26 02 06 Perez Whittlesey CME Planning Review 1

West Orange Zoning Board February 6, 2026 Re: 66 Whittlesey Avenue Our File No. 115.WRZ0129.V01 Planning Review #1 Page 4 H:\Legacy\Howell-FS1\SEC\West Orange\Zoning Board\115.WRZ0129.V01 - 66 Whittlesey Ave (Perez)\Review Phase\CME & Board Prof Review Reports & Correspondence\26-01-22 Whittlesey - CME Planning Review 1.docx b. §25-7.1 Maximum Building Height – The maximum building height is 2.5 stories / 35 feet where, and 3 stories +/- 42 feet is proposed. As this height increase is greater than 10% of the maximum permitted, this requires a d-6 height variance. c. §25-7.1 Front Yard – The minimum required front yard setback is 30 feet, where 9.35 currently exists, and 9.29 feet is proposed. d. §25-7.1 Maximum Lot Coverage – The maximum lot coverage permitted is 55% of the total lot area, where 62.8% has existed, and 73.81% proposed. e. § 25-12.2(a) Parking Spaces – The minimum number of parking spaces required is 7 parking spaces, where 4 are proposed. 5. Master Plan Considerations The Township’s Master Plan was last reexamined in December of 2019. The following goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Master Plan may be relevant to this application: • Maintain the existing scale of the community. • Improve and maintain existing residential neighborhoods. • Encourage appropriate residential development. 6. Planning Comments a. The applicant should discuss the proposed project, addressing the general scale and scope of improvements proposed for the site. b. The application as proposed will require a D-1 use variance for non-compliance with the permitted principal use requirements for uses in the R-T Residential District. With any ‘d’ variance, the applicant has an enhanced burden of proof to demonstrate that both the positive and negative criteria can be satisfied before the Board can grant a ‘d’ variance: i. Positive Criteria: The applicant must show that there are special reasons to grant the variance. Special reasons can come in one of three forms: 1) that there is an economic inutility in using the property for one of the permitted uses in the district; 2) that the proposed use is considered “inherently beneficial”; or 3) that the proposed use would promote the general welfare by advancing one of the purposes of zoning, and that the site is particularly suited for the use. The site suitability test requires that the applicant demonstrate that there

omote the general welfare by advancing one of the purposes of zoning, and that the site is particularly suited for the use. The site suitability test requires that the applicant demonstrate that there is something specific about the site characteristics that make it particularly suitable for, or lend itself to use a multi-family property rather than a single family or two family use on the property as is otherwise expressly permitted.