PB 21-06 Montclair Golf Club - 25 Prospect Avenue - Resolution (Adopted)

2. The property is located along Prospect Avenue near the boundary of West Orange and Verona. The surrounding area is primarily characterized by residential uses. 3. The application requires the following bulk variance relief from this Board: Section/Requirement Required Existing Proposed 25.8-4.a Maximum fence 4 feet 100 feet Additional height fencing at 75 feet 4. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-46b and 50a are the focal points for consideration of amended preliminary and final site plan applications. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-46b provides that if “any substantial amendment in the layout of improvements proposed by the developer that have been subject of a hearing” is proposed, “an amended application for development shall be submitted and proceeded upon, as in the case of the original application for development.” N.J.S.A. 40:55D-46b further provides that the Board “shall” grant amended preliminary site plan approval if the Proposed development complies with all provisions of the applicable ordinances. Similarly, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-50a provides that final site plan approval “shall” be granted if the detailed drawings, specifications, and estimates of the application conform to the standards of all applicable ordinances and the conditions of preliminary approval. As such, if the application complies with all ordinance requirements, the Board must grant approval. Conversely, if the application does not comply with all ordinance requirements, the Board must deny approval. Cortesini v. Hamilton Planning Board, 417 NJ. Super. 201, 215 (App. Div. 2010). However, there are two exceptions: (1) The first exception is where an application does not comply with all ordinance requirements but the Board grants relief in terms of variances or exceptions. In that case, the Board then must review the application against all remaining ordindnce requirements and grant approval if the application complies with all such remaining requirements. : §.. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-60 permits a planning board to grant variances from the bulk regulations of a zoning ordinance and other zoning deviations that do not require a “d” variance as part of site plan or subdivision review. The variance proofs are the same as for “c” variances as set forth in N.J.S.A. 40:55D- 70c. A “c(2)” variance may be granted where the purposes of zoning are advanced and the benefits of deviating from the ordinance requirements outweigh any

c” variances as set forth in N.J.S.A. 40:55D- 70c. A “c(2)” variance may be granted where the purposes of zoning are advanced and the benefits of deviating from the ordinance requirements outweigh any detriments. The benefits derived from granting a “c(2)” variance must include benefits to the community as a whole, not just the applicant or property owner. A “c” variance applicant also must address the “negative criteria,” and affirmatively demonstrate that the variance can be granted “without substantial detriment to the public good” and “without substantial impairment to the intent and Purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance” of the municipality. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Board reaches the following conclusions of law. 1. This application requires the following variance relief, as well as amended site plan approval: