Planning Board recommends amended zoning ordinance for 660 Pasc Road, advancing 32-unit project to council

The Township of Washington Planning Board on June 3 reviewed amended ordinance 26-04, a rezoning and regulatory update tied to a proposed 32-unit residential development at 660 Pasc Road, and voted to recommend it to the Township Council.

Board planner Joe Burgess told the board the ordinance keeps the regulatory controls for the 32-unit development on lots 6 through 11 while removing lot 1 (the corner lot at Washington and Pasc) from the rezoning and returning it to RAA single-family zoning. "This ordinance maintains the exact regulatory controls governing the 32-unit development that's going to take place solely on those lots 6 through 11," Burgess said.

Burgess described changes to coverages and setbacks: building coverage will increase slightly to 30 percent; overall impervious coverage is capped at 50 percent with a 15 percent limit specifically for driveways, patios and certain decks. He said the board recommended the applicant redesign portions of the site to increase the use of pervious materials.

Residents in attendance raised questions about details that will be addressed at site-plan review. John Ramik, a nearby resident, asked whether existing homes on or near the site would remain; Burgess said one dwelling unit will remain on the property and other structures north of Washington will be removed as part of redevelopment. Neighbors pressed concerns about the north-line setback and landscape buffer size after the design shifted from an earlier larger multifamily building to a townhouse layout; Burgess responded that the current design sets a 30-foot building-wall setback, with patios set back 20 feet, and requires a double row of evergreen plantings within the buffer to provide screening.

On technical issues, Burgess and board members said drainage, detailed landscaping specifications (planting size and spacing), traffic studies and fence or barrier options will be presented and reviewed during the site-plan process. "The site plan review will include testimony from the applicant's experts and review by the board's engineer and, if necessary, a traffic consultant," Burgess said.

Several residents expressed frustration that concept notices lacked map-level detail; Burgess and staff said filed site-plan materials and the housing element exhibit will be posted on the township website before future hearings. A resident also asked whether affordable units would be rentals or for sale; Burgess said the affordable units are planned as rentals while market-rate units are expected to be for sale.

After public comment and board discussion, the planning board approved a motion recommending amended ordinance 26-04 as consistent with the master plan and adopted resolution PB-26-21 by roll call (Mr. Carol, Mr. Pledo, Mr. Toro, Mr. Weransky and Chairman Sabino voted yes; a board member who also serves on the township council did not vote on the recommendation). The recommendation will be transmitted to the Township Council for final action.

Next steps: the developer must file formal site-plan documents (drainage, landscaping, traffic) for review; those materials will be posted online and scheduled for public hearings before the planning board prior to any building permits.