The New Jersey Supreme Court recently clarified whether an application for a use variance based on the assertion that the site is “particularly suitable for the proposed use” requires proof that the project must be built on that site because it is the only one available. The issue arose because
The site plan approval process often causes headaches for New Jersey municipalities and developers alike. The process is further complicated when the property changes hands multiple times and takes years to get off the ground. In Courter v. Absecon Planning Board, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New
Cell phone towers have become the latest “not in my backyard” issue for New Jersey municipalities. In two recent cases, the New Jersey Superior Court considered whether the requirement that a cell phone carrier seek a least intrusive site from a community impact standpoint continue unabated where a municipality had
On June 7, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court again halted the Council on Affordable Housing’s (COAH) process to seize unused affordable housing trust funding. The order vacates the stay on the taking of the housing trusts funds, but also states that COAH cannot continue with efforts
A recent United States Supreme Court decision clarifies a key area of administrative law while also providing telecommunications providers with potential grounds to argue that a municipality is not promptly reviewing development applications for telecommunication facilities. In City of Arlington, Texas v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 11-1545 (May 20, 2013), the
The Appellate Division recently considered whether an ordinance that authorizes “health and wellness centers” and “fitness and health clubs” in two industrial zones changes the “classification” of those zones, thereby requiring compliance with the notice requirements of New Jersey’s Municipal Land Use Law. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-62.1 provides that a municipality must
A New Jersey federal court recently rejected North Wildwood City’s attempt to dismiss a lawsuit under the American’s With Disabilities Act (ADA). The municipality had argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing because they did not suffer an injury-in-fact. The Facts of the Case In Hamill v. North Wildwood City, two
Many homeowners faced with damage from Superstorm Sandy may have another obstacle to rebuilding – the Municipal Land Use Law. In a recent decision, the Appellate Division held that a home in Seaside Park lost its ‘grandfathered’ non-conforming use and structure status when it was gutted for repairs. The Facts
