Historic homes in Rutherford recently took another step towards protection through local law as the Planning Board passed a resolution in December to incorporate over 170 properties listed on the town’s historic site survey into the borough’s Master Plan. Though this means that the borough’s Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is entitled to notification when demolition or alteration of any of these properties is proposed, the board is still only limited to advising town officials.
Up until this resolution was adopted, Rutherford’s Master Plan only recognized seven sites in the borough that were already on the state or national register of historic sites. They include Iviswold Castle at Felician College, the Kip Homestead at 12 Meadow Rd., the train station, William Carlos Williams’ house at 9 Ridge Rd., the Yereance-Berry House (the current home of the Meadowlands Museum) at 91 Crane Ave. and the Yereance-Kettel House and the Ackerman House, both at 245 Union Ave. It also recognized the Route 3 Bridge over the Passaic River, the World War I monument, the post office at 156 Park Ave. and the downtown district from Erie to Pierrepont avenues as sites that had received a Certificate of Eligibility from the New Jersey Historic Preservation Officer.
Incorporating the HPC’s historic site survey into the Master Plan allows another 174 properties recognized by the Bergen County Historic Sites Advisory Board to be incorporated into the plan. These include buildings such as the First Presbyterian Church at 1 East Passaic Ave., the William H. Smith House at 103 Donaldson Ave. and the Lafayette Hoag Houses at 127 Donaldson Ave. and the Rutherford National Bank at 24 Park Ave. The survey also includes several districts as being of historic interest such as the Grace Church district on West Passaic Avenue, the Arthur Drive district between Walter Court, Crane Avenue and Feronia Way and the Kip Farm district from Fairview to Union avenues and from Irving Place to Maple Street.
Borough historian Rod Leith praised the addition of the historic site survey to the Master Plan, noting that in the last 30 years, Rutherford has lost 21 structures regarded as important local architecture. Since 2006, historic structures on East Passaic Avenue, Chestnut Street and Union Avenue have been demolished and the buildings proposed to replace them haven’t yet been built.
“They [the planning board and board of adjustment] have to hear from the Historic Preservation Commission what their recommendation would be,” said Leith. “That’s a significant step forward for the HPC.” This step ensures the commission will have advance notice when a property owner in town is planning to demolish or alter a historic building. Leith said in the past the commission has done its best to find out ahead of time, but its knowledge was sometimes haphazard. “Sometimes we know what’s coming up before the board,” said Leith, “sometimes we don’t.”
“They have the ability to comment if someone wants to tear down [a historic structure] or change an exterior,” said Planning Board chair David Porter. But “as I understand it they have no legal right to stop someone from doing what they want with their property.”
Though the HPC is called a commission, it actually only has the powers of a committee. Leith emphasized that in order to afford historic buildings a greater degree of protection, the town would have to establish an actual commission.
Currently, he said, “we can advise the planning board, we can advise the board of adjustment, but things move on with or without our advice.”
Councilwoman Kim Birdsall, the HPC’s council liaison, said that she would be willing to present an ordinance to the council to create a full commission “when the time is appropriate,” but she didn’t indicate whether that would be anytime in the near future. She noted that establishing a full commission would open the town up to greater grant funding.
In 2008, at the request of former HPC liaison Maura Keyes, then borough attorney Lane Biviano drafted an ordinance modeled on Montclair’s to establish protections for historic houses. However, it was only a draft and was never brought before the council.
In the meantime, Leith said this decision represents a step forward.
“The town has a certain image right now as a community that protects the quality of its historic homes and historic districts,” said Leith. “It has surreptitiously been able to maintain these. But they’re disappearing bit by bit and that will continue unless you draw the line someplace and say enough is enough. If you come back to Rutherford 20 years from now you may not be able to recognize an area.”
E-mail: okeefe@northjersey.com