26 01 15 Knollwood Drive Pullman Planning Review 1

West Orange Zoning Board January 15, 2026 Re: 12 Knollwood Drive Our File No. 115.WRZ0161.V01 Planning Review #1 Page 3 "H:\Legacy\Howell-FS1\SEC\West Orange\Zoning Board\115.WRZ0161.V01 - 12 Knollwood Drive\26-01-09 Knollwood Drive (Pullman) - Planning Review 1.docx" It appears that the following variances will be required of this application as proposed: a. §25 Attachment 3 Minimum Lot Area – The minimum required lot area is 15,000 square feet, where the lot area is 11,469 square feet. This is an existing non-conforming condition. b. §25 Attachment 3 Minimum Rear Yard – The minimum required rear yard setback is 35 feet. The existing rear yard setback is 14 feet, which is proposed to be increased to 18.5 feet. This represents an existing non-conforming condition that will be brought closer to conformity with the zoning requirements. 5. Master Plan The Township’s Master Plan was last re-examined in 2019. The December 2019 Reexamination Report does not specifically address decks or setbacks within the R-4 district. However, one of the Master Plan’s primary goals is to preserve the Township’s neighborhoods. 6. Planning Comments a. The applicant will require a bulk variance to permit the development of a deck that is within the required minimum rear yard setback. For any bulk or ‘c’ variance, the applicant must address both the positive and negative criteria: i. Positive: The applicant must show that either there is a practical hardship or undue burden in complying with the requirements of the ordinance (c-1 hardship variance), or that the proposed conditions are a preferable alternative to compliance with the code, that the proposed conditions would advance one of the purposes of zoning, and that the benefits of doing so would outweigh any detrimental impacts (c-2 flexible variance). ii. Negative: The applicant must demonstrate that the variance can be granted without substantial detrimental impacts on the public good – meaning that allowing the deck to encroach into the setback would have a substantial negative impact on the quality of life for nearby residents or character of the surrounding community. The applicant must also show that granting the variance would not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zoning plan. b. We note that the existing property is non-conforming in terms of lot area and rear yard setback for the requirements of the R-4

d not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zoning plan. b. We note that the existing property is non-conforming in terms of lot area and rear yard setback for the requirements of the R-4 district. These are both existing non-conforming conditions. The proposed application would improve compliance with the rear yard setback requirements, while the lot area will remain unchanged. c. It appears that the other homes on Knollwood Drive have decks within the rear yard, that may also encroach into required setbacks.