A standing-room-only crowd packed the Lawrence Township Council chambers Tuesday night as officials considered whether to designate the William Gullick House property at the corner of Lawrenceville Rd/206 and Province Line Rd. as an area in need of redevelopment.
The 5-0 vote does not approve a development project or authorize construction. Instead, it allows the township to move forward with redevelopment planning for one of the sites identified to help meet Lawrence’s affordable housing obligations under New Jersey’s fourth-round Fair Share Housing requirements.
Still, the discussion drew passionate public comment from residents concerned about preserving the historic property, increasing housing density and protecting the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Council members, in turn, pushed back against some of the language used during the meeting to describe affordable housing and future residents.
Why this property?
The Gullick House property, along with the former Educational Testing Service campus on Rosedale Road, was identified as a potential housing site as Lawrence works to satisfy its state affordable housing obligations.
Earlier this year, the Planning Board approved an amendment to the township’s Fourth Round Housing Plan after the township reached a settlement with the property’s owner over the number of housing units proposed for the site. The agreement allows up to 110 units, including 22 affordable units, an increase from an earlier proposal for 64 units.
Township Planner Elizabeth McManus walked council through the property’s redevelopment investigation, explaining that the building meets multiple criteria under New Jersey’s Local Redevelopment and Housing Law.
“The first one speaks to the condition of the building,” McManus said. “Specifically it states the generality of buildings that are substandard, unsafe, unsanitary, and dilapidated.”
She cited fire code violations, foundation cracks, uncontrolled basement access, debris around the property and years of deferred maintenance. The building also meets statutory criteria related to obsolete design and inadequate facilities.
Residents urge preservation
While township officials focused on the building’s condition, several residents asked council to consider its historical significance before advancing redevelopment.
Nathan Kunkel, a founder of the Lawrence Junior Historians, said the house, built in 1855, is one of the township’s few remaining examples of Italianate Revival architecture.
“It was built in 1855, and it is one of the few buildings in Lawrence Township that shows Italian revivalist architecture,” Kunkel said.
He also described previous efforts to preserve the property, including an unsuccessful proposal to convert it into a nursing home during the 1990s, and expressed concern about protecting nearby green space along the Lawrence Hopewell Trail.
“The Lawrence Hopewell Trail runs alongside the project,” Kunkel said. “I do believe that maintaining green space in our already declining green township is important.”
Township Manager Kevin Nerwinski acknowledged the community’s interest in preserving the house but said the township has had limited authority over the privately owned property.
“Over thirty years there has been many efforts to save this house,” Nerwinski said. “The primary reason is we lack the legal mechanism to do it as a governing body. We don’t own that house.”
A history of preservation concerns
Concerns about the future of the Gulick House are not new.
The property was placed on Preservation New Jersey’s list of the state’s Most Endangered Historic Sites in 2007 because of its deteriorating condition and the possibility of demolition as redevelopment proposals emerged. The preservation organization described the house as one of the finest examples of high-style Italianate domestic architecture in central New Jersey and said its preservation is important to the character of Lawrence Township.
Built during the third quarter of the 19th century by prominent local farmer William Gulick, the home later underwent Colonial Revival renovations before remaining a private residence until Bristol-Myers Squibb purchased the property in 1988. At the time, the company considered converting the house into a guesthouse and conference center, but those plans never materialized.
Preservation New Jersey noted that multiple redevelopment proposals over the years included plans for assisted living, with some preserving the house and others contemplating its demolition. In a 2011 update, the organization reported that a three-alarm fire had significantly damaged the building’s interior after years of neglect. Township historian Dennis Walters told the organization at the time that while the property had become “an eyesore,” it remained “a very beautiful thing” architecturally and reflected “the price we pay for neglecting our history.”
Questions about the future development
Many residents focused their comments on what redevelopment could eventually mean for the neighborhood.
One resident questioned whether 110 housing units could fit appropriately on the approximately seven-acre property.
“I don’t understand how you can have 110 units on seven acres,” the resident said.
Mary Levy, speaking on behalf of the North Lawrence Citizens Association, said she believes the project would change the character of the neighborhood.
“You’re urbanizing our bucolic neighborhood,” Levy said. “We want the character of our bucolic neighborhood to be undisturbed so we can enjoy what we earned to live in Lawrence.”
Later in the meeting, Levy suggested additional redevelopment discussions involving other township properties were taking place. When asked by Mayor Christopher Bobbitt to elaborate, she declined to provide additional information. An email seeking clarification from the North Lawrence Citizens Association had not been answered as of publication.
Another resident questioned McManus’ role in preparing the redevelopment investigation. Township officials defended her qualifications and rejected suggestions that she had acted improperly.
“She’s been our planner for seven or eight years,” Nerwinski said. “She is a professional planner with experience, certifications and education to do the job of a planner.”
Not everyone who spoke opposed the designation.
“There seems to be a group here that is speaking for all of Lawrence,” resident Martha Friend said. “Please don’t speak for me.”
Council addresses affordable housing comments
Before voting, several council members reflected on comments made during public discussion.
Councilwoman Patricia Hendricks Farmer said some of the language used during the meeting concerned her.
“I was listening clearly to the comments made,” Hendricks Farmer said. “Words like urbanizing, these people, draining resources, subsidized housing, not feeling safe in my neighborhood because of these people. It pains me to hear these words coming from my community.”
She added that Lawrence should remain a place where a wide range of residents can afford to live.
“I strongly believe that our police, firefighters, our professionals, and the young college student who spoke today deserve a place to live in Lawrence.”
Councilwoman Amanda Santos echoed that sentiment.
“Everyone deserves a place to live,” Santos said. “I fully support this for my generation, and for generations to come.”
Mayor Bobbitt also noted that affordable housing eligibility often includes working families with moderate incomes.
“If twenty percent of the units are affordable housing, that could mean a family of four making six figures could qualify,” he said.
Following the discussion, council voted unanimously to designate the property as an area in need of redevelopment.
As several officials emphasized during the meeting, Tuesday’s action does not approve a redevelopment plan. Any proposal for the site would still require additional public review and approvals before construction could begin.
