Conversion of Age Restricted Housing to Non-Age-Restricted Housing

Senate Bill No. 2577 Permits the conversion of age-restricted housing units to non-age-restricted housing. The Bill has passed both houses of the Legislature and is on the Governor's desk for signature. To be eligible for conversion, a developer must agree to set aside a percentage of units in the development not to exceed 20% for affordable housing. The project must have preliminary and final approval prior to the Bill's effective date. Moreover the developer must not have taken any deposits or conveyed any units to buyers under the age-restricted program. The local land use board has the right to review the parking standards, recreation and other amenities, water supply and sanitary sewer  to ensure that these elements are adequate for the amended project. There is also a procedure that gives the developer recourse to the courts if  the local land use board refuses to approve the conversion.  The Bill if signed will breathe life into a number of age-restricted approvals that are not feasible in these challenging economic times.     

Permit Litigation with New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

As a result of the New Jersey Appellate Division's recent decision in the case of Dragon vs.  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, a developer can no longer utilize the long standing procedure in contested matters of entering into a settlement agreement or letter of authorization in lieu of issuing an actual permit. In addition the court held that the Department lacked the authority to waive substantive coastal policies in the absence of a comprehensive regulatory procedure to waive such policies. 

The practice pointer is to make sure that any settlement of DEP litigation which permits an entitlement is memorialized in an actual issued DEP permit which is accordance with all applicable regulations and policies. 


Purchaser of Commercial Property Found to be Liable for Payment of a Broker's Commissions Where the Purchaser Obtained the Seller's Interests Under a General Assignment of Leases and Rents

In a recent decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the purchaser of a commercial property may be liable for the payment of a broker’s commission which was due under leases assumed by the purchaser pursuant to a general assignment executed at closing. 

In Pagano Company v. 48 South Franklin Turnpike  (decided March 9, 2009), the Court applied its prior holding in VRG Corp. v. GKN Realty Corp., 135 N.J. 539 (1994) which held that to incur liability by virtue of an assignment the purchaser must have “affirmatively assumed” the seller’s obligations to pay the commissions, to require that a purchaser honor a commission agreement even without a separate, express agreement to pay such commissions. 

Continue Reading...