The New Jersey Supreme Court recently issued an important decision that will change how zoning boards evaluate applications for certain projects that provide a clear public benefit.

In Monarch Communities, LLC v. Township of Montville, decided on July 13, 2026, the Court updated the legal test used when an applicant seeks a use variance for an "inherently beneficial use."

The decision affects applications for projects such as schools, hospitals, child care centers, group homes, assisted living facilities, and other developments that New Jersey law recognizes as serving the public good.

The Longstanding Sica Test

For more than 30 years, zoning boards have relied on a legal framework known as the Sica test when reviewing applications for use variances involving inherently beneficial uses as set forth in the Supreme Court case Sica v. Board of Adjustment of Wall.

Under that test, boards generally considered:

• How important the proposed public benefit is.
• What negative impacts the project might have on the surrounding area.
• Whether those impacts could be reduced through conditions placed on the approval.
• Whether, after weighing the benefits and drawbacks, the project should be approved.

This balancing approach has guided land use boards across New Jersey since 1992.

The New Standard

The Supreme Court in Monarch Communities, LLC v. Township of Montville concluded that the traditional Sica test no longer fully reflects New Jersey law. The Court explained that the Legislature amended the Municipal Land Use Law in 1997 to make clear that applicants seeking approval for inherently beneficial uses must also prove that their project will not substantially impair the municipality's zone plan and zoning ordinance.

Until now, that requirement was not expressly included in the Sica balancing test. To bring the test in line with the statute, the Court revised the fourth step of the analysis.

Under the updated rule, a zoning board must first determine whether the applicant has shown that the proposed project will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the municipality's zoning plan. The applicant cannot rely solely on the inherently beneficial use designation, but must present an affirmative planning analysis that the impact will not negatively impact the zoning plan and zoning ordinance.

If the applicant cannot make that showing, the variance must be denied. Only if that requirement is satisfied does the board move on to balance the project's public benefits against its potential negative impacts.

In other words, the balancing test is no longer enough by itself. Applicants must now separately demonstrate that their proposal is consistent with the municipality's overall planning goals.

What Does This Mean for Applicants?

Applicants seeking approval for an inherently beneficial use will likely need to spend more time explaining how their proposal fits within the municipality's planning objectives. T

It will no longer be enough to simply show that the project serves the public. Applicants should be prepared to explain why the proposed location does not undermine the municipality's master plan or zoning ordinance.

What Does This Mean for Municipalities?

The decision also highlights the importance of thoughtful planning.

The Supreme Court encouraged municipalities to maintain detailed master plans and zoning regulations that clearly identify where inherently beneficial uses are appropriate. Those planning documents will play a more significant role when zoning boards evaluate future variance applications.

The Supreme Court's decision does not make it impossible to obtain a use variance for an inherently beneficial use. These projects continue to receive special consideration because they serve the public good.

However, applicants must now clear an additional hurdle. Before a zoning board weighs the project's benefits against its impacts, the applicant must first show that the proposal will not substantially impair the municipality's zone plan and zoning ordinance.

As New Jersey's land use laws continue to evolve, experienced legal counsel is more important than ever. The attorneys at Lavery, Selvaggi & Cohen regularly assist developers, property owners, and institutions in navigating the land use approval process and obtaining the approvals necessary to move projects forward. Whether you are evaluating a potential development or pursuing a use variance, our Land Use and Development Practice Group is ready to help.