The Township of Washington Planning Board voted to adopt the municipality’s 2025 Housing Element and Fair Share Plan, a document the board said is required by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to comply with fourth‑round affordable‑housing rules.

The plan matters because the state assigned Washington Township a fourth‑round prospective need of 184 units; the township used a vacant‑land adjustment to reduce its realistic obligation to 11 units and identified sites and policies intended to satisfy that obligation while preserving the town’s procedural protection from exclusionary‑zoning litigation.

Board planner and legal advisers told the public the DCA number (184) must be accepted or appealed and that the municipality had 48 hours to file the adopted plan with the state after adoption. The panel also noted an unsettled statutory interpretation—disputed by Fair Share Housing Center—over a separate 25 percent adjustment that could raise obligations if courts adopt a different reading. The board said the dispute is likely to be resolved through the state dispute‑resolution program and the courts, and could play out through the coming winter and spring.

What the plan designates: The adopted plan lists two primary sites the board rezoned as reasonable opportunities for affordable housing. One site at 660 Pascack Road (the northwest corner of Pascack and Washington avenues) is proposed for up to 28 townhouse dwellings; the plan specifies that 20 percent of those units — seven units — would be affordable under state rules. The second site is the former bank property at 370 Pascack Road, a roughly 5.16‑acre parcel for which the applicant initially submitted plans showing a potential 74‑unit development; the plan acknowledges the exhibit number while reserving the municipality’s right to require larger perimeter buffers and to resolve the final unit count in site‑plan review. Board testimony said 2–4 units might be shaved from that concept as the project proceeds.

Other items the plan records include a completed Habitat for Humanity homeownership project on Jefferson Street (used toward the earlier round obligation), a Franklin Court rental project (seven family rental units under construction), and a past payment‑in‑lieu from a Van Emberg property owner of about $325,000 deposited to the township housing trust fund. The plan also notes an overlay on Ridgewood Avenue (listed in the plan as Stone Mill Gardens), which currently operates as a garden center and remains undeveloped for housing.

Public comment at the meeting was extensive and largely critical. Several residents questioned impacts on traffic, school capacity and property values and criticized the state timetable, which the board said allowed municipalities only a few months to prepare plans that normally take six to nine months. Debbie Carlson, a Hoover Avenue resident, told the board: “This town has 0 need for affordable housing,” and other speakers urged the board to pursue senior housing, further study of infrastructure (water, sewer, drainage) and to require stronger site‑level design standards.

Board members and municipal counsel repeatedly told attendees that the town is not building the housing itself; adoption of the plan obligates the municipality to zone and enable reasonably feasible sites so developers may apply. Planning staff and counsel emphasized that the governing body must adopt a resolution endorsing the plan so the township can file it with the state and retain the procedural protection from exclusionary‑zoning lawsuits while objections are adjudicated.

Next steps and timing: The board directed staff to incorporate minor corrections discussed at the meeting and to provide a signed copy of the resolution to the township council and state agencies. After adoption, the state allows July and August for objections to be filed; the DCA’s dispute‑resolution panel (six retired judges) begins review September 1 and must forward recommendations to an affordable‑housing judge. The board warned that even after a recommendation, parties will likely litigate and appeal, so finality on interpretive issues (notably the 25 percent language) may not come until the following winter or spring.

Votes at the meeting: The planning board adopted the 2025 Housing Element and Fair Share Plan and instructed staff to file it with the state. A roll call on the adoption recorded affirmative votes by the board members present (see actions[]). The board also asked staff to send a signed resolution copy to the council and county as required.

Why it matters: Adopting a housing element and fair‑share plan is Washington Township’s formal path for complying with state affordable‑housing rules established after the Mount Laurel decisions and later statutes and DCA regulations. The short timetable, residents’ objections about school and traffic impacts, and the pending legal dispute over the 25 percent calculation mean the plan’s adoption begins a period of administrative review and likely litigation that could change outcomes or timelines.