[0:41] There we go. Do I need to start over for

[0:43] the tape?

[0:45] Anyway, um

[0:48] good afternoon everybody.

[0:50] Uh, this is a regular meeting of the

[0:52] Princeton Historic Preservation

[0:54] Commission being held on August 25th at

[0:58] 5:00 PM in the main building in the main

[1:01] meeting room of the of the Princeton

[1:03] Municipal Building at 400 Witherspoon

[1:06] Street. Pursuant to section 13 of the

[1:09] open public meetings act, adequate

[1:12] notice and time of in place of this

[1:14] meeting has been noticed by transmitting

[1:16] a copy of the agenda to the Princeton

[1:18] packet town topics times of Trenton and

[1:22] by filing a copy with the clerk of

[1:24] Princeton, posting on the municipal

[1:26] website in the center

[1:31] and posting on the official bulletin

[1:33] board at the Princeton Municipal Complex

[1:35] here at 400 Witherspoon Great.

[1:38] Sarah, could we please take the role?

[1:45] » Miss Satderfield is joining from Zoom.

[1:48] Can I get a here,

[1:51] >> here, here, here, here, here, here.

[1:54] >> Adam will fix that echo, but thank you.

[1:57] [snorts]

[1:58] >> Uh, Mr. Shatskin is absent.

[2:03] » Miss Howard

[2:04] >> here. Miss Capazolei

[2:07] here. Miss Freriedman is absent. Miss

[2:09] Croll is absent. Miss Kosnikova is

[2:12] absent. Chair Sher

[2:14] >> here.

[2:15] >> We have quorum.

[2:16] >> Thank you very much.

[2:21] So we usually start our meeting with um

[2:25] any announcements.

[2:26] >> The design guidelines uh public comment

[2:29] period ended yesterday. I am reviewing

[2:34] them, compiling them and we should get

[2:36] any major updates to the uh guidelines

[2:41] review committee and our consultant for

[2:43] any changes shortly and there will be a

[2:46] presentation to council on September

[2:50] 14th for the

[2:52] >> very interesting. Do you have um a sense

[2:54] of how many people submitted comments?

[3:03] » We definitely had more sort of

[3:06] conversations at the public presentation

[3:08] than submitted them in writing, I would

[3:10] say.

[3:11] >> Right. And for the audience, we you and

[3:14] I both wrote up the uh

[3:16] >> Yes.

[3:16] >> to be in the list of things that will be

[3:19] considered when you're going over all of

[3:20] it. And my understanding is what happens

[3:23] next and Sarah you can correct me if I'm

[3:25] wrong is that the committee who worked

[3:27] with the [snorts] consultant on this for

[3:29] about a year will um be called to

[3:32] reconvene and to go over the the

[3:34] comments and to then give feedback to

[3:37] the consultant about where we go, how we

[3:40] tie this up and and get the product done

[3:42] and ready for um final distribution and and use.

[3:52] Did you something we're going to add or

[3:54] >> I Yes, I I'm going to summarize the

[3:59] comments and send them out to everybody

[4:01] to see if we need to meet again. If

[4:03] there's any major outstanding items we

[4:05] need to discuss and revise um or if

[4:08] there are things we have identified that

[4:11] can be

[4:13] >> discussed for future projects

[4:16] >> and maybe something we don't need to

[4:18] revise now.

[4:19] And that's it's kind of up to us as the committee.

[4:23] >> Very good.

[4:26] All right. Um, normally we review the minutes next. Um,

[4:31] >> has everyone had a chance to look at

[4:33] them? And is there any input or comment?

[4:37] >> Um, I think the minutes look fine and

[4:39] I'll make a motion to approve. Second.

[4:44] >> I second.

[4:50] Okay, Sarah, when you're ready,

[4:51] >> roll call. Uh,

[4:54] >> Miss Soldderfield,

[4:56] >> yes.

[4:58] >> Miss Howard?

[5:00] >> Yes.

[5:01] >> Miss Capazolei?

[5:02] >> Yes.

[5:02] >> Chair Sher?

[5:03] >> Yes.

[5:04] >> Minutes have passed.

[5:05] >> Was Miss Satderfield at the last

[5:07] meeting?

[5:09] >> She read them.

[5:10] >> Okay, I read them.

[5:12] >> Awesome. Thanks.

[5:16] » Okay.

[5:17] So, we will move to the applications.

[5:19] Um, first off is uh 61 Lee Avenue. If

[5:23] you want to come up and sit at the

[5:25] table,

[5:43] » joining us is our liaison. Um, Leighton

[5:47] Nulan.

[5:50] Okay. You want to get them established?

[5:54] >> Hey, will you both be testifying or

[5:57] discussing the application?

[6:00] >> Okay. So, I'm just

[6:01] >> I'm sorry.

[6:06] » Press the button.

[6:07] >> Okay. Um All right. Well, I can swear

[6:09] you both in and if she um wants to

[6:12] testify, then I can swear her in as

[6:14] well. So, Um,

[6:15] >> and will Jiva be giving testimony or is

[6:19] it just you?

[6:20] >> Um, yes. Say yes.

[6:23] >> Yes. So, can you wait a second?

[6:26] >> Yeah.

[6:26] >> Thank you.

[6:35] For those of you in the audience, we are

[6:38] excited that our um

[6:40] >> later down in the agenda, you'll see

[6:42] that we're going to get a um courtesy

[6:44] review from the people associated with

[6:46] the Princeton Battlefield Park on the

[6:48] progress of what's being done there. And

[6:50] we hope that people will um stick around

[6:52] if they can.

[7:06] Yes,

[7:07] this picture.

[7:52] Can you hear me? No,

[7:54] >> tell just tell Cecilia that I can't come

[7:57] today. Don't tell her I'm at a meeting

[8:00] and tell her that I do want to be partly

[8:02] want to participate and I'll be at the

[8:04] next meeting.

[8:09] » Yeah,

[8:19] » this

[8:21] All

[8:46] right. So, I'm just

[9:05] I can swear you all in at this time, you

[9:07] know, in case you guys testify and for

[9:09] Max as well. So, if you could all please

[9:11] raise your right hands, I can do it

[9:12] simultaneously. Um, do you swear that

[9:14] the testimony you're about to give shall

[9:16] be the truth, the whole truth, and

[9:17] nothing but the truth to help you God? I

[9:19] do.

[9:20] >> I do.

[9:20] >> Okay. So, then I guess we'll have you

[9:22] each say your names as as you speak. So,

[9:26] >> Okay.

[9:27] >> Good afternoon or good evening, early

[9:29] evening. I'm Max Hayden. I'm the

[9:31] architect for the applicant. Um, Jiva

[9:34] and Mita live at 61 Lee Avenue in the

[9:38] Witherspoon Jackson neighborhood. Um,

[9:41] they have a 1910 era house. It's uh one

[9:46] of several in a cluster nearby. Uh we

[9:50] they would like to extend their porch to

[9:53] the right hand side of the house,

[9:55] wrapping it back to the L to gain much

[9:58] needed space. They have the most

[10:01] adorable little set of twins I ever saw

[10:04] and they have less adorable teenagers.

[10:07] And so there are six people living in a

[10:11] relatively modest house. And the porch

[10:14] addition will have an extension of the

[10:16] front porch, but it will also include a

[10:19] much needed mudroom and bathroom for the

[10:22] first floor. Um, at the rear of the

[10:25] house, we are uh extending a porch over

[10:27] an existing set of stairs. The stairs

[10:30] will actually be replaced, but they lead

[10:32] from the kitchen to the garden. and uh

[10:36] we really want to cover them over to

[10:38] protect them and replace the 1950s era

[10:42] concrete steps with something more

[10:44] sympathetic to the architecture of the

[10:46] house. So, we're really trying to make

[10:48] it look as if this is how the house was

[10:50] built. Uh we're also asking for um

[10:55] permission to erect a fence to separate

[10:57] the parking, the existing parking from

[11:01] um the garden. They're avid gardeners.

[11:04] They have some chickens. They really

[11:06] love hanging out in their yard. They

[11:07] have an they have a double lot and

[11:10] they'd like to um you know have a little

[11:13] bit of privacy. Um they are going to

[11:16] match all the existing finishes. The

[11:19] color of the trim will stay the same.

[11:21] The color of the windows will stay the

[11:23] same. Uh we are

[11:25] >> with with one Oh, go ahead.

[11:26] >> With with one exception. So Oh, Jiva

[11:29] Petran, I'm one of the owners. Um the

[11:32] prior owners painted some of the windows

[11:35] pink and some maybe five different

[11:37] shades of green. So our proposal

[11:39] includes um matching the what seems the

[11:43] most historical part which was the

[11:46] sophet was a sages green. Um, and so our

[11:50] proposal includes making all the windows

[11:52] the same shade

[11:55] >> and uh we might be changing the stuckco

[11:59] color.

[12:00] >> Um, and the stucco is in very poor shape

[12:03] and we need to patch it in multiple

[12:05] areas. So, the plan is to um the most

[12:10] original stucco color was a a very

[12:12] bright coral pink and then it's gone

[12:14] through multiple iterations of various

[12:17] paints all over it. And so, we would

[12:19] propose to bring it to like a beigish

[12:22] lightish pink like a sandstone color

[12:25] like a white off-white I don't know how

[12:27] to describe that

[12:30] just not the bright coral that it was.

[12:33] We also the applicant also is required

[12:36] to get a variance because the porch

[12:38] exceeds the prevailing setback and the

[12:42] zoning code takes 500 ft along one side

[12:47] which is kind of funny I will call it

[12:51] because the cluster of houses that this

[12:53] house is similar to all have the same

[12:56] porch and the same setback to the

[12:58] street. So, it's a little ownorous on

[13:00] the owner, but that's the next step for

[13:02] us. So, we're hoping that the historic

[13:05] commission will deem this an appropriate

[13:08] application and uh would welcome any

[13:10] questions you might have.

[13:17] » Uh I'll [music]

[13:19] briefly go through the the main points.

[13:22] Um, as the applicants and Max have said,

[13:25] the applicants have filed an application

[13:27] for historic preservation plan review as

[13:30] well as an application toward the zoning

[13:31] board of adjustment for severances

[13:33] related to the restoration and extension

[13:36] of the existing front porch, the

[13:38] construction of a one-story addition on

[13:39] the east side elevation of the dwelling,

[13:41] as well as landscape and hardscape

[13:43] changes to 61 Lee Avenue. Uh, the site

[13:45] is identified as 6904, lots 23 and 24 on

[13:49] the Princeton tax map. It is in

[13:52] Princeton historic overlay in

[13:53] Witherspoon Jackson historic district as

[13:55] a type two district which is defined per

[13:59] T10B2 I is subject to preservation plan

[14:02] review for any changes visible from the

[14:04] public right ofway. Uh 61 Lee Avenue is

[14:08] a circa 1915 2 and a half story L-shaped

[14:11] woodframe vernacular building clad and

[14:13] stucco with some colonial and folk

[14:16] revival influences based on the historic

[14:18] sandborn maps. The building largely

[14:20] retains the same footprint since its

[14:22] original construction. This includes the

[14:24] full width front porch, the twotory L on

[14:26] the east side elevation as well as the

[14:28] one-story shed roof for your edition.

[14:30] The proposed scope of work includes the

[14:32] restoration of the existing front porch

[14:34] and kind that is not that's a blank

[14:37] page.

[14:37] >> [snorts]

[14:38] >> uh the restoration of the existing

[14:40] masonry the restoration of the existing

[14:41] masonry stoop with a wood stoop and

[14:43] railing as well as the extension of the

[14:46] front roof around the east elevation

[14:48] connecting and closing the east side

[14:50] elevation and south front elevation of

[14:52] the main block and L respectively. The

[14:54] enclosure will eliminate the existing

[14:56] stoop entrance to the L creating a

[14:58] one-story addition. The east elevation

[15:00] of the addition will feature two new

[15:02] wood windows with custom lentils sills

[15:04] casing and trim to match the existing

[15:06] windows. The applicant also proposes to

[15:08] add a new bluestone walkway to replace

[15:10] the existing brick walkway, a 6-ft tall

[15:13] cedar fence to the rear yard, and a shed

[15:15] roof extension to the existing one-story

[15:17] shed roof rear edition. There were also

[15:19] additional landscaping changes proposed

[15:21] for the rear yard that will not be

[15:22] visible from the public rightway with

[15:24] the installation of the new fence. The

[15:26] proposed scope of work appears to

[15:28] largely retain the historic fabric and

[15:29] character defining features at the

[15:31] property. The proposed one-story

[15:32] addition on the east elevation of the

[15:34] front facade will alter the building's

[15:36] overall massing, but the form will

[15:37] remain evident. Similarly sized and

[15:40] placed additions have been made to a

[15:42] number of dwellings along Lee Avenue,

[15:43] including 64, 66, and 87 Lee, although

[15:47] these additions appear to be to have

[15:49] been construction prior to local

[15:50] designation of the historic district.

[15:52] The the additions appear to be

[15:55] compatible with the existing size,

[15:57] scale, and proportion massing of the

[15:58] houses along Lee and within the larger

[16:00] Weatherspoon Jackson Historic District.

[16:02] Therefore, the proposed addition at 61

[16:05] Lee Avenue appears to be consistent with

[16:07] the existing paradigm of the block and

[16:08] falls within the vernacular traditions

[16:10] of the neighborhood. The fence provided

[16:12] in the concept plans appears to match

[16:14] existing fencing found throughout the

[16:16] Weatherspoon Jackson neighbor

[16:17] Witherspoon Jackson historic district as

[16:19] a wood fence with the lattice top. In

[16:21] addition, the blue stone walkway and the

[16:23] proposed rear rear roof addition appears

[16:25] to have minimal impact on the building

[16:26] or the surrounding district. Uh this is

[16:29] an application for development. So the

[16:31] HBC is a referral to the zoning board of

[16:35] adjustment.

[16:37] As a contributing resource to the

[16:40] Witherspoon Jackson Historic District,

[16:42] staff recommends that the commission

[16:43] consider whether the project as proposed

[16:46] generally retains the building's

[16:47] historic integrity, spaces, and spatial

[16:50] relationships as well as the overall

[16:52] historic character of the property. In

[16:54] addition, staff recommends that the

[16:55] commission consider the following while

[16:57] conducting their historic preservation

[16:58] plan review and sub subsequent

[17:00] recommendation to the zoning board

[17:02] adjustment. Whether proposed project

[17:04] meets the secretary of the interior

[17:05] standards for the treatment of historic

[17:06] properties. Whether proposed project is

[17:08] appropriate to and compatible with the

[17:10] existing structures and landscape of the

[17:12] Wman Jackson historic district. Whether

[17:14] the proposed project would adversely

[17:15] affect the ambiance, character, and

[17:17] appearance of the district. Whether

[17:19] proposed project preserves or enhances

[17:20] the historic or architectural value of

[17:22] the structure. Whether proposed project

[17:24] would reversely affect the exterior

[17:26] architectural features and setting of

[17:27] the structure as well as its historic

[17:30] and architectural character. whether the

[17:32] modifications proposed to the existing

[17:34] dwelling that are beneficial to comp

[17:35] contemporary living including the

[17:37] construction of the new onesto edition

[17:39] are consistent with the architectural

[17:40] design and character of the structure

[17:42] and the larger district. Whether

[17:44] proposed addition is visually compatible

[17:45] with the structures and places within

[17:46] the district. Whether the proposed

[17:48] addition acts as a backdrop to and does

[17:50] not visually intrude upon the structures

[17:52] and places within the district. Whether

[17:54] the height of the addition is visually

[17:55] compatible with the structures within

[17:56] the district. Whether the relationship

[17:58] of the width and the height of the

[18:00] district of the addition is visually

[18:02] compatible with the structures and

[18:03] places within the district. Whether the

[18:06] relationship the proposed addition to

[18:07] the open space between it and joining

[18:09] structures is visually compatible.

[18:11] Whether the roof shape of proposed

[18:12] addition is visually compatible with

[18:14] structures within the mated setting and

[18:16] whether the size, massing, and windows

[18:17] on the proposed addition is visually

[18:19] compatible. and whether the fencing

[18:21] proposed is appropriate for the historic

[18:22] preservation district and the principal

[18:24] structure on the lot.

[18:30] Thank you.

[18:33] If um

[18:37] unfortunately I can see part of the

[18:39] drawing up here that you guys can't see

[18:41] on the screen there. Um I had one

[18:43] question about it, but I would ask the

[18:45] commission members if they want to make

[18:47] some comments before I go.

[18:50] Um, I will

[18:53] >> Okay, go ahead.

[18:53] >> Um, I agree entirely. This seems to be

[18:57] very consistent with the neighborhood

[18:59] and that the owners have shown

[19:01] themselves to be very wonderful stewards

[19:04] of the property. So, I think it fits in

[19:08] beautifully with the with the

[19:10] neighborhood context.

[19:19] I just needed some clarification on the

[19:21] fence.

[19:23] Um,

[19:25] a picture of the fence.

[19:27] >> The fencing will be cedar.

[19:30] Um, there's a lattice on top of it to

[19:33] break down the scale of it because it is

[19:35] a 6 foot tall fence.

[19:38] >> And um,

[19:40] you know, there is a gate allowing

[19:42] access from the parking to the rear

[19:44] yard. It's on the second

[19:46] >> and it connects to the shed.

[19:48] >> What is the uh existing fence? I think

[19:53] it's iron, is it?

[19:55] >> What is the

[19:56] >> There's an existing fence there.

[19:58] >> No, there is no fence. No.

[20:03] Sorry.

[20:05] >> So, I don't know if it helps, but to

[20:07] plan the plan is to in front of the

[20:10] fence plant a rain garden to capture

[20:14] some of the the rainwater there. Um, so

[20:17] the plan is that really there will be a

[20:19] little bit of plantings there also

[20:22] hiding the fence from view. I don't know

[20:24] if that helps explain, but that it won't

[20:27] be like the first thing you see.

[20:35] » Surely, do you have any uh comments you

[20:37] want to add?

[20:38] >> Yes, I agree with the commission. I

[20:40] don't agree with extending the porch.

[20:43] And um the reason that it's pink and

[20:46] green is probably because it's festive.

[20:49] uh with the family who was there before.

[20:51] I agreed to changing it all to a a

[20:54] green, but um I wanted to stay the way

[20:57] it is and just do the fixer uppers uh

[20:59] and not extend the the porch.

[21:08] Um okay, thank you.

[21:12] Um my question, and it's going to be a

[21:14] little bit hard to do without without

[21:16] graphics. I'm going to ask um

[21:22] Max if he can kind of with words work

[21:25] with me. The gable over the entrance

[21:30] currently,

[21:32] how does that relate to the gable that I

[21:35] guess is going to be in about the same

[21:37] place, but the porch being brought out?

[21:40] The gable now looks like it's in the

[21:42] middle of the porch roof and it looks

[21:45] like it's at a different pitch.

[21:47] >> No, I mean it's meant The gable's

[21:50] staying there. Gable's not moving.

[21:51] >> Oh, that gable and and those precise

[21:53] angles are staying there. Then it's just

[21:55] my eyes. Sorry.

[21:56] >> Yeah. No, we're just truly extending to

[21:59] the right and it will be an open porch

[22:02] and then the addition is from the wall

[22:04] of the house back where it's enclosed.

[22:07] And you know, the whole thought was to

[22:08] make it look as if it was at one point

[22:11] kind of a wraparound porch that Yes,

[22:13] they then enclosed,

[22:15] >> which I don't think is out of character

[22:18] with the rest of the neighborhood.

[22:19] >> Mhm.

[22:22] >> And it gives them very much needed

[22:24] space.

[22:27] Okay. Then um

[22:34] then I g I I guess that now that I

[22:37] understand that that gable is not

[22:38] changing. It's just that it's it's

[22:40] position just looks different when you

[22:43] have extended the

[22:45] >> it it might be

[22:48] I may have drawn it not accurately but

[22:50] truly we're not changing the gable.

[22:53] >> Okay. I my hope is that we can actually

[22:56] keep the roof um the moldings are all

[22:59] rotten.

[23:01] >> Um and everything is covered in lead

[23:02] paint. I have 2-year-old toddlers and so

[23:05] part of this is abatement of any

[23:07] possible lead. But we are hoping

[23:09] actually to preserve the gable as it is.

[23:12] Um as well as the existing roof and just

[23:15] really replacing the moldings and

[23:17] everything else. So really kind of doing

[23:19] very little to to to any of that. We're

[23:22] not touching the ballisters. Uh we're

[23:24] keeping the original spindles. The porch

[23:26] really should not look noticeably

[23:28] different to people who have known it

[23:30] before except for that it extends just a

[23:33] little bit further out. It should really

[23:36] be as much original as possible.

[23:41] And also I think that you know um

[23:46] as I understand it now um looking at it

[23:50] you would still be able to understand

[23:52] what had been there all along and what's

[23:56] being changed

[23:58] uh without standing out as a change. You

[24:02] can kind of pick up that where where

[24:04] things looked originally.

[24:06] Um, so that makes me more comfortable.

[24:12] >> There is a side entry door in the L now.

[24:15] >> Mhm.

[24:16] >> With another set of steps. There are

[24:18] three entrances into the house. We're

[24:20] really kind of making a front door and a

[24:23] back door and trying to codify it a

[24:26] little bit.

[24:27] >> Mhm.

[24:35] Are there members of the public who

[24:37] wanted to speak about this application?

