ZB 23 09 Seton Hall Preparatory Resolution submission

FINAL —V1 —5.16.24 22. As to the signage related “c(2)” variance, Mr. McDonough testified that: (i) the addition adds to the aesthetic of the building and helps identify the school; (ii) the sign is remote from residential uses; and (iii) it adds to the ambience of the building and creates a sense of space. 23. As to the parking related “c(2)” variance, Mr. McDonough testified that: (i) the addition provides no added intensity of use; (ii) the addition will provide for an enhanced learning environment; and (iii) there will be no increase in student or faculty population. 24, On questioning by the Board Planner, Mr. McDonough confirmed that the application also satisfies the “d(3)” conditional use variance standards, since all deviations relate only to existing conditions and there is no intensification. DECISION 25. After reviewing the evidence submitted, the Board, by a vote of seven (7) to zero (0), finds that the Applicant has satisfied its burden of proving an entitlement to the requested expansion of a nonconforming use, conditional use, sign, and parking variances, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70(d)(2), (d)(3) and (c)(2), respectively. 26. The Board first notes that, to establish an entitlement to any variance relief under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70, an applicant must demonstrate the "positive" and "negative" criteria applicable to the type of relief requested. 27. In the case of (d)(2) expansion variances, the positive criteria is established bya showing of "special reasons" to permit "an expansion of a nonconforming use." New Jersey Courts Tecognize such "special reasons" may be found where the proposed use inherently serves the public good. See, Saddle Brook Realty, LLC v. Twp. of Saddle Brook Zoning Bd. of Adj., 388 N.J. Super. 67, 76 (App. Div. 2006). Likewise, such special reasons for a d(3) conditional use variance may also be found where the proposed use is inherently beneficial.