26 03 25 516 Pleasant Valley Way Planning Review 2

West Orange Zoning Board March 26, 2026 Re: 127 Mitchell Street, LLC (516 Pleasant Valley Way) Our File No. 115.WRZ0154.V01 Planning Review #2 Page 6 • Properly Locate Public, Commercial/Retail, Industrial, Residential and Service Uses • Promote Community Sustainability and Resiliency • Promote a Desirable Visual Environment 6. Planning Comments a. The applicant should discuss the proposed project, addressing the general scale and scope of improvements proposed for the site. Testimony should be provided addressing the anticipated operations of the office use on the site, including the type of businesses, hours of operation, and number of employees on the site. b. The applicant should clarify whether lot consolidation is proposed as a part of the application. The applicant has indicated that lot consolidation is proposed. c. The application as proposed will require an amendment to the previously granted d-1 use variance. Although this is technically an expansion of a non-conforming use and not the establishment of a new use on the site, under the case of Puleio v. North Brunswick, the courts determined that the d-2 variance only applies to uses that predate the adoption of the ordinance that would make them non-conforming, and not for uses that exist but were permitted by the granting of a d-1 use variance. However, as the use variance has already established that mixed uses can be permitted on site in the form of office and residential dwellings, the application of the statutory criteria should be very similar, if not essentially the same as what is necessary for a d-2 expansion of a non-conforming use. d. 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. ii. Negative Criteria: The applicant must show that the proposed use will not have a substantial

lfare by advancing one of the purposes of zoning, and that the site is particularly suited for the use. ii. Negative Criteria: The applicant must show that the proposed use will not have a substantial detrimental impact on the public good (quality of life for residents or character of the community), and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan. e. For expansions of non-conforming uses, the applicant must demonstrate that the site can accommodate the expansion, that the proposed expansion will improve the site conditions, and that with the expansion the site will continue to satisfy the negative criteria. Mixed