[24:41] Okay.

[24:45] Uh notwithstanding that Shirley has a

[24:47] different uh view on this porch, um is

[24:50] anyone wanting to put forth a motion

[24:53] about what we'd like to do? Um, I'll

[24:57] [clears throat] put forward a motion to

[24:59] accept the application as presented.

[25:04] » Second.

[25:07] » A second.

[25:13] » Okay. Um,

[25:24] » let's go ahead and have a a roll call on

[25:26] that, please. On that motion,

[25:29] >> Miss Satderfield.

[25:37] » Oh, I already made my decision. Yes.

[25:42] >> Yes. to the motion.

[25:45] >> Yes.

[25:46] >> Okay.

[25:49] Miss Howard?

[25:50] >> Yes.

[25:52] >> Miss Capazolei?

[25:54] >> Yes.

[25:55] >> Chair Sher?

[25:56] >> Yes.

[25:57] >> Okay. Motion has passed.

[25:59] >> Thank you very much.

[26:00] >> Thank you all very much.

[26:01] >> Thank you.

[26:09] » Okay.

[26:19] Thank you.

[26:40] » [clears throat]

[26:44] » Oh, okay. Um, would the um application

[26:47] for 30 lid like to take the table?

[26:52] I'm going to uh just mention one thing

[26:55] is these microphones are kind of

[26:58] sensitive. So, when you're talking just

[27:00] lean into them.

[27:02] >> Sounds good.

[27:06] If you could both raise your Are you

[27:08] both going to be speaking on? Yes. Okay.

[27:10] If you could both raise your right hand.

[27:12] Um do u do you swear that that the

[27:16] testimony you're about to give shall be

[27:17] the truth, the whole truth, and nothing

[27:18] but the truth to help you God.

[27:21] >> Yes.

[27:22] I do.

[27:22] >> Okay. And then if you could state your

[27:25] full names for the record.

[27:26] >> Sure.

[27:27] >> Luke Hermer,

[27:29] >> Ana Tavgar. Okay.

[27:35] So, go ahead and tell us about your

[27:37] project. Um, let's get it up on the

[27:39] screen if we can.

[27:44] » Do you want to start? You want to be on

[27:45] the screen?

[27:46] >> Yeah, I mean I can start. So, we bought

[27:49] this house uh about a year ago. Uh, and

[27:52] when we bought it, it had a uh like

[27:55] dilapidated garage on it that was by

[27:58] ASIS. Uh, and so, you know, when we

[28:02] moved in, we were like, we want to, you

[28:05] know, refurbish this and change it. We

[28:07] had a architect come, Ronald Berlin,

[28:10] whose letter is in the testimony. And

[28:12] then same thing with a builder, a Smith,

[28:15] who

[28:16] >> does a lot of work in the neighborhood,

[28:17] lives in the neighborhood.

[28:18] >> Uh, and they both were basically like,

[28:20] yeah, this has to be demolished and torn

[28:24] down. Uh and then so then we were

[28:27] evaluating other options and basically

[28:30] noticed that a lot of the uh houses in

[28:32] the neighborhood don't have garages and

[28:34] so we were like okay well maybe we don't

[28:36] need one. It would be really expensive

[28:38] to completely redo everything uh about

[28:41] the garage. So we applied for a building

[28:44] permit to get the garage to demolish the

[28:47] garage and we received the permit and so

[28:49] then we demolished the garage. Uh, and

[28:52] then when we wanted to, we decided we

[28:54] wanted to just do a small patio off the

[28:56] back. Uh, and put a fence in and put in

[28:59] like a little prefab shed for storage.

[29:03] uh we applied to do so and were informed

[29:06] that you know we needed to get approval

[29:09] from the historic district uh in order

[29:11] to do that and have then like I guess

[29:14] retroactively sort of applied for

[29:16] demolition of the garage including

[29:19] informing our neighbors and publishing

[29:21] stuff in the newspaper. Yeah.

[29:23] >> And whatnot. Uh and so the proposed

[29:25] changes would be it's like a small uh

[29:28] like blue stone patio

[29:30] >> paver

[29:30] >> uh or with pavers

[29:33] >> uh it's a cedar wood fence and uh the

[29:37] shed is like just a prefab like Quaker

[29:39] shed

[29:40] >> on the shed. Also, I will mention too

[29:42] regarding the building permit we

[29:44] received for the demolition. Um, that

[29:46] was an instance of going to the

[29:49] municipal office window and, you know,

[29:52] ringing the bell or whatever it is and

[29:54] just saying, "Hey, we we don't know

[29:56] what's going on, but we need a permit."

[29:57] Um, and we weren't directed to speak

[29:59] with with Sarah or the Historic

[30:01] Preservation Commission. Um, so that's

[30:03] how that process went forward without

[30:06] doing this first.

[30:10] Thank you. Um Sarah, do you want to tell

[30:14] us about

[30:15] >> Sure. Uh I'm going to kind of largely

[30:19] read this one in full because it's a

[30:21] little more complex. Uh so apologize for

[30:25] my garbled length. Um the applicants uh

[30:30] Ania and Luke have filed an application

[30:32] for historic preservation plan review

[30:34] related to the replacement of the

[30:36] existing wood fence with the cedar fence

[30:38] at 30 Lidle Street. The scope of work

[30:41] also includes items that are not visible

[30:43] from the public rightway such as the

[30:44] installation of a pre-fabricated shed

[30:46] and the installation of a blue stone

[30:48] patio in the rear yard. The site is

[30:50] identified as block 1501, lot 17 on the

[30:53] Princeton tax map and is located in the

[30:54] R4B zone within the Witherspman Jackson

[30:57] Historic District. The property is

[30:58] designated on Princeton's historic

[31:00] overlay district as a type two, which is

[31:02] defined per 10T T10B2 is subject to

[31:06] preservation plan review for any changes

[31:08] visible from the public ride ofway. In

[31:10] addition, in the application

[31:11] description, the applicant noted that

[31:13] they had applied for a building permit

[31:14] to demolish and remove the detached

[31:16] garage, concrete slab, and a portion of

[31:18] the existing driveway on May 5th, 2026.

[31:23] Am I um a building permit was granted on

[31:25] May 6, 2026 for the demolition of a

[31:28] one-story woodframe garage listed as a

[31:30] shed. However, no prior historic

[31:32] preservation plan review application was

[31:33] filed for the demolition of the garage

[31:35] or the hardscape changes to the side and

[31:37] rear yards. Once staff learned about the

[31:39] demolition of the garage uh and the of

[31:42] the demolition, staff followed up with

[31:44] the building department to let them know

[31:45] that exterior changes within a historic

[31:47] preservation zoning district, including

[31:49] but not limited to the demolition and

[31:51] removal of any structure subject to

[31:53] historic preservation plan review and

[31:55] should be referred to the office of

[31:56] historic preservation immediately. It

[31:58] appears that the building department

[31:59] believes the removal of such a small

[32:01] structure such as a shed would not

[32:03] require HBC review and did not refer the

[32:05] application to the historic preservation

[32:06] officer. In early discussions with the

[32:08] applicant, it appeared the applicant

[32:10] largely assumed the same or was unaware

[32:12] regarding the garage and staff

[32:14] instructed them on the required

[32:15] application noticing under T10B 378 and

[32:19] T10B390.

[32:21] Although the garage has been demolished,

[32:22] the commission should consider if it met

[32:24] the criteria outlined under T10B390,

[32:27] including whether or not the garage

[32:29] could not have been put to a reasonable

[32:30] use and its preservation would have and

[32:33] whether or not its preservation would

[32:34] have imposed a financial hardship on the

[32:36] applicant. The property is in the Wii

[32:40] Jackson Historic District as shown on

[32:41] municipal overlay zoning map of historic

[32:43] districts and buffer districts on the

[32:46] south side of Lidle Street east of the

[32:48] intersection of John and Lidle Streets.

[32:49] The Willisman Jackson Historic District

[32:51] is primarily a residential district

[32:53] unique in Princeton with a period of

[32:55] significance that reflects the

[32:56] development of one of the earliest

[32:58] African-American communities in New

[32:59] Jersey from 1830 to 1969. The district's

[33:02] cultural significance is represented

[33:04] through the built environment that

[33:06] developed over time in simple vernacular

[33:08] styles due to economic disparity,

[33:10] displacement, and discrimination. 30

[33:12] Lidle Street is a two-story woodframe

[33:14] vernacular dwelling constructed s circa

[33:16] 1900 along with its neighbor 32 Lidle Street originally 28 and 30 Lidle

[33:22] respectively. The former garage located

[33:24] southwest of the dwelling in the rear

[33:26] yard was a one-story frame building clad

[33:28] and stuck with an asphalt shingle gable

[33:30] roof and an asphalt shingle halfhipped

[33:32] roof extension over the north front

[33:34] elevation which featured vertical board

[33:36] sliding doors. Historic Sandborn maps

[33:38] indicate that the garage was constructed

[33:40] circa 1925.

[33:42] The construction of the detached garages

[33:44] or similarsly sized out buildings was

[33:46] not uncommon in the Wii Jackson

[33:47] neighborhood between 1918 and 1927. Most

[33:50] of this development appears to have been

[33:52] concentrated along the north section of

[33:54] the neighborhood as parcels along Lee

[33:55] and Birch were laid out and were later

[33:57] accelerated by the construction of

[33:58] Palmer Square. However, the central

[34:00] cross streets of the district also saw

[34:02] the construction of these outbuildings,

[34:03] including those on Lidle, McClean,

[34:05] Quarry, and Green, with a few appearing

[34:07] on along John Street as well. While it's

[34:09] difficult to confirm if they were all

[34:11] constructed specifically as garages,

[34:13] historic photos from the Historical

[34:14] Society of Princeton showed the presence

[34:16] of cars throughout the neighborhood as

[34:18] widespread car ownership expanded

[34:19] nationally in the 1920s. For communities

[34:22] like Withersman Jackson, car ownership

[34:24] also provided a level of freedom to

[34:25] travel beyond their walkable

[34:27] neighborhood. This is reflected in the

[34:29] annual Negro Motorist Guide Book, also

[34:31] known as the Green Book, a travel guide

[34:33] for African-Americans during the Jim

[34:35] Crow era, that included advertisements

[34:37] for four Princeton businesses within the

[34:39] Withers Jackson neighborhood. Cars also

[34:41] provided additional employment

[34:43] opportunities beyond those at Princeton

[34:44] University or within the Manners,

[34:46] especially at the Princ after the

[34:47] Princeton Fastline Trolley that l ran

[34:50] along Witherspoon Street was shut down

[34:52] in 1930. While the garage at 30 Lidle

[34:54] Street appeared to be utilitarian in

[34:56] design with little to no architectural

[34:58] ornamentation compared to other garages

[35:00] from the period, its significance is

[35:02] marked by the development it

[35:03] represented. The Wman Jackson Historic

[35:05] District is first and foremost a

[35:07] historic district designated for its

[35:09] cultural significance. This significance

[35:11] is reflected in the built environment of

[35:13] not just vernacular residences but also

[35:16] outbuildings and garages that survive

[35:18] from earlier periods. For a community

[35:20] facing racial discrimination,

[35:22] segregation, and limited employment

[35:23] opportunities, the freedoms provided by

[35:26] car ownership in the early 20th century

[35:28] were not insignificant. This importance

[35:30] is reflected in the increased

[35:31] development of rear out buildings and

[35:33] garages between 1918 and 1927. Based on

[35:36] current aerials, few of these

[35:37] outbuildings remain extent with the

[35:39] majority still concentrated along Lee

[35:40] and Birch. Additionally, staff can only

[35:43] find one similar design similarly

[35:45] designed extent garage to 30 lid on man,

[35:48] although it is a smaller version. The

[35:51] integrity of a cultural historic

[35:52] district like Witherspman Jackson is

[35:54] largely reflected in the cohesive

[35:56] setting and building density of the

[35:58] neighborhood. While a small shattered

[36:00] garage may not be architecturally

[36:02] significant, it can reflect the unique

[36:03] history, development, and character of

[36:05] the surrounding area.

[36:10] This application represents an after

[36:12] the-act demolition review that did

[36:14] obtain building permits in addition to

[36:17] the proposed improvements after the

[36:19] demolition of the garage. In addition to

[36:21] reviewing the appropriateness of the

[36:23] replacement fence, staff recommends that

[36:25] the commission consider the following

[36:27] while conducting their historic

[36:28] preservation plan review. whether the

[36:30] demolition of the garage met this

[36:32] criteria outlined under 10B390,

[36:35] including whether or not the garage

[36:37] could not have been put to a reasonable

[36:38] use and whether its preservation would

[36:40] have imposed a financial hardship on the

[36:42] applicant, whether proposed project

[36:44] would adversely affect the exterior

[36:49] architectural features and setting of

[36:50] the property as well as its historic and

[36:53] architectural character. Whether the

[36:54] proposed project preserves or enhances

[36:56] the historic architectural value of the

[36:58] character of the property. Whether the

[37:00] proposed project is appropriate to and

[37:02] compatible with the existing structures

[37:04] and landscape of the district. Whether

[37:06] the proposed fencing is appropriate for

[37:08] the historic preservation district and

[37:09] the dwelling on the property. Whether

[37:11] proposed fencing would change the open

[37:13] streetscape or obstruct the view of

[37:15] these nearby structures.

[37:20] » Thank you.

[37:25] my um

[37:27] first um item here. Um

[37:31] well, let me first find out if there's

[37:33] any comment from anybody in the public

[37:35] first on this project. Okay. Uh I guess

[37:38] the first thing I'm I'm going to ask um

[37:40] Sarah or Lisa is what is the action that

[37:44] we're that's before us tonight on this?

[37:48] What do we

[37:51] are we looking for?

[37:53] >> Just I was gonna say just I think the

[37:55] board is just determining whether or not

[37:59] um it would have approved the

[38:01] demolition. Um I don't think the board

[38:03] has the legal authority to um I mean I the board has [clears throat] the

[38:10] legal authority to make factual findings

[38:11] but the board wouldn't for instance if

[38:13] the board said this was wrongful cannot

[38:16] order to you know the building be

[38:17] rebuilt or anything like that. It's just

[38:19] more for purposes of um uh setting forth

[38:23] a record about um and making findings

[38:27] about um the really what what is in the

[38:32] board's purview which is whether or not

[38:35] um it would have approved demolition.

[38:38] >> Thank you.

[38:39] >> Does that help?

[38:41] >> Sorry. Do you have anything to add? I

[38:44] yeah, I think that's that's we're

[38:46] they're you're reviewing the the

[38:47] application they submitted of the fence

[38:50] and the the the other changes to the

[38:52] backyard, which aren't really visible,

[38:54] so it's not really within our

[38:55] jurisdiction. Um, and then an after

[38:59] the-act review of the demolition of the

[39:02] garage.

[39:04] >> Yep.

[39:05] >> There's no recourse, but on the record

[39:08] of whether or not we would have whe it would have been approved.

[39:11] >> Thank you. Can I ask a quick question?

[39:14] >> Yes.

[39:14] >> I'm wondering Sarah, we got it late if

[39:17] the um statement from Abel Smith was

[39:19] also given to the board.

[39:21] >> It was uploaded to all the I just want

[39:24] to make sure that both you have both

[39:25] documents because they talk about the

[39:27] >> they address the um the guidelines for

[39:30] demolition

[39:31] >> both Abel Smith and Ron Berlin,

[39:33] >> right?

[39:34] Um

[39:37] >> I have a question for Lisa really. Um,

[39:39] how does the fact that they they

[39:42] received zoning approval, how does that

[39:45] affect us?

[39:47] >> Well, I think it definitely

[39:50] impacts the, you know, impacts what

[39:52] happened. It it you can't ignore that

[39:54] it, you know, they they had gotten

[39:56] building approval. Um, so it you can

[40:01] definitely consider that this is a very

[40:03] unique situation. But I would also, you

[40:06] know, look at the, you know, the

[40:08] historic preservation standards because

[40:10] I think it's important just publicly

[40:11] also not not just for, you know, one

[40:14] application, but just in general, um, so

[40:17] people understand, you know, the

[40:19] demolition standards you to, you know,

[40:21] to go through those standards and and to

[40:23] review it here just to make a public

[40:27] record. But at the same time, I think it

[40:30] is reasonable to consider the fact that

[40:32] the building department issued approval.

[40:35] I I definitely think that that is a

[40:36] reasonable consideration.

[40:44] I'll make a comment.

[40:47] Um,

[40:48] I do think that

[40:51] it's remiss of the building department

[40:56] to

[40:58] just casually um allow for a demolition

[41:03] in a historic district. I think that's

[41:06] beyond their ability to approve. On the

[41:10] other hand, this building is in terrible

[41:13] shape and it's not really significant as

[41:16] far as its architectural style. So, I

[41:19] think we're

[41:21] in some ways just lucky. So, I do think

[41:25] we would have allowed the demolition of

[41:28] this, but I don't think it was right for

[41:31] the building department to say, "Okay, I

[41:34] think we should have been able to at

[41:35] least have Sarah look at it." So, but

[41:39] given the fact that this all happened,

[41:41] I'm I'm comfortable moving on,

[41:45] you know, with the whole thing.

[41:51] » Surely,

[41:54] do you have some comments to add?

[42:04] Okay. Well, she may be thinking about it

[42:06] some. I will tell you my thoughts what I

[42:08] think are are consistent with what we're

[42:10] hearing overall this evening and you

[42:12] know this is from a historic

[42:15] preservation point of view and what's

[42:17] happening on a property and a historic

[42:20] resource uh regardless of its condition.

[42:23] Uh, I think that the point that Sarah

[42:25] brings up, well, um, we we think it's

[42:28] not a high-style building. It's a part

[42:30] of the complete package of what was

[42:32] going on in that neighborhood, which is

[42:34] significant, but well, moving on from

[42:37] there, I I think that a, you know,

[42:39] unfortunate series of actions took

[42:41] place. Um, the building is gone. Um but

[42:45] I think this is as as I think

[42:47] everybody's saying an opportunity for

[42:50] all the parties and and and I mean the

[42:53] municipal parties um property owners but

[42:57] also some of the contractors who are

[42:59] familiar with this area and familiar

[43:00] with this town also too have kind of

[43:03] guided you or misguided you. Um, I kind

[43:07] of like this be, you know, as far as the

[43:10] record goes, anyone reads our minutes,

[43:13] um, that this is a situation that we'd

[43:15] like not to see happen or if it's going

[43:18] to happen and that's still the same

[43:19] result we come up with, at least we've

[43:21] done our process on it. And, um, I think

[43:24] that's

[43:26] the most we can ask for. Um but I think

[43:29] if we can also uh kind of reverberate

[43:32] from here that um that the departments

[43:36] and the people that you know are in

[43:38] charge of giving permission need to uh

[43:41] be aware um and to that actually and I

[43:46] we don't need to get into these details

[43:48] but I understand that notice of what

[43:51] properties are within districts

[43:52] sometimes is is lost that property

[43:54] owners don't always realize that and

[43:57] that's something that's on our long-term

[43:59] plan. It's in our uh design guideline

[44:02] review. Um this is something that

[44:05] um we want to try and be um more aware

[44:08] of and and try to work on more

[44:10] proactively and um there we are. Um

[44:15] actually, thank you for coming in. Thank

[44:17] you for your your honest description of

[44:19] what happened and um

[44:22] >> yeah,

[44:23] >> wants to make a comment.

[44:26] Yeah, I would like to make a comment f

[44:28] first. Welcome to the neighborhood.

[44:30] >> Uh, thank you. I

[44:31] >> I live in the Witherspoon Jackson

[44:32] neighborhood, but I would be remiss if I

[44:35] didn't comment on the following. Um, we

[44:38] over the past year and a half, we've

[44:39] been working with a very talented

[44:41] consultant named Dominique

[44:43] Wilkins who is putting together Hawkins,

[44:47] I'm sorry, Hawkins, right?

[44:50] Hawkins, who's putting together

[44:52] uh a navigational tool that goes over

[44:57] every single historic district in

[44:59] Princeton so that people who move into

[45:04] Princeton, in particular in a historic

[45:06] district,

[45:08] know that they are in a historic

[45:10] district.

[45:12] My point is is that Witherspoon Jackson

[45:14] may not be uh Mercer Hill, Hyd Road,

[45:20] uh Constitution Hill. It's not Ca. It

[45:25] it's the word vernacular means it's kind

[45:27] of helter skelter. So, it would be easy

[45:31] to know that you had moved into a very

[45:35] uh regular house in the Witherspoon

[45:38] Jackson neighborhood and it's not a

[45:41] historic district. But the truth is is

[45:44] that neighborhood

[45:48] arguably

[45:50] has greater history

[45:52] than any neighborhood in this town.

[45:58] and I and others worked on this being a

[46:02] historic district, this Princeton's 20th

[46:04] historic district. And I got to tell

[46:05] you, it did not come easy.

[46:08] >> It was a allout struggle

[46:12] >> because there were many people that

[46:14] thought it wouldn't make the historic

[46:17] district designation because

[46:20] h of houses like the one you bought.

[46:24] >> But here's the real story. There's more history in that house.

[46:28] The Trotman's live there.

