Jersey City Mayor Stephen Fulop recently announced several key changes to the municipality’s tax abatement policy. The changes are part of Jersey City’s new comprehensive housing policy and are intended to ensure that all areas of the city benefit from the area’s rapid growth and development. In 2013, Mayor Fulop
In Matula v. Township of Berkley Heights, the Appellate Division refused to dismiss a suit alleging that conflicts of interest prevented a planning board and township council from passing resolutions related a potential property exchange between the township and local church. The majority of members of the Board and Township
In an effort to retain the character of its downtown area and encourage “mom-and-pop” and other unique enterprises, Jersey City recently enacted a municipal ordinance that will limit chain stores to 30 percent of the ground-floor commercial space on any lot located in the downtown area. While the first of
In Fair Share Housing Center v. Zoning Board of Hoboken, et al., the Appellate Division considered five consolidated appeals filed to determine the enforceability of an affordable housing ordinance adopted by the City of Hoboken. The appeals court ultimately determined that the ordinance was enforceable, overturning the trial court’s ruling.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently unveiled its much-anticipated final rule to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH). The updated regulations have been in the works for more than two years and are intended to provide program participants with clear guidelines and data to meet federal fair housing
In Pennsgrove Associates, LP, et al. v. Carneys Point Township Planning Board, et al., the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court held that an agreement executed between a developer and planning board regarding the payment of legal fees did not amount to an unlawful quid pro quo arrangement.
The Appellate Division has addressed the appraisal and good faith negotiation obligations of a condemning authority under N.J.S.A. 20:3-6. In County of Morris v. Randolph Town Center Associates, L.P., the court held that the County of Morris made a fair offer and attempted to initiate bona-fide negotiations, despite the property
The Appellate Division recently addressed when New Jersey planning boards must grant exceptions from the requirements for site plan approval under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-51(b). In White Castle System Inc. v. Planning Board of the Township of Middletown, the appeals court held that the Planning Board of the Township of Middletown (the
