Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » New Jersey » Appellate Court » 2008 » MICHAEL and JANE RICE v. BOROUGH OF AVALON
MICHAEL and JANE RICE v. BOROUGH OF AVALON
State: New Jersey
Court: Court of Appeals
Docket No: a3352-06
Case Date: 08/06/2008
Plaintiff: MICHAEL and JANE RICE
Defendant: BOROUGH OF AVALON
Preview:a3352-06.opn.html

The status of this decision is unpublished

Original Wordprocessor Version This case can also be found at *CITE_PENDING*. (NOTE: The status of this decision is unpublished.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3352-06T33352-06T3 MICHAEL and JANE RICE, Plaintiffs, v. BOROUGH OF AVALON, Defendants. _______________________________ SAVE AVALON'S DUNES, L.L.C., and ELAINE SCATTERGOOD, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MICHAEL and JANE RICE, BOROUGH OF AVALON and STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Defendants-Respondents. ________________________________________________________________

Argued April 23, 2008 - Decided Before Judge Cuff, Lihotz and Simonelli. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Cape May County, Docket Nos. L-625-06 and L-704-06. Jonathan M. Preziosi argued the cause for appellants Save Avalon's Dunes, L.L.C. and
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a3352-06.opn.html[4/20/2013 3:56:32 PM]

a3352-06.opn.html

Elaine Scattergood (Pepper Hamilton, L.L.P., attorneys; Mark A. Solomon, of counsel; Mr. Preziosi, of counsel and on the brief). Richard M. Hluchan argued the cause for respondents Michael and Jane Rice (Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, L.L.P., attorneys; Mr. Hluchan, of counsel and on the brief). Lisa G. Daglis, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent Department of Environmental Protection (Anne Milgram, Attorney General, attorney; Patrick DeAlmeida, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Rachel Horowitz, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief). Respondent Borough of Avalon has not filed a brief. PER CURIAM These actions were consolidated by the trial court. In the first matter, plaintiffs Michael and Jane Rice (the Rices) filed a complaint in lieu of prerogative writs against the Borough of Avalon (Avalon) seeking a permit to construct a swimming pool. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Rices. No appeal has been taken from that order. The second captioned case is the matter under review. Plaintiffs Save Avalon's Dunes, L.L.C. and Elaine Scattergood (collectively SAD) seek (1) to invalidate a 2001 Stipulation of Settlement (Settlement) between the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the Rices that included a Coastal Area Facilities Review Act (CAFRA), N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 to -21, permit, and (2) to enjoin construction of the Rices's proposed five-story, forty-room residence and swimming pool in a dune area. SAD pursues its position on behalf of the citizens of Avalon pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:15-18. Although injunctive relief was denied, the Law Division reserved the power to order any construction removed. On January 29, 2007, Judge Perskie, "decline[d] to exercise whatever jurisdiction [the court] may have[,] in favor of plenary exercise of jurisdiction by the Appellate Division," and entered an order transferring the matter to this court pursuant to Rules 1:13-4 and 2:2-3(a)(2). Additionally, he ordered that the issuance of the permit to construct the swimming pool was predicated on the validity of the CAFRA permit, "so in the event of a later determination of invalidity, the [Rices] are proceeding at their own peril." Respondents argue the appeal is untimely. SAD disagrees for several reasons. First, SAD maintains the Settlement was an informal agency action and not a final agency action subject to appeal. Second, the CAFRA permit must be invalidated because DEP made no findings of fact to support its issuance. Third, the DEP action violated a preexisting agreement with Avalon, which prohibited construction of swimming pools in the dune area. Finally, the DEP has not complied with its procedures and failed to provide notice of its action to interested parties, as required by N.J.A.C. 7:6-5.4; absent notice, the time to appeal has not expired. We are not persuaded by SAD's arguments and dismiss the appeal.

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a3352-06.opn.html[4/20/2013 3:56:32 PM]

a3352-06.opn.html

The Rices purchased realty located as 5299 Dune Drive, Avalon, designated as Block 52.03, Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 and Block 52. 05 Lots 1 to 5 (the property). The property is 44,100 square feet. The Rices sought to remove the existing dwelling and proposed construction of a single-family home, pool, accessory buildings, brick driveway and terrace. In February 1999, the Rices filed an application for a CAFRA permit with the DEP. Notice of the filing was given to Avalon, the Avalon Zoning/Planning Board (Board), the Borough of Avalon Environmental Commission (Commission), the Cape May County Planning Board, the Borough of Avalon Construction Official, and homeowners located within 200 feet of the property. Only the Commission responded. After the Commission held a public hearing, it submitted its concerns to the DEP, which included the need for run-off holding areas, modification of the driveway design, more limited removal of vegetation, reduction of the overall size of the structure, addressing the construction's impact on wildlife habitats, and mitigation of tree damage due to the use of heavy equipment. Also, the Commission highlighted that the Rices's plan to construct a swimming pool violated Section 1(b) of a 1994 State Aid Agreement (Agreement) between the DEP and Avalon. Although swimming pools are a permitted accessory use in the R-1AA zone, pursuant to
Download a3352-06.opn.pdf

New Jersey Law

New Jersey State Laws
New Jersey Tax
New Jersey Labor Laws
New Jersey Agencies
    > New Jersey DMV

Comments

Tips