Ltr Diane Chandler Zimmerman enc documents 91224

Planning Report: Canterbury Village Pagi The Township of West Orange Land Use Regulations and Zoning Ordinance currently allows the following conditional uses within the OB-2 Zone: e Nursing Home/Long Term Residential Facility §25-24.2b.1.(g). e Congregate Care §25-24.2b.1.(h). ¢ Residential Health care -§25-24.26-T{> Assisted Living §25-24.2b.1.(j). All of these uses are defined and licensed by the NJSDOHSS. The definitions of each of these uses within the zoning ordinance (§25-4b.) are consistent with the State regulations. While Canterbury Village may offer some of the services that are integral to these permitted conditional uses, by license and definition it is a different use and is therefore a prohibited use within the OB-2 Zone. ZONING REQUIREMENTS The West Orange Zoning Ordinance applies the following bulk standards to development within OB-2 Office Building Zone; Criteria Required / Proposed | Comments / Notes Allowed MINIMUM Lot Area 10,000 sf. 95,004 sf. Lot Width 60 ft. 177.0 ft. Lot Frontage 45 ft. 177.0 ft. Front Yard 30 ft. 23.1 ft. Existing non-conforming condition to remain Side Yard - left 10 ft. 23.7 ft. Side Yard - right 8 ft. 8.7 ft. Rear Yard 30 ft. 49.67 ft. Open Space 30% 52% MAXIMUM Building Coverage 30% 30% Existing = 25.0 % Building Height (new Buitcing) 4 stories 1 story A portion of the existing building is 2.5 stories Building Height (new Portion) 48 ft. 18 ft +/- A portion of the existing building is 32 feet +/- Lot Coverage 50% 47% Existing = 42.0 % PARKING Number of Spaces [ 60 spaces | 26 spaces | C1/C2 Variance (Existing req. = 48 spaces) Note: Items noted as an Existing Non-Conforming Condition to Remain represent pre-existing conditions that have neither been created nor exacerbated by the current application. This proposed site plan does not comply with the following general and/or supplemental requirements of the Zoning Ordinance: Criteria Required / Proposed | Comments / Notes fa Allowed " YL Parking Setback 75 ft. 14.60 ft. | Existing non-conforming condition to remain To Property Line ' §25-8.1b | . Parking Setback 100 ft. 92.5' +/- Existing non-conforming condition to remain To Residential Zone Prop. Line § 25-8.1b } Driveway Width (Exist.) 24 ft. 18 ft. Existing non-conforming condition to remain §25-12.1.h6 Driveway Width (Prop.) 24 ft. 20 ft. C1 variance: §25-12.1.h.6

Planning Report: Canterbury Village Page 4 D(2) VARIANCE: EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE Positive Criteria MLUL, under § 40:55D-70.d empowers a municipal board of adjustment to approve a use variance only in “in particular cases and for special reasons.” This demonstration of “Special Reasons” is known as the “positive” criteria. The standard for establishing special reasons depends on the type of (d) variance at issue. Case law allows that special reasons exist whenever a project advances the purposes of zoning. (Kohl v. Mayor of Fair Lawn, supra, 50 NJ at 276 (1967)) The purposes of zoning are enumerated in MLUL 40:55D-2. Among the purposes of the act are: a. To encourage municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of lands in a matter that will promote the public health, safety, morals & general welfare. g. To provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for a variety of residential & commercial uses, both public & private, in order to meet the needs of all NJ citizens. i. To promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangements. It has long been held that certain educational, charitable or institutional uses such as a residential health care facility are deemed inherently beneficial, and therefore automatically meet the positive criteria by advancing the “general welfare” of the public. (Sica v. Bd. Of Adjustment of Township of Wall, 127 NJ 152, 159-60, 603 A. 2d 30, 34 (1992)) The general welfare of the public can also be advanced upon demonstration that a site is particularly suited for the proposed use. (Medici v. BPR Co., 107 NJ 1, 18, 526 A.109, 118 (1987)) When seeking a variance for a new commercial facility prohibited in the zoning ordinance, the Medici court actually demands a showing that the site is particularly suited for the proposed use. However, when seeking an expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming use, a lesser showing of special reasons will suffice for the (d)(2) variance, in that any of the purposes of the MLUL may be advanced. (Burbridge v. Mine Hill Township, 117 NJ 376, 568 A2d 527 (1990)) The Burbridge court states that “cases in which the variance would create an entirely new nonconforming use require greater proof to demonstrate the merits of such a variance than do cases in which an applicant seeks only a

tes that “cases in which the variance would create an entirely new nonconforming use require greater proof to demonstrate the merits of such a variance than do cases in which an applicant seeks only a minor expansion of a pre-existing nonconforming use.” The Burbridge court further states that “appearance, aesthetics and compatibility of the use in the neighborhood become uniquely significant, especially when there is not any evidence that the use is ever going to whither and die.” Burbridge also held that in certain circumstances, aesthetic improvement alone can justify a variance to expand a pre-existing non-conforming use. It is my professional opinion that the proposed expansion of the Canterbury Village facility meets the Positive Criteria by advancing the following 3 purposes of zoning: e The proposed expansion promotes public health, safety & general welfare by providing a better, safer and more modern living environment for the residents and their families. The expansion further allows for the reorganization of the facility which creates a safer arrival sequence for visitors and increased security for the residents. (MLUL § 40:55D-2.a.)

