4 2 25 WO PB Draft Minutes

10 • The rear setback is existing 6.54. The ordinance is looking for a minimum of 30 feet. • This is not a new build per se, but they're working with the land and the structures that are lawfully existing. Mr. McDonough believes that's a legitimate hardship based on the existing condition. There's some case law on that point known as the Hawrylo case. • Along the same lines, we look at lot coverage where 84.2% is what is there, what has been there, and what the applicant is looking to continue, not worsen, where 75% is the maximum that's allowed. That's the same as what was said for the setback. • It's a hardship related to the land and the structures that are lawfully existing there on. • In terms of the legal justification, there's a basis under hardship, but primarily Mr. McDonough is going to focus on what is called the C2 balancing test, whereby the benefits of the application as a whole would substantially outweigh the detriments. • Again, we look at the application holistically, the impact on main street, the impact on the neighborhood, the impact on the community at large. • The project as a whole will promote multiple purposes of the land use law at NJSA 40:55 D-2, including purpose A, the promotion of the general welfare, which is advanced with renovation, repurposing, and revitalization of this long-standing building. • This locally familiar building in the downtown that will add new housing for people to live in, new businesses for people to work and shop and provide business offerings to the public. • Purpose G, the promotion for a variety of uses in appropriate locations because the site is in a civic center and it is good planning to concentrate people in downtown settings with easy access to civic and public amenities. • The walk score here is very good. 78 out of 100, that's considered a very walkable area where most errands can be accomplished on foot. That is good for the public in terms of its efficiency. • This walk score has been recognized by authorities such as the National Institute of Health as a reliable and valuable source for considering the walkability of an area. That's why Mr. McDonough thinks it's a good thing to put people here where we have lessened reliance on the automobile. • Additionally, purpose I, the promotion of a desirable visual environment. This is going to give a site that's been here almost five decades now, a

where we have lessened reliance on the automobile. • Additionally, purpose I, the promotion of a desirable visual environment. This is going to give a site that's been here almost five decades now, a fresh new look, bring it more into harmony with the transformation of the area. • Accolades to the community and to the downtown alliance for the great transformation that's taking place on Main Street and this is going to be a nice continuum in that regard. • Lastly, purpose M, which is their planning goal to take what's there, repurpose and reuse it. That's called efficient use of land. The applicant is working with that which is there. • That certainly has much less impact on a neighborhood than a complete demolition here, a complete rebuild. Again, this is putting a cap on the building that's there and essentially keeping the rest in place. • That's as efficient as it gets from a planning standpoint. It’s called adaptive reuse, renovation and conversion of what's there. • Taking all of those public benefits, we now consider the potential impacts associated with the relief seeking. • Based on all of the testimony from witnesses before, licensed professionals and their operators sworn under oath, none of the relief based on the record will cause impacts of a substantially adverse nature.