Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin September 10, 2011 I Volume 5 I No. 17 <br />See also: Wambat Realty Corp. v. State, 41 N.Y.2d 490, 393 N.Y.S.2d <br />949, 362 N.E.2d 581, 7 Envtl. L. Rep. 20363 (1977). <br />Case Note: The court also found that the challenges of the persons <br />and entities failed because "none of their allegations constitute[d] <br />concrete injuries sufficient to state a justiciable claim." "The mere <br />fact that petitioners may have to endure the APA review process <br />[was] not sufficient, without more, to constitute injury for this <br />purpose." <br />Modification —Developer Receives Approvals <br />for One Project, Then Obtains Approvals for <br />Different Project <br />Objector says subsequent project approvals resulted in <br />automatic rescission of prior project approvals <br />Citation: Price v. Martinetti, 2011 WL 2977124 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. <br />Div. 2011) <br />NEW JERSEY (07/25/11)—This case addressed the issue of whether <br />subsequent land use approvals for a development site result in automatic <br />rescission of any prior approvals. <br />The Background/Facts: A developer, 315, 7th St., LLC (the "Devel- <br />oper"), owned property (the "Property") in the city of Union City (the <br />"City"). The previous owner of the Property had received from the <br />City's Board of Adjustment (the "Board") site plan approval and associ- <br />ated variances. The site plan approval and variances were for the pro- <br />posed construction of a seven -story, 20-unit apartment building on a <br />5,000-square-foot property ("Project 1"). Thereafter, the Developer took <br />steps to proceed with construction of Project 1, demolishing existing <br />buildings and performing site preparation work on the Property. <br />In January 2006, the Developer decided to change its development <br />plan. It acquired adjacent lots, and sought approval for construction of <br />an 18-story, 84-unit apartment building on the now 10,000-square-foot <br />property ("Project 2"). The Board granted the Developer's application <br />for site plan approval. <br />An objector, Larry Price ("Price") then brought a legal action chal- <br />lenging the approval of Project 2. That action resulted in a Law Division <br />decision invalidating the approvals for Project 2. <br />Subsequently, the Developer again decided to change its development <br />plan. It purchased additional adjacent property. It applied to the Board <br />for the site plan and variance approvals required to construct a 14-story, <br />© 2011 Thomson Reuters 9 <br />