Thursday, May 28, 2009
A developer sues and get the right to subdivide into smaller lots than otherwise permitted under local zoning rules, through a state statute designed to build more affordable housing. Can a purchaser from the developer take advantage of this special zoning? No, according to a New Jersey appellate court holding yesterday (Tanenbaum v. Township of Wall Bd. of Adjustment (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. May 27, 2009)).
A couple had bought a large lot in the development and sought to split it into two parcels, both of which would have been large enough under the zoning granted to the developer through New Jersey’s complicated “Mount Laurel” laws for affordable housing. But because the couple had not been a party to the developer’s lawsuit, the township and court both found, the couple’s plan was “non-Mount Laurel construction,” and thus they were bound by the pre-lawsuit minimum lot size requirements, which would not allow two lots on their land (which might be surrounded, of course, by smaller lots subdivided by the developer).
It may be said that New Jersey townships have fought the implication of the Mount Laurel principle at every turn and in every way, sort of like the Russian Army at Stalingrad (perhaps they see the consequences of doing otherwise as similar), and this decision is yet another chapter …
[Comments must be approved and thus take some time to appear online.]
This blog is an Amazon affiliate. Help support Land Use Prof Blog by making purchases through Amazon links on this site at no cost to you.
- Deborah Curran on Field notes on navigating a POPO
- Stephen Miller on Commissioner's Corner: Should a Commissioner Be Permitted To Peak at a Google Maps View of a Project Site in a Quasi-Judicial Hearing?
- Ben Davy on Commissioner's Corner: Should a Commissioner Be Permitted To Peak at a Google Maps View of a Project Site in a Quasi-Judicial Hearing?
- Jesse Richardson on Commissioner's Corner: Should a Commissioner Be Permitted To Peak at a Google Maps View of a Project Site in a Quasi-Judicial Hearing?
- Stephen Miller on New Arkansas law requires local governments to pay for a "takings" where certain "regulatory programs" reduce FMV by at least 20 percent
- Shocking Allegations of Rough Justice at a P&Z Hearing in the Rural West: Environmental Activist Opposing Oil and Gas Project at Public Hearing Charged with Criminal Trespass and Spends Five Days in Isolation
- Cheever & Owley on Enhancing Conservation Options
- Planning for States and Nation-States in the U.S. and Europe
- New study highlights worker conditions in the sharing economy
- Audubon honors Women Greening Journalism