Planning board urges clearer definition in demolition ordinance; asks staff for rewritten language

The Township of Washington Planning Board reviewed draft Ordinance 2025-20 and Resolution 25-307 on Sept. 17 and recommended clearer definitions for how the ordinance measures ‘‘50%’’ demolition.

Board members repeatedly flagged the draft clause ‘‘which may or may not include the foundation’’ as ambiguous and urged the drafters to state unambiguously whether the above‑ground portion of a foundation counts toward the 50% threshold. A primary point of contention was whether to measure demolition by ‘‘surface area’’ (a two‑dimensional length × width calculation) or by square footage, and whether basements should be included.

Paul, a board member who reviewed prior applications, said the persistent problem has been a lack of a consistent calculation method and urged a clearer metric so applicants and staff can apply the rule uniformly. ‘‘The primary concern was that it needs to be screened,’’ Paul said, adding that a defined calculation or worked example would help avoid future disputes.

Mister Toro, another board member, emphasized the intended meaning of ‘‘surface area’’ in the draft. ‘‘Surface area is just a two‑dimensional area — length times width,’’ he said, arguing that the draft should state whether that measure includes below‑grade areas such as basements.

Mayor Calamari recommended plain language to avoid confusion: if the intent is to include the above‑ground portion of the foundation, ‘‘let’s just say that instead of saying ‘which may or may not,’’’ he said.

Mark, who said he had been instrumental in preparing the drafts with the township attorney and the construction official, described the drafting and review process: the ordinance was prepared by the township attorney after consultation with construction officials and engineers, sent to the mayor and council for first reading, and provided to the planning board for comment. He asked the board to supply specific language changes for the council’s consideration.

The board agreed to recommend several specific edits: define ‘‘surface area’’ (or replace it with ‘‘square footage not including basement’’), clarify whether and how foundations count (for example explicitly include above‑grade foundation portions or state they are excluded), and add a short calculation example or sketch in the ordinance text to guide applicants.

Paul agreed to consult with township engineer Glenn Beckmeier and construction official Darius Pecoy and bring revised language back to the planning board. Mark said he would circulate an introductory email the next morning to start the revision process.

Procedural notes: the board opened and closed the general public portion after no members of the public requested to speak. The board approved the minutes of July 16, 2025, by roll call during the meeting. The planning board also received a brief update on the master plan timeline and adjourned after a motion.

Next steps: staff will draft proposed language clarifying measurement and foundation treatment and return the revised ordinance text to the planning board for additional review before further council action.