Hillsboro planning board approves five‑lot subdivision at 241 Woods Road amid affordable‑housing questions

The Hillsboro Township Planning Board on Oct. 9 approved a major subdivision to create five single‑family lots on 12.28 acres at 241 Woods Road, granting variance relief to allow an 18‑foot shared driveway for two of the lots and placing conditions on tree mitigation, stormwater design and an affordable‑housing fee.

The application, filed by Green Care Farms LLC (file 24‑PB‑09‑MS), was presented by attorney Mike Ogdan, who said the plan would produce five custom homes. “We’re intending to seek approval for the construction of five single family homes,” Ogdan told the board as he introduced civil engineer Michael Ford and planner Tom Barrens to present exhibits and testimony.

Why it matters: the parcel previously had zoning approval for a 15‑bed memory‑care facility that the township counted in its Round‑3 vacant‑land analysis for affordable‑housing credits. Applicant testimony said that assisted‑living plans became economically infeasible, and board members warned the applicant and the township that removing that assumed housing contribution may require coordination with Fair Share Housing Center and the courts.

What the board approved: engineers and planners described two layout options. The board accepted the applicant’s revised plan that separates three east‑side driveways and retains a widened, RSIS‑compliant 18‑ft shared driveway for two west‑side lots, rather than requiring a short cul‑de‑sac that would add new public‑road improvements. The board’s approval is conditioned on compliance with the township professionals’ memoranda, completion of agreed plan revisions, execution of maintenance/deed language for the shared driveway, and payment to the affordable‑housing trust as required by the township ordinance.

Technical and environmental safeguards: civil engineer Michael Ford testified that stormwater will be handled with three bio‑retention/infiltration detention basins designed to meet current state standards, including a conservative design for the future 100‑year rainfall event (discussed in testimony as approximately 12 inches). Ford said the basins include outlet structures to control flow and that water‑quality storms will infiltrate in the basins’ planted media with no discharge for the design event.

Tree mitigation and discrepancies in counts: testimony recorded several figures for tree disturbance and replacement. Ford testified that the initial plan showed removal of roughly 329 trees and a disturbance of about 52% of wooded area, and that mitigation plantings would exceed 400 trees organized to restore wooded areas on site. Planner Tom Barrens and other witnesses provided mitigation totals in the record (another figure cited was 273 mitigation trees). The board’s approval requires the applicant to comply fully with the current tree‑mitigation ordinance, address the board engineer’s specific comments, and include deed/resolution language limiting disturbance outside approved clearing areas.

Affordable‑housing and prior approvals: applicant managing member Rajiv Singh described a years‑long effort to develop a green care memory facility inspired by European models but said rising construction costs, lower occupancy and changing reimbursement made that use infeasible. Singh said the prior memory‑care approval and the town’s inclusion of the site in its vacant‑land inventory were not commitments he had entered into; board counsel and several members advised that any adjustment to the township’s Round‑3 credits would require work with Fair Share Housing Center and possibly court filings. Singh and counsel indicated willingness to notify Fair Share and to pursue any required change‑of‑circumstance process.

Public input and board action: resident Judy Lavoy (255 Woods Road) urged the board to prefer a conforming design rather than grant variances. After deliberation the board voted unanimously to approve the subdivision with the conditions described, including language in the resolution and deeds to govern tree disturbance and shared‑drive maintenance, and an obligation to remit the applicable affordable‑housing contribution (the application cited a 1.5% fee; an illustrative estimate discussed in the hearing was about $150,000 based on assumed home values). The roll call recorded all members present voting yes.

What happens next: the approval is subject to final plan revisions that address the October 7 board‑engineer memorandum, the planning director’s comments and the fire marshal and environmental‑commission recommendations. The applicant and township will also need to coordinate about the site’s role in the affordable‑housing plan and any steps required by the Fair Share settlement or court.