A draft of an ordinance that would merge historic preservation policies from Princeton’s former Borough and Township was presented to the consolidated town’s Planning Board last week. Preservation proponents who attended the meeting expressed several concerns and pushed for changes in the draft document.

Chief among their complaints is a $3,000 escrow fee for applications for historic districts and buffer districts. A proposed $1,000 fee for concept reviews was eliminated after lengthy discussion during the meeting.

Resident John Heilner commended the Planning Board for recommending the removal of that fee, but said that the $3,000 fees, which were in neither the former Borough or Township ordinances, “will work to discourage resident participation in preserving our communal heritage. They will stifle and chill citizens’ initiative and motivation to apply for historic determinations.”

In a letter sent last month to the Planning Board by members of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), chairperson Julie Capozzoli wrote, “The purpose of escrow is to provide a fund against which professional review fees may be charged, and is a benefit to the taxpayers as it lowers administrative costs. Over the last few years taxpayers have spent six to 10 thousand dollars on review of districts that have not been adopted. The escrow fee proposed for review of historic district designations prepared by parties other than the HPC is intended to ensure that all proposals being placed before the HPC and the professional staff meet the requirements of the ordinance. The HPC’s intent in establishing an escrow fee is to encourage groups to work in partnership with the Commission, not to discourage historic preservation in our community.”

Mr. Heilner argued that even the appearance of the $3,000 fee would be a deterrent to citizen participation. “It leaves a big question in the public’s mind. What if the HPC doesn’t ‘take up’ our proposal? It’s nice to say that the $3,000 fee will be waived if the HPC does take it up and approve it going forward, but suppose the HPC calendar is ‘just too full’?”

A few days after the meeting, Mr. Heilner said that he commends the HPC for taking the two complicated ordinances and putting them together. “They did a great job,” he said. “But all of a sudden out of the blue come these two things that were never in either of the previous ordinances. It seems like they are anti-historic-preservation. They’re making it more difficult for residents to not just designate a historic district, but even a single historic site.”

Mr. Heilner lives in the town’s western section, and has been a proponent of designating parts of the neighborhood a historic district.

The argument that the $3,000 fee goes to fund staff work on reviewing applications does not sit well with Mr. Heilner and the others who spoke at the meeting, including former Township Mayor Jim Floyd and Princeton Battlefield Society member Kip Cherry. “I don’t buy it,” Mr. Heilner said. “What are our taxes going for? Why do we have a historic preservation officer?”

The residents also disagree with staff’s assessment that because historic designations are part of zoning, they should carry escrow fees like other applications for zoning variances. “This completely fails to recognize that historic preservation benefits all the residents of Princeton — not an individual property owner like other zoning variance applications,” Mr. Heilner said in his remarks to the Planning Board.

Other concerns noted by the residents who spoke at the meeting have to do with a new definition of “historic site,” and other issues. The next step is for Princeton Council’s code review subcommittee to review the Planning Board’s recommendations and then bring the proposal before Council at a date to be determined.