Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board finds Lanadex/Parsippany Road redevelopment plan consistent with master plan
Summary
Township redevelopment counsel and the project planner said the Lanadex redevelopment would add about 970 units (1,570 total), set aside 20% (314) as affordable housing, and add ground‑floor commercial space; the board voted to find the plan consistent and will address site‑plan details later.
Township redevelopment counsel Dustin Glass asked the planning board on Monday to find a proposed redevelopment plan for the Lanadex/Parsippany Road area consistent with the township master plan.
Edward Snicus, a planner with Burgess Associates, told the board the proposal creates two subzones (PC‑1 and PC‑2), envisions a modern mixed‑use center of storefronts and multifamily buildings, and would increase housing on the tract by about 970 units to a total of roughly 1,570 units. "Twenty percent will be set aside for affordable housing," Snicus said, which he quantified as 314 units. He also said the plan anticipates about 20,000 square feet of commercial area (in addition to roughly 9,000 square feet in the first phase), structured and surface parking, and design standards intended to reduce visual impact on nearby single‑family neighborhoods.
Glass and Snicus framed the plan as a tool to help the township meet state affordable‑housing obligations and to transition an aging office park into a mixed‑use center. "This plan is substantially consistent with the master plan," Snicus told the board, citing housing‑element goals and the 2020 master plan language.
Board members pressed the consultant on building height and fire access after Snicus said the developer is requesting seven stories but will not exceed 70 feet and can provide 65‑foot clearances where necessary for fire access. A board member said that the site’s topography and distance from single‑family homes make the location suitable for taller buildings if circulation and open space requirements are met.
After questions about circulation, traffic review and stormwater, a member moved that the board find the redevelopment plan consistent with the master plan; the motion passed by roll call. The board and applicant agreed the developer will return for detailed site‑plan review, where traffic, circulation, stormwater and other technical items will be examined.
The board’s finding is procedural: it permits the developer to proceed to later site‑plan and subdivision applications, which the board said must address outstanding engineering and county/Highlands comments.
