|
N.J. Court Limits Exactions for Recreation, Open Space
Municipalities in New Jersey do not have the authority under the state’s Municipal Land Use Law to exact certain on-site and off-site improvements from developers, according to a June 25 ruling by the New Jersey Supreme Court.
In its ruling, the court consolidated the appeals of the Builders League of South Jersey v. Egg Harbor Township and New Jersey Shore Builders Association v. Jackson Township, which raised the issue of a municipality’s authority to adopt ordinances that require developers to provide open space or recreation set asides within a community, or payment in lieu of them, as a condition of development approval.
“This is a tremendous victory for residents of New Jersey — particularly for those who are about to or those who may be considering buying a new home — in that it rejected the ability of municipalities to impose recreation and open space requirements on traditional subdivisions and site plans. Before today, these requirements were added to the cost of a home,” said Michael Paparone, president of the Builders League of South Jersey.
“The home buyers of today should not bear the costs of providing open space and recreation for the entire community,” Paparone added. “Every ordinance that raises the cost of building a new home negatively impacts the housing affordability.”
The price of obtaining approvals and permits to construct a typical new home in New Jersey is quickly approaching $100,000, he said.
“This decision is important, because it serves to halt a growing trend in local land use ordinances to exact increasing amounts of contributions from developers, which affected both on-site and off-site improvements,” Paparone said.
“This case was not about a municipality’s authority to take land for open space and recreation, but rather a municipality’s belief that it can enact land use ordinances to take that land for free,” he said. “We asked the New Jersey Supreme Court to reject them.”
To view the decision on New Jersey’s judiciary Web site, click here.
The court’s decision followed the lead of another decision it handed down last year in Toll Bros., Inc vs. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Burlington County, 194 N.J. 223 (2008) that concluded that New Jersey developers cannot be held responsible for general community impacts beyond the narrow categories of improvements set forth in Section 42 of the Municipal Land Use Law.
|
