Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2012

Home

Zoning Bulletin December 25, 2011 I Volume 5 I No. 24 tion of the ordinances. Among other things, RSA challenged the ordinanc- es on procedural grounds. RSA maintained that, in accordance with New Jersey statutory law—N.J.S.A. 40:49 -2.1 , the notices should have identi- fied more information, including the new zones being created. Section 40 :49 -2.1 requires the publication of a notice citing a municipal land use ordinance to contain a "brief summary of the main objectives or provisions of the ordinance." The statute also requires that amendments to ordinances include "a summary of the objectives or provisions of the amendment or amendments." The City, City Council, and Linden as intervenor, maintained that is was sufficient if the notice, as here, identified the property by common name and by block and lot number, and informed the public that the per- mitted use of the property would change. The Law Division. judge concurred with the latter view. The judge con- cluded that the public notices for Ordinances 52 -71 and 53 -10 conformed to statutory requirements. RSA appealed. DECISION: Judgment of Law Division reversed. The Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, held that the public notices for the ordinances were legally deficient in apprising the public of the substantive changes to the municipality's zoning effected by the,proposed ordinances. The court stated that the "summary" required by N.J.S.A.- 40:49 -2.1 must apprise interested readers throughout the municipality of the zoning changes contemplated as well as their nature and import. In other words, notice of proposed changes in the zoning laws "must be reasonably suf- ficient and adequate to inform the public of the essence and scope of the proposed change." A mere reference to the objective of the ordinance does not satisfy the statute, said the court. Rather, the notice must alert prop- erty owners of the possibility that the proposed amendment may affect the zoning of their properties or nearby properties. The notice must identify the subject property and inform the reader that the ordinance would result in substantive changes to the municipality's zoning. Thus, at a minimum, New Jersey law requires that published notice of a zoning ordinance creat- ing new zones and uses applicable to an area identify and briefly describe those new zones and uses. It must provide sufficient derail of what is pro- jected to inform the interested public whether to participate or object. It must provide "an accurate description of what the property will be used for ...." It should "focus on the substantive effect of the amendment ...." Here, the court found that the public notice of Ordinance 52 -71 "mere- ly advised that the zoning [was] being amended as to the properties iden- tified...." This general, standardized language "provide[d] no real notice apprising the public of what exactly [was]. being proposed." Indeed, the changes to be effectuated by Ordinance 52-71—including the changing of previous zone boundary lines, changes in allowable uses and densities in the area rezoned, and the creation of new zones that previously did not ex- 0 2011 Thomson Reuters 7