Montclair Stables Listing of Variances for Application

Reasons For Relief Use Variance The property is in the R-1 (Lot 186) and R-5 (Lots 176 & 178) zones. Neither of these zones list a horse riding and training facility as a permitted use, and neither identify it as an expressly prohibited use. The Applicant is not seeking to change the use of the site which would require a D(1) variance, indeed, this Applicant seeks to continue with the current use with certain enhancements. Those enhancements will not only serve to increase the quality of the property for its intended use but also be a benefit to the surrounding parcels. As the proposed larger outside riding arena and new parking lot are dissimilar from current conditions, the Applicant will need to seek relief from the Board under a D(2) variance. The Board of Adjustment has the power pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70d(2) to permit expansion for lawfully created pre-existing nonconforming uses “in particular cases and for special reasons”. Our courts have held that the promotion of the general welfare is the zoning purpose that most clearly amplifies the meaning of “special reasons”. Burbridge v. Mine Hill Board of Adjustment, 117 N.J. 376 (1990). This is derived not from the use itself but from the development of a site in the community that is particularly suited for the very enterprise proposed. Id. Special reasons may also be found in the fact that the variance would minimize the nonconformity and make it more acceptable in the setting. Id. Also aesthetic improvement alone can be the basis for special reasons. Id. The Board may not exercise its power to grant a D(2) variance otherwise warranted, however, unless the so-called negative criteria has been satisfied. The variance may be granted only if it is not a substantial detriment to the public good and does not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and ordinance. In the current application, it is important to note that no structure is being expanded. The Applicant is not intensifying the use by a building addition. Instead, the Applicant is upgrading a dilapidated outside riding area. In the first instance, this weighs in the favor of the Applicant. The facility is well-suited to the neighboring residential area and this proposed enhancement ensures its continuation into the future. The area while it could be developed as permitted into multiple single family homes, instead is

the neighboring residential area and this proposed enhancement ensures its continuation into the future. The area while it could be developed as permitted into multiple single family homes, instead is continuing in a less intensive pastoral use. In total, the use under the proposal meets the special reasons criteria. Additionally, the negative criteria is satisfied. The refurbishment to an outside riding arena does not implicate a detriment to the public good. The outside riding arena already exists and has done so for decades. It is not a noxious, hazardous or otherwise odious activity. Indeed, it serves as a distinction in the area making the neighborhood a more desirable location. This also demonstrates that the zone plan is not substantially impaired. This continued use with its new riding area, while not permitted, is not prohibited in either zone. Additionally, the use can be seen as compatible with the residential district it abuts. Bulk Variance The Applicant in its refurbishment efforts also must seek the Board’s approval to continue certain pre-existing bulk variances, reduce other pre-existing bulk variances but ones which remain nonconforming and new variances which are necessary as part of Applicant’s beautification goals.