Court Opinion

ID: 9707596
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 02:16:22.552569+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:41:48.757087
License: Public Domain

O’HERN, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the opinion and judgment of the Court. I write separately simply to observe that the opinion does not suggest or intimate that the Department of Environmental Protection’s exclusive authority to regulate the sale and distribution of soil-derived products (SDPs) would enable it to convert a residential neighborhood into a gravel pit, quarry, or nursery. Rather, the effect of the legislative scheme is that if such uses exist in a community, it would not be an abuse of discretion for the DEP to authorize a related SDP use; and, conversely, if such uses are barred, the community could interpose strong and legitimate objections to the introduction of a site for SDPs, and a decision authorizing such a use would be an abuse of discretion.
For reversal — Justices HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI, STEIN and COLEMAN — 6.
Opposed — None.