Planning Report: Canterbury Village Page 5 e The proposed expansion allows for the continued existence and improved operation of a small ds scale residential health care facility which offers a more intimate experience than what has become the industry norm. (MLUL § 40:55D-2.g.) J e The proposed building addition is appropriately scaled to the existing building and site and creates a significantly more attractive fagade to visitors. (MLUL § 40:55D-2.i.) Negative Criteria MLUL further states that “no variance can be granted without a showing that such a variance or other relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance.” This is known as the “negative criteria.” Burbridge also gives direction to the application of the negative criteria. Citing earlier case law, the Burbridge court summarized that “expansions of existing nonconforming uses ordinarily are less disruptive to the zoning plan than new nonconforming uses.” Case law finds that a limited extension of a pre-existing non-conforming use will ordinarily be less likely to involve substantial impairment of the Zoning plan than will be the creation of a wholly new use of such nature. This is especially evident when the non-conforming use is a permitted conditional use within the zone. It is my professional opinion that the proposed expansion of the Canterbury Village facility meets the Negative Criteria as follows: e The architectural solution to the physical expansion of the facility produces no detriment to the public good. e The placement of the addition as a connective element within the existing “C” shaped structure limits visibility from neighboring properties. e The 1 story infill expansion does not add mass to the existing structure, further reducing visibility and preserving the character of the neighborhood. e The size and character of the expansion also preserves the use of air light and open space on the neighboring properties. e There is no detriment to the zone plan and zoning ordinance since the use is a permitted conditional use within the zone and in the context of the applicant's proposed plan, the site continues to be appropriate for the use, notwithstanding the deviations from some of the conditions imposed by the ordinance.

Planning Report: Canterbury Village Page 6 “C" VARIANCES ~ POSITIVE CRITERIA The Municipal Land Use Law under sections 40:55D-70c.(1) & 40:55D-70c.(2) provides the basis for the requested variance relief related to deviations from the specific conditions of a conditional use and design standards as outlined above. \ The c(1) criteria speaks to certain practical difficulties that the site's size, shape, topography, unique physical features or placement of existing structures might impose on the property to be developed. zoning deviation where the application advances the purposes of the MLUL and the benefits of the deviation will outweigh the negative impacts resulting from the grant of the requested variance. VA f < c(2) criteria, often referred to as the “flexible c” criteria allows that the governing body may approve a Existing Non-conforming Conditions: C(1) Criteria: A portion of the existing facility predates the current zoning ordinance and does not meet the ordinance requirement for Front Yard. The existing site also deviates from the parking.setback requirements of the Supplemental Provisions for the OB-2 Zone contained in Section 25-8. These-existing non-conforming conditions are to remain unchanged by the application. Any attempt to meet the front yard requirements would require the demolition of the historic portion of the facility. Given the lot configuration, any attempt to meet the parking setback would virtually eliminate the parking lot altogether. The size and shape of the property, combined with the location of the lawfully existing building and parking lot create a practical difficulty or hardship upon Canterbury Village in any attempt to expand or improve the facilities or bring the site into closer compliance with the zoning ordinance. Parking Minimum Parking Spaces: 60 Spaces Required, 26 Spaces Proposed The West Orange Zoning Ordinance §25-12.2 identifies the minimum required number of parking spaces based upon the use of the property. None of the defined uses matches Canterbury Village. The most analogous use identified in this section of the ordinance would be §25-12.2g.: hospital, nursing home, sanitarium or minimum care facility, which requires 1 space for each bed plus 1 space for every 2 non- resident employees. This yields a parking requirement of 60 spaces for the proposed 53 beds and 13 non-resident employees. It

cility, which requires 1 space for each bed plus 1 space for every 2 non- resident employees. This yields a parking requirement of 60 spaces for the proposed 53 beds and 13 non-resident employees. It should be noted that the parking requirement for Residential Healthcare facility or Assisted Living facility as outlined in §25-24.2b.1.(i)(8) & §25-24.2b.1.(j)(8) respectively are more analogous to the parking demand generated by Canterbury Village. The criterion for either use is 1 parking space per 1.5 beds which yields a requirement of 36 spaces for the 53 beds. C(1) Criteria: The L shaped configuration of this undersized, lot, the presence of a stream along the northeasterly boundary and its required stream encroachment and riparian setbacks and the location and configuration of the existing building do not allow for any expansion of the parking lot to provide additional parking.

