Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic District Design topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates architectural review after approving Mount Kimball subdivision; no redesign condition added
Summary
The Morris Township Planning Board confirmed a prior 8-1 approval for a two‑lot subdivision at 257 Mount Kimball Avenue but heard concerns from members about a lack of architectural drawings for future house designs in the historic district and who enforces design standards.
The Morris Township Planning Board discussed whether it had inadvertently relinquished design oversight after approving a subdivision at 257 Mount Kimball Avenue, concluding the original action—an 8–1 approval to create two residential lots—stands but that enforcement of architectural standards lies with the zoning officer and the Historic Preservation Commission.
What happened: At a follow-up session the board revisited the application for Lot 2, Block 5401 (257 Mount Kimball Avenue) previously approved by an 8–1 vote. Several board members and one commissioner said the record did not memorialize a request to see proposed architectural drawings and that the township’s designated historic district should prompt more explicit design review at the time building permits are submitted.
Concerns raised: Board member Benoit said he was “perfectly fine with … all the variances” granted for the subdivision but objected that no architectural drawings were provided and that without them the board had “given up its authority” over design-sensitive areas in a designated historic district. He said earlier conceptual contemporary drawings (from a previous proposal of 11 units) would not be sympathetic to the historic context and that the board’s master plan designations should guide future architecture.
Staff and process response: Other members and the board’s professionals said the current approval was for a subdivision schematic—not a building/site plan for house construction—so architectural design review typically occurs at the later site- or building-permit stage. The legal counsel said that if the ordinance requires certain architectural standards for buildings in the historic district, the zoning officer could require compliance at permit review; a waiver of ordinance architectural standards would require a separate variance request by the developer.
Board next steps and options: Members discussed asking township staff to develop an advisory procedure—potentially involving the Historic Preservation Commission—so that future building designs in the district are reviewed for sympathetic design. The board also suggested reviewing the ordinance for clarity about whether the Historic Preservation Commission can review noncontributing new construction in a historic district and whether the board should add an advisory condition to future subdivision approvals.
Formal action referenced in the discussion: The minutes recorder and subsequent roll call show the original subdivision vote was 8–1; one member (Bill Barrett) was identified in the record as the lone dissenting vote. The board approved the meeting minutes and other procedural resolutions that preceded the discussion.
What the discussion did not change: The board made no attempt to rescind the prior subdivision approval at the meeting. The record shows the board intends to review ordinance language and possible advisory procedures for future design oversight in historic districts rather than retroactively altering the subdivision approval.
