that are being submitted for a new replica house is way premature None I don't even think
anything should be reviewed as far as that goes because it's already beyond the scope of what they're allowed to do Um the uh where's the there's one other thing I wanted to say but
um yeah the the I just I I I've said kind of said this in the uh other other meeting but I I you know we have the new historic plaque outside this house that's now been installed on on Plansboro Road and it would re it would really be ironic to have the the
building come down and replaced with uh you you know a new ver a new replica when it's not historic And and you know they can they can get a high quality building by restoring this building And oh that was the one other thing I wanted
to say and this goes along with Mark's comments about the um the maintenance required to the building Um you know they you were actually given
uh a small gift from them by them submitting their structural reports because they are showing you that they are not meeting the requirements of the maintenance code for cranberry they're allowing water to
enter the structure and that that is actually that breaks the not only the deed uh agreement but also the maintenance code of cranberry So it not it's not even like you have to do your inspection they have submitted that for
you to see and it should trigger uh the repairs to happen immediately Um I don't know if you want to be any questions but I I just want that's basically what I wanted to say Anyone have any questions nope
Oh well I do I just um So they purchased the house in in 2022 and so is there any way of knowing how far along the house was up until then and then how much i mean I I see they haven't done anything in the last few years So they've done nothing and there's been neglect from
then on But leading up to how did it get so to where it is now even yep So um I have I'm actually in a a unique position that I was given access to the building in 2020
uh between 2020 and 2022 and I I can the house was handed off Well the house was during those periods was very overgrown around the exterior of the building and was
allowed to become in a deterior state and the over the course of 2020 to 2022 the house was was buttoned up to meet the maintenance standards but wasn't fully renovated yet It was basically
uh stabilizing it to be pre like to the point of renovation Um but it was not yet renovated Um they're you know the the leaks that are they're showing in these in were not present to the extent that they were previously Um you know
the other damage that they're the the the structural reports quote are very typical of many houses throughout town And even one thing I thought was was funny there's one section that says it's um the the structural the structural
makeup of the floor for the first floor seems to be a little haphazard for they they changes direction for some reason for some unknown reason Um it's because that portion of the floor with the brick underneath it was probably closer to 300 years old than than from uh 18 you know
60 There's a portion of the house that was even older on the first floor that they reused when they reimaged it in in the 1860s too So it was still built It was an even older house and why it why it um meets the first criteria of the
the the places and significant past in addition to just the architecture of the building But um I don't know if uh a construction official was given access or not to the property earlier through that But they did they were given uh
they were given access through earlier like even earlier and um you know there might be records on file with the township as far as what the what the condition of the property is and or was in But um you know even when you look
back at all the uh owner's representatives or owners or whoever was uh whoever was part of that it's it's actually all becomes less less relevant to what the conditions currently are and how just what needs to get addressed
based on who the owner is and what the what the what the status is So that's the biggest thing is to stay focused on um the requirements that are put forward for the for the applicant and for the owner Um so I just you know I just want
to say that stay stay focused on you know who who who's required to do what So okay any further questions all right Thank you Great Thanks very much Come on up I'll just take a few minutes
Three minutes John Chambers Hi Thank you Did you turn it off okay Here I am with the mic on You can hear me Okay my students could all hear me without without the mic But anyhow wherever we are as a professional
historian I want to uh totally express my uh opposition to the proposed demolition of the historic farmhouse called the Dancer House at uh 147 Plainsboro Road Now this is truly a
historic structure present house dates back to 1860 but that date is the recognized official date given by the Middle Sex County and the state of New Jersey registers of
historic structures as u Steve Gana has mentioned but there is evidence uh in the basement in the brick flooring in the different framing that indicates that the current house is cited on an even
older Edabellum farmhouse The fact that this is on part on the old part of the old Barkley farm and also the house was relationship to the dancer family adds weight to its
importance The Barkclays of course as we all know is one of the oldest and most prominent families in Cranberry They arrived in the 1680s came over with the Scots Voyagers u who were founding Perth Amboy as a
seapport wanted to compete with New York City And they uh hoped for the Scottish settlers would spread out throughout central Jersey and establish essentially a Scottish colony here
Uh the Barkley farmhouse is also known as you know uh commonly called the dancer house and that's the reason for that is because the dancers have rented that family rented that house and the farm and they farmed the farm uh for
