Response to Completeness 3282025 rcd 4 1 2025

Memorandum: Justification for Relief — 66 Franklin Avenue Development Proposal To: Gerard M. Haizel, PP, AICP, Planning Board Planner CC: Diana P. McGovern, Esq., Planning Board Attorney From: Roosevelt J. Donat, Esq., Special Counsel at Murphy Schiller & Wilkes LLP Date: March 28, 2025 Re: Request for Variance and Site Plan Approval — 66 Franklin Avenue, West Orange, NJ |. Introduction On behalf of M Vega Investments LLC (“Applicant”), | submit this memorandum in support of its application for preliminary and final major site plan approval, including necessary variances, to redevelop 66 Franklin Avenue (Block 134.02, Lots 75.03, 79, and 81) in West Orange, NJ. The Applicant seeks to modernize and repurpose the existing 10,000 sq. ft. commercial property in the B-1 Retail Business Zone. The site currently includes a 1-story masonry building, a detached shed, and a parking area used as a contractor's storage yard. The proposed redevelopment will convert the building for retail use, incorporating eight parking spaces, enhanced landscaping, and curbing. Stormwater runoff will be managed through an inlet system, directing water to an existing storm manhole. The requested relief will optimize property use, promote economic growth, and align with West Orange’s development objectives while maintaining compliance with key zoning regulations. Il. Requested Variances The applicant is seeking variance relief, including both 'C' and 'D' variances, to facilitate the proposed development. The 'C' variances are required to address deviations from bulk zoning requirements such as setbacks, lot coverage, and other dimensional standards, ensuring the project can proceed despite nonconformities with the zoning ordinance. Additionally, the applicant is requesting 'D' variances to permit deviations from use regulations, specifically for the renovation of the existing 1-story building into a retail business. Moreover, the applicant requires Preliminary and Final Major Site Plan Approval from the West Orange Zoning Board to ensure full compliance with township zoning and land use regulations. Ill. Legal & Planning Justification for Relief A. Positive Criteria — Advancing the Purpose of Zoning Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-2, the proposed redevelopment furthers multiple core zoning objectives: 1. Enhancing the General Welfare (§ 40:55D-2a) co The project revitalizes an

the Purpose of Zoning Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-2, the proposed redevelopment furthers multiple core zoning objectives: 1. Enhancing the General Welfare (§ 40:55D-2a) co The project revitalizes an underutilized site, transforming it into a productive mixed-use space that contributes to the economic and social vitality of the area. 2. Providing a Balanced Land Use Plan (§ 40:55D-2g)

co The addition of a residential unit within a commercial zone introduces smart growth principles, reducing urban sprawl while meeting housing demand. 3. Encouraging a Desirable Visual Environment (§ 40:55D-2i) co The project modernizes an aging structure, improving the aesthetic appeal of the site and surrounding area while adhering to contemporary architectural standards. 4. Promoting Smart Growth & Sustainability (§ 40:55D-2e) o Adaptive reuse of an existing building reduces environmental impact. o The mixed-use concept supports walkability, public transit use, and reduced vehicular congestion. B. Negative Criteria —- No Substantial Detriment to the Public Good or Master Plan The requested variances will not cause substantial detriment to the public good, nor will they substantially impair the intent or purpose of the zoning plan, as demonstrated below: 1. Traffic & Parking Considerations o The light truck parking use is low-intensity and will not generate disruptive traffic or excessive noise. o The project provides adequate on-site parking, ensuring no overflow into residential streets. 2. Neighborhood Character & Compatibility o The proposal maintains the commercial nature of the district while introducing a residential component that complements existing development patterns. o The project’s design is consistent with surrounding structures, preserving the architectural integrity of the area. 3. Minimal Impact of Bulk Variances o The minor lot width, front yard, and side yard variances do not hinder light, air, or open space access. o These deviations are modest in scope and justified by existing site conditions. IV. Public Benefits of Approval Granting approval for this project will significantly benefit the municipality, advancing several key objectives: 1. Economic Growth & Job Creation o The new office space will attract businesses, generating employment opportunities and increasing local tax revenue. o Increased property tax contributions will support municipal services.

2. Modernization & Sustainable Development o The project replaces an aging, underutilized property with a modern, efficient, and attractive development. o The adaptive reuse approach aligns with sustainability goals by minimizing demolition waste and maximizing land efficiency. 3. Enhanced Urban Planning & Infrastructure o The mixed-use approach reduces reliance on vehicular traffic, encourages pedestrian activity, and supports local commerce. o The design prioritizes functional, aesthetic, and environmental considerations, making it a model for future redevelopment in West Orange. V. Conclusion The proposed redevelopment of 66 Franklin Avenue represents a thoughtful, well-planned investment in West Orange’s economic and urban development strategy. The project: 1. Complies with key zoning objectives while requiring only minor relief. 2. Enhances the public welfare by revitalizing a strategically located yet underutilized site. 3. Aligns with modern land use planning by integrating residential and commercial uses. 4. Creates economic and social benefits that outweigh any minor deviations from zoning standards. For these reasons, we respectfully request the approval of the preliminary and final major site plan application, along with the necessary variances. We look forward to further discussing this proposal and addressing any questions from the Board. Respectfully submitted, Roosevelt J. Donat, Esq.