12012025 PB 25 04 76 Ashland Ave Planning Report 2

Memorandum Page 8 of 10 236 BROAD STREET, RED BANK, NJ 07701 • TEL 732.741.2900 • FAX 732.741.2929 • MAIL@HGAPA.COM • www.HGAPA.com be stored is also to be provided. This list shall be provided to the Township of West Orange Fire Department for their approval. c. The nuisance prevention in this document notes that Blue Violet shall use advanced ventilation and filtration systems to minimize the smell of Cannabis inside and outside the cultivation site. Applicant should further clarify what advanced mean? Typically, when a cannabis cultivation and manufacturing plan is involved robust type of filters are used to scrub the odor and refilter the air, applicant should provide the Board on detail testimony on how that is to be achieved. This is especially keeping in mind there is residential on this site. 11. Statutory Criteria: The applicant has confirmed that the three (3) existing non-conforming conditions: a. Insufficient Side Yard Setback (Chapter 25 Attachment 3) – A minimum side yard setback of 10 feet is required when adjacent to residences, where less than 10 feet exists, and is proposed to remain. b. Prohibited Parking Space Location (§25-12.1) – Where parking spaces are not permitted within 50 feet of the public right-of-way along Ashland Avenue, parking spaces exist within this setback and are proposed to remain. c. Prohibited Access Drive Location (§25-12.1) – Where access driveways are not permitted within 5 feet of a side lot line, a driveway exists within this setback and is proposed to remain. Further, all three (3) newly-created variances outlined in our previous memo remain relevant: 1. 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. 2. Insufficient Number of Loading Spaces (§25-12.3) – Where a total of 3 loading spaces is required, 0 loading spaces are proposed. 3. 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. 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

Memorandum Page 9 of 10 236 BROAD STREET, RED BANK, NJ 07701 • TEL 732.741.2900 • FAX 732.741.2929 • MAIL@HGAPA.COM • www.HGAPA.com 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 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 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).

Memorandum Page 10 of 10 236 BROAD STREET, RED BANK, NJ 07701 • TEL 732.741.2900 • FAX 732.741.2929 • MAIL@HGAPA.COM • www.HGAPA.com 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). a. The applicant shall provide testimony regarding the implications of deviating from the Reexamination Report’s vision.