PB 24 14 172 174 Main Street Draft Resolution

variance as part of site plan or subdivision review. The variance proofs are the same as for “c” variances as set forth in N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70. A c (2) variance may be granted when the purposes of zoning are advanced and the benefits of deviating from the ordinance requirements outweigh any detriments. The benefits derived from granting a “c (2)” variance must include benefits to the community as a whole, not just the applicant or property owner A “c” variance must address the “negative criteria,” and affirmatively demonstrate that the variance can be granted “without substantial detriment to the public good” and “without substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance” of the municipality. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Board reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. The requested variances for rear lot setback and maximum lot coverage satisfy the c (1) criteria as these are pre-existing conditions that have existed since the building was constructed at a time when the Code permitted such conditions. 2. The variance for the third story satisfies the c (2) criteria because the project as a whole advances the purpose of the MLUL as the project presents special reasons under the MLUL N.J.S.A. 40:55D-2, specifically paragraphs a) advancing the general welfare because the building is being restored and renovated; g) provides sufficient space for a variety of residential and commercial uses with easy access to public amenities, is in a walkable location which creates less reliance on automobiles; i.) provides a desirable visual environment by bringing the building more into harmony with the surrounding area and providing aesthetic enhancements to both the building and parking area; and