Gloucester Solar I, LLC recently sought approval to build a commercial solar energy facility in the Business District of Franklin Township. The Township’s zoning ordinance did not explicitly include solar energy facilities as a permitted use in the Business District. 

Gloucester argued at a public hearing in front of the Zoning Board that the district should be considered an “industrial district” under the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL), which would permit the solar project. The Zoning Board emphasized that the Business District allows a range of uses, including light industrial and office, while still being distinct from industrial uses.

During the hearing, Gloucester argued that the legislative intent behind the MLUL supports renewable energy projects in industrial zones, and that many of the uses listed in the ordinance were industrial in nature. Despite support from some local landowners, the Zoning Board denied the application, maintaining that the business district was re-zoned to distinguish it from industrial zones. Gloucester then challenged the decision in the Chancery Division.

The lower court judge found that the legislative intent behind the MLUL was to promote renewable energy, including solar power, and adopted a broader interpretation of what constitutes an industrial district. The court emphasized that the MLUL did not require a district to be exclusively industrial, but rather allowed for the inclusion of industrial uses within a district. It concluded that the Business District, while mixed-use, included light industrial activities, which aligned with the purpose of the statute..

The Appellate Division reviewed the case de novo. The court emphasized that the primary goal in interpreting a statute like the MLUL is to discern the intent of the Legislature, with the plain meaning of the statutory language being the most reliable indicator of that intent.

The Appellate Division found that the Township’s ordinance specifically provided for multiple uses in the Business District, but did not include solar energy facilities. The court noted that the Legislature referred to “industrial districts” in the MLUL, not “light industrial” zones, and concluded that the Business District’s inclusion of “light industrial” uses did not make it equivalent to an industrial district. The Appellate Division upheld the distinction between light business districts and industrial zones, asserting that the Business District’s mixed-use character excluded the installation of commercial solar energy facilities under the MLUL.

In the end, the Appellate Division’s decision highlights the importance of clear interpretations, precise definitions, and of understanding the legislative intent behind land use laws. By clarifying that “light industrial” does not equate to an “industrial district” under the MLUL, the court emphasized the need for municipalities to carefully draft ordinances that reflect both the needs of their communities and the scope of state regulations.