Pinelands

Back to Topic Index

Adjacent Lot
Financial inability to buy an adjacent lot is not an extraordinary hardship as defined by the rule permitting waivers of strict compliance. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 448
Alternative Septic System
Waiver of strict compliance for development of a parcel in a rural development area was contingent on the use of an alternative design septic system. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 825
Beneficial Use
Petitioners were denied a waiver. Their land has beneficial use because the DEP has offered to purchase the lot at a fair market value. The fact that petitioners have the right to construct a home on the lot because of the grandfather clause does not affect the sale value of the property because the construction rights cannot be transferred to a third party purchaser. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 438
Burden of Proof
Those seeking to build in the Pinelands bear the burden of obtaining all prior construction permits. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 441
Petitioner did not meet burden of proving that environmental problems would result from development of spray field and storage lagoons at Woodbine facility. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 472
Compelling Public Need
The need for the creation of employment opportunities in an economically depressed area constitutes a compelling need for development. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 319
Constitutional Law
The Office of Administrative Law is not the appropriate forum to resolve a facial attack on the constitutionality of a regulation when that question is not coupled with other issues. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 167
Construction Application
Approval of construction in the Pinelands Protection Area may be granted if there is a finding of extraordinary hardship to the applicant and no substantial impairment to the natural resources of the Pinelands. An applicant's failure to demonstrate that he could live only in the Pinelands, coupled with the agency's demonstration of a potential for substantial impairment, support a denial of such an application. Decision: 1 N.J.A.R. 273
Contiguous Lots
A landowner's prior sale of a contiguous developed lot, which, when considered in conjunction with the presently owned lot would have permitted the yield of a reasonable return, is evidence which will support a denial of a waiver from the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 152
Contiguous lots under common ownership must be viewed together in any determination of extraordinary hardship. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 014
Reasonable rates of return from contiguous lots under common ownership must be determined from the potential of both lots. Where such lots together are capable of yielding a reasonable return, an extraordinary hardship does not exist and thus the owner does not qualify for a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Where the original owner of contiguous lots had been unable to establish an extraordinary hardship based on an inability to obtain a reasonable rate of return, the current owner of one of those lots took ownership with the same disability attached. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Where no evidence has been offered as to whether petitioners might purchase vacant land adjacent to their property, their appreciation for a waiver from the minimum lot size requirement must fail. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 063
When requesting a waiver of strict compliance from the requirements of the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan, all reasonably available adjacent land must be acquired in order to minimize the extent to which the proposed development necessitates a waiver. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 067
Request for waiver of strict compliance was denied. Any hardship which exists is the result of applicants' failure to offer to purchase additional land from adjoining property owners. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 084
All contiguous lands in common ownership on or after January 14, 1981 must be considered in determining whether a parcel has beneficial use. Therefore, if a parcel was subdivided, the beneficial use of the original parcel must be considered. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 092
Because petitioner previously owned a contiguous lot but sold it knowing the remaining lot did not meet minimum lot size requirements for development, he did not demonstrate that the remaining lot did not have beneficial use without a waiver of strict compliance. The application for a waiver was denied. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 817
Estoppel
Failure to demonstrate that a developer relied to its detriment on an action of the State precludes the imposition of estoppel against the Pinelands Commission. Decision: 3 N.J.A.R. 009
The Pinelands Commission is not estopped from imposing building restrictions based upon representations made before the Pinelands preservation area boundaries became final since those boundaries were tentative and the Commission is free to restructure them. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 205
Comments by a Pinelands Commission staff- member which are preliminary in nature and which clearly alert an individual that his application is still pending are insufficient to establish detrimental reliance. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 202
Extraordinary Hardship
Expenses incurred prior to receipt of local approval for a project do not constitute an extraordinary hardship under the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 3 N.J.A.R. 009
The four extraordinary hardship situations listed in the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan are merely illustrative and not exclusive. While such examples serve as guidelines, each applicant is entitled to have his facts tested against the intent of the legislation. Decision: 3 N.J.A.R. 009
Extraordinary hardship is demonstrated by physical improvement to the land coupled with a substantial commitment of township funds. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 319
