From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Evesham Township Zoning Board of Adjustment v. Evesham Township Council

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 12, 1980
176 N.J. Super. 503 (App. Div. 1980)

Opinion

Argued December 1, 1980 —

Decided December 12, 1980.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Law Division, Haines, J.S.C.

Before Judges SEIDMAN, ANTELL and LANE.

Thomas Norman argued the cause for appellant Evesham Township Council.

George J. Botcheos argued the cause for appellants Ruggierio ( Laskin Botcheos, attorneys).

No brief filed on behalf of respondents.


These consolidated appeals are from a judgment of the Law Division entered upon the opinion of the Law Division published at 169 N.J. Super. 460 (Law Div. 1979).

We have carefully studied the issues involved. We affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Haines. We believe that the conclusion reached is supported by N.J.S.A. 40:55D-2(m). One of the ways in which the Legislature sought to encourage coordination to lessen the cost of development of land was to provide that planning boards and zoning boards of adjustment have final authority in development matters save only for the right of appeal. Our reading of the statute convinces us that the governing body's scope of review was meant to be limited to a determination of whether the planning board or the zoning board of adjustment had acted arbitrarily or unreasonably. See, New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education, Municipal Land Use, at 237 (1980); Sussna, "The New Municipal Land Use Law," 99 N.J.L.J. 81 (1976). The statement of disapproval in Kessler v. Bowker, 174 N.J. Super. 478 , 489 (App.Div. 1979), is obiter dictum.

Permitting William Abele to intervene as a plaintiff shortly before the trial was appropriate. In Mountain Hill Prop. v. Tp. Comm. of Middletown, 63 N.J. 571 (1972), the township committee appealed to the Appellate Division a decision by the Law Division reversing the denial of a variance by the township committee. Middletown Council of Civic Associations petitioned to intervene eight days after the township committee announced at a public meeting that it was withdrawing its previously filed notice of appeal by virtue of having reached a negotiated settlement with Mountain Hill Properties. The Appellate Division denied the request for intervention. The Supreme Court granted certification and summarily remanded the matter to the Appellate Division with instructions to grant the application to intervene and to hear the merits of the appeal. Cf. Allan-Deane Corp. v. Tp. of Bedminister, 63 N.J. 591 (1973).

The judgment appealed from is affirmed. Any stays pending appeal are dissolved.


Summaries of

Evesham Township Zoning Board of Adjustment v. Evesham Township Council

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 12, 1980
176 N.J. Super. 503 (App. Div. 1980)
Case details for

Evesham Township Zoning Board of Adjustment v. Evesham Township Council

Case Details

Full title:EVESHAM TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND WILBERT D. ABELE…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Dec 12, 1980

Citations

176 N.J. Super. 503 (App. Div. 1980)
423 A.2d 1012

Citing Cases

Monroe Realty Co. v. Middletown Properties, Inc.

Evesham Tp. Bd. of Adj. v. Evesham Tp., 169 N.J. Super. 460 (Law Div. 1979), aff'd 176 N.J. Super. 503…

Lizak v. Faria

Since the objecting neighbors timely referred an appeal of the matter to the township council, the Faria…