Planning Report: Canterbury Village Page 7 C(2) Criteria: Canterbury Village is a licensed Comprehensive Personal Care Home in which none of the residents operate or maintain vehicles: The parking lot is used solely by the staff and visitors. Canterbury Village will offer testimony that the existing parking lot will accommodate the potential increase in residents from 40 to 53. Since the existing parking will meet the anticipated demand, any increase in parking would merely increase the total amount of impervious coverage at the expense of landscaping. Accordingly, we feel that the benefit of the deviation outweighs any detriment. The purposes of the MLUL advanced are: 40:55D-2c. Provision of adequate light, air and open space. Aesthetic enhancement Conservation of open space & natural resources; prevention of urban sprawl and degradation of the environment through improper use of land Driveway Width: Minimum Width: 24’ Required, 20' Proposed, 18’ Existing to remain C(1) Criteria: The narrow lot width of this L shaped undersized lot, combined with the location and configuration of the existing building does not allow for viable 24 foot wide two-way driveways as required by code. The existing driveway in the front area of the site will remain at 18 feet in width and cannot be expanded. Once past the existing building, the driveway will be expanded to a width of 20 feet. In the area of the new building addition, the driveway will be further expanded to 28 feet to allow for a 20’ wide, 2-way driveway and an 8 foot wide barrier-free drop-off area immediately in front of the new building entrance. “C” VARIANCES — NEGATIVE CRITERIA MLUL requires a showing that the “C” variance relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantial impairment of the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance. It is my professional opinion that the granting of the C variances requested will not result in any detriment to the public good. Any potential negative effects of the proposed project have been mitigated through the following design features: © The placement of the addition as a connective element within the existing “C" shaped structure eliminates any visibility from neighboring properties to the north, south and east. e Agenerous landscape plan will limit visibility of the addition for neighboring

the existing “C" shaped structure eliminates any visibility from neighboring properties to the north, south and east. e Agenerous landscape plan will limit visibility of the addition for neighboring properties to the west of the site. e The landscape plan further reduces the scale of the 1 story addition and helps to define the new building entrance. e The landscape plan includes a mix of evergreen trees and evergreen shrubs that provide year round screening. The mix of ornamental trees specified produce different color leaves and flowers at different times during the seasons to provide a variety of changing color and textures throughout the year. e The 1 story infill expansion does not add mass to the existing structure, further reducing visibility and preserving the character of the neighborhood. e The size and character of the expansion preserves the use of air light and open space on the neighboring properties.

Planning Report: Canterbury Village Page 8 e The existing parking lot is well screened from the neighbors. e The existing parking inventory of 26 spaces is more than adequate for the expanded residential capacity. e The new building entrance contained in the proposed addition is closer to the parking area with new sidewalks. This reduces the need for pedestrians to use the driveway and improves safety. e The driveway configuration with an added barrier free drop off area allows for safe 2 way traffic despite not meeting the code requirement for West Orange. The proposed configuration improves safety over the existing condition. e The proposed application preserves and enhances the character of the existing neighborhood with no negative impacts on the surrounding properties including the residentially zoned properties to the north. It is my professional opinion that the C variances will not impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and ordinance. The variances sought allow for the safe and attractive expansion of a longtime and respected use within the community. CONCLUSION The proposed reorganization, renovation and expansion of the existing Canterbury Village facility will improve the quality of life for its residents and their families through improved security, enhanced amenities, better circulation and a better quality of care. The carefully scaled, one story building addition along with a comprehensive landscape plan will create a more attractive campus while preserving the character of the neighborhood. It is my opinion that this project meets the standards for the grant of variances under section 40:55D- 70d(2) and 40:55D-70c of the MLUL. It is my further opinion that the project will not have a substantial detrimental impact upon the zone plan, zoning ordinance or public good of the Township of West Orange. Because the proposed development meets the statutory criteria outlined, the West Orange Zoning Board of Adjustment is empowered by the New Jersey MLUL to approve the proposed development including the variances requested. As a professional planner, | feel this project will be beneficial to the residents of Canterbury Village, the surrounding neighbors and the Township of West Orange. | ask that it be approved.

TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE 66 MAIN STREET, WEST ORANGE, N.J. 07052 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ROBERT D. PARISI Tel: (973) 325-4110 Mayor Fax: (973) 325-6359 Email: SBorg@westorange.org SUSAN BORG, A.LC.P., R.A. Planning Director TO: Zoning Board Members FROM: Director Susan Borg, P.P., A-LC.P., R.A. DATE: August 22, 2011- Updated 10/27/11 RE: ZB-11-17/House of the Holy Comforter t/a Canterbury Village Block: 88; Lot: 26; Zone: OB-2 33 Mt. Pleasant Avenue Seeking “D” and “C” variances for expansion and renovations to an existing non-conforming use INTRODUCTION The applicant, a not for profit Comprehensive Personal Care facility, is seeking amended site plan approval for a one story, 4,571 square foot expansion and renovation of an existing non- conforming use with a “D” and “C” variances. While the West Orange zoning ordinance does not define Comprehensive Personal Care Facility, it does have conditional uses for Residential Health Care which is similar in use. This is in the conditional use section in Chapter 25-24.2b.1 (i). I am looking at these conditions as an analysis for this application and compare them to the OB-2 zone. LAND USE The property is located in an OB-2 zone. Surrounding land uses are residential dwellings, Llewellyn Park to the north, the West Orange Library to the south and an open stream in the rear of property on the north side.