568 A.2d 888 (N.J. 1990)
In June 1986, defendants including Diane Vallorosi and partners in S & V Associates purchased a home located in the restricted residential zone of the Borough of Glassboro.1 The purchase was intended to provide a college home for Peter Vallorosi, the brother of defendant Diane Vallorosi and the son of two partners in S & V Associates.2 It was contemplated that nine of Peter’s friends would share the house with him while the group attended Glassboro State College.3 Seven of the ten students renting the house were sophomores at the time their lease took effect, and all ten were between the ages of eighteen and twenty.4 All ten students entered into separate, renewable leases for a semester-long period of four months, with renewal possible if the house was found to be in order at the end of the preceding term.5
The students moved into their new home in early September 1986.6 The house had one large kitchen shared by all ten students.7 The students often ate meals together in small groups, cooked for each other, and generally shared the household chores, grocery shopping, and yard work.8 A common checking account paid for food and other bills, and they shared the use of a telephone.9 Although uncertain of living arrangements after graduation, the students intended to remain tenants as long as they were enrolled at Glassboro State College.10
In July 1986 the Borough amended its zoning ordinance to limit the use and occupancy of detached dwellings and structures with two dwelling units in residential districts to families only.11 The ordinance defined a family as one or more persons occupying a dwelling unit as a single non-profit housekeeping unit, who are living together as a stable and permanent living unit, being a traditional family unit or the functional equivalency thereof.12 The amendment included a statement of purpose reflecting the Borough’s intention to confine college students either to the dormitories provided by Glassboro State College or to other zoning districts that permit apartments and townhouses.13
In September 1986 the Borough commenced this action seeking an injunction against the use and occupancy of the house by the students.14 The complaint alleged that the occupants did not constitute a family as defined in the Borough’s ordinance.15 The Chancery Division focused on whether the specific circumstances of the students’ occupancy satisfied the ordinance’s requirements, relying on testimony that the students rented the whole house rather than individual rooms, shared common areas with free access, used one kitchen for meals eaten together or in small groups, maintained a common checkbook for bills, and intended to stay in Glassboro so long as they attended the college.16 The Chancery Division denied the Borough injunctive relief.17 The Appellate Division affirmed.18
The Supreme Court granted the Borough’s petition for certification and the defendants’ cross-petition.19 During the pendency of the appeal, Peter Vallorosi withdrew from Glassboro State College and the use of the home by the students ended effective September 1, 1988.20 The Court rendered a decision on the merits because of the important issues presented.21
Whether a group of ten unrelated college students living in defendants’ home constitutes a “family” within the definition of a restrictive zoning ordinance?22
Zoning ordinances may restrict residential districts to single housekeeping units that are stable and permanent living units equivalent to a traditional family.23 The determination whether a group constitutes such a unit is functional, focusing on whether the occupants exhibit stability, permanency, and a functional lifestyle equivalent to that of the traditional family unit, without regard to biological or legal relationships.24
Yes. The ten students shared a single kitchen and often ate meals together in small groups while cooking for each other and sharing household chores, grocery shopping, and yard work. They maintained a common checking account for food and other bills and shared the use of a telephone. The house was purchased by relatives of one student to facilitate their plan to live together for three years while attending college.25
Although the leases were for four-month periods, they were renewable if the house was in order, and the students intended to remain as long as they were enrolled at Glassboro State College. These arrangements demonstrate the stability and permanency required by the ordinance, as the trial court found based on the students' testimony that they rented the whole house and shared common areas with free access.26
The group of ten unrelated college students constitutes a “family” within the definition of the restrictive zoning ordinance.27