much of the last century And I wanted to add that the dancers ultimately became stalwarts uh of the farmland preservation program and helped to convince other farmers uh to support it
So the dancers played a major role in our farm preservation program which is so crucial to the nature of this village and its connected farmland Historically Cranbury was a crossroads village surrounded by farmland dotted
with farmhouses And the Barkley Dancer farmhouse if I may cause it call it both names from the mid 19th century is the farmhouse and the working farm closest I
believe to the village uh and uh and and that and that helps to preserve the historic vista As one drives down the Plains Road towards the village you see the farmhouse you see
the working farm uh and you and you recognize the connection Uh and that connection the farm village connection has been important part of Cranberry for the last 300 years So as a result I most strongly urge the
HPC and the township committee when the time comes to deny the request to allow demolition of this truly historic structure The dancer clay house I call it again to prevent further demolition
by neglect and to require its restoration Just to wind up the 19th century Blackley Don Danzer farmhouse is in my opinion irre irreplaceable
Irreplaceable Now in regard to creating a replica uh as one who has toured many historic houses I can safely say that reproduction is never the same thing as
the real thing So that's my presentation Any questions for me ladies and [Music] gentlemen friends and neighbors thank you No I just say thank you very much for the Thank you historic perspective
It's really very enlightening My pleasure Thank you very much Thank you Thank you very much Okay Have some copies I hope I have enough here Okay
Sue can share with you Thanks very much Sorry Okay who's next good evening Hello Um Linda Schilling 40
Station Road Um I just want to support what everyone has said I'm not going to repeat all that but I do want to say I live in a historic house which is very similar to that house I'm required to
maintain it and do things that are a lot more expensive than if I did it the modern way And I I don't even have a preservation easement in my deed And I wasn't even in the historic district when I moved here So um but I have to do
it And then Audrey Smith asked me to read this brief letter Uh dear township committee and historic preservation committee members I am not able to attend the meeting this evening but wanted you to know that I feel strongly
that the deed restricted house on the pretic property at 147 Plainsboro Road should be restored and not torn down I remember when Cranberry Township had many more farm houses than it does now I
think it is important to preserve this house and hope you agree Sincerely Audrey Smith president Cranberry Historical and Preservation Society Thank you Thank you Hello Good evening
Um Joan Widner 28 North Main Street in Cranberry and the proud owner of the historic house Um I'm just here because I'm a member of the board of trustees for the Cranberry Historic and Preservation Society First I want to uh support the letter from Mark and the
comments from John and from Linda Um what appears to me is that the Brtenic family was um neglectful in their care or lack thereof of the house in the farmhouse And to be rewarded for that
lack of effort uh by being granted permission to demolish it and put up a new one uh no matter how close it may look in appearance uh would be to me a dangerous president for the town and in
not in the best interest of the town of Cranberry and its beautiful historic tradition That's it Thank you very much for your work on this Thank you All right Anyone else okay All right Thank you everyone
Um on the same topic uh our chair prepared a draft PowerPoint presentation which is in your packet Um I guess for us to look at tonight and review thank you
Um so uh did anyone look at this prior to the meeting um I think one of the challenges that I did speak to her about uh last week was that we do not understand kind of the format of the meeting on the 28th So
we're not quite sure um what uh what we're allowed to say and whether this presentation is allowed to proceed Um any comments on this thought that crossed my mind tonight that I wasn't able to share with
the chair in advance So therefore it's not in this But so so the deed is clear that there you know f financial reasons isn't a reason to grant an exception Um but I thought that's crossed my mind tonight is that there were financial
implications for the township when the township purchased it and then sold it The township purchased it for 3.4 million and then sold it for 2.3 million And the reason why it sold for less is because of the deed restrictions of the township all the taxpayers all the
residents they put this money to preserve it And that that um we that if if we're going to be talk if if financial reasons come up I think we need to look at the investment that the town made when they when they put that
restriction on and gave up the money in in selling the land Interesting So are we going to ask the township to explain that no I just I just think that you know it shouldn't matter right the
deed is pretty clear that the finances shouldn't matter But if we are talking about finances then the town invested in this property Yeah Well I had talked to the chair about this too and and you know one of my questions was
about cost relative cost I mean I think it's clear it doesn't really matter but if they're making a case for demolition and rebuilding as some as a more coste effective solution there's
no evidence of that and I would question whether that's really the case anyway So that would be one big question I would have Okay But can I also just address this slideshow yes please Please My personal
opinion because I I'm sorry but I didn't have a chance to review it in advance of the meeting but I'm paging through it I think there's too much here I think we could it could be condensed down to four or five slides at the most I
