2 ZBA Application

ii. Further, even assuming arguendo that the fields themselves are not inherently beneficial, the Applicant has met both the positive and negative criteria. The proposed construction can be done without substantial detriment to the public good and it clearly does not substantively impair the intent or purpose of the Township’s zoning plan and zoning ordinances for the reasons stated herein, Further, because the R-1 zone clearly permits playgrounds and parks and public and private schools as conditional uses, and athletic fields go with each of these uses, it clearly must have been intended, evidenced by the fact that when the Township master plan was last redone, there was no question with regard to the fact that Seton Hall was already operating athletic facilities and fields at the current site. Thus, there is no substantial impairment of the Town’s zoning plan and ordinances by the granting of the proposed variances. 12, It should be noted that prior decisions of courts have expressly permitted private schools to do similar types of construction, In Burton v. Town of Montclair, 40 N.J. 1 (1963), the New Jersey Supreme Court dealt with an application by the Montclair Academy Foundation to construct a new school building and gymasium on a nearby tract of land to where its existing facility was located. The board approved and granted the variance subject to a number of conditions. The Supreme Court affirmed the granting of the variance in part noting that the “educational and cultural use to be achieved thereby (by -42-