EDISON — A unique issue arose during a recent Planning Board hearing for the development of 10 new homes on Woodland Avenue.
Applicants Tom and Karen Shea received preliminary approval for the project at the Aug. 10 meeting, but not before receiving a history lesson on the parcel they plan to develop.
“This is a Revolutionary War battlefield,” said Nancy Walker, a board member of the Metuchen-Edison Historical Society. “The battle took place in Edison in 1777.”
Walker addressed the board during the public hearing, saying the site in question is part of the Short Hills Battlefield Historic District. The site is recognized by the federal government and is listed on the National Park Service Register of Historic Places, she said.
As a researcher involved in the rediscovery of the battlefield, Walker asked for permission to conduct a metal detector survey of the site prior to development. But she was denied permission.
“The researchers of the battlefield believe that this particular parcel is a very key piece of the battlefield, and once it is disturbed, the information that it might yield about the battle can no longer be accessed, so we have a one-time opportunity to survey this,” Walker said. “We believe [the site] is pretty much the heart of the battlefield.”
She said that Revolutionary War battlefields were rather fleeting, so artifacts are likely not buried deep within the ground. What she was requesting, she said, was “a much lighter touch than other forms of archeological survey.”
The discovery of any items on the land would not impact the ability of the developers to build there, she said.
“It is for research purposes; it cannot prevent development, it is only to gather research and then move on,” Walker said.
The board responded that it does not have the authority to mandate — in the form of a condition of plan approval — that the landowner allow Walker and her colleagues to do such a survey.
Steven Tripp, attorney for the applicants, was not amenable to Walker’s request.
“We don’t have any reason to believe there’s anything on our property,” he said, adding that the request was very vague. “It’s not an appropriate consideration to this discussion.”
The response disappointed resident Esther Nemitz, who said she was part of the recent similar survey on the adjacent Smith farm. That search yielded the discovery of a couple of items, she said.
“I would really appreciate it if they could reconsider their position,” she said.