[46:31] Uh Mary Tropman, Mr. and Mrs. Tropman,

[46:33] Marv Tropman was a great basketball

[46:36] player at Princeton High School. He grew

[46:37] up in that house. That house is loaded

[46:40] with history. So my last point in in

[46:43] bringing this to a close is is that I

[46:46] think that

[46:48] uh

[46:49] we sometime lose sight of

[46:53] what's valuable architecturally

[46:56] because it's not it's not pretty.

[46:59] >> It like it may not make that much sense.

[47:02] But uh you do live in a hell of a

[47:06] historic district and and and uh I hope

[47:09] that uh

[47:12] and it's not the first time.

[47:14] >> But but to be honest,

[47:17] the these sort of things don't happen

[47:19] anywhere else but in our in our in in

[47:21] our neighborhood.

[47:23] >> And we got to stop that.

[47:25] >> Um you didn't make the mistake.

[47:29] We made the mistake. And we got to

[47:32] correct that because that cost us.

[47:36] That raggedy ass shack in the back of

[47:38] your house was something really

[47:40] important to a lot of people and under

[47:43] different circumstances.

[47:45] We would have made you renovate that

[47:46] damn shack. We you would have brought it

[47:49] back to the way it used to be. That's what kills me in this whole

[47:53] conversation. I'm not mad at you. I'm just tremendously disappointed and

[47:58] sad

[48:00] >> that we lost that little raggedy shack.

[48:02] >> Yeah.

[48:02] >> Because that's that's the kind of thing

[48:04] like people rebuild their lives when

[48:06] they get shattered.

[48:08] >> That's what historic designation is. You

[48:10] rebuild shacks when they lose their

[48:12] integrity. So

[48:14] >> yeah,

[48:14] >> I hate to wax poetic and take longer

[48:16] than I should have, but it was important

[48:18] that I shared this with you. And I hope

[48:20] everybody uh here was paying attention

[48:22] and everybody online was paying

[48:24] attention. And I hope somebody covered

[48:26] this that's in the local newspapers and lets people know what I said here

[48:31] today. Thank you.

[48:34] >> I want to thank you um Councilman Nuland

[48:37] for for offering that testimony. I think

[48:39] it's really really important and I

[48:41] agree. You know, we we tried as best as

[48:45] we could to to go through proper

[48:46] channels and even bringing in Mr. Berlin

[48:49] and Mr. Smith to come and look at the

[48:51] what at the property was because we know

[48:53] they have a a real reverence for the for

[48:56] the Witherspoon Jackson neighborhood in

[48:58] the historic district. Um, and it wasn't

[49:00] just an it wasn't an accident that those

[49:02] were the two people that we consulted

[49:03] about this. Um, but also I agree I agree

[49:07] with everything you said and we want to

[49:10] also be uh reverent and responsible um

[49:14] members of this neighborhood and this

[49:15] community.

[49:17] >> We are happy that you're here. Welcome

[49:20] again to the neighborhood. We got some

[49:21] work to do to go. Thanks.

[49:23] >> Yeah. Thank you.

[49:24] >> Thank you.

[49:25] >> Porchfest 9:26. It's going to be

[49:28] happening in the neighborhood.

[49:32] » Thank you everybody for these comments.

[49:35] I think they're they're very meaningful.

[49:39] Back to the application. I I guess the

[49:42] other parts of it, the patio and stuff

[49:44] aren't really under our purview, so

[49:46] we're not really looking at an

[49:47] application for that. We're Yes. So the prefab shed and the patio would

[49:53] ultimately fall out of the view of the

[49:55] public rightway, but the fence and the whatever would need to be voted on

[50:01] for historic preservation plan review is

[50:04] the fence which was provided in the

[50:06] application specs and whether the garage

[50:11] met the criteria, the demolition

[50:13] criteria.

[50:23] So, we're looking for a motion on that

[50:27] or

[50:27] >> Yes.

[50:28] >> Okay.

[50:31] » Anybody got that?

[50:37] I I guess it's just defense and that we

[50:41] have

[50:43] by default we have to accept that the

[50:45] demolition of the garage happened.

[50:48] >> Not by no not by default is as we

[50:54] you can find that it didn't meet the

[50:56] criteria. It's just that we don't have

[51:00] for the record that it didn't meet the

[51:01] criteria under 390

[51:06] for the record, but then we're there's

[51:09] no other recourse outside of that.

[51:12] >> That's for you to

[51:15] decide.

[51:18] >> So, do we have drawings of the patio? I

[51:22] see drawings here, but I'm not sure what

[51:24] I'm looking at.

[51:27] Is this it?

[51:28] >> Hello.

[51:32] >> Charlie.

[51:34] >> Yes. I've been saying hello for the past

[51:36] 10 minutes. Can you hear me

[51:38] >> now? We can. Yeah.

[51:39] >> Yeah. Well, I just want to say what

[51:41] Leighton has said is exactly what I was

[51:43] going to talk about. I went past the

[51:45] house when I when I was going to the

[51:46] American Legion, which is one of the

[51:48] buildings that's going to be renovated.

[51:50] That's a historic um post. And I looked

[51:54] at the house and I thought the house

[51:55] really looked they didn't do very much

[51:58] to change it from the historic district

[52:00] except for what Leighton said about the

[52:03] um about the garage. Also, I want to say

[52:06] that um I was going to talk about

[52:08] Mildred Trotman, not Mildred Trotman,

[52:10] but uh one of the Trotmans who lived in

[52:12] that house. Um

[52:15] uh I want to also say that when this

[52:18] historic district was started, it

[52:21] started in my dining room with nine

[52:24] people, three from Princeton community

[52:28] and how many left? Six from those of us

[52:31] who grew up in this town. And uh when

[52:34] people call, I get so many calls, would

[52:37] you like to sell your house? I spend

[52:39] time giving them the history of the

[52:41] Witherspoon Jackson community and they

[52:43] hang up. So I want I want everyone to

[52:46] know including the two who live on Lidle

[52:48] Street is that when you move in this

[52:50] neighborhood, remember our ancestors and

[52:53] remember our families who took care of

[52:56] not only this community but all of

[52:58] Princeton. So thank you Leighton for the

[53:00] speech that I was going to say. You

[53:02] already told it but I I kept saying

[53:04] hello. Nobody heard me. So thank you.

[53:09] >> Thank you.

[53:10] >> We're coming in from this.

[53:15] » Um,

[53:18] we're still trying to reconcile what the

[53:20] drawings tell us and what what we're

[53:22] trying to look at. From

[53:23] >> Yes.

[53:24] >> From what we're looking [clears throat]

[53:26] what Freda and I are looking at, we we see a a garage building that's marked

[53:31] masonry on the drawing. So, that's not

[53:32] the one that came down, although that

[53:35] seems to be the location of It was

[53:36] surveyed as masonry, but it was stuck

[53:39] over frame.

[53:40] >> Oh.

[53:41] >> Uhhuh.

[53:42] >> So that's what Okay. So then the fence

[53:45] is this line.

[53:47] here. Yeah.

[53:50] >> So what are we approving regarding the

[53:52] fence?

[53:57] » So this is the building that actually

[53:58] did come down.

[54:00] >> And this is the fence line.

[54:02] >> Got it. And that's going to be What do

[54:04] we know about the fence? Is it

[54:06] >> um It's a shadow box cedar fence.

[54:10] >> Yeah, we're just replacing the existing

[54:12] one and then we're like adding a little

[54:15] gate at the end of the driveway.

[54:17] >> Were you adding it?

[54:18] >> It's like a gate.

[54:19] >> If the house is here, the driveway, it's

[54:21] like the very end.

[54:22] >> Yeah. Yeah. I didn't know.

[54:24] >> But this doesn't look like it because on

[54:27] the survey it's like in the middle of

[54:29] the property.

[54:36] Thank you.

[54:48] » Oh, okay. So, we didn't see those.

[54:50] >> Oh, and this is just

[54:51] >> Yeah. And the shadow box in here.

[54:54] >> Okay.

[54:54] >> And then this.

[54:56] >> And then I guess this would be the

[54:58] patio.

[54:59] >> Yeah.

[54:59] >> Which is not really visible.

[55:02] Okay.

[55:08] » What's a motion? [laughter]

[55:15] » Julie, do you have um

[55:16] >> Julie's better at motions?

[55:18] >> And a motion for this one.

[55:19] >> Yeah, I'll I'm happy to make a motion.

[55:22] Um, I move that we approve the the fence

[55:26] and the patio

[55:28] and that we as a commission

[55:33] state our

[55:36] displeasure with the building department

[55:38] for

[55:40] >> uh issuing a demolition permit. Um, you

[55:44] know, just as the statement that that

[55:46] should not that practice should not

[55:48] continue.

[55:53] » Second.

[55:55] >> I second.

[55:56] >> Okay.

[55:57] >> Second.

[55:57] >> Shirley first.

[56:00] >> Shirley second.

[56:02] All in favor or are you going to do roll

[56:04] call?

[56:04] >> Um, are we making a motion on the

[56:08] demolition itself?

[56:10] >> Yeah. Well, do we have to go beyond that

[56:14] and say we approve the demolition or can

[56:18] we just say that

[56:20] >> we didn't question.

[56:23] >> Okay, Lisa.

[56:24] >> Sure. You I you can do either. I I mean

[56:28] I think it might be helpful for the

[56:32] record for you to make a decision if

[56:34] you're able to on the demolition, but

[56:37] >> or it could be a case of we don't have

[56:38] enough information.

[56:39] >> Yeah. You Right. I I think the most

[56:43] important point here is just to make

[56:45] sure the process

[56:47] >> is corrected

[56:49] >> and that you know that's I think that's

[56:52] where we kind of are as far as

[56:56] what we see. Um you know it could have

[57:00] been presented in a lot of different

[57:02] contexts. So I'm not sure.

[57:04] >> Yeah. No, that's that's fair.

[57:07] >> Yeah.

[57:08] >> All right. So with the

[57:10] >> you can absolutely yeah you can I guess

[57:13] >> include that maybe you know may you may

[57:16] not have enough information to make that

[57:18] determination right

[57:19] >> on the demolition

[57:21] >> because it is after the fact and you

[57:22] don't have

[57:23] >> right so I guess that's where I stand

[57:27] >> and that our goal from that is that a a

[57:29] message is

[57:31] comes out that the building department

[57:33] really needs to coordinate with Sarah's

[57:35] office.

[57:35] >> Yes. and um

[57:40] these poor people had to come to the

[57:41] principal's office because of it. Um

[57:44] >> right.

[57:46] >> So our our our our motion is that we

[57:49] acknowledge that this demolition

[57:52] happened. If we'd had a chance to review

[57:54] it more properly, we may have

[57:58] a different outcome or we may I'm I'm

[58:01] stumbling now. Um,

[58:08] » I think we would would have appreciated

[58:09] an opportunity to review it,

[58:11] >> right? We would have appreciated an

[58:13] opportunity to review it and hope that

[58:14] the building department hears this loud

[58:16] and clear.

[58:19] As for the fence, we find that that's

[58:22] acceptable and

[58:23] >> right

[58:25] >> and that the patio we can't see is not

[58:27] our business,

[58:29] >> right?

[58:30] >> That part out.

[58:33] Roll call vote. Miss Satderfields.

[58:37] >> Yes.

[58:39] >> Miss Howard?

[58:41] >> Yes.

[58:41] >> Miss Capazolei?

[58:43] >> Yes.

[58:43] >> Chair Sher?

[58:44] >> Yes.

[58:46] >> Resolution is passed.

[58:48] >> Thank you.

[58:49] >> All right.

[58:50] >> Thank you guys.

[59:04] All right. Next up, courtesy review for

[59:07] the Princeton Battlefield State Park.

[59:16] » Small correction to the agenda. This is

[59:18] more of a presentation than a review.

[59:21] Um, but the commission is of course open

[59:23] to provide comments. I'm

[59:25] >> I'm sorry. It's a This is a

[59:28] presentation.

[59:29] >> Presentation.

[59:31] Okay. I Right. I was reading it.

[59:39] Well, welcome everybody. Lisa's about to

[59:41] um get you all started.

[59:45] Just a presentation.

[59:48] All right. And we're I guess we're

[59:50] looking to see if we can get your audio

[59:52] video stuff up. I see Sarah's down the

[59:56] hall. pressure on.

[59:57] >> Oh, look at that.

[1:00:04] » Aha,

[1:00:05] >> I saw it.

[1:00:09] » All right. We don't need to be swearing

[1:00:11] you in, but if you all as a group would

[1:00:12] like to introduce yourselves for the for

[1:00:15] the community, for the panel, and then

[1:00:17] we'll just take it from there.

[1:00:20] >> Go ahead.

[1:00:21] >> Hi, my name is L. Mcnite. I'm a state

[1:00:24] and local government relations manager

[1:00:25] for the American Battlefield Trust. I

[1:00:28] cover the state of New Jersey and spend

[1:00:30] a lot of time up here in Princeton. It's

[1:00:31] one of my favorite places to come and

[1:00:33] I'm very excited about the project that

[1:00:34] we're working on together.

[1:00:38] I'm Will Krakower. I'm the resource

[1:00:39] interpretive specialist for the New

[1:00:41] Jersey Department of Environmental

[1:00:43] Protection, Division of Parks, Forests,

[1:00:45] and Historic Sites, which is the long

[1:00:47] way of saying I am the chief historian

[1:00:48] and site manager for Princeton

[1:00:50] Battlefield State Park.

[1:00:53] I'm Ben Strong, president of the

[1:00:55] Princeton Battlefield Society and I've

[1:00:57] been on the board of the Princeton

[1:00:58] Battlefield Society since 2003.

[1:01:03] » Sorry, six.

[1:01:05] >> Pleasure to be here with you. My name is

[1:01:07] Glenn Stack. I'm a preservation

[1:01:08] landscape architect, a consultant to the

[1:01:11] American Battlefield Trust, speaking

[1:01:13] today on the topic of cultural landscape

[1:01:15] preservation. Thank you.

[1:01:24] All right. So, I'm kicking it off. Uh,

[1:01:26] for those of you uh who have not visited

[1:01:30] the battlefield, I'm certain you've

[1:01:31] driven through it. Uh, it is obviously

[1:01:34] an important part of our nation's

[1:01:36] history, the world's history, but more

[1:01:38] specifically of Princeton's history. Uh,

[1:01:41] if you want to just hit that real quick.

[1:01:43] Uh, a brief overview in case you are

[1:01:46] unaware of the importance of this site.

[1:01:48] The Battle of Princeton occurred on the

[1:01:50] morning of January the 3rd, 1777. We are

[1:01:52] now less than six months away from the

[1:01:54] 250th anniversary of that date. It is

[1:01:57] the third and final battle in what

[1:01:59] became known as the 10 crucial days

[1:02:01] campaign, which began with Washington's

[1:02:03] crossing of the Delaware River on

[1:02:04] Christmas night, 1776.

[1:02:06] Nine days of fighting and maneuvering

[1:02:08] later, General Washington commits what

[1:02:10] we call a rudigare, a ruse of war and

[1:02:13] marches overnight from Trenton to

[1:02:15] Princeton and catches the rear guard

[1:02:17] stationed here at Princeton on the

[1:02:20] morning of the third fighting this

[1:02:22] climactic action. It cements

[1:02:25] Washington's uh reputation as a

[1:02:28] commanding general of the army and it

[1:02:31] also seals uh what I like to call the

[1:02:33] first chapter of the American Revolution

[1:02:35] in favor of the Continental Army and

[1:02:37] keeps the flame of independence from

[1:02:39] growing out uh prematurely.

[1:02:43] Our story begins uh much much later in

[1:02:46] 2016. the uh Institute for Advanced

[1:02:50] Study was beginning a project to

[1:02:53] construct new faculty housing on the

[1:02:55] property adjacent to the battlefield

[1:02:57] known as Maxwell's Field. Uh it had

[1:03:01] gotten almost all the way through when

[1:03:04] the American Battlefield Trust, then

[1:03:05] known as the Civil War Trust, became

[1:03:07] involved and offered to broker an

[1:03:09] agreement with the IAS uh for the

[1:03:12] property what uh will become known as

[1:03:14] Maxwell's Fields. uh what could have

[1:03:16] been just a small sign and a new trail

[1:03:21] uh on this property next to the

[1:03:22] battlefield instead became something

[1:03:25] that's wholly unique for the New Jersey

[1:03:27] State Park Service and something truly

[1:03:29] wonderful in the world of historic

[1:03:30] preservation. By 2022, just a few years

[1:03:34] later, uh we had conducted an

[1:03:37] interpretive plan for the park which had

[1:03:40] a vision for what the park would one day

[1:03:42] become. It included new trails. It

[1:03:45] included new fences uh and it included

[1:03:48] the possibility of a visitor and

[1:03:51] education center for the site. And we'll

[1:03:53] talk a little more about uh the needs

[1:03:55] for the site as we go forward. Uh

[1:03:57] something that's been on my mind lately

[1:03:59] and maybe the rest of yours if you're

[1:04:01] avid baseball watchers is if you build

[1:04:03] it, they will come. This is an

[1:04:06] incredible example of that. Uh I started

[1:04:10] at the battlefield in 2018. So right as

[1:04:13] the initial agreement uh kicked off uh

[1:04:17] and in that time I started with about

[1:04:20] 400 school children coming in per year.

[1:04:24] We are now well over 5,000 per year. Uh

[1:04:28] because of that things have to change.

[1:04:30] Uh Princeton Battlefield has largely

[1:04:33] suffered uh from what I politely call

[1:04:37] benign neglect uh for a very long time.

[1:04:40] Uh maintenance has been deferred in

[1:04:43] every quadrant of the park for far too

[1:04:46] long. And we now find ourselves at that

[1:04:48] wonderful and unique juncture between a

[1:04:52] major uh commemorative event, the 250th,

[1:04:55] and back in the 2010s, the threat of

[1:04:57] development uh on the eastern side of

[1:05:01] the park.

[1:05:03] between the Department of Environmental

[1:05:05] Protection, the American Battlefield

[1:05:06] Trust, and the Princeton Battlefield

[1:05:08] Society. We've come together uh to work

[1:05:11] on bringing this interpretive plan to

[1:05:13] reality. We've created MOAs with each

[1:05:15] other going all the way back to 2023

[1:05:18] uh to fund raise for continued

[1:05:21] interpretation and the rehabilitation to

[1:05:24] the site and to preserve it uh support

[1:05:26] its preservation treatment moving

[1:05:28] forward. Uh I'm sure it comes as no

[1:05:31] surprise that managing a site like this

[1:05:34] is incredibly expensive and that the

[1:05:36] state's budget is not very big. Uh so we

[1:05:39] learned very quickly that we're going to

[1:05:41] have to rely on the township. We're

[1:05:43] going to have to rely on private

[1:05:45] funding. Uh which is why this memorandum

[1:05:47] of understanding is so important. uh and

[1:05:49] that we're so grateful to have had uh

[1:05:51] the American Battlefield Trust hop on

[1:05:53] and of course always continuously

[1:05:55] grateful for the Princeton Battlefield

[1:05:57] Society's role in keeping us uh relevant

[1:06:00] within the community.

[1:06:03] There are four major projects uh that

[1:06:06] have come to shape the most recent

[1:06:09] rehabilitation

[1:06:10] uh project and you probably noted I keep

[1:06:12] using the phrase rehabilitation. We

[1:06:14] cannot use the word restoration. Uh,

[1:06:17] restoration means that we would actually

[1:06:19] have physical evidence or a photograph

[1:06:21] of something that we're going to

[1:06:22] recreate. And as I'm sure you're well

[1:06:24] aware, there are no cameras in 1776.

[1:06:28] So, we're going based on handdrawn maps

[1:06:30] and paintings of the time, uh, as well

[1:06:32] as archaeology and primary source

[1:06:35] accounts written by the men and women

[1:06:37] who were actually living here in

[1:06:39] Princeton and what was actually not

[1:06:41] Princeton, but the Quaker settlement of

[1:06:42] Stony Brook 250 years ago. The two

[1:06:46] projects we want to highlight for you

[1:06:47] today is what we call project one,

[1:06:49] trees, trails, fields, and fences, and

[1:06:51] project four, which involves the

[1:06:53] Maxwell's field rehabilitation. The

[1:06:55] other two projects uh are largely being

[1:06:59] uh conducted by the NJ DP. Uh as a brief

[1:07:02] overview, as I mentioned, our visitation

[1:07:05] has increased exponentially over the

[1:07:07] last several years. Uh we need to take

[1:07:11] away some of the uh onus on the Thomas

[1:07:14] Clark house which is an original witness

[1:07:16] structure to the battle now over well

[1:07:18] over 250 years old. It cannot support

[1:07:21] that many people coming through and act

[1:07:23] as the site's sole visitor center and

[1:07:25] visitor contact station for much longer.

[1:07:28] Um, we also want a place to better tell

[1:07:31] the story, the full story, not only of

[1:07:34] uh the fighting that occurred on the

[1:07:36] morning of the 3, but the story of the

[1:07:38] Quaker settlement that was here and the

[1:07:40] settlement in Princeton and the College

[1:07:42] of New Jerseys role in the American

[1:07:44] Revolution as well. Uh, the new entry

[1:07:47] parking is also being covered by the

[1:07:49] NJP. I am sure we will be coming to you

[1:07:52] in due time to discuss that.

[1:07:56] So, go right ahead. So, I'll start where

[1:07:58] we always start and where I'm sure you

[1:08:00] always start too, which is the research.

[1:08:01] This is the earliest map of uh the

[1:08:05] battlefield as it existed at the time.

