TFE 81 Northfield Interpretation Request Application Digital Copy 1142416095411

WATERS, MCPHERSON, MCNEILL Diana Chandler-Zimmermann A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION November 4, 2024 Page 6 in an organized and efficient manner, with little to no impact on any other site or individual, in furtherance of the objectives of the MLUL and the Ordinance. Finally, in terms of the character of the neighborhood and surrounding areas, while not directly relevant to the inquiry here as such parking should be permitted as of right under the Ordinance, it is worth nothing there is little to no impact in terms of visual effect, as a majority of the surrounding properties constitute commercial sites, and what limited residential uses are nearby tend to fall in the variety of garden apartment complexes with attendant parking lots (and such lots are filled with cars and vehicles of all types, including a number of commercial vehicles and vans, presumably belonging to residents, that are almost certainly parked by occupants/residents of such apartments, including on an overnight basis). In addition, with respect to the interpretation of the Ordinance posited by the Township in denying Elite’s use it appears that part of the hesitancy of the Zoning department to approve the parking in question here is the fact that building on the Property is an office building that accommodates multiple tenants. It thus logically follows that in the case of a multi-tenant office building, that such building will in fact be occupied by multiple tenants, many, if not all, of whom are likely to be engaged in different lines of business. In case of Elite, there is no doubt that Elite is permitted to occupy the building as its main business offices and to conduct business from the Property. Thus, it is respectfully submitted that the proper analysis of the Ordinance with respect to the Property and Elite’s use thereof for example, including the analysis of whether the parking in question here is a permitted accessory parking use, must be confined to and considered, in the context only of that particular tenant and the fact that other permitted users of a site exist should not impact such inquiry. Said another way, and by way of a hypothetical yet illustrative example, if for example, a plumbing company opted to rent office space in the same OB-1 zone as the Property for use as its main business office, but happened to instead lease space in a building only suitable for one tenant,

a plumbing company opted to rent office space in the same OB-1 zone as the Property for use as its main business office, but happened to instead lease space in a building only suitable for one tenant, as opposed to a multi-tenant space, it is highly unlikely that anyone would argue that parking of a plumbing truck overnight at such a location was not a permitted, required accessory parking use. B. External Support for Interpretation of the Ordinance In addition to the support provided above for the interpretation of the Ordinance so as to permit parking of vehicles in the manner proposed by Elite at the Property, New Jersey case law provides further support for the interpretation advanced herein. For example, in State v. P.T. & L. Construction Co., in a wildly different, but appropriately illustrative example, the New Jersey Supreme Court ultimately determined that a helipad was a valid accessory use to an applicant’s use of the subject premises as headquarters/primary offices for a construction company, as use of helicopter by company personnel to travel from job sites from the office was part of the company’s essentially routine operations, and thus sufficiently related to the primary use of the premises. 77 N.J. 20 (1978). The Court generally noted that two determinations must be made in determining whether a use is customarily incident to the permitted use of a property (which is directly relevant here as the Ordinance provides that parking in the OB- 1 zone that is required accessory parking is permitted as of right): 1) “whether the use is incidental to the main use: does the use bear a close resemblance and obvious relation to the main use to #1606835v1