High-Voltage Transmission Lines and Home Buying in New Jersey: What You Need to Know

DISCLAIMER: Drafted with a touch of AI and a watchful human eye. This article is for informational purposes only—not legal advice. Reading it does not make us your attorney (charming as that might sound). Please consult a licensed lawyer before making any legal decisions, especially in New Jersey, where things are rarely simple.

Homes and parks in many New Jersey communities sit near tall transmission towers. Residents often worry these steel pylons (like the ones above Mercer County Park) will mar views or even hum audibly. In one recent review, a judge noted a proposed line would run “in tight areas … up against the back yards of 607 residences,” near schools and parks tworivertimes.com. Such proximity can spark fears of health risks from EMFs, visual blight, noise, fire, or dropping property values. For example, an expert on the Monmouth reliability case estimated local house prices might fall about 10% if the line went through tworivertimes.com. Buyers commonly ask: Do power lines cause cancer? Do they make homes unsellable? Below we address these concerns with the latest science, law, and cases (but remember: each situation is unique).

Common Buyer Concerns

• Health & EMF Exposure: Many worry that living near a high-voltage line will raise cancer risk (especially childhood leukemia). Scientific reviews by agencies (WHO, NIH/NIEHS, etc.) have consistently found no strong evidence that typical power-line EMFs cause disease niehs.nih.gov; bellevillenj.org. The WHO classifies power-frequency fields as “possibly carcinogenic” (Group 2B) – the lowest category of concern – based on very limited data. bellevillenj.org. In practice, magnetic fields drop off very quickly with distance. For example, a 230 kV line might produce ~57 mG directly under the wire, but only ~7 mG at 100 feet away niehs.nih.gov (background indoor fields are often 0.5–2 mG). Health agencies note that most childhood leukemia studies show at most a weak association with high fields, and no causal mechanism is known niehs.nih.gov bellevillenj.org. In short, “everyday” exposures near a transmission line are far below any established hazard level.

• Aesthetics & Noise: Tower structures and wires are often seen as eyesores. Neighbors may hear a faint buzzing or corona discharge in foggy/rainy weather, but most transmission lines are relatively quiet. Line corridors also require clearing vegetation, which can alter scenic views. In the Monmouth case, for example, residents pushed back hard, pointing out that 140–210 ft poles would line backyards and woodlands tworivertimes.com. While none of this is illegal, communities often cite “visual and environmental impacts” in hearings.

• Property Values: New lines can affect market prices. Empirical studies are mixed, but many find a modest negative impact on nearby values. Courts recognize that even fear of EMF or loss of view can reduce what buyers will pay. In the RAGE litigation, the judge credited an expert’s estimate of a roughly 10% price drop on homes nearest the proposed line tworivertimes.com. (By contrast, utilities typically argue that many factors affect value and that precise studies are sparse.) In general, properties directly under or abutting a ROW are most affected, while homes a few lots away tend to see little or no blight.

• Fire Hazards: In dry or stormy conditions, downed or faulty lines can ignite fires. Wildfire reports (mostly from arid Western states) have linked power equipment to some blazes; one U.S. review found that electrical networks caused about 19% of large wildfires during 2016–2020 wfca.com. (This is very location-specific – New Jersey’s climate and vegetation differ greatly from California’s.) Nevertheless, utilities in NJ are required to follow safety standards (NESC/OSHA) and maintain vegetation to prevent contact. In the rare event of a line break or contact with trees, there is a genuine risk of sparking. Communities often expect rigorous maintenance and rapid shutdown procedures to mitigate such risks.

EMF Research & Health Agency Views

Over the past several decades, hundreds of studies have examined power-line EMFs. Government and academic reviews have found no definitive link to cancer. For example, the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) notes that some 1990s studies showed only a weak association between high magnetic fields and childhood leukemia, and that no evidence connects ELF EMF to adult cancers niehs.nih.gov. Lab studies (animals and cells) largely show no increase in tumors from EMFs. The American Cancer Society similarly reports that large lab studies found no rise in cancer risk, even at exposures much higher than anything typical in homes cancer.org. International bodies like WHO and Health Canada maintain that, aside from the childhood-leukemia signal (still not proven causal), “the overall balance of evidence is towards no effect” bellevillenj.org. In short, official health assessments urge reassurance: EMFs from power lines at ordinary residential distances are well below levels linked to harm. No U.S. agency recommends routine preventive measures for homeowners beyond normal safety standards. (Of course, if someone has unusual sensitivity or anxiety, prudent spacing and landscaping can further reduce exposure – even small increases in distance cut fields dramatically niehs.nih.gov.)

New Jersey Siting Laws & Regulations

State and local law determine where lines can go. Local zoning boards generally control overhead lines under the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL). Utilities typically must apply for a variance or conditional-use permit in each town or county. Unlike many states, New Jersey has no statewide certificate-of-need process (CPCN) for ordinary transmission projects dgardiner.com. Instead, developers work through municipal planning boards (which can deny projects on typical land-use grounds). However, utilities enjoy special powers under state law. For example, N.J.S.A. 48:7‑3.1 expressly grants electric companies eminent domain authority to acquire rights-of-way “reasonably necessary” for transmission law.justia.com. (This means a utility can condemn land for a line, subject to compensation.) Also, under MLUL’s N.J.S.A. 40:55D-19, a utility can petition the Board of Public Utilities (BPU) for a determination that its proposed use of land is “reasonably necessary” for the public. If granted, that order overrides all local zoning and permit rules law.justia.com; law.justia.com. In practice, few petitions reach that stage unless multiple towns block a vital line. (Notably, a 2021 law lets BPU also override local rules for offshore-wind grid lines.) Finally, various state environmental rules can constrain routing – for example, the NJ Coastal Zone rules prohibit overhead lines over wide bays or reservoirs law.cornell.edu, and wetlands/coastal permits from NJDEP may be needed if lines cross protected areas.