mean I think a lot of the testimony that's been given to us tonight summarizes very clearly what the issues are right and I think we could do something similar to that Ask fewer questions ourselves and just
make some statements that more statements fewer questions Yeah that would be my approach Okay Yeah I do think it is uh not as focused as it could be Yeah So um and I think if
they do give us an opportunity to present something at the meeting this would be kind of lost in the Right We got to go for it right it's got to be quick Okay Um so I think we should work on it All right Any further comments
are we supposed to come to some conclusion as to what our position will be at the meeting i think it's obvious but um well it might be obvious but it would be better if it wasn't was stated was it was clear
and without doubt Well I would say that there is not adequate evidence to justify um I believe this is a a request to vacate the deed restriction as opposed
to an actual request for demolition Um the the inference is that the request to vacate the deed is the request for demolition that would result in the demolition that would result in it
Um uh so my opinion is there's not adequate evidence presented um that would indicate it's kind of circular isn't it sorry I'm thinking this through as we go
Um because they provided evidence of the condition which uh you know uh has been pointed out kind of indicates how they have been uh maintaining the property Um and because
of the condition of the building they're requesting the vacating of the deed restriction but they're in violation So that it's not a justification to vacate So that makes sense to anyone Let me know if you agree
Yeah Yes I I would think they were certainly aware of this when they bought the property If they were concerned about the condition and this restriction in the deed the time to address it where they were in the process of buying the property and making those conditions
clear or they to make some financial adjustment in the price because of the condition of the property fact that they were required to maintain it not afterwards going on the assumption that well we just let it fall down and see what happens I agree Um I think maybe we have a um a
duty to kind of explain uh the the difference between a a replica and a historic property and how um like replication is
is welcomed or not by the state preservation office by the National Park Service replica because uh h lose the entirety of their historic integrity Um it is completely gone And uh if this
property were in a historic district or in our expanded historic district or our thematic historic district that's coming later if you want to hear about that um that uh a replica of an an entire
building or of um even a piece of a building is always a question because you lose that historic integrity uh when the 1713 cottage was relocated even just picking up that building in its entirety
and moving it across the street there's the question of does it maintain its historic integrity because you've changed the site So if you're saying knock the whole thing down and build a replica in the same location everything historic about
that property about that site is is gone is lost And I think we have a duty to explain that as well to not just not just the property owners but to the township as well Okay I'm done
Okay So I think uh maybe we can uh come up with some comments on the uh PowerPoint presentation for the chair and uh maybe go through it again somehow without being um we'll figure that out
Um but I think um the uh information we received this evening um has been super helpful in putting it in focus So thank you all very much and I think we're going to move on All right
Thank you Um so I do want to hop around again Um I'm going to hop to the CLG grant Uh Mr Zbo is not here tonight but I do want to let you know that the CLG grant
application has been submitted and that grant application was for I believe the the final number was 87 properties Does that sound right 87 properties outside the historic district um village district and the
town the cranberry h station hamlet um that we want to have surveyed and that includes I the majority I believe are agricultural properties um for this express purpose of having
documentation of buildings um that may be threatened in the future So uh we will wait to see uh uh if we are uh successful in our grant application to start the survey Um you know it depends
on forces larger than Cranberry Township Um the state and the federal government because that's where the funding comes from Um so stay tuned It's great It is good Um Lori did a great
job Uh so let's stick with It feels like Jeopardy Let's stick with amendments to the Cranberry Historic Village District Um planning board prep Who Who is that
is that you perhaps Brendan i did some prep but it was less for the planning board and more for the TC um because ultimately when the TC adopts anything they're we're going to need to provide an inventory of the properties in the district And so I have uh compiled an
inventory of all 65 properties that are being designated Uh 43 were surveyed in phase three and 22 were not Uh so 40 from the 43 that were in the phase 3 survey I took the beginning of each of
those property reports that kind of just like the broadest description of the building um and use that for the 22 that are not Uh Dave has uh already done a short description of them from the uh spreadsheet that he was using for the
CLG grant So I use those Um and then in the inventory it also has um the the address the lot and block the uh whe and whether or not it's contributing and um and the date is usually mentioned the date of construction is mentioned in the
description So that can be a basis It could be we could add more details to them if we think that it it would improve it or not Um I I guess I'll share it before the next meeting so that way if anyone has if anyone looks at one of those properties and thinks that they