[1:08:07] There are certainly earlier maps of the

[1:08:08] area, but none of them have as much

[1:08:11] detail as this one. It was done in 1816

[1:08:14] by a man named James Wilkinson, who at

[1:08:16] the time is a soldier in the Continental

[1:08:18] Army. uh when he wrote his memoirs, he

[1:08:21] came back to these places uh and did an

[1:08:23] extensive amount of research on the maps

[1:08:25] and the troop movements as they existed.

[1:08:27] Uh because this was the earliest map and

[1:08:29] it so very clearly depicted the orchard

[1:08:32] uh and not only the orchard but also uh

[1:08:35] what we know today as Mercer Road or

[1:08:37] Princeton Pike which is running right

[1:08:38] down the m the center of the orchard. Uh

[1:08:42] we chose to use this as one of our

[1:08:44] primary sources for the location and the

[1:08:48] recreation of the orchard and a number

[1:08:50] of fence lines which you'll see in just

[1:08:52] a moment uh where we're going to be

[1:08:53] placing those.

[1:08:56] Uh and for those who aren't aware of the

[1:08:58] history of the Stony Brook settlements,

[1:09:00] uh you'll see a number of names up there

[1:09:02] that might sound familiar. Thomas Clark

[1:09:04] being the one at the battlefield.

[1:09:06] Benjamin Clark, the property today

[1:09:08] largely owned by the IAS and the uh

[1:09:11] Historic Society of Princeton, the

[1:09:13] Quaker meeting house which has exactly

[1:09:16] the exact same square footage that it

[1:09:17] had uh 250 years ago in 1776. William

[1:09:22] Clark to the east and to the north,

[1:09:24] Matthew Clark and Robert White who is

[1:09:26] married into the Clark family as well. U

[1:09:30] go ahead. This is one of my favorite

[1:09:32] photographs of the park. It's one of the

[1:09:35] earliest aerial photographs taken in

[1:09:37] 1945.

[1:09:39] It depicts the battlefield on its west

[1:09:41] side looking east back towards town. If

[1:09:43] you were to follow the road in the

[1:09:45] middle there, that's Mercer Road. It

[1:09:46] would take you all the way back to

[1:09:48] Princeton. Some notable features down on

[1:09:50] the bottom right where it says number

[1:09:52] three is the Thomas Clark house and the

[1:09:55] barn. If you follow the driveway all the

[1:09:57] way back down towards the center of the

[1:09:59] photograph to Mercer Road, you'll note a

[1:10:01] number of small shrubs on the side of

[1:10:03] the road, those are the Norway spruces

[1:10:05] which today tower over the driveway at

[1:10:07] Princeton Battlefield State Park. They

[1:10:09] had been planted about a decade prior.

[1:10:11] Um, and if you look across the fields

[1:10:14] there, uh, on the upper left hand side,

[1:10:16] you might see, uh, David's house all the

[1:10:20] way in the back left corner. Uh but uh

[1:10:22] that number one spot there was

[1:10:24] recognized as the common grave where the

[1:10:26] mass grave is today. It's near where the

[1:10:28] colonade stands today. This photograph

[1:10:30] was taken about 10 years before the

[1:10:32] colonade was moved. You can actually see

[1:10:34] it in the photograph just above number

[1:10:36] two. There is the Mercer Manor uh

[1:10:39] sitting up there and the colonade is at

[1:10:41] the moment still attached to that

[1:10:42] building. [laughter]

[1:10:44] Go ahead.

[1:10:46] I like that image because we've used a

[1:10:48] similar vantage point for what we expect

[1:10:51] the battlefield will look like come the

[1:10:52] end of this year. What you're seeing all

[1:10:55] the way on the top side of the image is

[1:10:57] the faculty housing constructed by the

[1:10:59] Institute for Advanced Study. That

[1:11:01] housing has concluded. Uh what you're

[1:11:03] seeing as you come down is the addition

[1:11:05] of Maxwell's Field and the new trails

[1:11:07] that will link the existing park to the

[1:11:11] new section of the park which is slated

[1:11:12] to be added by the end of the year to

[1:11:15] Princeton Battlefield. There are two

[1:11:18] tree lines in the if you go back to the

[1:11:20] previous one, two tree lines of note.

[1:11:23] The first is right where it says number

[1:11:25] four. That's of course the old Mercer

[1:11:27] Oak there. But that tree line today no

[1:11:29] longer exists. There are maybe three or

[1:11:30] four trees still standing along that

[1:11:32] tree line. It's important for us because

[1:11:35] it's the property boundary between

[1:11:36] Thomas Clark and his brother William

[1:11:38] Clark. And the other boundary of note is

[1:11:40] just to the north of that. And uh so if

[1:11:44] you go look for number two and look

[1:11:45] down, follow that tree line there. That

[1:11:48] is a driveway which we recently

[1:11:50] discovered when doing work on the

[1:11:52] property. It's the original driveway of

[1:11:54] William Clark's home, which would have

[1:11:55] been somewhere in that mess of trees uh

[1:11:58] 250 years ago.

[1:12:00] And you can see it there with a few

[1:12:02] trees dotting that extent road uh

[1:12:04] structure. The fencing that you see in

[1:12:07] the image here is all historic. Uh it is

[1:12:11] chosen based on archaeology and maps of

[1:12:14] the area uh and descriptions from the

[1:12:17] soldiers and the Clark family and the

[1:12:19] Hail family who followed them. One other

[1:12:22] item of note which is worth mentioning,

[1:12:24] you'll see near the top left of the

[1:12:26] image is the apple orchard uh which is

[1:12:30] sort of the premier uh historic

[1:12:32] preservation project for us. The

[1:12:35] recreation of a commemorative orchard

[1:12:38] near the location of where the original

[1:12:40] orchard stood. Uh apple orchards are

[1:12:43] incredibly important to 18th century

[1:12:45] history. uh everybody who owned property

[1:12:48] had one uh either for mass production

[1:12:52] mostly for their own con consumption or

[1:12:55] in some cases as I like to say mad

[1:12:57] scientists who like to breed different

[1:12:59] kinds of apples as a as a pastime. Uh it

[1:13:03] also plays of course a central role in

[1:13:05] the opening shots of the Battle of

[1:13:06] Princeton.

[1:13:08] With that I'm going to hand it over to

[1:13:10] Mr. Mcnite to tell us a little bit about

[1:13:12] our partnership.

[1:13:13] >> Great. Thanks Will. And uh yeah, I just

[1:13:15] want to highlight here just how

[1:13:16] important the partnerships are with the

[1:13:18] state of New Jersey, the Princeton

[1:13:19] Battlefield Society, and the American

[1:13:21] Battlefield Trust to making this whole

[1:13:23] reimagining Princeton plan come

[1:13:24] together.

[1:13:26] Um just a little bit about the American

[1:13:28] Battlefield Trust. Uh we're a national

[1:13:30] nonpartisan nonprofit battlefield

[1:13:32] preservation organization dedicated to

[1:13:35] preserving our nation's hollow ground

[1:13:37] from the Civil War, the Revolutionary

[1:13:40] War, and the War of 1812. Uh to date we

[1:13:43] have saved uh 63,000 acres across the

[1:13:46] nation across 25 different states. Uh we

[1:13:49] provide a wide variety of educational

[1:13:50] resources

[1:13:52] um on our website and on our YouTube

[1:13:54] channel um and have reached 40 million

[1:13:56] people uh annually um and uh so that's

[1:14:00] just a little bit about the American

[1:14:01] Battlefield Trust.

[1:14:05] Now, we originally, as Will mentioned,

[1:14:07] were the Civil War Trust and only did

[1:14:10] Civil War battlefields. Princeton

[1:14:11] Battlefield was one of the first

[1:14:13] revolutionary battlefields that we came

[1:14:15] in and helped save land at. Uh, so as he

[1:14:18] mentioned, the Institute of Advanced

[1:14:20] Study was going to um build faculty

[1:14:21] housing. You can see the original

[1:14:23] footprint in the light blue there. Um,

[1:14:25] we were able to come in with a group of

[1:14:27] preservationists and actually reach an

[1:14:29] agreement. uh got them to revise the

[1:14:31] footprint down to that dark blue oval up

[1:14:33] there where it currently sits. Uh and as

[1:14:36] a result were able to save Maxwell's

[1:14:38] Field, the site of Washington's charge

[1:14:41] where he, you know, led the charge

[1:14:42] against the British, helping to turn the

[1:14:44] tide of the battle. Um and ultimately

[1:14:46] the American Revolution. Uh so this is

[1:14:48] very very important hollowed ground uh

[1:14:50] that we were a part of helping to save.

[1:14:54] Um, now as part of our phase one

[1:14:57] interpretive work at the battlefield,

[1:14:58] we've done a a wide variety of things

[1:15:00] and I encourage you all to get out there

[1:15:01] and check them out if you haven't. Um,

[1:15:03] but in the top right you can see Will

[1:15:05] actually interacting with the large

[1:15:07] topographical map of the battlefield.

[1:15:10] And this is a very great feature. It

[1:15:11] actually you can use your phone scan the

[1:15:13] QR code and overlay troop movements on

[1:15:16] the map. So I it's one of the best ways

[1:15:19] you can really learn about how the

[1:15:20] battle unfolded. Um, some really cool

[1:15:23] other features that we've got on the

[1:15:24] battlefield are the uh battle windows.

[1:15:27] So, we took a a painting of the Battle

[1:15:29] of Princeton and were able to overlay it

[1:15:31] on the landscape of the Princeton

[1:15:33] battlefield. Uh, we have two of those

[1:15:35] now at the park and this is one of the

[1:15:37] coolest features I've seen at a

[1:15:38] battlefield and actually I think it's

[1:15:40] something that's going to spread to

[1:15:41] other battlefields across the country

[1:15:43] with how popular it has been. Um, yes.

[1:15:46] And, uh, you know, [clears throat] part

[1:15:48] of the work we've done has also involved

[1:15:50] archaeology.

[1:15:51] um as part of the due diligence of any

[1:15:53] anytime we're you know the ground is

[1:15:55] being disturbed we're going to do

[1:15:56] archaeology there. Um found some very

[1:15:58] cool things there. One of the one of my

[1:16:00] personal favorites is the uh coin from

[1:16:02] the Jacobite rebellion uh that they

[1:16:04] found there featured in the center of

[1:16:06] the picture here.

[1:16:09] Uh this photo just shows all of the

[1:16:12] archaeology that has gone on throughout

[1:16:14] the years at the Princeton battlefield.

[1:16:16] Uh you can see in the in the red and the

[1:16:19] green all areas that have been looked at

[1:16:20] with the by archaeologists um notably

[1:16:23] around the Clark house down in the south

[1:16:26] uh up near the orchard um and near where

[1:16:29] the institute of advanced study is as

[1:16:30] well. So just showing all the areas

[1:16:32] we've done archaeology at.

[1:16:36] uh Will mentioned this a little bit

[1:16:37] earlier, but uh sort of phase two of the

[1:16:40] project is the hopeful wish that we will

[1:16:42] have a visitor and education center at

[1:16:44] the Princeton battlefield so that um the

[1:16:47] Thomas Clark house no longer needs to

[1:16:49] serve as the uh sort of visitor center.

[1:16:51] It's a historic house and it's really

[1:16:53] not best equipped for that. We want to

[1:16:55] try to preserve that um and have a

[1:16:57] proper visitor and education center.

[1:16:59] It'll be better to accommodate larger

[1:17:01] school groups uh and visitors. it'll

[1:17:03] hopefully attract more tourism to the

[1:17:04] town as well.

[1:17:07] Um, just looping in the theme of

[1:17:09] partners as well. Um, with the orchard,

[1:17:12] we brought in pomologists, apple

[1:17:14] experts. I I just learned that word

[1:17:16] recently. um from Mount Vernon,

[1:17:18] Montichello, all sorts of historic sites

[1:17:21] to help advise how to best um you know

[1:17:24] manage and steward this new orchard uh

[1:17:26] that we plan to have placed at the

[1:17:28] battlefield which is a very important

[1:17:31] feature of the battlefield to understand

[1:17:32] how the battle unfolded. Um that's what

[1:17:35] we want is we want George Washington if

[1:17:36] he was to come back and look at the

[1:17:38] battlefield he would recognize it as the

[1:17:40] battle of Princeton like he saw it back

[1:17:42] in the day.

[1:17:44] Um as part of the work goes on uh phase

[1:17:48] one uh also includes field management.

[1:17:51] Um so the trust has been working very

[1:17:54] hard to reduce mowing uh on the on the

[1:17:56] park uh and to bring back the natural

[1:17:59] biod diversity of the area. Uh the trust

[1:18:02] has a land stewardship uh expert that is

[1:18:05] uh leading the charge for us on this. Uh

[1:18:07] Tom Selli. uh he takes very careful uh

[1:18:10] work to make sure like any ground

[1:18:12] nesting birds and uh natural wildlife

[1:18:14] are not disturbed and actually enhancing

[1:18:17] the environment of Princeton through

[1:18:19] this work.

[1:18:23] Um and lastly here I'll I'll highlight

[1:18:26] the you know Will's personal favorite

[1:18:27] here the Battlefield Bioblitz. I don't

[1:18:29] know if you all have heard of it. Um,

[1:18:31] but we've partnered with Sustainable

[1:18:33] Princeton, the Friends of Princeton Open

[1:18:35] Space, and even Ruckers University, uh,

[1:18:38] to ultimate ultimately get people out to

[1:18:40] the battlefield and document the

[1:18:43] biodiversity that they see on the

[1:18:45] battlefield, and this will help inform

[1:18:47] future stewardship of the land. So,

[1:18:49] that's been a hit so far.

[1:18:54] » That's right.

[1:18:55] >> All right. And uh Ben, I'll go ahead and

[1:18:57] let you talk about the Princeton

[1:18:58] Battlefield Society here. [laughter]

[1:19:01] >> Thanks. Um Princeton Battlefield Society

[1:19:05] has been here for quite a long time

[1:19:06] since the 1970s. In a nutshell, our job

[1:19:09] would be to protect, preserve, and

[1:19:13] promote the Princeton Battlefield in the

[1:19:15] memory of the men who fought there

[1:19:16] because it is very much hollowed ground.

[1:19:19] The uh American Revolution turns at the

[1:19:22] Battle of Princeton in the favor of the

[1:19:23] patriots. Having said that, uh, we have

[1:19:28] been promoting a very vigorous program

[1:19:30] both on an educational sense and working

[1:19:33] with this tremendous team. As you can

[1:19:35] see here, we're very energized. We're

[1:19:37] very active and we're doing an awful lot

[1:19:40] of different things such as Young

[1:19:41] Patriots Day, bringing the younger

[1:19:43] generation, experience the Battle of

[1:19:45] Princeton, which is our very large scale

[1:19:47] reenactment, which we're doing again

[1:19:49] this year on December 27th. I should add

[1:19:52] last year we had about 3,500 people

[1:19:54] there. Sorry, my voice is going with

[1:19:56] allergies. And uh that's the biggest

[1:19:59] crowd we've ever had for one of those.

[1:20:01] And I think this year it's going to be

[1:20:03] even bigger. And we have great

[1:20:04] expectations for that event.

[1:20:07] We also do tours on a regular basis for

[1:20:09] people often from out of state uh

[1:20:12] bringing in the uh the enthusiasts for

[1:20:15] American history from all across the

[1:20:17] country. We have a CAD Walder lecture

[1:20:19] series where we do [clears throat] uh

[1:20:21] every couple of months, usually about

[1:20:23] every three months or so, a lecture from

[1:20:25] an author or or a historian, sometimes

[1:20:28] other individuals on uh American the

[1:20:30] American Revolution or something to do

[1:20:32] with Princeton.

[1:20:34] uh we've had a lot of success with that

[1:20:36] and got a lot of attention for that

[1:20:39] and we just uh do whatever we can to

[1:20:41] bring the focus to the battle of

[1:20:43] Princeton which we uh feel has been

[1:20:45] somewhat overlooked over the years and

[1:20:47] the group that we have here with our

[1:20:49] agreement with the D and the ABT

[1:20:52] American Battlefield Trust and the

[1:20:54] Department of Environment Protection uh

[1:20:57] we feel we have really got something

[1:21:00] going here that's really good not only

[1:21:02] for the battlefield but for Princeton

[1:21:03] for the state of New Jersey. So, it's a

[1:21:06] type of uh public private partnership

[1:21:09] that people want to have but often don't

[1:21:11] get. You sort of uh aspire to do what I

[1:21:14] think we're doing right now because

[1:21:16] we're really uh hitting on all eight

[1:21:19] cylinders. So, from our perspective, uh

[1:21:22] this is great stuff that's going on and

[1:21:24] uh we've had a great uh partnership as

[1:21:27] well with the township of Princeton. So,

[1:21:30] we're hoping that this can continue.

[1:21:34] Thank you, Ben.

[1:21:36] So, now on to the application for

[1:21:38] project authorization. This is the um

[1:21:41] the document that was sent forward to

[1:21:43] the historic preservation office uh in

[1:21:45] Trenton, and you all received a copy of

[1:21:48] that. Specifically, what I wanted to

[1:21:50] provide just a context for the last sort

[1:21:52] of bit of additional context here is

[1:21:55] battlefields as cultural landscapes and right you you deal with historic

[1:21:59] properties that come to you and those

[1:22:01] properties may be significant for a

[1:22:04] historic event. It may be attributed to

[1:22:06] a historic designer. Uh it may be an

[1:22:09] ethnographic landscape. Uh it may be a

[1:22:11] vernacular landscape. All of those

[1:22:13] things come together uh in the same way

[1:22:15] for landscapes as they do for you know

[1:22:18] elements of architecture as well. But

[1:22:20] cultural landscapes you know are defined

[1:22:23] as natural and cultural spaces that have

[1:22:26] been shaped by human interaction. Uh

[1:22:29] they are governed by the secretary of

[1:22:31] interior standards in the same way that

[1:22:33] the secretary of interior standards were

[1:22:35] written for buildings. But only recently

[1:22:38] in about the 1990s uh were those same

[1:22:41] standards written to apply to

[1:22:43] landscapes. Uh so within the arc of

[1:22:46] preservation it's a relatively young uh

[1:22:49] discipline but again the this the same

[1:22:52] standards uphold

[1:22:54] we four treatments preservation

[1:22:56] rehabilitation restoration and

[1:22:58] reconstruction which you see frequently

[1:23:00] to buildings as will mentioned this is a

[1:23:03] rehabilitation uh rehabilitation largely

[1:23:06] says protect what you inherit but

[1:23:09] repurpose for a new and compatible use

[1:23:12] and when will tip you

[1:23:14] classified this as it could have just

[1:23:17] been a preservation action that started

[1:23:19] all of this, the preservation of 13

[1:23:21] acres and someone puts up a sign and

[1:23:23] says we save this. But it has gone far

[1:23:26] beyond that. has been transformative on

[1:23:29] the part of the state, on the part of

[1:23:31] local partners and the local community

[1:23:34] to make this something that really is

[1:23:37] befitting of a national historic

[1:23:39] landmark battlefield, a best-in-class,

[1:23:41] globally significant site. So, as

[1:23:45] mentioned, the the study was done of the

[1:23:48] archaeology, all of the the background

[1:23:51] research of both natural and cultural

[1:23:53] resources completed. There are three

[1:23:55] principal movements. Uh the meadow

[1:23:58] restoration

[1:23:59] and I just want to say something you

[1:24:01] know from the standpoint of sustainable

[1:24:04] practices. There are roughly there are

[1:24:06] over 50 acres of land that are mowed

[1:24:10] bi-weekly.

[1:24:11] >> Yeah. By

[1:24:12] >> bi-weekly. We have the opportunity now

[1:24:15] to take those 50 acres and create more

[1:24:18] sustainable meadows that reinforce the

[1:24:21] individual properties, holdings, spatial

[1:24:25] character of the historic period. When

[1:24:27] we talk about historic landscapes,

[1:24:29] there's trees, there's structures, uh

[1:24:32] there's circulation, all of that's

[1:24:33] important, but spatial character is is a

[1:24:36] very significant contributing feature.

[1:24:38] and the establishment of the meadows

[1:24:40] will be transformative to that spatial

[1:24:43] character. Again, proposed species mix

[1:24:46] looking at at both warm season grasses,

[1:24:49] native legumes, and pollinator species.

[1:24:52] Poundforpound, the acre of meadow

[1:24:57] restored. And and as naturalists, they say restoration, and they mean

[1:25:02] something entirely different than we

[1:25:03] would talk about from the standpoint of

[1:25:05] preservation. But a restored meadow

[1:25:07] pound-for-pound provides more oxygen

[1:25:10] than an acre of of trees. From that

[1:25:13] standpoint, the rate of oxygen, the deep

[1:25:16] root mass that is attributed to this not

[1:25:20] only supports the reinterpretation and a

[1:25:23] more authentic experience of that 1777

[1:25:26] condition, but it's better for the

[1:25:27] environment.

[1:25:30] We also looked at again three major

[1:25:32] movements. the historic William Clark

[1:25:35] Lane. On the far right was a tree survey

[1:25:37] that was conducted uh by Davy Resource

[1:25:40] Group that identified the condition of

[1:25:43] that property line separating the IAS

[1:25:45] property now owned by the American

[1:25:47] Battlefield Trust and the State Park

[1:25:49] property identified largely consists of

[1:25:53] ash trees, invasive trees, dead trees.

