Gibbons Law Alert

Gibbons Law Alert

Tagged: Zoning & Permitting

Taking on the NJDOT: Appellate Division Broadens Objector’s Ability to Challenge NJDOT Permits

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On December 30, 2010

It is not uncommon in New Jersey for businesses to fight tooth and nail to prevent competitors from obtaining development approvals. This month, in In the Matter of the Issuance of Access Conforming Lot Permit No. A-17-N-N040-2007 by the New Jersey Department of Transportation for Block 136, Lots 2 and 3 in Mahwah Township, New Jersey, the Appellate Division dragged the New Jersey Department of Transportation (“NJDOT”) into the fight and provided objectors with another path to delay or even prevent a business competitor from moving into town.

What You Need to Know About Variances and Existing Non-Conformities for Your Next Development Application in NJ

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On December 28, 2010

Earlier this month, the New Jersey Appellate Division decided and approved for publication Cortesini v. Hamilton Township Planning Board, a case that addressed the issue of whether a developer must apply for a variance in connection with a pre-existing non-conforming condition created by a prior/non-appealable development approval. The Court’s answer was a resounding “no” based on the facts presented.

Howard Geneslaw to Speak at 2010 New Jersey Planning Conference

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On October 29, 2010

Howard D. Geneslaw, Esq., PP, AICP, a Director in the Gibbons Real Property & Environmental Department, will be a speaker at the 2010 New Jersey Planning Conference on Friday, November 5, 2010, in New Brunswick, New Jersey. Howard’s topic will be “The Due Diligence Process: Protection for Both the Public and Private Sectors.” Two consulting planners will also be a member of the panel.

Land Use Public Notices: N.J. Developers/Attorneys Beware!!!

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On August 26, 2010

In the most recent case decided in New Jersey on the issue of the adequacy of a land use public notice, the court continued the trend of requiring applicants on development applications to put as much information in their notices as possible to make the general public aware of the nature of the matter under consideration. In Neshanic Coalition for Historic Preservation v. Hillsborough Township Planning Board, Judge Buchsbaum ruled that the applicant’s public notice failed to meet the statutory requirement of setting forth the “nature of the matters to be considered” under the New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law because it omitted the fact that the building to be demolished was located in an historic district.

Ye Shall Have No Wine Before It’s Time – New York Federal District Court Dismisses Winery’s Claims on Ripeness Grounds for Failure to Obtain a Variance Decision or Provide Sufficient Proof That Efforts to Obtain a Variance Would Be Futile

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On August 18, 2010

Despite potential substantive merit to Plaintiffs’ federal and state constitutional claims, the Federal District Court of the Northern District of New York in Rivendell Winery LLC v. Town of New Paltz dismissed Plaintiffs’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on ripeness grounds as a result of the Plaintiffs’ failure to either obtain a final variance decision or to satisfy the relatively high burden for showing that an application for a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would have been futile. The crux of the decision lies in the Court’s reiteration of an important principle that although the success of a land use application may seem doubtful, doubt alone is insufficient to establish that the decision maker has dug in its heels and made certain that the application will be denied.

No Room at the Inn – New York Closes the Door on Illegal Hotels

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment / Transactional Real Estate and Leasing

On August 12, 2010

On July 23, 2010, Governor David Patterson signed into law, legislation that amends the New York State Multiple Dwelling Law to define permanent and transient occupancy. The new illegal hotel law forbids most residential apartment units to be rented out for stays less than 30 days. This legislation may be a reaction to City of New York v. 330 Continental LLC, a 2009 Appellate Division – First Department holding, which relied on the fact that the critical terms “transient” and “permanent” are not defined in either the Multiple Dwelling Law or the New York City Zoning Resolution.

Yes, Building in the Highlands Preservation Area is Possible: Court Upholds NJDEP Exemption for Church Project as “Reconstruction” Within “Footprint” of Previous Development

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On August 11, 2010

New Jersey’s Highlands Water Protection and Planning Act (Highlands Act), which created and granted substantial powers to a regional Council, has engendered significant controversy, especially with respect to the strict development restrictions it imposes within a statutorily defined preservation area. Certain redevelopment projects, however, are exempt from those restrictions, and a recent Appellate Division upheld the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP) interpretation of key statutory provisions when it determined that a multi-purpose redevelopment project qualified for such an exemption.

A Redevelopment Designation Worthy of Gallenthin – South Plainfield, NJ, Does it Right

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On August 10, 2010

In 2007, just as regulations began to force New Jersey development into its urban areas, where the use of redevelopment is a virtual necessity, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided Gallenthin Realty v. Paulsboro. There, the Supreme Court rejected a municipality’s designation of an area in need of redevelopment because the underlying investigation was insufficient under the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law criteria.

Time-out: Pennsylvania Passes Permit Extension Act

by

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On July 16, 2010

Last week, Governor Rendell signed the Permit Extension Act (“Act”) into law as part of the approval of the budget, breathing life into expired and expiring permits and the development projects they represent. The Act, found at pages 99-110 of the budget bill, extends the expiration date of many governmental approvals, permits and agreements, including building permits and construction permits, relating to construction and development projects.

Connect:

About Gibbons

With 200 attorneys, Gibbons is a leading law firm in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Washington, DC, and Florida, ranked among the nation’s top 200 by The American Lawyer. More…

Subscribe

Archived Blog Posts

Categories