Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. v. Board of Adjustment
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1DissentColeman, J.
The question presented by this appeal is not whether a variance runs with the land, about which there is no debate. The Appellate Division in this case acknowledged that “use variances are not *441personal to the owner, but run with the land.” Stop & Shop, supra, 315 N.J.Super. at 434, 718 A2d 1218. Rather, the question is whether the new owner’s intended use of the land so significantly differs from the variant use as to unreasonably affect a legitimate land use purpose. Berninger v. Board of Adjustment, 254 N.J.Super. 401, 405, 603 A.2d 954 (App.Div.1991), aff'd o.b., 127 N.J. 226, 603 A.2d 946…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Manalapan Realty v. Township Committee of the Township of ManalapanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1995
- Kramer v. BD. OF ADJUST., SEA GIRT.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
- Southern Burlington County N.A.A.C.P. v. Township of Mount LaurelSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
- Ward v. ScottSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
- Burbridge v. Governing BodySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1990
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.