[1:25:57] Uh but we we did an extensive study

[1:25:59] really over six months to look at at

[1:26:01] what's what to save. No large trees of

[1:26:04] significance will be removed that aren't

[1:26:06] dead or ash. Uh from that standpoint,

[1:26:10] there are 219 trees proposed for

[1:26:12] removal. 40 of those are dead, 30 are

[1:26:15] ash, 35 are hazard trees. There are 115

[1:26:20] regulated trees by your ordinance uh

[1:26:23] that are proposed for removal. We've

[1:26:25] worked closely with uh Taylor Saputo uh

[1:26:28] the t the arborist for the municipality

[1:26:32] uh and are working to far exceed the

[1:26:36] planting the compensatory planting for

[1:26:38] the removals. Uh I think by the

[1:26:39] compensatory planting um we would be in

[1:26:42] the 100s range. were in were over 200

[1:26:46] and we're planting those on the east

[1:26:47] buffer uh adjacent to the IA property uh

[1:26:52] in the commemorative orchard as was

[1:26:53] discussed and then we've worked with the

[1:26:56] friends of Princeton open space to

[1:26:58] identify an area that's been succumb to

[1:27:00] emerald ashbor and are planting 100

[1:27:03] trees there as well. Why would we do

[1:27:05] that and not you know plant them back at

[1:27:08] the battlefield in part is to steward

[1:27:10] the resource. It's an archaeological,

[1:27:13] you know, sensitive resource. So, every

[1:27:17] tree that's planted, you know, in in the

[1:27:19] eyes of the archaeologist is is

[1:27:21] injurious uh to that resource. So, how

[1:27:23] do we balance that in a way that's both

[1:27:27] respectful of nature and culture? All

[1:27:29] the trees planted back will be of native

[1:27:32] varieties that are have provenence to

[1:27:35] Princeton. Last thing, the heirloom

[1:27:38] orchard. Uh, as Will mentioned, uh, you

[1:27:41] know, this is a topic in landscape that

[1:27:44] I will say is slightly different than

[1:27:47] buildings. In in a building, you would

[1:27:49] never build back a historic structure

[1:27:51] that that was is no longer there. In

[1:27:54] most cases, you wouldn't do that.

[1:27:56] Landscapes and trees and individual

[1:27:59] features like fences have a lifespan

[1:28:01] within the landscape. And when they

[1:28:03] succumb, they are replaced within a

[1:28:06] cultural landscape. when there's

[1:28:08] documentation to support that. And

[1:28:10] that's precisely what's proposed in the

[1:28:13] rehabilitation of an orchard. Uh as Will

[1:28:15] mentioned there on on the far side at

[1:28:18] the end of the William Clark lane. Uh

[1:28:21] we've worked with national experts,

[1:28:22] pomologists, which is a fun word to say.

[1:28:25] Uh and they have identified the heirloom

[1:28:28] species that have providence to

[1:28:31] Princeton in the mid 18th century. uh we

[1:28:35] are supporting that with uh a collection

[1:28:38] of crab apples that will give structure

[1:28:41] to the orchard as it develops over time.

[1:28:44] These heirloom orchards and varieties

[1:28:46] are grown to spec. You can't just run

[1:28:48] out to Lowe's and buy them. Um they are

[1:28:50] grown specifically for this battlefield.

[1:28:53] Uh and the the community that has

[1:28:56] congealed around this is really quite

[1:28:58] significant. They're writing a

[1:29:00] management plan for this orchard that

[1:29:03] will span both staff overview uh hired

[1:29:08] for hire consultation um to take care of

[1:29:12] the trees and then volunteer efforts

[1:29:15] spurred by the Princeton Battlefield

[1:29:16] Society, local garden clubs and others

[1:29:19] that are looking to care for this icon

[1:29:22] of nature and culture on the

[1:29:24] battlefield.

[1:29:25] So what was put forward uh to the

[1:29:28] historic preservation or sorry to the um

[1:29:32] historic preservation office is a

[1:29:34] collection of both uh if you see in the

[1:29:36] far right hand corner

[1:29:39] non ground disturbing activities and

[1:29:41] light ground disturbing activities. So

[1:29:44] when we say fields, fences, trees and

[1:29:48] trails, these are, you know, low impact,

[1:29:52] high return when it comes to the

[1:29:54] rehabilitation of this space.

[1:29:57] This is a view of Maxwell's field as it

[1:30:00] exists now. Again, you know, years of of

[1:30:04] inattention here to be assessed and

[1:30:07] opened up to the public. Uh this is a

[1:30:10] view of course of the overall landscape

[1:30:13] character of the battlefield. Even in

[1:30:15] this photo, it looks a little bit

[1:30:16] different than it did a year ago. Uh

[1:30:19] these are the pathways that are now

[1:30:22] proposed uh and they're already being

[1:30:24] moan to change the experience to make it

[1:30:27] more authentic uh and to interpret

[1:30:29] features that no longer exist. This is

[1:30:32] the tree line that separates the IS

[1:30:34] property and the state park property.

[1:30:37] Right in the center of it is a very

[1:30:39] definable depression of the William

[1:30:42] Clark Lane. It went straight to his

[1:30:45] house. There are only two roads that run

[1:30:48] in that north south direction and they

[1:30:51] both went to Clark's uh one to Thomas

[1:30:55] Clark and one to William Clark. And so

[1:30:57] that exists in there that will remain as

[1:30:59] a living relic. Uh it also has small

[1:31:03] depressions for the hedge or fence lines

[1:31:06] that would have existed to support and

[1:31:08] protect that lane during the period.

[1:31:12] Again conditions of of the current state

[1:31:14] of things at at the state. Um you know

[1:31:18] there are a lot of invasives and the

[1:31:21] biob blitz has you know provided a

[1:31:24] baseline to understand what the

[1:31:26] character of that landscape is today. Uh

[1:31:28] and I'm happy to say that partners have

[1:31:30] signed an agreement to do a biob blitz

[1:31:33] every 5 years for the next five years

[1:31:35] just to demonstrate program efficacy. Uh

[1:31:38] so that should tell us, you know, how

[1:31:39] we're doing as new species are planted.

[1:31:43] When we look at historic fence lines or

[1:31:45] fence lines, there are are at minimum

[1:31:47] three

[1:31:49] uh details. This is a non-historic fence

[1:31:52] line. So this is a five rail uh snake

[1:31:56] rail fence.

[1:31:58] and that's to to be placed in locations

[1:32:00] where there weren't historic fence

[1:32:02] lines, but you need the control of

[1:32:04] vehicular access, those sorts of things.

[1:32:07] Uh there's a dilapidated trail that runs

[1:32:09] along that property line. Again, that

[1:32:11] historic William Clark Lane is right off

[1:32:14] screen to our right. That will be

[1:32:16] removed and again, new trails put in its

[1:32:20] place. Even today to the far left you

[1:32:23] can see the old property line between

[1:32:26] Thomas Clark to the right and William

[1:32:29] Clark to the left.

[1:32:32] And again these are the

[1:32:35] IAS properties that were built in 2019

[1:32:38] uh and beyond. So additional uh trees

[1:32:41] will be planted along that buffer to

[1:32:43] support the screening of those lands.

[1:32:47] This is a snapshot of the wood lots uh

[1:32:50] that are over at Mountain Lakes, an area

[1:32:52] that has succumbed to emerald ashbor.

[1:32:54] And we'll we will be working with them

[1:32:56] to plant 100 trees there. And that's a

[1:32:59] location within Mountain Lakes to show

[1:33:01] in that circular area the uh roughly

[1:33:04] halfacre portion of land.

[1:33:08] This is an area of the proposed meadow

[1:33:12] restorations. Uh and so these will go

[1:33:14] through a process of

[1:33:18] controlled burns or prescribed burns and

[1:33:21] working with the state forest service

[1:33:22] who will be managing that project. Uh

[1:33:25] the locality and and working with the

[1:33:27] planning office here is very excited

[1:33:29] about that. This would be the first of

[1:33:31] its kind uh in Princeton. Uh it is you

[1:33:35] know absolutely essential from an

[1:33:36] ecosystem standpoint uh to contribute to

[1:33:39] the rehabilitation of this site.

[1:33:43] again the historic fence lines. So this

[1:33:45] would be along the the old historic

[1:33:48] roads and lanes.

[1:33:50] We saw the non-historic and then these

[1:33:52] are the five rail post and rail fences

[1:33:54] that are out there today that are also

[1:33:57] documented from a historic standpoint.

[1:34:01] And then lastly the location of

[1:34:03] additional trees to be planted along the

[1:34:06] IAS buffer.

[1:34:09] And with that, that is the the end of of

[1:34:11] our review today. We're happy to answer

[1:34:13] any additional questions or comments

[1:34:16] that you have in in review and I'll

[1:34:19] point it to the state or to the American

[1:34:21] Battlefield Trust accordingly. So, thank

[1:34:23] you for your time.

[1:34:27] » Wow, that was a great presentation and I

[1:34:30] kind of know some of these pieces, but

[1:34:31] this was to see it all together is is

[1:34:33] really great. Um, does anybody have any

[1:34:36] questions or comments or

[1:34:39] very exciting?

[1:34:39] >> I have comments. Do you hear me?

[1:34:41] >> Yes.

[1:34:41] >> Yep.

[1:34:42] >> This is Shirley. Um, first of all, thank

[1:34:45] you gentlemen. Um, when I was in

[1:34:48] elementary school, when they integrated

[1:34:50] the schools and I was at the elementary

[1:34:53] school on Nassau Street, um, our history

[1:34:56] was about Princeton history and we were

[1:34:58] taken to the battlefield and I remember

[1:35:01] a cannon and cannonballs that were

[1:35:04] shaped like a um, shaped in order. What

[1:35:08] happened to those cannons and that

[1:35:10] cannonball cuz it had been there for

[1:35:12] years.

[1:35:13] >> That's the the million-dollar question,

[1:35:15] believe it or not. Uh, we don't know

[1:35:17] what happened to those cannon balls. No

[1:35:19] one seems to know the straight answer.

[1:35:21] My theory is that they're currently in

[1:35:22] the basement of the state museum in

[1:35:25] Trenton. Um, those were Civil War era

[1:35:28] cannonballs and at some point somebody

[1:35:31] decided to take them off of the field.

[1:35:33] Uh, the one cannon that used to be out

[1:35:35] there is actually still there, but it's

[1:35:37] not in the same spot. It's now on the

[1:35:39] porch of the Clark house uh in a new

[1:35:42] sort of carriage for it. uh the old one

[1:35:44] having broken um and probably when you

[1:35:47] were there uh it was on its side sitting

[1:35:50] in the dirt for some time. But yeah,

[1:35:52] that's the million-dollar question. Uh I

[1:35:54] get that one a lot. Where are the

[1:35:55] cannonballs? Um and uh

[1:35:57] >> they were they were up on a hill and you

[1:36:00] could it looks like they were facing the land.

[1:36:03] >> They were they were placed near the site

[1:36:05] where General Mercer was believed to

[1:36:07] have fallen. Um yeah uh that monument

[1:36:10] when we did the archaeology we found

[1:36:12] some evidence of the concrete uh of the

[1:36:15] original uh monument. So we know exactly

[1:36:17] where it was. Uh it's just a question of

[1:36:19] when did those disappear

[1:36:21] uh and where did they go and the state

[1:36:24] actually does not know [laughter] what

[1:36:26] happened to them. Um so come back to me

[1:36:29] soon. That's that's my white whale. I'll

[1:36:31] find them eventually.

[1:36:33] >> I also want to thank the lady. I don't

[1:36:35] know who the lady is that regrrew the uh

[1:36:38] Mercer tree, but it's beautiful.

[1:36:41] >> Yes. Yeah. One of our neighbors from

[1:36:43] Parkside Drive is responsible for uh

[1:36:46] that 1980s repopulation of the oak. Uh

[1:36:50] so the one that's sitting there out

[1:36:51] there today, we lovingly call Mercer Oak

[1:36:54] Jr. or baby Mercer Oak. Uh she's over 50

[1:36:57] years old now, so she's not a baby

[1:36:58] anymore, but she is beautiful. Uh right

[1:37:01] now Mercer Oaki the third is currently

[1:37:03] growing in my office uh getting ready

[1:37:05] for replanting somewhere on the field

[1:37:07] soon.

[1:37:08] >> Well, I like going down Mercer. I always

[1:37:10] go that way because it's beautiful. But

[1:37:12] I want to know what's happening to the

[1:37:13] grass cuz the grass is all brown now.

[1:37:16] >> Yeah, that's what we were just talking

[1:37:18] about. We're letting the grass grow out

[1:37:21] as part of this sustainable

[1:37:24] uh programming for the nature of the

[1:37:26] site. Um eventually what you're going to

[1:37:28] see happen and actually quite soon we

[1:37:31] hope is that all of that is going to be

[1:37:33] knocked back down uh and then treated

[1:37:35] and prepared for a prescribed burn. Uh

[1:37:39] once the burn takes place, we will then

[1:37:41] be able to sew uh a um what is it

[1:37:45] called? Winter wheat.

[1:37:46] >> Well, well, we're going to grow winter

[1:37:47] wheat. a starter uh crop, a starter

[1:37:50] crop, which is winter wheat, which u

[1:37:53] interestingly enough is actually what

[1:37:54] was growing at the battlefield at the

[1:37:56] time of the battle was winter wheat. Uh

[1:37:58] once that winter wheat comes up, uh we

[1:38:01] will then make the transition from crop

[1:38:04] to natural meadow and natural grass. So

[1:38:09] wild flowers, pollinators, legumes, uh

[1:38:12] grasses that are all native to New

[1:38:15] Jersey will take the place of uh some of

[1:38:18] those larger swats of land. Uh and as we

[1:38:21] continue our progress years, you know, a

[1:38:25] few more years down the road with the

[1:38:26] creation of the uh visitors center and

[1:38:29] the removal of the current parking lot

[1:38:31] and the making of the new parking lot,

[1:38:33] we'll open more land for the open space

[1:38:35] that a lot of Princonians are used to

[1:38:37] for flying their kites and and

[1:38:39] picnicking. And we're going to enhance

[1:38:41] that area for our visitors as well. It's

[1:38:43] a delicate balance between this is

[1:38:45] hallowed ground. People fought and bled

[1:38:48] and died here for an idea. uh that all

[1:38:51] men were created equal and at the same

[1:38:53] time it's one of the few places with

[1:38:55] open space left in Mercer County and New

[1:38:57] Jersey. Uh so we have to straddle that

[1:38:59] line very very carefully. Uh and we do

[1:39:02] have people's thoughts in minds. So

[1:39:03] thank you for your input on the grass.

[1:39:07] >> Thank you. One other thing, Kip Cherry

[1:39:09] who grew up in Princeton is a very is

[1:39:12] quite an advocate for the battleground.

[1:39:14] >> She's sitting right back here.

[1:39:17] >> Kip Cherry's there.

[1:39:18] >> Yeah, she's here. [laughter] Oh, okay.

[1:39:20] Thank you. A word for Kip.

[1:39:27] » Any other commission members want to

[1:39:29] comment or ask any questions?

[1:39:31] >> I had a quick comment. Um, I wear two

[1:39:34] hats because I've been a member of the

[1:39:37] commission since 2003, but I've also

[1:39:39] been a member of the Princeton Friends

[1:39:41] meeting since 2005. So, um, we're

[1:39:47] very happy. I think from a preservation

[1:39:51] perspective, all the work you're doing,

[1:39:53] it's tremendously

[1:39:55] exciting and enriching our community.

[1:39:59] And from the Princeton friends meeting,

[1:40:01] I think you guys have been very

[1:40:02] respectful and very um aware of the

[1:40:06] Quaker history in our our town,

[1:40:08] especially with the Clarks and the

[1:40:12] neighboring um cemetery and meeting

[1:40:15] house and um the the friends the land

[1:40:20] that you know they used to worship

[1:40:23] there. So um we also appreciate your

[1:40:26] consideration and sensitivity to our our

[1:40:29] meeting. So thank you.

[1:40:31] >> It's our pleasure. It has been and

[1:40:33] remains my uh interpretive

[1:40:37] uh philosophy that the battle of

[1:40:39] Princeton is 0001%

[1:40:42] of the life of [snorts] that land and

[1:40:45] that the rest of the time in that period

[1:40:47] it belongs to somebody. It was

[1:40:48] somebody's home. It was somebody's place

[1:40:50] of worship. So, our story begins not

[1:40:52] with George Washington crossing the

[1:40:54] Delaware, but with the people who lived

[1:40:57] in this land. And that's what visitors

[1:40:58] get when they come to the Clark House

[1:41:00] and what we hope they'll get in our

[1:41:01] future visitors center.

[1:41:03] >> And and we have had at the meeting some

[1:41:06] ancestors from the Clark family that

[1:41:08] have come by to to visit us. So, yeah,

[1:41:11] >> it's we saw that they came by a couple

[1:41:13] weeks ago or a month or so ago. They

[1:41:15] were awesome.

[1:41:16] >> Yeah.

[1:41:21] Well, thank you very much. I really

[1:41:23] enjoyed that presentation. I can't wait

[1:41:25] to see

[1:41:27] um what all that happens and and that

[1:41:29] people can know more and more about what what happened here.

[1:41:35] >> Plus, it's fun to say pomologist.

[1:41:37] [laughter]

[1:41:38] >> Yeah. New f everybody's new favorite

[1:41:39] word, pomologist.

[1:41:43] » Thank you very much. Thank you for your

[1:41:44] time.

[1:41:44] >> I wanted to add just one thing quickly.

[1:41:47] Um, I wrote a brief memo that basically

[1:41:50] just summarized like, "Hey, you guys are

[1:41:52] coming in." Um, but

[1:41:55] wanted to emphasize the importance of

[1:41:57] this is a

[1:41:59] heavily designated property. It's a

[1:42:02] state park. It's a It's listed on the

[1:42:05] state and national register. It's a

[1:42:06] national historic landmark. It's locally

[1:42:08] designated. So there's a lot of eyes on

[1:42:10] this and p public and private

[1:42:12] partnerships, volunteer organizations

[1:42:14] working together for for this important

[1:42:17] stewardship project. I'm very excited

[1:42:20] and interested in the controlled burn. I

[1:42:22] think that will be very educational and

[1:42:24] helpful the community for how important

[1:42:26] that is to the environment and how it

[1:42:28] can benefit

[1:42:31] >> the ecology and the

[1:42:32] >> bio systems. Yeah. Um, I'm excited for

[1:42:35] the nerdy history apples and maybe

[1:42:39] potentially in the future nerdy history

[1:42:41] cider, but we'll see. Got got to grow

[1:42:43] those trees first. Um, but I also want

[1:42:46] to point out the importance of this

[1:42:48] project going forward and the parties

[1:42:50] involved on it here at the state and the

[1:42:53] local level. Um because we do currently

[1:42:56] have a federal administration that is

[1:42:59] trying to update the section 106

[1:43:02] regulations to roll them back to not

[1:43:06] respect

[1:43:08] anything that is essentially not the

[1:43:09] built environment. So it's going to

[1:43:11] impact cultural landscapes. So to have

[1:43:13] this in place and to have us all working

[1:43:15] together on this is significant and

[1:43:17] important. And I like that we're

[1:43:20] doing this together and moving forward.

[1:43:23] I think. Yeah, you're here. Everyone is

[1:43:25] uh like mind with you. So,

[1:43:27] >> yes.

[1:43:27] >> Yeah.

[1:43:28] >> All right. Thank you guys.

[1:43:30] >> Thank you.

[1:43:32] Sarah, for those remarks.

[1:43:34] Perfect. Thank you.

[1:43:42] [laughter]

[1:43:45] » Up next,

[1:43:48] concept review for 57 Birch Avenue.

[1:43:53] uh on technology here for the laptop.

[1:43:55] Should I just plug it in here or do we have a thumb drive we can provide?

[1:44:13] » We also have old school handouts if this

[1:44:15] does not work.

[1:44:42] You want

[1:46:13] Okay.

[1:47:24] We have a problem with my law firms over

[1:47:26] active security on his videos. Not we

[1:47:29] could hand these out.

[1:47:34] » Yep. These are all handouts.

[1:47:38] » Yep.

[1:47:40] >> I apologize to Shirley because she's not

[1:47:43] going to have

[1:48:01] Hold on, folks. We may have the

[1:48:03] technology solved here.

[1:50:32] All right. Thank you very much and I

[1:50:34] apologize for our technical

[1:50:36] difficulties. Uh my name is Kevin Moore

[1:50:38] with the firm of Stevens and Lee and I

[1:50:41] represent our applicant Gray 35 LLC

[1:50:45] which is owned by John Shadid and Yuma

[1:50:48] Shaded. They live in Lebanon, as in the

[1:50:51] country, not the township. So, they

[1:50:53] could not be here this evening. Um, they

[1:50:56] purchased the property on October 30th,

[1:50:59] 2025, and the property is 57 Birch

[1:51:02] Avenue. It's block 6902, lot 24 on the

[1:51:06] municipality tax map. It's approximately

[1:51:09] 5,999

[1:51:11] square feet in area. It's in the R9

[1:51:14] zoning district of the old township.

