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 8 j. In the case of any d-1 or d-2 variance, the bulk standards that have been adopted for the particular district, in this case those of the OB-1 district, were adopted with the intent to apply to those uses that are expressly permitted. When the ordinance was drafted it was not necessarily contemplated that this particular use might be proposed for a site in the OB-1 district. The standards of the OB-1 district are not necessarily intended to apply to a mixed-use building or apartments. In these cases, bulk variances related to specific requirements of the OB-1 district can be considered subsumed within the Board’s consideration of the ‘d’ variance. The Zoning Board can at its reasonable discretion determine appropriate bulk standards such as building setbacks and buffering requirements. k. The applicant should provide testimony addressing the lack of buffering, and any efforts that can be made to enhance the buffer between the site and the adjacent residential uses to the east, where currently only a row of arbor-vitae is proposed. l. The applicant should address the required open space set-aside for the site, and confirm the total proposed building area so that the required open space can be determined. Calculations have been provided. m. The applicant should address the screening of the air conditioning units. Will there be any new mechanical equipment outside of or on top of the building expansion? A fence is now proposed. However, it is not clear what type of fence is proposed. Will this be the 6-foot high vinyl privacy fence that is detailed on Sheet 8 of the site plans? The applicant should clarify. n. The applicant should clarify whether there will be any differentiation between employee parking for the office uses, and resident parking. o. The applicant should address anticipated demand for parking during peak hours, and in evenings. The Township code does permit shared parking as proposed, but there are no provisions in the code that permit a reduction in parking based on potential lack of overlap among the shared users, as can sometimes be the case between residences that typically use parking at night, while office users that require parking during the day. p. The applicant should address any green

the shared users, as can sometimes be the case between residences that typically use parking at night, while office users that require parking during the day. p. The applicant should address any green design measures being taken to enhance the sustainability of the project. q. Per §25-13.3.c, where any ‘d’ variance is required, at the discretion of the Zoning Board an environmental impact statement may be required of an application. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has now been provided. r. In the applicant’s response letter it is stated that additional landscaping is proposed to screen the dumpster area. However the landscaping plan provided with the revised site plan drawings does not appear to show any additional plantings compared to the initial submission. The applicant should clarify.