Lakewood Res. v. Cong. Zichron Schneur

3 Citing cases

  1. 29 E 29 St. Holdings v. City of Bayonne

    No. A-3316-21 (App. Div. Feb. 26, 2024)

    In short, the ordinance's purpose was to protect an existing hospital and its accessory uses. Relying on Lakewood Residents Association v. Congregation Zichron Schneur, 239 N.J.Super. 89, 98 (Law. Div. 1989), Bayonne asserts the real differences between the uses of long-term care facilities and hospitals justify O-20-20's distinction to further its purpose

  2. House of Fire v. Zoning Bd.

    379 N.J. Super. 526 (App. Div. 2005)   Cited 22 times
    Recognizing use of a church or house of worship "is an inherently beneficial use of the land"

    Because of the statutory requirement that a zoning ordinance and its amendments "shall be uniform throughout each district for each class or kind of buildings or other structure or uses of land," N.J.S.A. 40:55D-62(a), we cannot conclude, on the record before us, that the amended ordinance is invalid or that the City's action was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. See Allendale Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, supra, 30 N.J. at 278, 152 A.2d 569 (upholding offstreet parking requirements that were "indiscriminately applicable to all buildings" and "designed to promote the public safety and general welfare by lessening `congestion in the streets'" (citations omitted)); Lakewood Residents Ass'n v. Congregation Zichron Schneur, 239 N.J.Super. 89, 100-02, 570 A.2d 1032 (Law Div. 1989) (zoning ordinance considered reasonable where requirements for houses of worship "basically track the requirements for other permitted uses in the zone"). See also Rumson Estates, supra, 177 N.J. at 356-58, 828 A.2d 317 (noting that, in addition to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-62(a), other reasons for the uniformity requirement are "the constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection that guard against the arbitrary and unreasonable exercise of the police power") (citation omitted).

  3. Manalapan Builders v. Tp. Committee

    256 N.J. Super. 295 (App. Div. 1992)   Cited 7 times
    In Manalapan Builders Alliance, Inc. v. Township Committee of the Township of Manalapan, 256 N.J. Super. 295 (App.Div. 1992), the municipality adopted a floor area ratio scheme which, for quite legitimate environmental reasons, required developers to subtract from the total square footage of their lots environmentally sensitive areas to calculate the permitted size of the house.

    Although the power is broad, the municipality must use the power within the limits of the legislative delegation of the MLUL and the standards which accompany that authorization. Lakewood Residents Ass'n v. Congregation Zichron Schneur, 239 N.J. Super. 89, 93, 570 A.2d 1032 (Law Div. 1989). A zoning ordinance enjoys a presumption of validity, which may be overcome by a showing that the ordinance is "plainly contrary to fundamental principles of zoning or the [zoning] statute."