Wyndham Construction Co. v. Board of Adjustment

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Wyndham Construction Co. v. Board of Adjustment

63 A.2d 707, 1 N.J. Super. 197, 1949 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1069

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedFebruary 1, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.2d 707 (Wyndham Construction Co. v. Board of Adjustment) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wyndham Construction Co. v. Board of Adjustment, 63 A.2d 707, 1 N.J. Super. 197, 1949 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1069 (N.J. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

This matter is before the court on a writ of certiorari allowed, prior to September 15, 1948, to review an order of the Board of Adjustment of Teaneck denying the appeal of Wyndham Construction Co. for a variance from the zoning ordinance.

Plaintiff erected a group of apartment houses at the corner of Sterling Place and Red Road in Teaneck. Subsequently he planned to have one of the apartment houses contain seven apartments. The building permit for this was refused as it did not conform toSection 1-b-3 of the zoning ordinance which provided: "That no building in a row or group shall exceed three stories or 45 feet in height or contain dwellings for more than six families." An appeal to the Board of Adjustment was denied.

Plaintiff first attacks the ordinance as prohibiting it from making lawful use of its property. This point is not available on this appeal since it is not comprehended within the reasons filed. Next it is said that the Board of Adjustment had no jurisdiction to deny a variance. This argument is wholly without merit as a reading of R.S. 40:55-39 clearly indicates. Lastly it is said that the action complained of was arbitrary and capricious. We find as a fact that no unnecessary hardship resulted from a literal enforcement of the ordinance.

The order under review is affirmed with costs. *Page 199

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This matter is before the court on a writ of certiorari allowed, prior to September 15, 1948, to review an order of the Board of Adjustment of Teaneck denying the appeal of Wyndham Construction Co. for a variance from the zoning ordinance.

Plaintiff erected a group of apartment houses at the corner of Sterling Place and Red Road in Teaneck. Subsequently he planned to have one of the apartment houses contain seven apartments. The building permit for this was refused as it did not conform toSection 1-b-3 of the zoning ordinance which provided: "That no building in a row or group shall exceed three stories or 45 feet in height or contain dwellings for more than six families." An appeal to the Board of Adjustment was denied.

Plaintiff first attacks the ordinance as prohibiting it from making lawful use of its property. This point is not available on this appeal since it is not comprehended within the reasons filed. Next it is said that the Board of Adjustment had no jurisdiction to deny a variance. This argument is wholly without merit as a reading of R.S. 40:55-39 clearly indicates. Lastly it is said that the action complained of was arbitrary and capricious. We find as a fact that no unnecessary hardship resulted from a literal enforcement of the ordinance.

The order under review is affirmed with costs. *Page 199

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.2d 707, 1 N.J. Super. 197, 1949 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1069, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyndham-construction-co-v-board-of-adjustment-njsuperctappdiv-1949.