The 125-year-old Elberon Memorial Church is among the historic structures that would be protected by a new historic preservation ordinance. A local historian is calling on the Long Branch City Council to adopt stronger protections for the city’s historical structures.
Beth Woolley, a trustee of the Long Branch Historical Society, spoke at the Nov. 9 council workshop meeting to advocate for revision of the existing historic preservation ordinance, which she said needs to have stronger measures to prevent loss of the city’s historical sites. “Basically what I want is a stopgap measure so you can actually review before you tear down a historic site,” she said. “You want a stopgap measure so that you can at least take a month or two to think about it before you really want to lose this piece of property.”
Woolley said that because the current ordinance contains an opt-out clause that allows property owners to opt out of having their property considered as historical, the city is not eligible to become a certified by the National Park Service (NPS). “It has to meet certain requirements that the one we passed … does not meet,” she said. “By having an opt-out clause, we don’t meet all of their provisions.
“Also, they have certain requirements that they want for people on the [historic] commission,” she added.
The NPS website describes the program as a “preservation partnership between local, state and national governments focused on promoting historic preservation at the grassroots level.”
NPS and state Historic Preservation Offices jointly administer the program, and the NPS says a key benefit for certification is expert technical advice from the state offices.
Mayor Adam Schneider told Woolley that there are reasons the city included the opt-out clause.
“The last time we went through this, we stopped short for a couple of reasons,” he said. “We weren’t that anxious to impose it on people, and once you have the opt-out clause, it doesn’t have a lot of impact.”
The current ordinance calls for the creation of a historic commission that would review the potential effect of development and permit applications on designated historical sites.
However, the council has yet to appoint members to the seven-member commission.
Councilman John Pallone said he did some research on the matter after receiving an email from Woolley, and he will provide the council with four different examples of historic commissions with varying degrees of authority.
He said all four examples of commissions would meet the criteria for the city to be certified by the NPS.
An issue that Woolley said needs to be addressed in the new ordinance is historical properties being demolished by neglect.
“There has to be provisions to protect the city from this,” she said. “Some towns, if you are found guilty of demolition by neglect, they will require you to rebuild what you just let fall down, which I think is the most effective way to stop people right from the get-go. “If you know that you are going to have to rebuild it, why let it fall down?”
Shewent on to say that some towns have strong enforcement of this offense and some impose fines that can escalate over time.
Woolley said the challenge for the city would be to draft an ordinance that imposes regulations on historical properties that is not restrictive.
She cited the Ocean Grove ordinance that mandates what color a historical house can be painted as an example of an ordinance that is overreaching.
“You want to make it so you help people, but you don’t want to make it that they don’t fix up their houses,” Woolley said.
“Some of them are way over the top and put a burden on the property owner.”
If certified, the city would be eligible for a 60/40 matching grant administered by the New Jersey Historical Preservation Fund, she said.
Pallone said that through his research, he discovered that of the approximately 100 commissions across the state, about 45 are certified commissions.
He also said the state distributes only about $90,000 a year in grants to four or five commissions, and most are under $25,000.
According to Woolley, not only is the city eligible for grant money, but individual property owners are, too.
She said property owners are also eligible for tax credits if they restore a historical property .
As for what is considered historical, Woolley said it is subjective and up to a commission to decide.
She said an example of a historical house might be a house with architecture from a past era, a house where a historic event took place, or a house where a historic person lived.
Woolley gave an example of a house in West End that Bruce Springsteen once rented and wrote music in as something that people would consider historic in 10 years.
She also said that for the city’s centennial in 2004, she found that there are more than 1,100 buildings in the city that are over 100 years old.
“We found whole streets where every house on the street was over 100 years old,” Woolley said. “It would be fantastic to have historic districts, because it would lift the property values of whole sections of town.”
Woolley cited a home at 364 Cedar Ave. that was on the National Register of Historic Places and was demolished without much attention given to it, as an example of a property that might have been saved if the city had stronger regulations.
She said 20 properties in the city are currently on the national list, including the Church of the Presidents, the North Long Branch Primary School and the CedarAvenue house that is now an empty lot.
In fact, Woolley said, six of the 20 properties have been demolished.
Schneider said the city’s most historic structures are the three Takanassee Lifesaving Station buildings, but most of the historic buildings have been torn down.
“Most of the buildings that have great historic values are gone,” he said. “The ones that had great historic value in the mid- to late 1800s are gone. It would have been interesting if some of them had been saved.”
The current ordinance calls for the creation of a historic commission that would review the effect of development applications on designated historical sites and would advise the planning and zoning boards and individual property owners. The ordinance defines the goal of the commission as: “Maintaining, preserving, and rehabilitating these visual links to the past is an important function of government, not only to provide a sense of stability and continuity for future generations, but to provide impetus for the revitalization of the city’s economic base and for the resulting increase in property values.”
The responsibilities of the historic commission include preparing and maintaining preservation guidelines, reviewing applications that affect the historical properties, recommendations on design, and preparing an inventory of historical sites and landmarks.
Councilwoman Mary Jane Celli, who was on council when the previous ordinance was adopted, said the ordinance is too long and confusing and should be redone.
“It is 35 pages,” she said. “I don’t think any ordinance should be that long.”
Former Councilman Brian Unger, who started campaigning for historic preservation in 2007, originally introduced the ordinance.
The measure was controversial at the time, with the former council concerned about topics such as the opt-out clause and the creation of historic districts.
Woolley was a supporter of the ordinance at the time of its passage, and said at that time that it should be revised over time.
“It’s not a perfect ordinance, and I’m sure as time goes on it will be revised, but it’s a wonderful start,” she said in 2009.
Council President Michael Sirianni said at the meeting that the council would work with Woolley in crafting an ordinance that is effective.
“I think the council is different; I think we are going to have a different point of view,” he said. “Anything that says we can apply for money, I think will be helpful to the city and to saving what we do have left.
“Iwant to resurrect it because we are a different mix now on council; we have a strong interest in Long Branch, and I like the history.”