11102025 PB 25 04 76 Ashland Ave Planning Report 2

Memorandum Page 17 of 18 236 BROAD STREET, RED BANK, NJ 07701 • TEL 732.741.2900 • FAX 732.741.2929 • MAIL@HGAPA.COM • www.HGAPA.com 2. We have noted the following variances are required: a. Insufficient Sidewalks (§25-12.1) – Where 5-foot-wide sidewalks between any building and a parking area or drive used by the public are required, no sidewalks are proposed. b. Insufficient Number of Parking Spaces (§25-12.2) – Where a total of 39 off-street parking spaces is required, 38 off-street parking spaces are proposed. c. Insufficient Number of Loading Spaces (§25-12.3) – Where a total of 3 loading spaces is required, 0 loading spaces are proposed. d. Insufficient Parking Area Illumination for I District (§25-14.3) – Where a minimum illumination throughout the parking area is 1.0 footcandles (fc), less than 1.0 fc is proposed periodically. 12. Statutory Criteria: Bulk/ “C” Relief 1. The applicant requires c-variance relief for this application. The applicant shall provide testimony that demonstrates how the request for relief may be granted based on one of the standards provided in the MLUL at N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70c. It is the applicant’s responsibility to bear the burden of proof. In order to satisfy the positive and negative criteria for each c variance enumerated above, the applicant should provide testimony that satisfies either the c(1) hardship criterion or c(2) flexible criterion as set forth in the MLUL. a. Positive criteria: There are two types of c variances - the c(1) hardship and the c(2) flexible variance. The c(1) hardship criteria states that a “hardship” will occur if the variance is not granted. The hardship relates to the physical or topographical features of the property and cannot relate to financial or personal hardship. Hardship relating to property can include: i. Narrowness, shallowness, or irregular shape ii. An exceptional topographic condition iii. Other unique conditions or features affecting the property The c(2) flexible variance states that by granting the variance, the purposes of the MLUL would be advanced by a deviation from the zoning ordinance requirement and that the benefits of granting the variance substantially outweigh the detriments. b. Negative criteria: The applicant must satisfy the two-prong test of the negative criteria; i. The variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good; and

Memorandum Page 18 of 18 236 BROAD STREET, RED BANK, NJ 07701 • TEL 732.741.2900 • FAX 732.741.2929 • MAIL@HGAPA.COM • www.HGAPA.com ii. The variance can be granted without causing substantial detriment to the zone plan. The applicant’s testimony regarding the negative criteria should address any potential impacts that the proposed variances may have on the neighborhood, as well as how the proposed development is consistent with, or in potential conflict with, both the zoning ordinance and the Township’s Master Plan. 13. Conformance with the Township’s Master Plan The Township’s 2019 Master Plan Update (Reexamination Report with Plan Element Amendments) notes that, “Existing development in West Orange is generally consistent with zoning, although there are deviations due to changes in zoning that made preexisting uses nonconforming or by use variance approval” (p. 33). Further, the 2010 [Master Plan Reexamination] further noted the need to maintain the community scale by limiting the intensity of commercial/retail, industrial and residential development to assure compatibility with existing neighborhood character (p. 12). c. The applicant shall provide testimony regarding the implications of deviating from the Reexamination Report’s vision (i.e., proposing an intensification of parking and circulation of existing non-conforming uses on the site).