Moorestown will drop historic preservation panel
The township's historical society withdrew support of the proposed ordinance opposed by residents
By Rusty Pray, Inquirer Staff Writer

MOORESTOWN - An ordinance to create a historic preservation commission in the township, which met with heated opposition from residents at every step of its development, will be abandoned, Moorestown officials said yesterday.

The Historical Society of Moorestown, a driving force behind the proposed ordinance, notified the Township Council by letter on Thursday that it was withdrawing its support, said Jack Terry, township manager.

The ordinance, first introduced in November, went through several changes to allay fears of residents that it would put too much power in the hands of unelected officials and create a "paint police" that would dictate what kind of materials they could use for home repairs.

The revisions so watered down the ordinance, supporters said, it no longer could accomplish the goal of preserving historic buildings.

Midge Ingersoll, president of the historical society, could not be reached for comment.

The Township Council is expected to permanently table the ordinance, which never came to a vote, at its meeting Monday.

"Rather than create a new bureaucracy for property owners for a watered-down HPC law, I would rather focus on the real threat, which is outright demolition," Councilman Daniel Roccato said.

The ordinance would have created a historic preservation commission to establish a historic district, designate historic buildings and homes, and regulate changes to facades. It was first tabled after many residents raised objections during an emotional, sometimes raucous hearing Nov. 10.

When it was brought back for discussion early this year, the revised ordinance dropped requirements for owners of historic buildings or homes to apply to the commission before making minor repairs.

The scope was narrowed to protecting historic commercial and mixed-use buildings from demolition - the ordinance's original goal, Roccato said.

However, residents continued to oppose the ordinance, arguing that while at first only a small part of the town would be affected, as time passed more residences would be added. There also was continued debate on the qualifying age of a building for historical designation.

"There just was no real consensus," Roccato said.

Nicholas R. Menna Jr., one of several residents of Second Street who opposed the ordinance, said it was "sad people had to fight so hard to protect their right to do as they please with their homes. But we thank town council for listening to us."