Agenda - Planning Commission - 09/04/2003

Home

August 10, 2003 -- Page 3 Subdivision Approval - Board approves project subject to conditions Developer required to post $62,500 maintenance guarantee NEW JERSEY (6/13/03)- R.J.P. Builders inc. applied to the WooLwich Town- ship P'[anning Boarct for approval of a major subdivision for a project referred to as The Links. The board ~anted approval, bur subject to specLtied conditions. The builder objected to two of the conditions: Condition one required the applicant to complete construction and insmila- tion of the improvements required for the subdivision reflected in the cost est/- mare for bonding to the satisfaction of the township enaineer within 18 months, Condition three required the applicant [o post with the township a mature- nonce guarantee in the amount of $62,562, secur~mg maintenance of all im- provements to be constructed in the subdivision. The maintenance guarantee would run for a term of two years from the date of acceptance of the improve- ments by the townshi¢. Builders were cautioned that the subdivision would not be sig-ned by ~he county clerk until these conditions were satisfied. B uitders sued the board and the township, challenging the conditions. Tie township pointed to a local ordinance, reqm.dng a maintenance guarantee fore subdivision approval. The lower court determined that the conditions were valid, and the budders appealed. Toe builders argued the ordinance did not require a maintenance guarantee "to be posted" until after final acceptance of the improvements.. The township relied on the intmduCtor,? language of the'statute that provided. %e- fore recording of final subdivision plats or as a condition of final site plan approval." DE ~I$IO~: Reversed in part. Condition one was invalid, and condition three was valid. The first condition, requinng that construction be completed within 18 months, conflicted with the law, which could grant delays when governmental agency approval was required..Tne same statute conferred discretionary author- it,,/to planning boards to grant up to three one-year extensions in certain cases. However, condition three -- requiring a maintenance guarantee -- was valid. The stature provided that "sig-namres ... shall sot be affixed until the developer has posted the guarantees required." Thus, the use of the plural g~aar- antees meant that the township could requ/re a developer provide both a per- formance bond and maintenance guarantee. Citation: R.J.P. Builders v. 'Towns'hip o~'Woolwich, Superior Court of New Jersey, App. Div., No. A-&g43-OOT3 ('2003). see a/so: Salvarore ,2. Trace, 262 A.2d 409 1¥969). ~res atso: ~ll Brothers [nc v. Town, ship o~f Greenwich, 582 A. 2d ]276 (J990). NOw RENEW your sul~scription ONLEN'E at www, quinlan, eom 131