Commons v. Westwood Zoning Board Of Adjustment

81 N.J. 597, 410 A.2d 1138 (1980)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Commons (P) owned property in a subdivision. The property has been vacant since it was subdivided in 1927. Weingarten (P1), a builder, contracted to purchase the lot from P if he could build a house upon it. The lot was about 5190 square feet with 30 feet of frontage. However, zoning regulations called for a minimum frontage of 75 feet with 7,500 square feet for the lot. When the zoning ordinance was adopted in 1933, they contained no minimum frontage or area provisions, but those provisions were added in 1947. At the time that was adopted a small minority of homes in the subdivision actually were conforming. P1 submitted plans for a home that was in conformance with the local neighborhood except for the frontage and lot size. P1 also attempted to buy a 10-foot strip of land from a neighbor, but that fell through. Prior to this attempt P had also tried to sell the lot to a neighbor for $7,500, but that fell through when the neighbor countered with a $1,600 offer. P's sought a zoning variance from Westwood Zoning Board of Adjustment (D). Many neighbors opposed the application for a variance citing lowered property values, privacy, noise, trespassing, and aesthetic reasons. D denied the variance, claiming that it would adversely affect the aesthetic and economic value of the area and that P1 had failed to demonstrate any evidence to establish hardship and the variance would substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The trial court affirmed because the variance would be detrimental to the entire area. The Appellate Division affirmed per curiam. P appealed, claiming that the failure to grant the variance caused an undue hardship.