READINGTON TOWNSHIP, NJ - On November 16, 2005, Superior Court Judge Victor Ashrafi issued a comprehensive 102 –page decision affirming the validity of Readington Township’s Agricultural Residential zone. Readington’s Agricultural Residential zone is based on a planned density equivalent to minimum 6 acre lots but requires mandatory clustering of subdivisions to 1.5 acre lots with 70% of the subdivided property set aside for agriculture and/or open space. This decision holds important implications for municipalities that are planning for rural or agricultural preservation in the face of increasing development pressures.

Readington Township, Hunterdon County, is situated on the western edge of Somerset County. Notwithstanding development along the Route 22 corridor and scattered subdivisions, much of the 48 square mile area is still characterized by woodlands, stream corridors and farmland. As long-standing planning consultants to Readington, Clarke Caton Hintz prepared a Master Plan Amendment in 1998 to more effectively conserve the Township’s natural and agricultural resources and to better align Readington’s land use policies with those of Hunterdon County and the State Plan. The 1998 Master Plan amendment led to the creation of a new zoning district, the Agricultural Residential (AR) zone, which increased the minimum lot size from three acres to six acres throughout more than half of the Township. The AR zone also mandates that development of large tracts occur pursuant to the cluster subdivision regulations, rather than providing cluster as an option to a conventional subdivision---a highly innovative approach to land use regulation.

The Township’s AR zoning ordinance was challenged both as being arbitary and capricious in its own right and as applied to the plaintiff’s property. Howard Cohen, Esq. of Parker McCay was counsel for the Township; Valerie Bollheimer, Esq. and John Bowens, Esq. of Purcell, Ries, Shannon were counsel to the Readington Planning Board. In his decision, Judge Ashrafi found that Readington’s land use policies were consistent with the NJ State Plan, that the Master Plan provided a sound foundation for the AR zone, and that the AR zone effectuated the policies of the Master Plan. This decision reinforces other court decisions, such as Kirby v. Bedminster Township, Mount Olive Complex v. Mount Olive Township and New Jersey Farm Bureau v. East Amwell Township, which upheld local ordinances where the policy foundation is consistent with the NJ State Plan. It also ratifies the use of mandatory clustering as a tool in planning for the conservation of natural and agricultural resources.

Please contact Phil Caton or Michael Sullivan if you would like to learn more about this case. To download this article along with the full court decision please click the link below.