Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board finds Bank of America redevelopment plan consistent, urges higher affordable set‑aside and recreation plan
Summary
The planning board recommended the Redevelopment ordinance for the former Bank of America site as consistent with Springfield Township’s master plan, and asked the Township Committee to consider increasing the affordable housing set‑aside from 15% to 20% and to address off‑site recreation and parking/landscaping conditions.
The Springfield Township Planning Board recommended that the Township Committee find the proposed Redevelopment plan for the former Bank of America site consistent with the town’s master plan, and urged the governing body to increase the project’s affordable housing set‑aside and clarify recreation provision.
Planning staff summarized the proposal for 175 Morris Avenue: a multi‑story apartment building (three stories over surface parking) with 30 rental units, of which five units (15%) would be deed‑restricted as affordable. Staff described project amenities (two community rooms, a roof terrace and a minimum plaza), a conceptual parking scheme showing 57 off‑street spaces (planner calculations indicated a need for about 51), and noted the site’s prior designation as an area in need of redevelopment and the referral of the ordinance to the planning board for a consistency review.
Board members debated consistency and community impacts. Several members praised the design and said the project advances downtown revitalization goals; multiple members nonetheless urged increasing the inclusionary set‑aside to 20% (which would raise the deed‑restricted count from five units to six on the current plan) to better meet the township’s affordable‑housing obligations. The board also recommended that the Township Committee require a recreation solution — either on‑site amenity improvements or a contribution toward off‑site facilities — because the project provides limited dedicated recreation space.
Concerns raised included potential effects on school children distribution and the value of spreading affordable units across larger projects versus adding smaller, well‑designed buildings in downtown areas. Staff noted state regulations governing bedroom distribution in deed‑restricted units (referred to in testimony as the applicable UCH/"uck" rules) and explained that market‑rate unit bedroom mixes can be adjusted to minimize school impacts.
After deliberation the board voted to authorize the board attorney to draft a letter to the Township Committee stating that the Redevelopment ordinance is consistent with the master plan, and to include recommendations: consider raising the affordable set‑aside toward 20%, require a recreation plan or contribution, and adopt the other recommendations in staff’s report. The motion passed by roll call.
If the Township Committee adopts the ordinance on April 8, a full site‑plan application will return to the planning board for detailed technical review.
