Ltr Vite final requesting extension 81726

RS Law Offices of 75 Main Street, Suite 201 . . Rick@SchkolnickLaw.com Millburn, N! 07044 Richard Schkolnick, LLC SchkolnickLaw.com 973-232-5061 August 17, 2026 Via Lawyer’s Service and Email Jamilet Baquerizo Vite, Secretary Planning Board Township of West Orange 66 Main Street Room 210 West Orange, NJ 07052-5404 RE: Application of Tompkins Realty LLC 34 Tompkins Street Block 7, (formerly) Lot 12.02; now Lots 12.03 and 12.04 Dear Jamilet: This Firm represents Tompkins Realty LLC. Enclosed please find the Planning Board’s resolution granting minor subdivision approval with variances, memorialized February 7, 2024. The purpose of this minor subdivision was to permit my client to subdivide its property and construct one, two-family structure on the ‘remainder” lot. The deed perfecting the subdivision was recorded on May 7, 2024. Pursuant to West Orange Ordinance Section 25-48.10, a construction permit must be secured within two years (and one day) from the approval, or by February 8, 2026. “For good cause shown,” the Planning Board is permitted to extend the time period for securing the construction pennit. My client now requests a retroactive ‘extension’ of the time period to secure a construction permit, due to economic and other factors. We note the following: 1. 2. 3. 4, there have been no material changes to the neighborhood since the February 2024 approval. the zoning on the property has not changed since the February 2024 approval. the contemplated subdivision was perfected in a timely manner. my client fully intends to move forward with this project and has not abandoned it in any way. We are requesting an extension until July 1, 2027 to secure a construction penmit for the one, two family home that is the subject of this application.

Ms. Jamilet Baquerizo Vite, Planning Board Secretary August 17, 2026 Page2 We understand that public notice must be published and served when this matter is scheduled. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. febtd bl Richard S. Schkoinick RS/ip Enclosures Tompkins Realty LLC/34 Tompkins Street

RESOLUTION Township of West Orange Planning Board PB 23-11 Tompkins Realty, LLC/ 34 Tompkins Street Block: 7 Lot: 12,02; Zone: RM Decided on January 3, 2024 Memorialized on February 7, 2024 Application for Minor Subdivision Approval with Bulk Variances WHEREAS, Tompkins Realty, LLC (Hereinafter the “Applicant”) has made an application for Minor Subdivision Approval with Variances to subdivide an existing lot developed with a two-family home and related improvements into two lots at property located at 34 Tompkins Street, also known as Block: 7; Lot 12.02(the “Property”), in the R-M zone; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was conducted on January 3, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Applicant was represented by Richard Schkolnick, Esq.; and WBEREAS, the Applicant provided testimony from Dr. Carmine Allonardo, owner, Frank "D.Mileto, ALA, as & professional architect and Michael Tobia, P-P., as a planning expert: (the “Witnesses”); and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitied the following documents to the Board in the fom of the application package: ITEM SIGNED BY DATE/REVISION Survey of property David J. VonSteenburg, PLS 12/8/2021 Minor Subdivision Plat David J. VonSteenburg, PLS 8/28/2023 Architectural Plans Frank D. Mileto, A.LA. 5/9/2023 Planner’s Report Lisa Phillips, P.P., AICP 10/13/2023 Ex, A

WHEREAS, Tepresentatives of the public were provided with an opportunity to pose questions of the Wimesses and also had an opportunity to offer statements in regard to the Application; and WHEREAS, the Board reviewed and considered the Application and ihe documents submitted therewith, the testimony of the Witnesses and members of the public; and WHEREAS, the Board also considered the testimony and filed review letters of its professionals at the hearing, including a review memo dated November 29, 2023, from John J. Hess, P.E., PP, CME (Township Engineer) and a Planner’s Report by Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Township Planner dated October 23, 2023. NOW THEREFORE, the Board makes the following findings of fact, based upon the evidence presented at its public hearing, at which a record was made: 1, The Applicant is requesting approval for minor subdivision with variances to subdivide an existing lot developed with a two-family house and related improvements into two lots at property located at 34 Tompkins Street, also known as Block 7, Lot 12. 02. The property i3 4,098 square feet and is a through: jotpresently developed ag a tw6-07" family dwelling on Tompkins Street and a detached one-story garage fronting Stockman Street, 3. The subject property is located in the southeastem section of West Orange and is located on a block bounded by Freeman Street and Mitchell Street, 4, The area surrounding the subject property is developed with a mix of land uses, which. include one, two and multi-family residential, commercial and institutional uses.

