Land Use Decisions

A sampling of current rulings from New Jersey courts on land use issues. Included are published and unpublished cases.

Added February 2004.

• 2003-2004 NJ Courts Unpublished Land Use Decisions (Information is not available on whether these cases are now on appeal to a higher court)

   Township Upheld in Condemnation Appeal
  Case: Laroy , et ux., et al. v. Twp. Of Rockaway, et al., App. Div., (per curiam) 44-2-3025. Decided March 7, 2003

  Based on the evidence, the trial judge was justified in denying the plaintiffs’ claims (1) that their nine lots were subjected to a regulatory taking because they couldn’t obtain required wetlands and building permits to allow them to develop the lots; (2) seeking reimbursement for a sewer assessment that they had to pay on the lots; and (3) seeking reservation of sewer plant capacity for the lots.

  Municipality Wins Eminent Domain Action
  Case: Twp. Of North Brunswick v. U.S. Home Corp., etc. et al., App. Div. (per curiam) 44-2-3061. Decided March 11, 2003

  The lower court was correct in ruling that the plaintiff municipality properly used its power of eminent domain, taking the 105 acres of farmland property, of which the appellant is a contract purchaser, for development of athletic fields. The developer did not prove its case that the condemnation action was brought in bad faith to prevent use of the tract for senior citizen housing; and that there is no public need for more recreational facilities in the community.

  Land Use Case Remanded for Fact Findings
  Case: McKenna v. Zoning Bd. of … Bayonne, et al., App. Div. (per curiam) 26-2-3015. Decided March 6, 2003

  Despite the fact that the plaintiff filed her complaint in lieu of prerogative writs—challenging the grant of site-plan approval and variances to the applicant— beyond the 45 days from publication of the notice, the judge offered no reasons for granting summary judgment or denying plaintiff’s reconsideration motion and motion for restoration of her complaint “in the interests of justice.” Hence, the case is being remanded for the trial court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law.

   Zoning Dispute Decided in Favor of Township
  Case: Support Development Corp., etc. v. Twp. Of Holmdel, etc., et al., App. Div. (per curiam) 26-2-3038. Decided March 7, 2003

  In an earlier remand, the court found sufficient basis in the record for defendant’s decision to change its zoning from office-lab development to low-density residential use, but it wasn’t convinced about the reasonableness of the choice to establish four-acre lots within that new zone. On remand, the judge concluded that the larger lot size was unjustified, and determined that one-acre zoning would better serve the needs of both the municipality and the developer-plaintiff. In reversing this decision, the appeals court now holds that the ordinance was a valid exercise of municipal zoning power.

  Trial Judge Erred in Invalidating Ordinance
  Case: N.J. Builders Assn., etc. v. Twp. Of Egg Harbor, etc., et al., App. Div. (per curiam) 30-2—3016. Decided March 6, 2003

  A previous judgment invalidating an ordinance that required developers in the Pinelands portion of the defendant-township to provide a 20-year maintenance guarantee for stormwater management systems has been reversed. Following N.J.S.A. 13:18A-12(b), the Pinelands Commission certified that the ordinance conformed with the minimum standards of the commission’s comprehensive management plan adopted pursuant to the statute. The trial judge erred in concluding, nonetheless, that the ordinance was invalid because the 20-year maintenance guarantee exceeded that allowed under the Municipal Land Use Law, which permits only a two-year guarantee, and because he thought that the comprehensive management plan, which would take precedence over the MLUL provision, authorized no more than a four-year guarantee.

  Citizens Lose Appeal of Shopping Center Approval
  Concerned Citizens for a Better Hillsborough, Inc. v. Hillsborough Twp. Pl. Bd., et al. App. Div. (per curiam) 26-2-3151. Decided March 18, 2003

  The appellate panel refused to overturn a resolution by the Hillsborough Planning Board which granted site plan approval to developers to build a community shopping center on a 95-acre tract of land in the municipality. In affirming the dismissal of the plaintiff’s action in lieu of prerogative writs, the Court rejected the Concerned Citizens’ arguments that the board’s approval was based on an invalid, partial settlement of a Mount Laurel builder’s remedy suit, and that the proposed shopping center exceeded the allowable legal square footage.A

  Convictions for Violating Ordinance Upheld
  Case: State v. Poku, Appellate Division, A-5338-01T2, Decided May 9, 2003

  The Court affirmed convictions for violating a municipal ordinance by failing to obtain a permit before installing a fence, and contempt of a previous order concerning the storage of inoperable vehicles on the defendant’s property. It was undisputed, the Court said, that the defendant installed a fence without obtaining the necessary permit. Furthermore, the Court ruled, the defendant admitted he was aware of the order to remove the inoperable vehicle from his yard, and gave no valid reason for disobeying the order.

  Law Division Ruling Remanded for Site Plan Review
  Case: Sprint Spectrum, L.P. v. Pohatcong Township Zoning Board of Adjustment, App. Div., A-4019-01T1. Decided March 31, 2003

  The Appellate Division has affirmed and remanded a Law Division ruling, in an action in lieu of prerogative writs, setting aside the Board’s denial of the plaintiff’s application for a conditional use variance to build a cellular communications tower in a quarry. The Court upheld a trial judge’s denial of the Board’s request to consider site plan issues that were deferred by the Board in the proceedings that led to the Board’s decision that was before the Court on prerogative writ review. Accordingly, the matter should be remanded to the Board for the limited purpose of site plan review, to be completed within 75 days.

   

  Watch for more cases to be added ....