• Local Approval: Most new lines must be approved by municipal boards under local zoning and MLUL standards. (Companies often hold hearings and show engineering reports to justify need.) dgardiner.com

• BPU (N.J.S.A. 40:55D-19): A utility can ask the BPU to declare a project “reasonably necessary for the public welfare.” If BPU agrees, then “neither N.J.S.A. 40:55D‑1 et seq., nor any other…ordinances” can block the project law.justia.com; law.justia.com. The Montville‐Whippany case is a recent example: JCP&L convinced BPU it needed a 230 kV line, and the NJ Appellate Division upheld that order, effectively nullifying local zoning for that project law.justia.com.

• Eminent Domain (N.J.S.A. 48:7-3.1): Utilities may condemn private land for transmission easements. Roads or highways crossed by new poles must be approved by the controlling authority law.justia.com. In other words, even if neighbors object, a power company with sufficient proof of need can ultimately force a line through via legal condemnation.

• Environmental/Coastal Rules: Certain state regs restrict where lines go. For instance, NJ’s Coastal Zone rules ban overhead lines over large bays, lakes or reservoirs law.cornell.edu (reflecting the value placed on scenic resources). NJDEP wetlands and forestry permits can also affect routes.

Notable Cases and Disputes

Litigation over transmission lines in NJ is relatively rare, but some high-profile battles highlight the stakes. In Montville Township (2019), JCP&L filed under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-19 for a 230 kV line. The local Board of Education objected (the line ran near a school), but the BPU found the line “reasonably necessary.” The Appellate Division affirmed, emphasizing that once need is shown, the project is exempt from local zoning law.justia.com. By contrast, in Monmouth County (2019) a judge reviewed JCP&L’s 230 kV Monmouth County Reliability Project. The judge agreed a grid violation existed, but ultimately denied approval – finding the utility had overstated future demand. In her 180-page opinion, Judge Cookson balanced utility needs against community impacts and noted EMF “questions and concerns,” though she said potential EMF levels “will not inform my decision” tworivertimes.com. She also accepted a property expert’s view that home values nearest the line would drop significantly (about 10%) tworivertimes.com. The BPU then took up that order. These cases show how highly fact-specific each fight is: outcomes can turn on technical load studies, alternative routes considered, and the persuasiveness of local testimony.

Outside NJ, courts have generally not ruled power-line EMFs to be a personal injury. Lawsuits claiming cancer or other health damage from EMF have almost never succeeded, in part because of the weak science. By contrast, a few “fear of harm” property cases have resulted in compensation under inverse condemnation or nuisance theories jenner.com. A famous California case (San Diego Gas & Electric v. Daley, 1992) even awarded extra damages for reduced value of remaining land. But many states follow a more conservative rule, requiring claimants to prove actual injury. New Jersey follows no established “fear damages” rule for EMF; each claim would depend on applicable condemnation or tort principles and the evidence presented.

Nuance, Disclaimers, and Advice

Every situation is unique. Health and legal outcomes depend on many factors: the exact line voltage, distance, terrain, local zoning codes, and the specifics of scientific studies. For example, living 50 feet from a 500 kV line is very different from 200 feet from a 150 kV line. New laws and regulations can also change (NJ’s offshore-wind override is a recent example). This post is a general overview – it’s not a substitute for professional advice. Buyers should do their own due diligence: inspect site plans, ask sellers about any line projects, and consider hiring experts (e.g. a real estate attorney or land-use planner). In any dispute or for property transactions, it’s wise to consult an attorney familiar with NJ land use and environmental law. Remember: claims that a line will cause illness are extremely hard to prove, and even property-value claims hinge on complex market evidence. Courts will look carefully at the facts. If you have concerns about a specific property, seek legal counsel and professional assessments.

DISCLAIMER: Some content on this blog may have been drafted with the help of artificial intelligence, though every effort is made to ensure clarity, relevance, and occasional charm. That said, nothing here should be mistaken for legal advice. This blog is for informational purposes only—meant to help you understand big-picture concepts in key areas, not to handle your specific legal situation.

We would be flattered if you find it helpful, but reading a blog post—even a rather well-written one—doesn’t make us your attorneys. Anything even mildly legal is far too nuanced to trust a general article (or a machine) to solve. Every situation is unique, every jurisdiction has its quirks, and—because this is New Jersey—there’s probably a form for it. So before making any big decisions, speak with a licensed attorney who can give you advice tailored to your specific situation. We aim for accuracy, but we are not responsible for outdated info, typos, or rogue hyperlinks. We are not endorsing, sponsoring, or vouching for third-party content. Use your judgment. Or, better yet, use a lawyer.

You can contact Chan Law today by calling (973) 544-8030 or email to info@kchanlaw.com.

Sources: Authoritative reviews by health agencies (NIEHS, WHO, ACS) and peer-reviewed studies on EMF niehs.nih.gov; bellevillenj.org; New Jersey statutes and regulations (e.g. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-19, 48:7-3.1, N.J.A.C. 7:7-12.16) law.justia.com; law.justia.com; New Jersey case law and administrative rulings law.justia.com; tworivertimes.com; local news coverage of NJ transmission disputes tworivertimes.com; tworivertimes.com.