10. 1. A commercial use is located on the adjacent lot to the north and New J lersey Transit’s Highland Avenue railroad station is located two blocks to the east and bus stops are located in the vicinity, The applicant proposes subdividing the existing parcel into two lots with the existing home remaining on Lot A and demolishing the existing garage and replacing the garage with a two-family dwelling above the existing foundation. The proposed two-family house on Lot B would have two bedrooms in each dwelling unit, along with one garage for each'unit. The garage for the proposed new two-family on Lot B would allow for two stacked cars, for a total of four off-street parking spaces on Lot B, Applicant proposed constriction of a paver parking area for two vehicles in the front of the existing dwelling on Lot A; however, the majority of the Board preferred that the property maintain the front hedge and lawn area which is aesthetically more pleasing and in keeping with the current neighborhood. The Board did nut foreclose a request inthe furure’for oi site puting ifi the front of the house on Lot A should conditions which currently are favorable for sufficient on street parking change. Dr. Carmine Allonardo, the property owner’s principal, testified that he bought the home trom his mother-in-law in December of 2021, cleaned up the existing house with new windows, siding and interior improvements such as new bathrooms and plumbing. Dr, Allonardo testified that the existing garage is falling apart and cannot be used.

13. 14. 15. 17. 18, 19, The existing two-family house consists of a one bedroom unit on the first floor and a three bedroom unit on the second floor, which equates to a required 3.5 parking spaces as per the Code. The proposed new two-family house would have a total of four bedrooms Gwith to bedrooms per unit) which would require 3 parking spaces (four spaces are proposed). | Applicant’s planner, Michael Tobia, testified that the proposed new two-family fronting on Stockman Street would be an aesthetic improvement, bringing the street scape which now, though zoned residential, is not a residential street scape, into better conformity with the appearance of a residential zone. As for the front yard setback and position of the new home on Lot B, Mr. Tobia testified that other houses on Stockman (specifically #’s 16, 18 and 22) are built close to the sidewalk. The proposed new two family would be 31 feet high, which is 4 feet less than what is permitted and is three stories, designed as a duplex style with a rooftop amenity ~ constructed with enclosed parapet fur safety.” see The rear yard of the new house on Lot B is proposed ta be six (6”) feet and the rear yard for the existing two family on Lot A would be 16.7 feet. The Applicant's planner testified that the proposed new lot and two-family house would promote the purposes of the MLUL, specifically paragraphs a. (promote the public health, safety, morals and general welfare), c. (to provide adequate light, air and open space), ¢. (promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of persons, neighborhoods, communities and regions and preservation of the environment), g. (to provide sufficient

: space for a variety of residential uses to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens), i, (to promote a desirable visual environment), and h. (to encourage location and design of transportation routes.) 20. As for the negative criteria, Mr. Tobia testified that there was little negative impact caused by the proposed new house and removing blighted buildings (such as the dilapidated garage) is good civic design. 21, The subject property is in the R-M Residential zone, which permits one-family detached dwellings, two-family dwellings and multi-family development, in addition to certain nonresidential uses permitted in all of the Township’s residential zones. Therefore, the existing two-family dwelling and the proposed two-family dwelling are permitted uses in the zone. 22. There are a number of existing non-conforming conditions with regard to the R-M zone bulk standards and other zoning regulations, and various new noncompliant conditions that are proposed. woreewreen werenvneenen 932° Fhe Application requires the fuliowing variance relief from the Board: SECTION/REQUIREMENT | PERMITTED/ | EXISTING | PROPOSED | PROPOSED REQUIRED LOTA LOTB 25-7.1 Minimum lot area- two- | 7,500 sq. ft. 4,098 sq, ft. | 2,584 sq. ft, | 1,514 sq. ft. family dwelling 23.7/1 Minimum Jot area per | 3,750 sq. ft. 4,098 sq. ft. | 1,292 sq. ft. | 757 sq. ft. unit- two-family dwelling 25-7.1 Minimum front yard 30 feet 20.5 feet/ | 20.5 feet 5.0 feet 2.4ft 25-7.1 Minimum side yard 10 ft. & 8 ft. 2.3 fL/.03ft. | 4.7 70.3 ft. | 2.380.718. 25-7.1 Minimum rear yard 30 feet NA 10.7 feet 6 feet

