Town CrierWest Orange, New Jersey
← Back to search

Supporting Documentation · Aug 15, 2024

325 Mount Pleasant Ave ZB 24 06 Planning Review August 12 2024

Preserved file SHA-256b7a5cc10c32b6b512bf7b0a0d91eba6b0f71e7a7d086f51d141abc87647791e8

Indexed text · page 11

Show all pages
Page 11

11 | Page 105 Grove Street, Suite 3 Montclair, NJ 07042 www.Nishuanegroup.com 973.954.2677 SITE PLAN, MAJOR - Shall mean any development plan for one or more lots that does not meet the definition of a minor site plan, as defined herein. SITE PLAN, MINOR - Shall mean any development plan of one or more lots that does not involve planned development, any new street, or the extension of any off-tract improvement, the cost of which is to be prorated pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-42; and proposes development that would require not more than five new parking spaces over and above the existing permitted spaces on the site, pursuant to the Township's zoning requirements; and proposes development of not more than 1,000 square feet of new building floor area. Planning Comments N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70(d) permits a Board of Adjustment “in particular cases for Special Reasons” to grant a variance to permit “a use or principal structure in a district restricted against such use or principal structure.” This represents the Positive Criteria of the statute. In addition, a showing of the Negative Criteria is necessary to obtain a “d” variance. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed variance can be granted “without substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and the purpose” of the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance. When considering the granting of a “d” variance, an applicant must demonstrate that special reasons are satisfied by either showing that the proposed use “inherently serves the public good” or that it promotes the general welfare because the proposed site is particularly suited for that use. It was held in Medici v. B.P.R. Co., 107 NJ 1 (1987) that the only “special reasons” which can be considered are those which promote the general purposes of zoning, as listed in N.J.S.A. 40:55D- 2. The court emphasized in Burbridge v. Mine Hill Twp., 117 NJ 376 (1990), however, that the MLUL includes all the zoning purposes listed in N.J.S.A. 40:55D- 2, not only the promotion of the general welfare. Therefore, each of these listed purposes may support an application for a “d” variance. In the case of a D2 variance, the Board has the power to grant the expansion of a lawfully created pre-existing nonconforming uses in particular cases and for special reasons. Because the use is lawfully pre-existing, the applicant shall show the

Page 11

e power to grant the expansion of a lawfully created pre-existing nonconforming uses in particular cases and for special reasons. Because the use is lawfully pre-existing, the applicant shall show the positive criteria related to the advancement to the Municipal Land Use Law, but does not need to demonstrate suitability, as the use already exists. In Burbridge

File revisions (1)