Fate of historic home still up for discussion

FREEHOLD — During an Oct. 26 discussion about the possible razing of the Richmond house on East Main Street, the members of Freehold Borough's Historic Preservation Advisory Commission were given two messages from the public.

The messages were: "Once it's gone it's gone" and "Do the job you were entrusted to do - protect the town's historic resources."

The Oct. 26 discussion marked the second time the commission considered the possible demolition of the pre-Civil War home at 42 E. Main St. The owners of the building want to construct a new office building in its place. The property that borders the Market Yard parking lot is in an area of the borough that has been designated for redevelopment.

A letter from Ron Emrich, executive director of Preservation New Jersey, asked Freehold officials to preserve what the organization called an "historically significant building to both the borough of Freehold and Monmouth County.

"We urge the commission and the Freehold Borough Planning Board to both encourage the property owner to retain this building and work with him to craft a solution that does such," the letter stated.

The Richmond house, which for many years housed the medical practice of Dr. Benjamin Richmond, is described as a temple front Greek Revival style house that likely dates from the 1830s.

The letter stated that preserving the building is the "only environmentally responsible approach to this situation."

The plan for the new office building was initially reviewed by the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission in July. The commission made several recommendations about the proposed building, but did not object to the razing of the Richmond house.

Subsequent to that, some people spoke up about the plan being put forth by Fox Associates.

Among the people who have called on officials to fight for the home's preservation were the borough's historian, Kevin Coyne, and the director of the Monmouth County Historical Association, Lee Ellen Griffith.

The Borough Council has not supported the developer's plan and the application has not yet come before the Planning Board.

At the Oct. 26 meeting of the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission, attor ney William Mehr and architect Daniel Bach, representing Fox Associates, described in detail what is being proposed.

Bach, who currently has his office in the Richmond house, described the structure and offered renderings of the new building that would replace the historic structure.

Bach described the building as "graceful," but said there are many areas of disrepair, especially in the rear of the building, specifically sagging, leaking windows that cannot be raised or lowered, and slanted floors. He said the building had additions and improvementsmade over the years and said there was nothing left of the original building.

Bach said vinyl siding covers the original wooden structure and said the back of the building is no longer historically significant because much of it had been replaced over the years.

He said the plan is to replicate the current building as much as possible, including duplicating the Federal style architecture.

Speaking as Freehold's historian, Coyne addressed the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission on Oct. 26.

"I mean no disrespect to this commission, but this commission was not provided with sufficient information about the history of this building. There was not enough testimony as to the historic value of the Richmond house," Coyne said, adding that the redevelopment plan the supercedes all current zoning ordinances.

"There is a strong section of the redevelopment plan that addresses historic preservation. It discourages any demolition and encourages rehabilitation and reuse," he added.

Coyne said the goals of the redevelopment plan do not contradict the goals of the borough's historic preservation ordinance.

The design standards used in the redevelopment plan have a very high priority in preserving the historic fabric of the town, according to Coyne.

In a later conversation he said the applicant did not present any testimony from a structural engineer who stated that the building is unsound.

Gail Hunton, the supervising historic preservation specialist for the Monmouth County Park System, told the commission that officials in many municipalities are trying to create a downtown like Freehold Borough's.

"You cannot continue to boast about the historic residences and not stand up for them. Now it's crunch time," Hunton said. "This is an opportunity for Freehold Borough to do something creative. In my opinion, the front of the building is historically significant.

"This is an opportunity to put Freehold Borough on the map with historic preservation. It's creative and it's doable. That's my plea," Hunton said.

Commission member Muriel Smith asked Bach if he had considered saving any part of the Richmond house.

"We looked at various ways to save some of the building, but we would have to chop off more parking spaces and it will then become less conforming" with parking regulations, Bach told Smith.

Hunton then asked the commission and the borough to consider reworking the parking regulations so that a piece of history could be preserved.

Resident Wayne Mason told the commissionmembers, "You do have considerable authority, but with that authority comes considerable responsibility mandated by the historic ordinance. Your responsibility is primarily to the historic resources in this town, and that means the Richmond house right now."

Mason, a former member of the commission, said the Richmond house was featured in the 1983 book "The New Jersey House" by Helen Schwartz.

"Some things that are invisible to us because they are so familiar never fail to catch other people's eyes," Mason said. "Fresh eyes are objective. Everything that is old is not bad, and don't get sucked in by those stories.

"The Richmond house was on the edge of town, the last house before the farms. That's how big Freehold was at the time. Every house tells a story about Freehold Borough and its progression.

"Older buildings can be restored. Demolition is forever," Mason said. "You can move Freehold Borough in another innovative direction, and not always do the same old same old."

Jeff Friedman, who said his father owned older homes in Freehold Borough, had a different perspective.

"These homes are very expensive to maintain," Friedman told the commission, adding that the town needs new buildings so that it does not lose its economic base.

"Apply the effort into putting in new buildings with an historic look. I understand the intensity of the people here and I respect that, but if we push developers away, we lose.

they won't spend money here, then we are all in trouble. In the long run, it's going to hurt us. I think the application is positive redevelopment."

Resident Ken Roginski said he lives in a home that was built in 1910.

"These homes give Freehold its atmosphere and character and a sense of place. People today love to live in a town with history and once one of these homes is gone, it's gone," he said. "You are in a position to make

difference."

Borough Councilman Marc Le Vine, who

the liaison from the governing body to the commission, said he believes the commission heard some compelling arguments on both sides of the issue.

"There is much new and important information that the commission needs to digest now and they need time to do this," he said.

There was a sense in the room that people are willing to work together to produce a winwin situation for Freehold Borough. Everyone is in the right frame of mind."

Le Vine said the hearing will continue on Nov. 9 at the next meeting of the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission. The meeting will be held at 6:30 p.m. at Borough Hall. Mehr said he understood the commission members' comments, as well as the comments that were made by the members of the public at the Oct. 26 meeting. He said the applicant would try to create a design for the new building that would at least preserve the front of the Richmond house.