Skip to main content



Township of Egg Harbor v. Gursky

A-975-02T5 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 2003) (Unpublished)

STRUCTURES—A cinderblock foundation and a mobile home placed on that foundation are both considered structures under the Uniform Building Code.

A property owner, without a permit, installed a mobile home. “He did this by having cinderblocks placed on top of cinderblocks. He then had the mobile home towed to the property, removed the wheels and placed the home on the cinderblocks.” When he requested a permit to install electrical service, his request was denied and then a notice of violation was issued requiring the property owner to remove the mobile home because it was not a permitted use. In fact, a former owner of the property had been denied a use variance for a mobile home. The owner contended “that the placing of cinderblocks on the vacant lot did not constitute construction under the Uniform Construction Code, nor was the placing of the mobile home without its wheels on the cinderblocks ‘construction.’” The lower court held that it was, in fact, construction and “deemed it irrelevant whether it was for a temporary or permanent use. [It] found that the mobile home itself [was] a structure and the blocks themselves [were] structures so that there were two different structures, satisfying the definition of ‘structure’” under the uniform building code. The Appellate Division agreed, holding that it was “unlawful for [the property owner] to construct the structure without filing an application with the construction official in writing to obtain the necessary permit.” It also had “no hesitancy in concluding that the use of cinderblock to support the mobile home and placing that home upon the foundation constituted construction under the definition set forth in the Code.”


MEISLIK & MEISLIK
66 Park Street • Montclair, New Jersey 07042
tel: 973-783-3000 • fax: 973-744-5757 • info@meislik.com