[1:51:16] [snorts] It's in the Weather Witherspoon

[1:51:18] Jackson Historic District, which is why

[1:51:20] we're here this evening. The house in

[1:51:23] its existing condition now is 2,183

[1:51:27] square ft. It has two stories plus a

[1:51:30] finished attic. It had three units on

[1:51:33] the property record card, but there's

[1:51:35] only it's only zoned for single family

[1:51:38] will be appearing before the zoning

[1:51:39] board. Um and uh it when my clients

[1:51:44] purchased the property had an illegal

[1:51:46] occupancy of about 30 people that it is

[1:51:49] now empty and they have uh it was in

[1:51:52] terrible condition uh and they have uh

[1:51:55] removed much of the damaged and

[1:51:57] dilapidated interior

[1:51:59] uh and we're seeking concept review. And

[1:52:02] I just want to clarify before Jason Viko

[1:52:04] our architect uh goes into this in

[1:52:07] detail. This is a rehabilitation and

[1:52:09] investment project. There's no no change

[1:52:12] whatever whatsoever proposed to the

[1:52:14] building footprint. No change to the

[1:52:16] building envelope. There's some minor

[1:52:19] demolition and inind reconstruction of a

[1:52:22] very severely damaged rear wall. And the

[1:52:25] plan is to refurbish the exterior as

[1:52:27] we'll show you this evening and

[1:52:29] refurbish the interior with three

[1:52:31] apartment units. I have two

[1:52:33] professionals presenting this evening.

[1:52:34] And the first is Jason Elviko, our

[1:52:37] project architect, and then uh James

[1:52:40] Shimalik, our uh civil engineer, who

[1:52:43] will provide some conceptual landscaping

[1:52:45] review. With that, I'd like to turn it

[1:52:47] over to Jason.

[1:52:53] » You're on, Jason.

[1:52:54] >> I'm good.

[1:52:55] >> Yeah, go.

[1:52:56] >> Um I'd like to do this in a couple

[1:52:58] different parts. if it's okay with the

[1:52:59] board. I'd like to go through my notes

[1:53:01] that respond to the project as an

[1:53:03] overall project and the um board's

[1:53:06] response letter, then go through the

[1:53:08] plans of what we're proposing, then go

[1:53:10] through two different sets of

[1:53:11] photographs. One of the exterior

[1:53:14] building and then one of the interior

[1:53:15] before the building was gutted, if

[1:53:17] that's okay. Um, starting with the

[1:53:19] notes, um, as Kevin said, this overall

[1:53:22] project approach is a rehabilitation and

[1:53:24] reinvestment to the existing building.

[1:53:26] Uh, we want to retain existing structure

[1:53:28] rather than replace it, correct unsafe

[1:53:30] and inappropriate previous alterations,

[1:53:33] repair deteriorated structural and

[1:53:35] building envelope conditions, improve

[1:53:37] the exterior appearance and residential

[1:53:39] character, convert the property into

[1:53:41] three safe code compliant residential

[1:53:43] units, maintain existing overall scale,

[1:53:46] massing and relationship to Birch

[1:53:47] Avenue. Um staff has already indicated

[1:53:50] that the project as a whole does not appear to pose a significant

[1:53:53] impact to the property or surrounding

[1:53:55] Witherspoon Jackson historic district.

[1:53:58] Um now the historical context important

[1:54:01] distinction between the history of the

[1:54:02] property and the building that currently

[1:54:03] exists. Uh the 1927 Sanbour map shows an

[1:54:07] earlier woodframe duplex at the

[1:54:09] property. Uh earlier the structure was

[1:54:11] demolished by approximately 1956.

[1:54:14] Uh current building was constructed by

[1:54:16] the mid 1960s. Existing building is

[1:54:18] therefore not the early 20th century

[1:54:20] duplex formally located on the property.

[1:54:23] The current building represents a later

[1:54:25] period in the evolution of Witherspoon

[1:54:26] Jackson neighborhood. Witherspoon

[1:54:29] Jackson significant extends beyond the

[1:54:30] individual architectural styles and

[1:54:32] includes its social, cultural, and

[1:54:33] residential history. Um we read through

[1:54:37] Adam Welch's the Witherspoon Jackson

[1:54:38] neighborhood how one community changed

[1:54:40] Princeton. Uh it reinforces the

[1:54:42] importance of viewing the district as an

[1:54:44] evolving community and neighborhood.

[1:54:46] Now the existing building construction,

[1:54:48] the main portion of the existing

[1:54:50] building is wood frame construction with

[1:54:52] a brick exterior. Uh the rear portion

[1:54:54] which was an addition at a later date is

[1:54:56] a m is a masonry construction with a

[1:54:59] brick exterior. Um the staff's

[1:55:01] memorandum questioned whether the

[1:55:03] building was masonry or framed

[1:55:04] construction and express willingness to

[1:55:06] review existing conditions in the field.

[1:55:08] Uh we're going to coordinate on-site

[1:55:10] review with staff if necessary. And I'll

[1:55:12] get to that a little later on. Um the

[1:55:15] existing previous alterations. The

[1:55:16] property was previously used illegally

[1:55:18] for multiple apartment units. Illegal

[1:55:20] rear stair was constructed to provide

[1:55:22] access to the basement apartment areas.

[1:55:24] Rear stair construction undermine

[1:55:25] existing footing. The existing building

[1:55:28] has undergone numerous alterations over

[1:55:30] time. The current project will remove or

[1:55:32] correct inappropriate and unsafe

[1:55:34] conditions. The existing conditions

[1:55:36] should not automatically assume to

[1:55:37] represent historical significant

[1:55:39] conditions.

[1:55:42] Uh in our proposal, we propose to uh

[1:55:46] treat the exterior brick with a a white

[1:55:48] wash, but that's more of a generalized

[1:55:50] term. Um you know, it's going to help us

[1:55:52] repair deteriorated brick as required.

[1:55:55] We're going to repoint the masonry where

[1:55:56] necessary. It's going to help clean

[1:55:58] existing brick prior application of any

[1:56:01] finish. Um we're not going to use a

[1:56:03] conventional exterior latex paint. I

[1:56:05] think that's an important note. Um

[1:56:07] proposed finish to be a breathable and m

[1:56:09] and masonry compatible. Uh the potential

[1:56:12] systems we're going to propose is either

[1:56:13] a lime wash, a mineral-based masonry

[1:56:16] coating. Um both are similar uh and

[1:56:19] breathable masonry treatments. Um the

[1:56:22] finish is intended to visually unify the

[1:56:24] existing repairs, differing brick

[1:56:26] conditions and previous alterations.

[1:56:29] Um we are willing to do a field mockup

[1:56:32] if necessary so it could be reviewed

[1:56:34] before the whole building gets that

[1:56:36] treatment. Um the staff's principal

[1:56:38] concern about the treatment was the

[1:56:39] previously unpainted brick and potential

[1:56:41] long-term masonry impacts. Um also part

[1:56:45] of the project is some window

[1:56:46] modifications. Uh selectively adjust

[1:56:49] second floor window locations, improve

[1:56:51] relationship between first and second

[1:56:53] floor openings. Um that's going to help

[1:56:55] us better establish a vertical

[1:56:56] alignment, a rhythm, a proportion, and

[1:56:58] an architectural organization. um

[1:57:00] maintain overall building height,

[1:57:02] building massing, uh roof configuration

[1:57:05] and residential scale and character. Uh

[1:57:08] the changes are intended as as the

[1:57:10] changes are in intended as limit facade

[1:57:13] improvements rather than a wholesale

[1:57:15] redesign. Um the Princeton Witherspoon

[1:57:17] Jack Jackson district documentation

[1:57:19] recognizes the vernacular and altered

[1:57:21] nature of the much of the neighborhood's

[1:57:23] building stock and supports reasonable

[1:57:25] flexibility in the rehabilitation.

[1:57:27] Uh we're also proposing some front

[1:57:30] entrance upgrades. Um we want to

[1:57:32] reconstruct and improve the existing

[1:57:33] front stoop, provide a modest roof over

[1:57:36] the primary entrance for protection from

[1:57:37] the weather. Uh that roof will contain a

[1:57:40] standing seam metal roof. Uh it's going

[1:57:42] to improve the weather protection at the

[1:57:44] entrance, provide clear entrance

[1:57:45] hierarchy. Uh it's going to add some

[1:57:47] architectural interest and curb appeal.

[1:57:49] Uh the pent roof remains subordinate to

[1:57:51] the principal building and proposed as

[1:57:53] compatible new element rather than

[1:57:54] attempted to recreate an undocumented

[1:57:56] historic historical feature being a

[1:57:58] front porch.

[1:58:01] Um it was um suggested in the letter of

[1:58:05] possibly putting back a front porch that

[1:58:07] may have been there. Um a staff notes

[1:58:10] existing brick condition suggests that a

[1:58:12] full width porch may have existed. Uh we

[1:58:14] acknowledge the importance of the front

[1:58:16] porches with proportions to the Wizman

[1:58:18] Jackson neighborhood. No historic

[1:58:19] photograph or drawing has currently been

[1:58:21] identified showing the porch. Um the

[1:58:23] existing information does not establish

[1:58:25] the following exact width, depth, roof

[1:58:28] form or pitch, roof material, column

[1:58:31] number or spacing, column design,

[1:58:33] railing, stair configuration, trim or

[1:58:34] decorative details, and whether the

[1:58:36] porch was open or enclosed. Uh there's

[1:58:39] currently brick ghosting may establish

[1:58:41] that the architectural element existed

[1:58:43] but does not provide suff sufficient

[1:58:46] information to accurately reconstruct

[1:58:47] this complete configuration.

[1:58:49] Um the secretary of the interior

[1:58:51] standards caution against conjectural

[1:58:53] reconstruction and creation of a false

[1:58:55] sense of historical development. Any

[1:58:57] reconstruction of a missing feature

[1:58:59] should be supported by adequate physical

[1:59:01] or documentary evidence. um continue

[1:59:03] with proposed pent roof unless

[1:59:05] sufficient documentation supporting an

[1:59:06] accurate porch reconstructed is

[1:59:08] identified. That's our current approach.

[1:59:11] Um there's also a practical and economic

[1:59:14] impact of a full porch if one were to go

[1:59:16] back. Uh there's three existing gas

[1:59:18] meters located on the front face of the

[1:59:20] building. Um the porch would have to

[1:59:22] have those relocated to a a new

[1:59:25] location. Um the associate work may

[1:59:28] include utility company coordination,

[1:59:30] new gas service piping, new building

[1:59:31] penetrations, removal of gas piping,

[1:59:34] exterior repairs and site work. It uh

[1:59:36] it's going to add significant

[1:59:38] construction cost to the project. The e

[1:59:40] the economic impact should be considered

[1:59:42] secondary to the preservation concern

[1:59:44] regarding undocumented reconstruction.

[1:59:46] Um then we have economic sustainability

[1:59:48] and preservation. Um, the long-term

[1:59:51] preservation requires buildings to

[1:59:52] remain occupied, useful, maintained, and

[1:59:55] economically viable. The three-unit residential use provides

[2:00:00] a viable long-term use for the property.

[2:00:03] provides funding and

[2:00:04] incentive to correct existing structural

[2:00:06] and and envelope deficiencies.

[2:00:09] Rehabilitation preserves the existing

[2:00:10] building rather than replacing it.

[2:00:12] Improvements contribute to overall

[2:00:14] condition and appearance of the

[2:00:15] streetscape. Preservation goals should

[2:00:18] be balanced with reasonable adaptive

[2:00:19] rehabilitation and long-term economic

[2:00:22] sustainability.

[2:00:24] >> Let's go to the picture.

[2:00:25] >> Yep. If I can go through the pictures

[2:00:26] real quick.

[2:00:27] >> Um I'll start with the exterior.

[2:00:30] There should be that should be the one

[2:00:32] that just says photos, not exterior.

[2:00:41] Uh example packet

[2:00:44] that one. Yep.

[2:00:47] That's it.

[2:00:51] So, the the first picture, photo one,

[2:00:54] this is a front elevation of the entry.

[2:00:56] Um, you can see between the windows

[2:00:58] there appears to be some patching or

[2:01:01] replacement of brick at one time. It

[2:01:04] also shows the stoop to the left and the

[2:01:06] three gas meters currently there. Um,

[2:01:09] photo two shows pretty much uh the upper

[2:01:12] facade and the same uh brick patching in

[2:01:14] the middle. It also shows that the

[2:01:16] middle windows currently are not

[2:01:17] aligned. The second floor middle windows

[2:01:19] kick slightly to the right from the

[2:01:22] lower window. Um the two to the right

[2:01:24] are aligned over top of each other. The

[2:01:25] middle alignment is something that we're

[2:01:26] proposing to fix.

[2:01:30] Um photo three is just another example

[2:01:32] of the left side of the patching in the

[2:01:34] middle between the windows and the two

[2:01:36] window alignments.

[2:01:41] Photo five shows the existing condition

[2:01:43] of the front stoop. Um the left side is

[2:01:46] a is a mixture of brick and masonry.

[2:01:50] Um photo six shows a rear entry that was

[2:01:54] created at some time without permit. Um

[2:01:58] it started to undermine the footing

[2:02:01] which can be seen in a couple pictures

[2:02:03] coming up. Uh photos seven and eight

[2:02:05] just further show that rear entry. Uh,

[2:02:08] photo eight, if you look towards the

[2:02:10] left, that's the footing that's sticking

[2:02:12] out, hovering kind of in the air.

[2:02:18] Um, photo nine

[2:02:20] shows where the mortar uh is kind of

[2:02:23] falling out from previous repairs. U,

[2:02:25] one of our proposed objectives is to

[2:02:27] repoint the brick and fix it up.

[2:02:30] Photo 10 is is a side picture showing

[2:02:34] the similar U mortar where it's coming

[2:02:36] out from a previous repair. It also

[2:02:38] shows the mix of both brick and block

[2:02:42] construction.

[2:02:47] And then photo 11 and 12 are from the

[2:02:50] opposite side of the front porch where

[2:02:52] the um exterior parch has completely

[2:02:55] come off. And at one time there was

[2:02:58] numerous materials stuck in there to

[2:02:59] infill it.

[2:03:04] Uh the next page shows some context

[2:03:06] along Birch Avenue. Uh the first picture

[2:03:09] is directly across the street. The

[2:03:11] structure to the right is a white

[2:03:14] horizontal sided house. The structure to

[2:03:16] the left is a masonry uh with white

[2:03:19] parch structure. Um Birch Avenue 2

[2:03:23] picture is further down the street. I

[2:03:25] believe that's a a a small church that

[2:03:27] has a masonry white exterior.

[2:03:31] And then Birch Avenue 3 picture is just

[2:03:33] another picture showing that there's um

[2:03:35] quite a bit of white exterior structures

[2:03:38] along the street.

[2:03:42] These last two photos I think are the

[2:03:44] most important. Um this is an example of

[2:03:48] the exterior treatment that we would

[2:03:49] like to do to the current brick. uh it's

[2:03:52] going to be more of a lime wash or

[2:03:53] mineral wash. Um it does not completely

[2:03:56] get rid of the look of the red brick.

[2:03:59] is still allowed to peek

[2:04:00] through in certain areas. Uh it is

[2:04:02] consistent with other structures

[2:04:04] throughout Princeton. Um and it's

[2:04:06] mindful to the existing red brick

[2:04:08] without completely covering up like a

[2:04:10] latex paint would. Um we are more than

[2:04:12] willing to do a mockup on site in a

[2:04:15] small area so the board can take a look

[2:04:17] and get approval if necessary.

[2:04:19] >> Cool.

[2:04:21] Um, the next set of photos is going to

[2:04:24] be interior photos.

[2:04:33] I'll go through these pretty quick.

[2:04:35] These just show the conditions of what

[2:04:36] was there before our clients purchased

[2:04:38] the building. Um, to Kevin's point,

[2:04:41] there was what, 30 units?

[2:04:43] >> Yeah, there was roughly 30 apartment

[2:04:45] units in this 2 and a half story

[2:04:46] structure. Um, they had people in units

[2:04:50] in the basement with an unfinished

[2:04:52] basement and a dirt floor. Um, photos

[2:04:54] one and two show a typical kitchen and

[2:04:57] sleeping area that was there before. Um,

[2:05:00] photos three is another area of the

[2:05:03] kitchen and living. Um, photo four is is

[2:05:07] a shower. Um,

[2:05:12] photo five is another shot of a

[2:05:13] bathroom. And then photo six, believe it

[2:05:16] or not, that was how people were that

[2:05:19] photo six, there was units down there

[2:05:20] with that basement as it as it is in

[2:05:22] that picture.

[2:05:24] And they were getting to that basement

[2:05:25] unit from that stair in the back.

[2:05:28] Um, photos seven and eight just show

[2:05:30] typical living areas and sleeping areas

[2:05:32] prior to the um, demolition. And then

[2:05:36] nine and 10 are similar pictures.

[2:05:43] Now, I'd like to walk through the plans

[2:05:44] real quick.

[2:05:48] » Uh, top one. Y.

[2:05:53] » So, the first page is a colored

[2:05:54] >> question. Did Did you note that there

[2:05:57] were 30 units in this house?

[2:06:00] >> Did we know

[2:06:02] >> 30 30 individuals of sleeping areas?

[2:06:05] >> Our client, you know, purchased the

[2:06:08] property. As I said, they're they live

[2:06:10] over they they have visited Princeton.

[2:06:12] They hope to actually retire to

[2:06:13] Princeton, not in this house, but uh and

[2:06:15] their son goes to Ruters. Uh but uh they

[2:06:20] were unaware of the situation when they

[2:06:23] purchased it. It obviously wasn't listed

[2:06:25] that way, but when they took title, they

[2:06:27] saw and determined the situation and

[2:06:30] corrected it.

[2:06:33] >> Thank you.

[2:06:33] >> And it's for cl clarity, it's empty now.

[2:06:39] Thank you.

[2:06:40] >> So, just to walk through the drawings

[2:06:42] real quick, the first page is color

[2:06:44] codes the units. Um, there's three units

[2:06:47] proposed. On the left image is the first

[2:06:50] floor plan. The blue the blue unit is on

[2:06:54] the second and third floor in the second

[2:06:56] floor and attic. Um, so the first at the

[2:06:58] you come into a first entry vestibule

[2:07:00] takes you up to the second floor and

[2:07:01] attic space. The yellow space is a unit

[2:07:04] in the front and the pink space is a

[2:07:06] unit in the back.

[2:07:11] » Question before you move on, please. Um,

[2:07:14] >> which color depicts existing conditions?

[2:07:19] >> Section.

[2:07:19] >> Which color shows us what is existing

[2:07:23] now?

[2:07:24] >> It's going to be the next page.

[2:07:25] >> I see.

[2:07:26] >> Yeah. The next page.

[2:07:28] >> The next page. A1- Z00. The image on the

[2:07:31] left is a demolition plan which shows it

[2:07:33] how it sits now. The red is what's going

[2:07:35] to be removed. Um if you notice at the

[2:07:38] top of that demolition plan, that back

[2:07:39] area is being completely removed because

[2:07:41] that is the area where the foundation

[2:07:43] wall and footing were undermined from

[2:07:44] that rear stair. Um the image to the

[2:07:47] right is a proposed floor plan for that

[2:07:49] first floor. It's going to have the one

[2:07:51] unit in the front with one bedroom

[2:07:53] kitchenet and living space. The unit in

[2:07:55] the in the back will also be a

[2:07:57] onebedroom unit with kitchen living

[2:07:58] space. And then that vest view up front

[2:08:00] goes up to the second floor which is on

[2:08:02] the next page sheet A1.10.

[2:08:06] Again the image on the left is a

[2:08:08] demolition plan which shows existing

[2:08:10] conditions. The red being removed. The

[2:08:12] image on the right is the plan for the

[2:08:14] proposed apartment. Um this space is

[2:08:16] this unit is going to be a two-bedroom

[2:08:18] unit. This is the second floor which

[2:08:20] contains a living space, a bedroom and a

[2:08:22] kitchenet. Um sheet A-1.20 20 shows the

[2:08:27] attic level that's going to contain an

[2:08:29] additional bathroom and bedroom for that

[2:08:30] unit and the image to the left is the uh

[2:08:34] existing adding plan with the red which is what is being removed.

[2:08:40] Uh moving on to the next sheet a-2.0

[2:08:44] these are the proposed elevations. Um

[2:08:46] the elevation in the top left corner

[2:08:48] front elevation proposed um shows the

[2:08:51] existing porch with new pent roof above.

[2:08:53] Uh we lined up the middle two windows

[2:08:55] for more of a symmetrical architectural

[2:08:57] look. Uh the two windows to the right

[2:08:59] were already there and lined up. We are

[2:09:01] slightly increasing the size of the

[2:09:03] windows to meet current egress

[2:09:04] standards. Um the image to the right is

[2:09:09] the right elevation uh from the right

[2:09:11] side. Um same thing we're increasing the

[2:09:14] windows slightly to meet uh current

[2:09:17] egress standards. The image on the

[2:09:19] bottom left is a rendering of what the

[2:09:22] color scheme will look like. Um there is

[2:09:25] no proposed increase in square footage.

[2:09:29] There is no proposed uh additions that

[2:09:32] will be exceeding the existing

[2:09:33] footprint. Um the image, the rendering

[2:09:36] image shows more of a pure white facade.

[2:09:40] You know, it's hard to get technology to

[2:09:42] do what you want sometimes, but the

[2:09:44] pictures in that packet, the back is

[2:09:46] more what it's going to look like with

[2:09:47] the line wash or mineral wash.

[2:09:51] Um, the next sheet, A-210,

[2:09:56] shows the rear elevation. That is the

[2:09:59] area that we are rebuilding to the

[2:10:01] existing footprint just to um because

[2:10:04] we're going to have to take it down to

[2:10:05] redo the foundation footing. So that

[2:10:07] back wall is is new, but it's within the

[2:10:10] existing footprint. Uh the next shot on

[2:10:12] the right, the left side elevation, um

[2:10:14] just shows it from the left.

[2:10:19] Um and that's it.

[2:10:22] >> Hi Sharon,

[2:10:24] I'm on Zoom. Um can I call you back?

[2:10:28] Okay.

[2:10:30] >> Having trouble hearing

[2:10:40] Sarah, do you have um

[2:10:43] some comments to share?

[2:10:46] >> Yes, I think um the applicant kind of

[2:10:48] covered a lot of it. Um

[2:10:54] generally there's there's no changes

[2:10:56] currently proposed to the building's

[2:10:58] footprint. Uh there's a lot of what

[2:11:01] mainly is happening is the rebuilding of

[2:11:03] the the rear wall um repairs,

[2:11:05] [clears throat] realignment of the

[2:11:07] windows, uh and the remainder for lack

[2:11:11] of a better term is kind of cosmetic. Uh

[2:11:14] painting of the brick, repairing of the

[2:11:18] facade and the addition of that pent

[2:11:20] roof over the front door. Um as I said,

[2:11:23] like willing to work with the applicant

[2:11:25] in any on-site design meetings. Um

[2:11:28] because based on what I could find,

[2:11:29] which

[2:11:31] the property tax records also said said

[2:11:33] this was a brick building, also said it

[2:11:35] was built in 1949, which I know is

[2:11:37] incorrect. Um and that was a three-unit

[2:11:39] building, so not the most reliable, but

[2:11:42] the infill above the windows where what

[2:11:45] was presumably a porch used to be made

[2:11:48] it look more like brick than brick

[2:11:50] veneer, but I could be wrong. Um

[2:11:56] and yes, so that that being my main

[2:11:58] concern is ensuring we're treating the

[2:12:02] brick facade correctly. We're not

[2:12:04] painting it with the wrong material and

[2:12:06] that the whatever changes we're making

[2:12:09] to the facade with a pent roof, all of

[2:12:10] that is kind of taken appropriately. But

[2:12:14] by and large, I the the project seems to

[2:12:17] not have a significant impact on the

[2:12:18] district.

[2:12:21] By and large, the project as currently

[2:12:23] proposed doesn't doesn't appear to have

[2:12:25] a large impact on the district.

[2:12:29] I mean, kind of what we're looking for

[2:12:32] your feedback on is we [snorts] would

[2:12:35] really like to do the lime wash

[2:12:38] and

[2:12:39] realign the windows. And we'd like to

[2:12:42] get your feedback on that so that now

[2:12:45] and because after this we'd obviously

[2:12:47] apply to the zoning board and then it'll

[2:12:49] be given you know referred to you

[2:12:51] formally for your formal recommendation.

[2:12:54] So we're [snorts] really here tonight

[2:12:55] looking for guidance on that.

[2:12:59] >> I'm sorry.

[2:13:01] >> Oh okay. We'll give you the conceptual

[2:13:04] landscaping

[2:13:05] uh presentation as well.

[2:13:09] >> Sure. Uh good evening everyone. Jim

[2:13:12] Kamalac, Kencho resources uh project

[2:13:15] engineer and we did submit a site plan

[2:13:19] on a survey just showing as you can see

[2:13:22] here the limits of the existing

[2:13:23] structure which is not changing and the

[2:13:26] main takeaway here um is the fact that

[2:13:29] in the prior photos you saw that there's

[2:13:32] absolutely no landscaping bare

[2:13:35] foundation um trees that once existed

[2:13:38] including street trees that have been

[2:13:39] removed. Okay. And we provided uh what

[2:13:42] we feel is an authentic and will be an

[2:13:46] ultimately a very nice upgrade to that

[2:13:48] frontage landscaping um that'll satisfy

[2:13:52] uh several particular things. One, as

[2:13:55] you can see, we're adding a street tree.

[2:13:57] Um one that formerly existed, I believe

[2:13:59] it was a uh an evergreen previously, but

[2:14:03] we're going to add a street tree there

[2:14:04] to replace that. Two other small um

[2:14:07] trees in the front yard. We'll maintain

[2:14:10] an existing square uh 600 square foot

[2:14:12] lawn area that can be used for open open

[2:14:16] space and a play area for example. We're

[2:14:19] also providing planting beds and then um

[2:14:22] with all of this native landscaping

[2:14:24] which we have incorporated with

[2:14:26] pollinators. Um it also includes

[2:14:29] foundation plantings that will

[2:14:30] adequately screen the foundation and

[2:14:33] we're sharpening up uh the walkway from

[2:14:36] the driveway into that front entry. So

[2:14:39] there'll be a clear path uh from the

[2:14:41] walkway to that front entry. So we feel

[2:14:43] as though there'll be an aesthetic

[2:14:44] elevation here um from a landscaping

[2:14:47] standpoint uh and from a native material

[2:14:50] standpoint that'll complement the facade

[2:14:53] treatments that were discussed.

[2:14:57] » That concludes our presentation.

[2:14:59] >> Thank you.

[2:15:02] >> Comments from commission members.

[2:15:05] >> Um I have a question.

[2:15:07] So, there's an

[2:15:09] enormous amount of utilities on the

[2:15:12] front of this building. There's like the

[2:15:14] gas meters, three gas meters. There's

[2:15:17] like electrical panels. There's huge

[2:15:19] cables running up and down the sides.

[2:15:22] Um, there's a whole lot going on there.

[2:15:25] Um, is that going to be removed or

[2:15:28] moved?

[2:15:31] >> Well, I I believe the the satellite

[2:15:33] dishes will be removed. Yeah,

[2:15:35] >> the gas the gas meters are most likely

[2:15:37] going to stay in the location they're

[2:15:39] in. Uh we're going to lean on the

[2:15:41] landscaping to kind of screen those from

[2:15:42] the street.

[2:15:43] >> Okay.

[2:15:44] >> And make it more uh sightful.

[2:15:46] Um same thing with the electrical

[2:15:48] panels. I mean, that's I don't think we

[2:15:51] planned on moving any of those

[2:15:52] utilities.

[2:15:56] » Where's the electrical panel?

[2:16:01] » Jason asking for the electric I believe

[2:16:04] there

[2:16:05] >> photo is that

[2:16:06] >> I believe it's on the one side

[2:16:10] here.

[2:16:15] » I'm not showing it on my photos.

[2:16:18] Freda, your questions, your thoughts?

[2:16:21] >> Um, well, just thoughts.

[2:16:24] That's weird.

[2:16:26] Just thoughts on the lime washing. Um, I

[2:16:31] mean, lime washing is a historic

[2:16:32] treatment, so I I don't see any reason

[2:16:35] for not using it. In fact, I think it'll

[2:16:38] improve that red brick. Um,

[2:16:43] and I even though the windows are, you

[2:16:46] know, very very visible, I think

[2:16:48] aligning them makes sense.

[2:16:53] That's pretty much my opinion on that.

[2:16:57] >> And the lime wash is going to

[2:16:59] It's historical treatment. It's also

[2:17:01] going to help us kind of hide some

[2:17:02] imperfections.

[2:17:03] >> Yeah.

[2:17:04] >> And I think it's important that we, you

[2:17:05] know, do move forward a mockup to make

[2:17:07] sure that it's

[2:17:08] >> Yeah.

[2:17:08] >> You know, at some point when we get to

[2:17:10] that stage, we'd like to do a mockup to

[2:17:11] get approval.

[2:17:12] >> Yeah. Because you never know how much

[2:17:14] >> Yep.

[2:17:15] >> it'll absorb. So, yeah, makes sense.

[2:17:19] >> Thank you, Shirley.

[2:17:22] >> Yes. Um, can you hear me?

[2:17:23] >> Yes. Um, I I may have missed the

[2:17:25] explanation as to why they didn't keep

[2:17:27] it a brick. Um, because this house

[2:17:30] really doesn't doesn't look like the

[2:17:32] houses in this community. And when you

[2:17:34] said something about a porch, this is

[2:17:36] not a porch. Um, our houses had porches

[2:17:39] and there were reasons for those porches

[2:17:41] for families who went to work and came

[2:17:44] back to relax before they worked for

[2:17:46] their family. Um, so I just wanted to

[2:17:49] know why you couldn't keep the bricks

[2:17:50] and and restore the brick building

[2:17:53] instead of putting this building up that

[2:17:55] does not comply with the little Jackson

[2:17:57] community.

[2:17:58] >> Oh, we're not we're keep it's exact

[2:18:01] surely it's the same building. We're

[2:18:02] just limewashing the existing brick.

[2:18:06] >> The other thing is um are the people who

[2:18:08] will be moving in are they owners of the

[2:18:11] house or are they renters? rent. It'll

[2:18:14] be three apartment units.

[2:18:21] » You can hear us.

[2:18:22] >> Thank you.

[2:18:28] » So, my comments are um

[2:18:34] that it cleans it up.

[2:18:38] Um

[2:18:40] the form of the building is probably its

[2:18:41] most significant

[2:18:44] attribute to the street.

[2:18:46] I I think it wasn't a uh high

[2:18:52] material, high quality

[2:18:56] structure, exterior finish to begin

[2:18:58] with. Um it was probably on the rebound

[2:19:01] of whatever the building was lost,

[2:19:04] either a new investor or someone who had

[2:19:06] to rebuild something after after what

[2:19:09] happened. So, I think it's just a

[2:19:11] straightforward, honest kind of building

[2:19:13] that we're trying to straighten up some.

[2:19:16] Um,

[2:19:20] I think it's unfortunate that um the

[2:19:24] electric or the gas meters caused that

[2:19:25] kind of trouble for not having a porch.

[2:19:28] However, I would also say that this

[2:19:30] building just didn't have a porch. it

[2:19:33] just

[2:19:35] uh it would be a nice feature if it

[2:19:36] could be added, but it's not like we're

[2:19:38] trying to get back something that had

[2:19:40] been taken away.

[2:19:42] >> Mhm. Um I understand the importance um

[2:19:46] surely of the um of the nature of the

[2:19:49] porches in this neighborhood that's been

[2:19:50] brought up many many times over the

[2:19:52] years and it has a real social compound

[2:19:55] component to it but it I don't think it

[2:19:57] just ever existed on this building and I

[2:20:01] think trying to apply one to it given

[2:20:03] the challenges

[2:20:06] >> and I think from your opening statement

[2:20:07] that you did look at that

[2:20:09] >> and I appreciate that. Um,

[2:20:14] getting the windows a little more uh

[2:20:18] relatable to each other, I guess that's

[2:20:20] the way to say it, or to get the

[2:20:21] geometry looking neat. I think it's a

[2:20:24] plus. I think the shed over the uh front

[2:20:28] doors

[2:20:30] is fine. Um, I don't really see much

[2:20:34] else to recommend or suggest. I I think it's

[2:20:38] a nice straightforward project. Um,

[2:20:41] commission members, if I'm going on too

[2:20:42] far and you have a different thought,

[2:20:43] please say so.

[2:20:48] » So, these are um just comments and

[2:20:51] recommendations. We don't take any

[2:20:53] action. Um, I hope that that's useful.

[2:20:56] >> Very useful.

[2:20:57] >> Um, I think it's always nice to see

[2:20:59] investment in projects, buildings that

[2:21:02] may have gotten away from an owner, a

[2:21:04] new owner trying to to do things as

[2:21:06] good.

[2:21:07] Sarah, from a staff point of view, is

[2:21:09] there anything else we need on this?

[2:21:14] » Okay.

[2:21:16] >> Nope, nothing on my end. It's I mean,

[2:21:17] it's concept review, so it's

[2:21:19] >> your guys feedback, my feedback, and we

[2:21:22] wait for the application from there.

[2:21:23] >> Yep.

[2:21:24] >> Great.

[2:21:24] >> Come back and see us.

[2:21:25] >> Thank you so much. Thank you.

[2:21:27] >> Very helpful.

[2:21:28] >> Thank you,

[2:21:31] » gentlemen. And I just want to say for

[2:21:33] somebody who um lives on Birch Avenue,

[2:21:36] uh well done.

[2:21:38] We it it's a plus. It is well done and

[2:21:42] it it's going to replace what during my

[2:21:45] lifetime is something that I don't think

[2:21:47] really lends itself to the to the to the

[2:21:50] streetscape at all. So this really is

[2:21:53] mimicking more of what is now in Birch

[2:21:55] Avenue. And I don't think you left the

[2:21:57] history at all. I think you enhanced it.

[2:21:59] So well done.

[2:22:00] >> Thank you. Thank you.

[2:22:11] Sarah, I see that we have um a couple

[2:22:12] other items before um the state historic

[2:22:16] markers or do you want to go to that and

[2:22:18] come back?

[2:22:21] » It looks like um public comment, staff

[2:22:24] report, member report. You

[2:22:26] >> Well, I mean, we have public comment,

[2:22:27] but I think Kip is the public at this

[2:22:30] point. Um, [laughter]

[2:22:33] I outside of the design guidelines, I

[2:22:36] don't have anything additional to

[2:22:38] report.

[2:22:39] >> All right, we'll come back to that in a

[2:22:40] minute. Kip, do you want to come on up

[2:22:42] and tell us tell us the stuff you know?

[2:22:59] So, this shouldn't take very long, I

[2:23:01] hope. Um,

[2:23:03] I've got the text for you to review

[2:23:07] >> signs.

[2:23:12] [clears throat]

[2:23:14] » Since this is being recorded, I think

[2:23:16] you need to get closer to the microphone

[2:23:18] just so we can hear you, but for the

[2:23:21] recording purposes. Oh, yeah.

[2:23:22] >> Thank you.

[2:23:30] Is that what this is?

[2:23:39] » So, um, a lot of people have been kind

[2:23:41] of confused about how we even got

[2:23:43] started on this. Um, the idea was to do

[2:23:47] something for the 250th

[2:23:49] and Elizabeth thought that that this

[2:23:51] would be a really great idea. I don't

[2:23:53] think that the HPC really focused on it

[2:23:56] very much. So, uh I was hoping to shovel

[2:24:00] it off on someone else, but that didn't

[2:24:02] work. [laughter]

[2:24:04] So, um it's a very simple uh sign that

[2:24:08] is used standard. Nothing unusual about

[2:24:11] it. Um you're allowed 50 um characters

[2:24:16] in the title and uh 615 in the text.

[2:24:21] So, uh, it's been hard to come up with a

[2:24:25] blurb that that really worked. So, the

[2:24:28] one that we've been using as a base is

[2:24:30] the one really that David thought was

[2:24:32] the best one. And then, uh, Will had

[2:24:35] some ideas. And so, it's it's sort of,

[2:24:37] uh, evolved. Uh, but the basic idea is

[2:24:40] that it's got to be under 615 characters

[2:24:43] no matter what.

[2:24:45] Uh, also the sign is along the uh,

[2:24:48] Quaker Bridge Road, not at the

[2:24:50] battlefield per se. So that there's got

[2:24:53] to be something in the sign that

[2:24:54] indicates to people that you're not at

[2:24:56] the battlefield. Otherwise, people are

[2:24:58] going to turn into the tow uh the toe

[2:25:02] path parking lot and think they're at

[2:25:03] the battlefield.

[2:25:05] So, um,

[2:25:07] let me just, uh, read it really quick

[2:25:11] and then I think you can vote on it so

[2:25:13] that somebody's voted on it anyway. And

[2:25:15] then Mark Texel maintains the

[2:25:18] prerogative of still making changes. So,

[2:25:21] we're not the end of the line.

[2:25:23] So, this is this is a state project

[2:25:28] and that's why that's why council is not

[2:25:32] it's not necessary for council to get

[2:25:33] that involved in the weeds. Um they

[2:25:37] don't know that much about the battle

[2:25:38] anyway and uh the state is going to be

[2:25:42] trumping everything. So,

[2:25:44] >> very good.

[2:25:44] >> You know, this this is the best we can

[2:25:46] do with it and then the state will do

[2:25:48] whatever they're the state is going to

[2:25:50] do.

[2:25:53] So, um, along this road, General George

[2:25:57] Washington and the Continental Army

[2:25:58] approached Princeton on January 3rd,

[2:26:01] 1777.

[2:26:03] Slipping away from Trenton, Continental

[2:26:06] forces had marched overnight along

[2:26:08] freezing back roads to surprise the

[2:26:11] British garrison at Princeton. Unaware

[2:26:14] of the approaching army, the British

[2:26:16] force from Princeton was marching south

[2:26:18] towards Trenton.

[2:26:21] Uh now I just said towards and ra and

[2:26:24] rather than sing I have to look at that

[2:26:25] again whether it should be single or or

[2:26:28] you know toward or tors. Uh leaving only

[2:26:31] a contingency behind. As fighting broke

[2:26:34] out both armies rushed onto the farms of

[2:26:37] Quaker brothers Thomas and William Clark

[2:26:40] while Continental General Hugh M. Mercer

[2:26:43] was mortally wounded. The battle was a

[2:26:45] critical turning point for the patriots.

[2:26:49] So that's it. Um, and no, it's not a

[2:26:51] poem. It's not supposed to be poetical.

[2:26:56] It's supposed to provide information in

[2:26:59] as tightly as as one can and make it as

[2:27:02] interesting as one can. So, um, you

[2:27:06] know, we wanted to include something in

[2:27:07] there about the u freezing back roads.

[2:27:10] That was something that kept getting

[2:27:12] knocked out and put back in because it creates the environment of of what

[2:27:17] that day was like as people are looking

[2:27:20] at the sign.

[2:27:22] So the idea is if you look at your

[2:27:24] chart, your diagram,

[2:27:27] if you're coming from uh does everybody

[2:27:30] have a copy? Okay. as you're coming from

[2:27:34] the big box shopping center and crossing

[2:27:37] the canal and that little bridge and

[2:27:39] then uh you are going along the canal

[2:27:43] and making a turn at the toe path uh

[2:27:46] park. So the first of all the criteria

[2:27:50] for this location had to be stateowned

[2:27:53] property. That was the number one

[2:27:54] criteria. It couldn't be anything else.

[2:27:57] Um

[2:27:59] and of course the state had to bless the

[2:28:02] idea of it and and what the state has

[2:28:04] final say. So uh you know some people

[2:28:08] may say well why did it happen this way?

[2:28:11] You know why wasn't the Princeton

[2:28:12] Battlefield Society more involved? All

[2:28:15] these different things. Well it's just

[2:28:17] the way it it worked because the uh

[2:28:19] state was in charge of the program and

[2:28:22] if you wanted to participate you had to

[2:28:24] apply to the state.

[2:28:26] Uh the the state incidentally uh you

[2:28:29] know they gave me a pretty rough time.

[2:28:31] They wanted a lot of um original

[2:28:33] citations

[2:28:35] to demonstrate that the battle of

[2:28:37] Princeton had happened and you know

[2:28:40] there's very little original material.

[2:28:44] So uh I almost got knocked out of the

[2:28:46] ballpark because of that. They were not

[2:28:48] satisfied.

[2:28:50] Now, you know, the Battle of Princeton

[2:28:52] was a big thing and very and a long time

[2:28:55] ago. Um, there are a lot of small

[2:28:59] historic houses and that kind of thing

[2:29:00] around and people can document that

[2:29:02] fairly well, but it's very hard to

[2:29:04] document the Battle of Princeton. So,

[2:29:07] um, and incidentally, um, I think we

[2:29:10] paid about $4 million for the property

[2:29:13] from the institute.

[2:29:15] Um, I've been involved now in two other

[2:29:17] acquisitions at Mammoth. We just closed

[2:29:20] two weeks ago on a property

[2:29:23] uh in roughly the same size. Let's say

[2:29:26] $15 million is how much the state had to

[2:29:28] pay for that.

[2:29:29] >> Wow.

[2:29:30] >> So uh you know this and you know it was

[2:29:34] nip and tuck as to whether or not we w

[2:29:36] were going to be successful and what the

[2:29:39] state does with the property remains to

[2:29:40] be seen and I don't know. I'm sure

[2:29:42] that'll be a matter of great discussion.

[2:29:45] And when you talk about orchards, for

[2:29:47] instance, it sounds very nice to put it

[2:29:49] in an orchard because there were

[2:29:50] orchards all over the place, but there

[2:29:52] was no orchard there at the time. Now,

[2:29:55] later on in the 1940s,

[2:29:58] the seller grew up on an orchard that

[2:30:01] was right there. The seller was actually

[2:30:03] the original the owner from the 1940s.