A long-term direct working relationship with a piece of property coupled with an individual's age and an inability to continue farming the land support a conclusion that a restriction on development would result in an extraordinary hardship. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 458
An extraordinary hardship does not exist if landowners are required to leave land as is without building a retirement home, or to use it for agricultural purposes which their age and health prevent them from doing, since neither was found to be an extraordinary hardship within the meaning of N.J. S.A. 7:50-4.66. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 167
Petitioners will not have established an extraordinary hardship when they fail to show that their property was not capable of yielding a reasonable return if used for its present use or developed as authorized by the plan; and, that this inability resulted from unique circumstances peculiar to that property which: (1) do not apply to or affect other property in the immediate vicinity; (2) relate to or arise out of the characteristics of the subject property rather than the personal situation of the applicant; and (3) are not the result of any action or inaction by the applicant or the owner or his precedessors in title. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 167
N.J.A.C. 7:50-4.66(a)1 establishes the criteria for extraordinary hardship; it contains no reference to the personal circumstances of the applicant but rather focuses on the physical characteristics of the land and a consideration of the capability of the property yielding a reasonable rate of return. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Where property to be developed is smaller than allowed by regulation, a waiver of strict compliance is required. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 063 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 237
Contiguous lots under common ownership must be viewed together in any determination of extraordinary hardship. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014
Reasonable rates of return from contiguous lots under common ownership must be determined from the potential of both lots. Where such lots together are capable of yielding a reasonable return, an extraordinary hardship does not exist and thus the owner does not qualify for a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Where the original owner of contiguous lots had been unable to establish an extraordinary hardship based on an inability to obtain a reasonable rate of return, the current owner of one of those lots took ownership with the same disability attached. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Petitioners proved extraordinary hardship in application for waiver because there is no contiguous land which can be acquired to increase the size of their lot. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 465
Fact that owner cannot afford to buy an adjacent lot does not constitute extraordinary hardship. Therefore, application for a waiver of the minimum lot size requirement must be denied. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 225
Financial inability to buy an adjacent lot is not an extraordinary hardship as defined by the rule permitting waivers of strict compliance. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 448
Petitioners' desire to have their daughter live nearby did not constitute extraordinary hardship. Their request for a waiver of the minimum lot size requirement was denied. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 771
Fair Market Value
Petitioners were denied a waiver. Their land has beneficial use because the DEP has offered to purchase the lot at fair market value. The fact that petitioners have the right to construct a home on the lot because of the grandfather clause does not affect the sale value of the property because the construction rights cannot be transferred to a third party purchaser. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 438
Grandfather Clause
Petitioners were denied a waiver. Their land has beneficial use because the DEP has offered to purchase the lot at fair market value. The fact that petitioners have the right to construct a home on the lot because of the grandfather clause does not affect the sale value of the property because the construction rights cannot be transferred to a third party purchaser. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 438
Interim Regulations
While the goals of the Pinelands Protection Act are to be weighed in considering interim applications, the Legislature created the exclusive means by which applications were to be measured in the interim period when it directed that the agency adopt rules which specify the general standard of the act. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 359
Minimum Lot Size
Failure to meet the minimum lot size of 17 acres required for development in a forest area results in a denial of a waiver of strict compliance from the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 152
Where property to be developed is smaller than allowed by regulation, a waiver of strict compliance is required. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 063
Ownership Required
Applicant for development approval must establish ownership of the land as of February, 1979 in order to satisfy eligibility requirements. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 012
Reasonable Return
Petitioners will not have established an extraordinary hardship when they fail to show that their property was not capable of yielding a reasonable return if used for its present use or developed as authorized by the plan; and, that this inability resulted from unique circumstances peculiar to that property which: (1) do not apply to or affect other property in the immediate vicinity; (2) relate to or arise out of the characteristics of the subject property rather than the personal situation of the applicant; and (3) are not the result of any action or inaction by the applicant or the owner or his predecessors in title. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 167
Failure to establish that property is not capable of yielding a reasonable return if used in an approved manner supports a denial of a waiver of strict compliance from the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 152
