Supporting Documentation · Date unavailable
PB 22-05 West Orange Public Schools/289 Main Street - Block: 125.01 Lot 40
665a075c9ca16fd2734b5b90ac5eb96eff85485b142b9d5eca185f6bc507ccbaIndexed text · page 2
Show all pagesWHEREAS, representatives of the public asked questions of the witnesses and had an opportunity to offer statements in regard to the submission; and WHEREAS, the Board reviewed and considered the school facilities project, testimony and documents submitted therewith; and WHEREAS, the Board also considered the input of its professionals at the hearing; and NOW THEREFORE, the Board makes the following findings of fact, based upon the evidence presented at its public hearings, at which a record was made: 1. The District has submitted a referral to the Planning Board for courtesy review of a school facilities project pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-31(a) and N.J.A.C. 6A:26-3.2(c) to replace an existing retaining wall and to install a Temporary Classroom Unit (“TCU”) on the property. 2. The property is located on Main Street and the surrounding area is characterized by businesses and retail, including an automobile rental business to the South. 3. The school facilities project does not require any variance relief from the Board. 4. The District referred the subject school facilities to the Planning Board for “review and recommendation in conjunction with [the] master plan[.]” N.J.S.A. 40:55D-31(a). The District may not act upon the proposed school facilities project without first reviewing the Planning Board’s recommendation. Id. Approval of the proposed school facilities project is determined bythe State Board of Education. See N.J.S.A. 18A:18A-16. The Planning Board’s recommendations and objections must be considered by the Bureau of Facility Planning Services of the New Jersey Department of Education. Id. However, the Planning Board’s role is “strictly recommendatory.” Murnick v. Bd. of Educ. of Asbury Park, 235 N.J. Super. 225, 230 (App. Div. 1989). NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Board reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. Testimony established that there currently exists a retaining wall that will be replaced with a new retaining wall made of reinforced cast in place concrete with a minimum height of six inches on the school side with a chain link fence (To replace the existing chain link fence) on top of the retaining wall. The fence will be of the same or similar height and construction as what currently exists. 2. The proposed TCU will be installed on the existing asphalt and the asphalt will be striped to
ining wall. The fence will be of the same or similar height and construction as what currently exists. 2. The proposed TCU will be installed on the existing asphalt and the asphalt will be striped to designate crosswalks and other striping to safeguard pedestrians. 3. The existing fence height is 16 feet at the corner (As it was used as a backstop for kickball), and the balance of the fence was approximately 8 feet. The new fence will be of similar height and no higher than 16 feet. 4. The TCU will have one small vestibule with two classrooms that will each have bathroom facilities. The intended use of the TCU is for 12 special education students along with a teacher and an aide in each classroom. The TCU will be ADA compliant.
File revisions (1)
- Sep 29, 2026
665a075c9ca12,002,680 bytes