[2:30:07] Uh, and his parents came along and

[2:30:09] bought the milk farm, and that's what it

[2:30:10] was at the time, and put an orchard into

[2:30:14] it. They thought they could make a life

[2:30:16] that way and and you know orchard

[2:30:18] remnants still remain and they still

[2:30:20] have a store there. It's a pie. They

[2:30:23] sell pies and uh so the parents are gone

[2:30:28] and uh Mr. Junko waited until his mother

[2:30:31] died before he embarked on this thing. I

[2:30:34] don't think she would have been very

[2:30:35] happy with him. He never was into the

[2:30:37] American Revolution. It was just a pain

[2:30:39] in the butt as a kid. He just didn't

[2:30:42] respect it at all. And then his parents

[2:30:44] came up with this this idea of selling

[2:30:47] pies and his mother came up with special

[2:30:49] recipes. And so people going along Route

[2:30:52] 33 to the shore would stop and buy a pie

[2:30:55] coming and going. And they're still

[2:30:58] struggling along. You would think that

[2:30:59] they would have given up a long time ago

[2:31:01] and said, "Well, you know, this business

[2:31:02] doesn't have any real future." But

[2:31:04] they're still at it. So, uh, and they're

[2:31:07] not making a lot of money on this

[2:31:09] because they gave everything that they

[2:31:11] were entitled to to the brother Junko,

[2:31:14] Mr. Junko, the son, and he's the one

[2:31:17] making the money, not not the rest of

[2:31:19] the family. So, that's just a

[2:31:21] parenthetical comment. So, um, on this

[2:31:25] chart, you can see, uh, where the cars

[2:31:27] are parked. The, uh, tow path is over on

[2:31:30] the, uh, right side there, the east

[2:31:32] side. and you see this little star and

[2:31:35] that's where we propose to put the uh

[2:31:37] the sign. So, as you come around the

[2:31:40] curve, you will see the sign. Um if

[2:31:44] somebody parks right in front of it, you

[2:31:46] know, we had there's some jostling about

[2:31:48] how to avoid that. So, it's moved a

[2:31:51] little bit uh to the left towards Stony

[2:31:54] Brook uh to try to avoid people parking

[2:31:57] right in front of it. Um what if there

[2:32:00] are a lot of weeds growing up around it?

[2:32:02] Well, it's going to be the

[2:32:04] responsibility of the state to maintain

[2:32:07] the the sign. Um, but uh the locals are

[2:32:11] supposed to report problems. So, you

[2:32:14] know, if the battlefield uh society

[2:32:16] sees, you know, it's not being well

[2:32:18] taken care of, they need to report that

[2:32:20] or any vandalism. Now, it would be nice

[2:32:23] to put a little circle of something

[2:32:24] around it so people don't actually put

[2:32:27] the front of their car right in front of

[2:32:29] it, but that's getting too complicated.

[2:32:31] So, you know, I think maybe the garden

[2:32:34] society might come along later and say,

[2:32:36] "Well, we could make that a little

[2:32:37] better because those weeds are not very

[2:32:39] good." And that's what will happen. I'm

[2:32:41] sure there'll be some weeds and maybe um

[2:32:44] you know, gravel. There are no

[2:32:46] provisions for designing the pad around

[2:32:49] the the marker and maybe we can prevail

[2:32:52] upon them. The the way this is going to

[2:32:55] work is first of all, we have to have

[2:32:57] some people that are going to take

[2:32:58] responsibility for getting the sign off

[2:33:01] the truck. That's not that easy. Nobody

[2:33:04] wants to take responsibility for that.

[2:33:07] Uh and then there are people with bad

[2:33:09] backs and all this kind of stuff. So,

[2:33:11] right now, we don't actually have it

[2:33:14] figured out totally. We're just saying

[2:33:16] parks maintenance is going to pull it

[2:33:18] off the truck or, you know, sometimes

[2:33:21] the truck driver will help and sometimes

[2:33:23] they won't. So, it's going to go into

[2:33:26] some kind of maintenance facility

[2:33:28] associated with parks. Uh, I was hoping

[2:33:31] to put it in the uh in that extra

[2:33:33] building at the Clark House, but there's

[2:33:35] it's full of stuff already. So, but that

[2:33:38] would be the ideal place for it because

[2:33:39] that wouldn't be very far away and we

[2:33:41] kind of keep an eye on it. I I hope it

[2:33:43] doesn't take forever to get the thing uh

[2:33:47] installed. That's another thing.

[2:33:49] Politically, you know, we're going to

[2:33:50] have to be after the maintenance folks

[2:33:53] to get it, and that's Mark Texel and his

[2:33:56] capabilities to get it installed.

[2:33:59] And you know, there some of the parks

[2:34:01] don't have superintendent. I'm not quite

[2:34:03] clear on where Washington's Crossing is

[2:34:05] right now in terms of having a

[2:34:07] superintendent.

[2:34:08] Um you know, Will is it at Princess

[2:34:11] Battlefield. there was no

[2:34:12] superintendent.

[2:34:14] So, you know, it's very murky as to how

[2:34:16] to make all this work. And it's going to

[2:34:18] take I mean, I don't imagine walking

[2:34:21] away from it. I imagine, you know,

[2:34:23] hanging in there until it's actually in

[2:34:25] the ground. And then I'm hoping that we

[2:34:28] will have some kind of a uh a

[2:34:30] celebration the way we did at the

[2:34:33] battlefield.

[2:34:34] um you know, invite all the monkeys and

[2:34:37] have um some speeches and uh you know,

[2:34:41] some refreshments and just say we did a

[2:34:44] good job and this is wonderful kind of

[2:34:46] stuff. So, um I think that'll that'll

[2:34:50] work out very nicely. Um

[2:34:53] and and then you know the the the the

[2:34:56] tow path parking lot is taken care of by

[2:34:59] parks maintenance not very well and you

[2:35:02] know it's got this kind of ugly uh guard

[2:35:04] rail. Um they did recently restore the

[2:35:10] bridge over Stony Brook. I doubt if it

[2:35:13] was really a restoration but it looks

[2:35:15] nice. Uh so uh you know that's there and

[2:35:20] uh and people can walk on this little

[2:35:23] pathway from the toe path parking lot to

[2:35:28] um the Stony Brook and look over the

[2:35:29] bridge and into the water.

[2:35:32] >> So that's very nice.

[2:35:33] >> That's pretty much it. Yeah, it's very

[2:35:35] simple and straightforward

[2:35:37] and uh it's just a matter of, you know,

[2:35:41] keeping the pressure up to make sure

[2:35:42] this thing gets

[2:35:43] >> Well, I think you've been doing a good

[2:35:45] job of that and um I appreciate it. I

[2:35:48] think the way you've got it edited right

[2:35:50] now, it reads beautifully. It's

[2:35:51] evocative of the day. You get a real

[2:35:53] picture of what's going on and you got

[2:35:56] within the word count or the letter

[2:35:57] count, which is not easy.

[2:36:00] >> Thank you. Well, the the state has um

[2:36:02] seven um signs that they're responsible

[2:36:06] for. Anybody could could apply for a

[2:36:09] sign.

[2:36:09] >> So, you know, HPC applied for the sign.

[2:36:12] The state did not apply for the sign.

[2:36:14] The council did not apply for the sign.

[2:36:16] That was something that HPC did. And I

[2:36:18] think it was fully within the

[2:36:20] responsibilities and authority of the

[2:36:22] HPC to to make that application. And

[2:36:26] then um so now, you know, we're kind of

[2:36:30] in a stack because the state said,

[2:36:32] "Well, uh since, you know, you have to

[2:36:35] have our okay because it's on state

[2:36:37] property and we're going to have to work

[2:36:39] it out with maintenance, we'll kind of

[2:36:40] take it over and and add it to our

[2:36:43] list." So, they have a gal now in charge

[2:36:45] of the list. So, you know, I'm trying

[2:36:48] not to get buried in that thing because

[2:36:50] I want to make sure that we get this

[2:36:51] thing done and have a nice 250th

[2:36:54] acknowledgement next year. So, um so

[2:36:58] that's that's the whole deal.

[2:37:00] >> Very good.

[2:37:01] >> And then, um maybe Sarah, could you pass

[2:37:04] this around? This is the u

[2:37:07] that's what the uh the exhibit looks

[2:37:10] like.

[2:37:11] >> And it was at the library. And Leighton,

[2:37:14] I think, was very concerned that, oh

[2:37:16] gee, the library is, you know, got

[2:37:17] something going on and we're, you know,

[2:37:19] we'll be behind because we're not doing

[2:37:21] ours until next year. But I don't know

[2:37:25] what was going on with the library, but

[2:37:26] they stuck it in a corner. It wasn't

[2:37:29] really noticeable. It wasn't pleasant to

[2:37:31] go through it from my point of view.

[2:37:33] Mhm.

[2:37:34] >> And it's a rather odd exhibit because um

[2:37:37] each panel is is a little bio, but it's

[2:37:41] on people that are not commonly known

[2:37:45] and and it's not as though there's a

[2:37:47] little bio like Hugh Mercer, you know,

[2:37:49] some of the famous people that kids

[2:37:50] could learn more about. These are on

[2:37:53] fairly unknown people. Now, that's not

[2:37:57] to say that they shouldn't be known. I

[2:37:58] mean they made a contribution at the

[2:38:00] time and some of them were slaves which

[2:38:03] is pretty exciting. Um, but the names

[2:38:07] weren't known and I didn't find when I

[2:38:11] went through the panels that I

[2:38:14] they took it in really, you know, I I it

[2:38:18] didn't really it wasn't that meaningful

[2:38:20] to me for some reason,

[2:38:21] >> which for would be just

[2:38:24] >> but it is what it is,

[2:38:25] >> you know. Yeah.

[2:38:26] >> So, I think that to add to that, um, if

[2:38:29] we had some handouts, which the library

[2:38:30] didn't have, have some handouts on

[2:38:34] people from Princeton who were involved

[2:38:36] in the Battle of Princeton who are names

[2:38:39] >> uh, including Orange who was an

[2:38:41] African-American in the battle and um,

[2:38:44] uh, there are a couple of other there

[2:38:46] are several African-Americans in the

[2:38:47] battle. U, so I think we could have at

[2:38:50] least one handout on either on each one.

[2:38:53] If we don't have enough material, then

[2:38:55] we could have one that clusters them

[2:38:56] together. And I think I could handle

[2:38:59] doing the those handouts, uh, Leon, but they would be on people rather than

[2:39:06] places.

[2:39:07] >> Mhm.

[2:39:07] >> So, you know, they're not not intended

[2:39:09] to be a map or, uh, you know, explain

[2:39:13] the battle. That's for the battlefield

[2:39:15] to do. This is just a sort of an

[2:39:17] augmentation to try to get a little

[2:39:20] spirit going in the community. And there

[2:39:22] isn't much spirit on the 250th

[2:39:24] and it's not just in Princeton, it's

[2:39:26] everywhere.

[2:39:27] >> I was going to say it's it's it's a very

[2:39:30] different event from the 200 that you

[2:39:33] and I remember and it just I was hoping

[2:39:37] it would actually trigger more interest

[2:39:39] in history and more interest in historic

[2:39:41] preservation as it did 50 years ago. Um,

[2:39:45] but it's not to say that it's completely

[2:39:46] lost and that Princeton has another

[2:39:48] chance to

[2:39:49] >> and it's up it's up to us and and um,

[2:39:52] you know, we can give this good

[2:39:53] promotion. Um, you know, I' I've done a

[2:39:56] lot of promotion over time. So, I mean,

[2:39:58] I can certainly and I think we should

[2:40:00] approach the schools and see if they

[2:40:02] can't get groups of kids over.

[2:40:04] >> Now, one of the logistics is, you know,

[2:40:06] are we going to have a host there when

[2:40:08] people go through how to handle that?

[2:40:11] and I'd like to get the mayor's opinion

[2:40:13] about, you know, what he might envision.

[2:40:16] Um, and we have to lay it out, you know,

[2:40:19] so and we have to put it up ourselves.

[2:40:23] So, uh, I'm a little concerned about

[2:40:25] that because I'm not, you know, it

[2:40:27] arrives in a big truck and you have to

[2:40:30] kind of put it up and you don't know

[2:40:31] what it's going to be like from the last

[2:40:33] person who used it. So, um, you know, I

[2:40:36] have to discuss that a little bit. that uh brochure. We only have that one.

[2:40:42] Yeah.

[2:40:43] >> We don't have, you know, and I'm going

[2:40:44] to ask them, you know, are there is

[2:40:46] there a stack we could put in the

[2:40:48] library? Uh which would be a little bit

[2:40:51] odd since they had their own show at one

[2:40:53] point, but they really didn't make a lot

[2:40:55] of it. They didn't tie it into a

[2:40:57] lecture, which we could do. We could

[2:40:59] have a lecture right here in the

[2:41:00] community room.

[2:41:01] >> Yeah.

[2:41:02] >> If we wanted to. Um we could have Will

[2:41:04] maybe I've already asked Will to do

[2:41:06] something in Pennsylvania. He hasn't

[2:41:08] acted overly enthused, but um you know

[2:41:12] that's a possibility. And then um

[2:41:15] there's a film uh that was shown at

[2:41:18] Morvin a couple of years ago um of the

[2:41:21] African-American community and how they

[2:41:23] gathered around and learn more about the

[2:41:26] participation of that community in the

[2:41:28] battle or in in Princeton life. And we

[2:41:31] could show that film at some point. I

[2:41:34] think that might be a nice thing to do.

[2:41:36] So, you know, we can use it as a

[2:41:38] programming focus and do other things

[2:41:41] around it, but we have that's the stuff

[2:41:43] we have to discuss with the mayor and

[2:41:45] the building maintenance because I don't

[2:41:47] know how they handle uh opening the

[2:41:49] building when it's not usually open and

[2:41:51] you know, all those kinds of little

[2:41:53] things have to be figured out. But, we

[2:41:55] have plenty of time.

[2:41:56] >> Yeah. So, maybe to wrap it up, what we

[2:41:58] could do is the uh

[2:41:59] >> I think Leighton had something to add

[2:42:01] real quick.

[2:42:01] >> Oh, sorry.

[2:42:03] Yeah, Leighton, have you got some

[2:42:05] comments?

[2:42:06] >> Yeah, I I've got some comments. Yeah, I

[2:42:09] think Kip, this is a great idea,

[2:42:11] especially the marker. Uh, you mentioned

[2:42:14] that this exhibit has been shown and was at the library. I think you also

[2:42:20] said you didn't uh rank high where they

[2:42:24] placed it at and how much attention they

[2:42:27] paid to it. But um I I think before we

[2:42:31] get too far down the road with a re uh

[2:42:35] establishing and re another exhibit

[2:42:37] bringing it back, I think that's

[2:42:39] something that that really should come

[2:42:41] before uh mayor and council.

[2:42:45] >> I would be glad to give them a

[2:42:46] presentation. Um again, I don't think

[2:42:49] they've been overly enthused about the

[2:42:51] 250th. I understand that Michelle now is

[2:42:54] coordinating that, which I didn't know

[2:42:56] about before. So, um

[2:43:00] you know, I certainly will do that and I need the um cooperation of the

[2:43:04] building um maintenance person,

[2:43:07] whoever's in charge of this building,

[2:43:09] you know, to work with them on that. So,

[2:43:13] >> well, those are all things

[2:43:14] >> I think one one of the points is is

[2:43:16] that, you know, we have like you

[2:43:18] mentioned Morvin, we just had a

[2:43:21] presentation from Princeton Battlefield,

[2:43:23] >> right?

[2:43:24] >> The library showed the exhibit. I think

[2:43:27] the real question is is is it the

[2:43:29] municipality's responsibility to really

[2:43:32] lean into the 250th more than what we've

[2:43:36] already done? And then I I'll just go a

[2:43:38] little bit further and say this for

[2:43:40] African-Americans.

[2:43:43] Uh we know the uh importance of

[2:43:48] African-Americans and Native American

[2:43:50] Indians who fought in the revolution in

[2:43:53] the war right here in Princeton. But we

[2:43:56] just heard from four gentlemen who sat

[2:43:59] up here for almost an hour said nothing

[2:44:02] about African-Americans.

[2:44:03] >> Right.

[2:44:03] >> I'm glad you did mention it. But from my personal perspective and what I

[2:44:09] know is that right now the 250th

[2:44:13] like I think back to what is a slave uh

[2:44:17] what you know what to the slave is the

[2:44:19] 4th of July. The frame is Frederick

[2:44:21] Douglas speech. And right now most

[2:44:24] people of color are not feeling very

[2:44:26] happy about where we are 250 years

[2:44:29] later.

[2:44:29] >> I know.

[2:44:30] >> So, you know, you want to give that some

[2:44:33] thought, but but I would, you know,

[2:44:34] invite you to come before mayor and

[2:44:36] counsel and and present rather than be

[2:44:40] here and making the assumption that we

[2:44:43] are ready and willing and able and

[2:44:45] really excited about the exhibit.

[2:44:49] >> Yeah, I'll do that. And um you know I

[2:44:51] think tying it in with a marker also is

[2:44:54] another thing that's nice for the

[2:44:57] community. As people drive in on Quaker

[2:44:59] Road, they will see that sign. Many

[2:45:02] people uh who don't really know where

[2:45:04] the battlefield is, don't know what

[2:45:06] happened there. And uh you know it's an evolving community. We have new

[2:45:10] people moving in move people moving out.

[2:45:12] There's you know always an evolution.

[2:45:14] the kids in school are interested at

[2:45:17] certain times and then not so much other

[2:45:19] times. I think fourth grade is when we

[2:45:22] got um our history lessons about New

[2:45:24] Jersey history. So, I mean, I'll have to

[2:45:27] coordinate with the school system and

[2:45:29] see what they want to do.

[2:45:31] So, um I I think it's a possibility of

[2:45:34] getting some excitement about this going

[2:45:37] and but I agree with you. I think that

[2:45:39] we're all kind of down in the dumps

[2:45:40] right now and and worried. Um maybe

[2:45:43] after the the November election we'll

[2:45:45] feel a little better. I hope. And uh and

[2:45:48] then you know we'll we'll keep going

[2:45:50] because we have to

[2:45:56] » Sarah does this present do we are we

[2:46:01] required to to do a vote on the um on

[2:46:04] the what what is we need to be doing

[2:46:06] business-wise? what we're trying to

[2:46:08] figure out up here.

[2:46:09] >> I don't think this was like a formal

[2:46:14] application to my knowledge. I think

[2:46:15] what KIP is looking for is

[2:46:19] I guess an informal vote in our feedback

[2:46:21] if we if the HBC approves this text.

[2:46:25] I don't think it needs to be like a roll

[2:46:26] call vote.

[2:46:27] >> Okay. So, we can say that um the

[2:46:30] consensus was if I'm speaking for

[2:46:32] everybody that we we like the text the

[2:46:34] way it is. We

[2:46:35] >> Yeah. Can we vote on that? because then

[2:46:37] I can tell the state, well, HBC voted on

[2:46:39] it.

[2:46:40] >> All right.

[2:46:40] >> Okay.

[2:46:41] >> Then if you need that, um,

[2:46:44] >> I move that we approve the text as

[2:46:47] written.

[2:46:49] >> Thank you.

[2:46:50] >> Second.

[2:46:50] >> All in favor?

[2:46:53] >> Did [clears throat] you hear me?

[2:46:54] >> Yes.

[2:46:56] I also want to say when I told you

[2:46:58] that how how much of an advocate um Kip

[2:47:02] is, I didn't know she was there. Now you

[2:47:04] hear she is. and she also was one of the

[2:47:06] persons who met um to make this a 20th

[2:47:10] historic district. So, thank you very

[2:47:11] much for that, Kip. Also, I work with um

[2:47:14] the committees for Morvin Museum and

[2:47:18] also the cemetery. I'm on the uh board

[2:47:21] of the cemetery of Nassau Presbyterian

[2:47:24] Church and I always give the history of

[2:47:26] African-Americans and Native Americans

[2:47:29] and we do talk about the uh slaves and

[2:47:32] those who worked for the um

[2:47:34] Revolutionary War.

[2:47:39] » That's it.

[2:47:40] >> Thank you, Shirley.

[2:47:41] >> Thanks, Shirley. So, is this a All in

[2:47:44] favor say I or is this a roll call?

[2:47:46] >> I just All in favor say I.

[2:47:48] >> All in favor?

[2:47:50] I

[2:47:50] >> I

[2:47:51] >> opposed.

[2:47:52] >> I

[2:47:55] >> Thank you. Thank you.

[2:47:57] >> And may I also thank say thank you to

[2:47:59] the council. I'm not the council, the

[2:48:02] historic preservation commission because

[2:48:03] when I brought this up about this being

[2:48:05] the 20th historic district, you gave us

[2:48:07] so much

[2:48:09] backbone and I want to thank those of

[2:48:12] you who were on the count on the pres.

[2:48:14] Oh god, I can't. This is part of my s

[2:48:18] all of you who were on the commission

[2:48:21] who helped make this the 20th historic

[2:48:23] district. I want to thank you also.

[2:48:25] >> Our pleasure.

[2:48:26] >> Thank you, Shirley.

[2:48:29] >> Thank you for understanding why I can't

[2:48:30] talk. [laughter]

[2:48:32] >> Thank you. [clears throat]

[2:48:35] » All right. Um,

[2:48:39] » I lost it.

[2:48:41] >> Staff report. Anything more to report?

[2:48:45] Motion to adjurnn.

[2:48:46] >> I move to adjurnn.

[2:48:48] >> Second.

[2:48:50] >> All in favor?

[2:48:51] >> Yes.

[2:48:53] >> All right.

[2:48:55] We are journed.

[2:48:58] >> Thank you, Shirley. You're a trooper.

[2:49:00] Welcome back.

[2:49:01] >> And thank you all and thank you for

[2:49:03] being with me through this journey.

Historic Preservation Commission - August 25th, 2026

Transcript