Hillsborough planning board reviews master-plan amendment to allow 'small-scale logistics' in LI district

Hillsborough Township Planning Board members reviewed a proposed master-plan amendment on the land-use element that would reintroduce a defined "small-scale logistics" use in the township's LI (Light Industrial) District as part of a settlement with Larkin entities.

The amendment, presented during the planning board meeting, would permit small-scale logistics facilities as a principal use in the LI District but impose limits intended to preserve neighborhood scale: a maximum building footprint of 41,000 square feet (with an exception noted for large-format supermarkets), a maximum height of two stories or 35 feet, and a limit on loading docks to one per 5,000 square feet. The study area covers nearly 300 acres in the LI District, roughly 43 acres of which remain undeveloped, and the township has issued 87 certificates of nonconformity since the ordinance removed warehousing, shipping and receiving as permitted principal uses in June 2023.

The amendment also recommends changing the definition of "industrial or office park" from a principal permitted use to a design standard, to clarify administration and avoid removing uses implicitly permitted by that definition. "If this amendment is approved, the township committee can take any of these recommendations and choose to apply the appropriate standards to enact it and put it in place," the presenter said during the meeting. The proposed ordinance text, the presenter explained, would include the 41,000-square-foot cap so "you couldn't have more than 41,000 square feet on any lot." He noted existing development standards such as minimum lot area (2 acres), floor-area ratio (0.3), and impervious-coverage limits would continue to apply.

During public comment Brian Tarantino of Fairfield Lane commended the township's 2023 action to remove warehouses as a permitted use but urged the board to guard against a loophole in which a developer could subdivide a property into multiple 41,000-square-foot buildings and achieve the same intensity the 2023 ordinance sought to avoid. "My concern is that... I just wanna make sure that there is some protection against folks getting creative and bypassing what you guys are trying to do," Tarantino said, and he suggested a cap on total square footage of small-scale logistics allowed on a single development or lot.

Board members asked for clarifications about how the proposed 35-foot height limit would be measured. One member noted past cases where averaging elevations for buildings facing two roadways let builders reach greater apparent heights and said the board should consider a uniform measurement approach in the broader master-plan update. The presenter acknowledged that the current ordinance measures height from grade to the highest part of the roof and that the measurement approach could be reviewed in the master-plan update.

The planning board opened the amendment for public comment and later closed public remarks. A motion to recommend the master-plan amendment to the governing body was made and seconded and a roll call was requested; the transcript does not record the roll-call result or formal outcome of that recommendation. If the planning board recommends the amendment, the township committee would need to act to adopt ordinance language and any standards into the municipal code.

The amendment text and a draft implementing ordinance (not yet adopted) also include a provision addressing replacement of nonconforming principal or accessory structures destroyed by accident, which the presenter said was intended to protect existing structures that might slightly exceed a new height standard from being rendered nonconforming by the amendment.

The master-plan amendment will be incorporated into the ongoing comprehensive master-plan update if the planning board and governing body approve it. The board indicated staff would verify whether existing LI properties such as RC Fine Foods meet the proposed 35-foot height limit before any ordinance introduction, to avoid putting lawfully built buildings into a noncompliant status.

Votes at a glance: The board voted to open public comment and later voted to close public comment (both recorded as "Aye" on voice vote). A motion to recommend the amendment to the governing body was moved and seconded and a roll call was requested; the meeting transcript does not record the roll-call result.