yard used as a parking area. | 25-7.1 Maximum _ building | 40% 45.7% 45.2% 69.6% coverage 25-7.1 Maximum lot coverage | 50% 30.4% 63.4% 78.7% 23-12.2a.1 Minimum off-street | 2 BR: 1.5 Three (3) Two (2) Four (4) parking spaces- two-family | 3BR:2.0 dwelling 4BR:2.5 25.12.4a.2 Minimum driveway | 5 feet <5 feet <5 feet <5 feet setback to side Jot line 25-12.4, b.2 Maximum portion | 30% Not >30% >30% of required front, side or rear provided 24, N.I.S.A, 40:55D-47 governs the Board’s review of the minor subdivision application. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-47 provides that minor subdivision approval shall be deemed to be final approval of the subdivision by the board, provided that the board or said subcomunittee may condition such approval on terms ensuring the provision of improvements. Further, approval of a minor subdivision shall expire 190 days from the date on which the resolution of municipal approval is adopted unless within such period a plat in conformity with such approval and the provisions of the “Map Filing Law,” {or a deed clearly describing the approved minor subdivision is filed by the developer with the county recording officer, the municipal engineer and the municipal tax assessor. Any such plat or deed accepted for such filing shall have been signed by the chairman and secretary of the planning board. As such, if the applicant meeis the standards set forth in the ordinances, the planning board lacks the authority to deny approval of the subdivision. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-50a; PRB Enters., Inc. v. S. Brmswick Planning Bd., 105 NJ. 1, 7 (1987); Dunkin' Donuts of NJ., Inc. v Twp. of N. Brunswick Planning Bd., 193 N.J. Super, 513, 515 (App. Div. 1984).

, Conversely, if the application does not comply with all ordinance requirements, the Board must deny approval. Cortesini v. Hamilton Planning Board, 417 N.J. Super. 201, 215 (App. Div. 2010). However, there are two exceptions: (1) The first exception is where an application does not comply with all ordinance Tequirements but the Board grants relief in tenns of variances or exceptions. In that case, the Board then must review the application against all remaining ordinance requirements and grant approval if the application complies with all such remaining requirements. w ro NLS.A. 40:55D-60 permits a planning board to grant variances from the bulk regulations of a zoning ordinance and other zoning deviations that do not require a “d” variance as part of site plan or subdivision review. The variance proofs are the same as Stat for “c” variances as set forth in NLS.A. 40:55D-70. Ac (2) variance may be granted when the purposes of zoning are advanced and the benefits of deviating from the ordinance requirements outweigh any detriments. The benefits derived from granting a “c (2)” variance must include benefits to the community as a whole, not just the ; applicant or property o1 owner, A “oO > variance must address the “negative ett criteria, » and affirmatively demonstrate that the variance can be granted “without substantial detriment to the public good” and “without substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance” of the municipality. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Board reaches the following conclusions of law: 1, The proposed two-family house on Lot B is a permitted use in the zone,

XV, . The requested variances satisfy the ¢ (2) criteria as noted in the case of Kaufman v. Planning Bd. For Warren Tp, 110 Nu. 551 (1988) and Pullen v. Tp. Of South Plainfield, 291 NJ. Super. | at 9 (App. Div. 1996) “cannot be considered in isolation, but must be considered in the context of its effect on the development proposal, the neighborhood, and the zoning plan.” 3. The proposed two fansily home satisfies the c (2) criteria because the project as a whole advances the purpose of the MLUL as it satisfies a number of the principals of the MLUL (specifically paragraphs a, c, e, g, hand i), provides needed in-fill housing, and is a significant aesthetic improvement to the neighborhood. 4, The benefits of the project outweigh any negatives, 5. The proposed minor subdivision and related bulk variances for the proposed two-family house meets the goals set forth in the Master Plan. _NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Board of the Township of ‘West Orange that approval for minor subdivision with c variances to constract a new two-family wevnernmmeranens« NOUSE On Lot B.is-granted;and----—- IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the approval granted to Tompkins Realty, LLC, is subject to the following terms and conditions: 1, The Applicant shall comply with all applicable Township, County, State and Federal laws, ordinances, regulations, and directives, including without limitation, obtaining all applicable local, state, and federal approvals, or permits. If another governmental entity or agency grants a waiver or a variance affecting the plans and/or exhibits submitted by the Applicant, this approval or the conditions attached to it, then the Applicant shall re-apply to this Board respecting the same and this Board shall have the right to view