Reasonable rates of return from contiguous lots under common ownership must be determined from the potential of both lots. Where such lots together are capable of yielding a reasonable return, an extraordinary hardship does not exist and thus the owner does not qualify for a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Where the original owner of contiguous lots had been unable to establish an extraordinary hardship based on an inability to obtain a reasonable rate of return, the current owner of those lots took ownership with the same disability attached. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Failure to demonstrate that property is incapable of yielding a reasonable rate of return if utilized for permitted uses results in a denial of a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 063
Roadside Stands
Roadside stands may be permitted in the preservation area district of the Pinelands but only if the stand sells farm products grown or raised on the premises. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 529
Scattered Development
Where development of a site and its proposed use are rational outgrowths and extensions of existing facilities, that development does not constitute piecemeal and scattered development. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 335
Solid Waste Landfill
Petitioner was granted a waiver permitting continued operation of its solid waste landfill until 1992, but must develop an alternative during that time. The Pinelands Protection Act requires closing all landfills after August 8, 1990. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 338
Subdivision
Inability of a parcel to have beneficial use may not be the result of an action or inaction of the applicant. Therefore, because lack of beneficial use is a result of the original parcel being subdivided, owner may not obtain a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 092
Substantial Impairment
Where an applicant fails to establish that development of a site would not substantially impair the resources of the Pinelands the application must be denied. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 343
Two-Generation Families
That part of the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan which permits the construction of two-generation extended families who have resided in the Pinelands for at least 20 years, does not violate the equal protection provision of the State Constitution since it is reasonably intended to preserve the essential character of the Pinelands by benefiting those who have a long residential attachment to the area. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 167
Waiver
Waivers of strict compliance may be granted only when it is demonstrated that the grant of the waiver will not result in substantial impairment of the resources of the Pinelands and that the waiver provides only the minimum relief necessary to alleviate the hardship. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 441
Where an applicant seeks a waiver of strict compliance from the Pinelands Management Plan and the land for which the waiver is sought is part of a subdivision, it is the developer's costs and revenues which must be considered to determine whether a reasonable rate of return could be achieved. Decision: 8 N.J.A.R. 317
Failure to establish that property is not capable of yielding a reasonable return if used in an approved manner results in a denial of a waiver of strict compliance from the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 152
Failure to meet the minimum lot size of 17 acres required for development in a forest area results in a denial of a waiver of strict compliance from the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 152
A landowner's prior sale of a contiguous developed lot, which, when considered in conjunction with the presently owned lot would have permitted the yield of a reasonable return, is evidence which will support a denial, of a waiver from the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Decision: 9 N.J.A.R. 152
N.J.A.C. 7:50-4.66(a)1 establishes the criteria for extraordinary hardship; it contains no reference to the personal circumstances of the applicant but rather focuses on the physical characteristics of the land and a consideration of the capability of the property yielding a reasonable rate of return. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Where property to be developed is smaller than allowed by regulation, a waiver of strict compliance is required. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 063
Reasonable rates of return from contiguous lots under common ownership must be determined from the potential of both lots. Where such lots together are capable of yielding a reasonable return, an extraordinary hardship does not exist and thus the owner does not qualify for a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 014 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 036 Decision: 10 N.J.A.R. 024
Waiver was granted with conditions designed to minimize the adverse environmental impact of the proposed development. Decision: 11 N.J.A.R. 465
When requesting a waiver of strict compliance from the requirements of the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan, all reasonably available adjacent land must be acquired in order to minimize the extent to which the proposed development necessitates a waiver. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 067
Requests for waiver of strict compliance was denied. Any hardship which exists is the result of applicants' failure to offer to purchase additional land from adjoining property owners. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 084
Inability of a parcel to have beneficial use may not be the result of an action or inaction of the applicant. Therefore, because lack of beneficial use is a result of the original parcel being subdivided, owner may not obtain a waiver of strict compliance. Decision: 12 N.J.A.R. 092
Petitioner was granted a waiver permitting continued operation of its solid waste landfill until 1992, but must develop an alternative during that time. The Pinelands Protection Act requires closing all landfills after August 8, 1990. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 338
Builder was granted a waiver for residential development in a wetlands area because the project would not impair the resources of the Pinelands. In addition, the expiration date of the waiver was extended because protracted hearings prevented the builder from acting on the waiver before it would expire. Decision: 13 N.J.A.R. 361