I'm sure that they can be improved these descriptions um then we we can do so but we have a foundation now for that inventory Uh do we have a target date of when we are presenting to TC to planning
board to anyone gina how do you know um I know a little planning board is going to be in June June 5th They're going to vote on the amendment um which Liz Laney is uh
drafting Okay great Yeah And then from there it will go to TC Okay Okay Great Thank you Um design guidelines So uh before I ask Mr Guyire to review
our meeting that we just had an hour ago um I will uh talk about the survey So the chair let me know uh from her vacation that uh she had seen three responses to the survey
uh so far Um I'm afraid I might have been one of them So uh uh that's a pretty low number So she asked me to ask you all um for suggestions on how to get word about the
survey out I did see it on the um the mayor's update I believe but like way at the bottom The the when it was first linked in the mayor's update it said click here and then it was a link that didn't go anywhere So that may have hurt
the responses Okay Yes So fix the link that would be but the second time it did work Um it did work eventually Okay Like and the when the subsequent email I guess one good thing is that if we're not hearing a lot of feedback then that means people
maybe don't object too much the way the things are and don't need to change that much I don't know We can we can assume that I don't know Um because here's an opportunity to you know offer improvements So if we're not hearing many recommendations then it's possible
things are okay Um is the survey on the township website not that anyone wanders there Just trying to I'm guessing I don't think it's posted
on the website yet Did Did she post it on All About Cranberry the Facebook page i was going to suggest I don't think so So then that's where you can maybe get some more hits on the Facebook Okay Okay Thank you
Um so the last item here says research and I don't know what that refers to Does anyone know what that refers to nope Okay Moving on Did you want me to report on the Oh yes Architect me Yes Summarized Yeah No
I But Brandon did you have something you want to say i can do it after you talk Okay So just um for everyone who walked in on us here while we were meeting we had uh six architects who regularly
uh submit plans uh for us to review uh meet with Sue and I which was great um that we had that kind of turnout And um I'd say the big picture is that they were all very complimentary to us and the process and
and uh not not much uh of any kind of frustration over anything that we do I think the one uh thing we did talk about that we probably need to think about relative to the design guidelines especially are uh material
substitutions that we developed some actual examples that create some guidelines for them to think about specifically um and and some and then also more
consistency One thing that Phil to point fingers but Bill Giddings said you know there are oftentimes different uh decisions made on windows that don't always seem to make sense in terms of
consistency of window approvals Um and he he said you know I think he and others have expressed an appreciation for us to be flexible because people with different buildings are different and people's situations are different but that we ought to take a look at that
and maybe create a little bit more consistency and and uh kind of preapprove certain kinds of things that would be accepted by us Um I think that's pretty much it Um did I miss anything yeah there were a
couple things that kind of went uh for the design guidelines themselves We talked about the signage So the silence ordinance was updated some years ago I know we were involved in it Um Stephen do you have a date uh no So
um the signage ordinance was updated and it is not specifically referenced in our design guidelines which predate that signage ordinance So if we could develop a section that would kind of graphically help property owners understand what the
the signage guidelines are I think that would be very helpful um for property owners Um there was a suggestion for the certificate for the application um uh for links to our new and improved
design guidelines Um so that uh to make the application process easier Um there was also a discussion I went back and forth about uh having a requirement for a massing model um maybe for larger
projects like um like additions or new construction or something like that Um and to to make sure that um uh street context is included Um showing adjacent properties and you know again talking
about massing to make sure that you know we're not approving um you know projects that are enormous essentially Um one other thing that was uh brought up
was lighting That there's no spec specific requirements for lighting and that depending on the property that can really have an impact on the um the building and and uh you know different color temperatures and
depending on what kind of lighting you use Um so it's something we should probably take a look at as well Um they did also talk about incentives So these were interesting Oh that wasn't it So uh they brought up the award So that's something that's been on and off
our agenda for the last couple of years but they they're talking about incentives for property owners to do the right thing to like pay the money for the proper materials and methods Um so uh an award they said would be a good
acknowledgement So maybe that's something we should focus on again Um and the other thing was yeah a little far-fetched but um the um there was a a town that um was also
preservation-minded that when a um property was was upgraded when a renovation took place that their property taxes remained the same So they were not reassessed um you know for their new and improved
