Chair Jennifer Suttmeier opened the discussion with a slideshow outlining the history and objectives behind the amendments. The Commission’s primary goal is to preserve Cranbury’s agricultural and historic inventory, a process that began in 2019 during a re-examination of the township’s master plan. The current historic district map has gaps, or “missing teeth,” where some houses are designated as historic while others are not, leading to confusion. The 200-foot buffer zone has also added complexity, attracting many non-historic properties and complicating the review process for applications.

The Commission received recommendations from municipal planners and historic preservation experts to address these issues. The difference between contributing and non-contributing properties was emphasized: contributing properties are historic and must preserve exterior features, whereas non-contributing properties enjoy more flexibility in renovations as long as changes do not detract from the overall historic character.

Public comments revealed mixed reactions. Chris Rusic from 18 Prospect Street sought clarification on the buffer zone’s removal, expressing concerns about the review process’s challenges. The Commission explained that incorporating non-contributing homes into the historic district would allow for consistent review and avoid focusing solely on properties in the buffer zone.

Another topic was the criteria for evaluating changes to non-contributing properties. The Commission discussed adopting review standards for non-contributing properties similar to those applied to buffer areas. Concerns were raised about the definition of “significant visual impact,” which is determined by the design, appearance, and scale of new constructions relative to adjacent historic properties. The Commission clarified that their role is advisory, with final decisions resting with the zoning board, which can override their recommendations.

The inclusion of non-contributing homes in the historic district sparked debate. Some argued that this would burden homeowners with additional scrutiny and regulations, while others believed it would help maintain the district’s historic streetscape. The Commission noted that many homes now approaching or exceeding 100 years old were excluded when the district was created in 1989. Including these homes aims to rectify that oversight and create a contiguous historic district for easier administration and maintenance of the streetscape.

The concept of “streetscape” was also discussed, as defined in Chapter 93 of the local code. Approximately seventy homes are currently in the buffer but not part of the historic district, while the proposed district would encompass around forty homes, reducing the Commission’s workload. Concerns about the impact of including non-contributing homes and the potential economic benefits of being in a historic district were voiced. Some residents worried that prospective buyers might be deterred by additional regulatory requirements.

Communication practices came under scrutiny. A resident who received notification about the changes only recently expressed confusion about why they had not been informed earlier. The Commission acknowledged the need for better communication and procedural clarity regarding property designation.

During the public comment section, resident Justin Landy from 138 North Main Street questioned the necessity of clear guidelines for governing non-contributing properties before passing any historic additions. He raised concerns about the definition of “adjacent” and the lack of criteria for assessing non-contributing properties. The Commission acknowledged Landy’s concerns and clarified that the township committee would ultimately decide on code changes, with the Commission providing recommendations.

Another resident emphasized the importance of agricultural context in Cranbury’s history, arguing that certain historic homes should remain protected under the existing buffer zone. There were also questions about the implications of adding properties to the historic district, such as the installation of solar panels, which must not be visible from the street to maintain the area’s aesthetic integrity.

The Commission aimed to balance preserving historic character with accommodating modern changes, recognizing the complexities and challenges involved.