property but they number of years I mean for not forever but for a short period of time they would benefit from not having you know their assessment change So thought that was interesting as well Uh I don't know if that's something that
HBC can uh can can uh make happen but uh worth mentioning definitely Um yeah I think that's all I I think that's pretty much it It was very interesting It was good I'm glad we did it Yeah
Um okay Uh yeah So one more thing about design guidelines Uh so as I was preparing the inventory something that I had uh recognized was the buildings that are pre-1940 that are non-contributing
because they've lost their integrity And there are um 33 buildings uh that that have lost their integrity but are old enough that if they still had their integrity they'd be contributing And uh they're all listed on page eight of
those those notes on the master plan Um and so four of those buildings were built in the 1930s and were surveyed in phase one using 1929 as the end of the period of significance So I think this is on the list of properties that was just submitted for those those four properties I think will be reserveyed so
we can assess whether or not using 1940 as the end of the period of significance would deem them contributing Um but the the other properties are don't fall into that particular thing Um so for example the Ezekiel Silver's house at 143 North
Main that was surveyed in phase one and it was deemed non-contributing because of its extensive alterations This is the one on the west side of North Main that's kind of the northernmost property after the field Um and there are some outuildings on that property Uh there's
two very prominent red barns that when when you enter cranberry on the north they're like kind of the first things that you see in across the field And now under the current design guidelines because we don't distinguish between contributing and non-contributing uh
resources they're they're you know they have to be preserved because because we don't distinguish But as we distinguish and move to separate guidelines for contributing and non-contributing if those
barns separate resources than the the primary residence and if the primary residence is non-contributing it doesn't mean that other aspects on the same property aren't contributing So for example in phase two when they surveyed
10 Maplewood the primary residence is non-contributing but it mentions the secondary building on the property which is the historic fire station and that is contributing In phase one they didn't really discuss those outuildings with enough detail to say contributing not
contributing And so I I just wanted to bring up for discussion you know I guess I guess that we need to be aware of you know if there's an application on a property that has multiple structures if it if the property report just gives a
blanket contributing or non-contributing to like the property boundaries that's not necessarily enough detail to know about specific things on the property that might be contributing So that could be um kind of guidance for
this next round of grants grant surveys Um but going back how do we kind of rectify that that's So I I noticed that all of these property reports the surveyor says recommends as contributing
or recommends as non-contributing which I think means that the ultimate authority lies with the commission And now we obviously defer to the experts in in making those decisions But in a case like for example like 143 North Main
where the experts haven't made that uh recommendation specifically about the outbuildings and in those cases I think if it ever came up then it's probably on the commission to decide I guess ideally it would be it would be great if we could decide some
things in advance so that way homeowners have more awareness going in Um I don't know how we accomplish that but wow it's very interesting Okay Yeah Moving forward we can take care of
that but we have three phases of u report of surveys that that don't really address it Uh so maybe we need to pay more attention when an application does come in and we look at the survey to kind of decide for you
know that for ourselves that um yeah these outuildings are significant I don't so that particular property I don't I've never been to those barns up close so I don't know in
those specific cases what materials that are used and things like that I just know that most people driving down North Main Street when they see those buildings they think it contributes to the district right they are in very original condition
Uh we had an application just a couple years ago right for like some of the barn doors Yeah But the the interior and everything else framework is all very very still the original And
that's part of the issue too right so when Mr Burkowski was here and said you know that the surveyor was too close to his property you know we're we're supposed to keep that respectful distance right so we'd have no way of knowing that the interior is so intact
to ask permission to build the property that asking is is important Yes Okay Very interesting Thank you Um Okay I'm going to move on from this Um Cranberry Station Hamlet Historic
District Certificate of Eligibility Uh last I heard the chair was uh reaching out to the state to I think we already have this so I'm looking at you um the um the multi- town district nomination
um for uh the railroad the Camboy and Camboy Camden Camden and Amboy Railroad um right so it was not it's not a district but it's it's eligible it was determined eligible and has a report and
I want to say several years ago when we were starting to research the Cranberry Station Hamlet for designation that we there was a copy of that that we had obtained So if anyone in the public has a copy um the chair has uh the chair has
requested it of the state and that's kind of where we're at We're going to use it as our basis for our um our certificate of eligibility application So that's the plan Um okay Revolution
New Jersey Any news nothing Nothing