|
KEY TOPIC: MISCELLANEOUS Baublitz v. Chanceford Tp. Board of Supervisors, Under a pre-existing non-conforming use exception, Landowner operated an airport on a five-acre parcel zoned for agricultural use. When Landowner's public airport license expired, the Department of Transportation made the grant of a new license to her conditional upon the Township enacting an airport hazard-zoning ordinance. Landowner subsequently petitioned the common pleas court to compel the Township to enact a model airport hazard-zoning ordinance through a writ of mandamus (a court order compelling a governmental entity or employee to take a specific action). Landowner argued that Township had an obligation to enact the model ordinance under Section 5912(a) of the Airport Zoning Act, 74 Pa. C.S. §§ 5911-5920 (1984). The lower court granted mandamus, but the Commonwealth Court reversed, concluding that the Township is not obligated to adopt model airport hazard zoning Ordinance. In finding that the Airport Zoning Act did not require the Township to adopt a model airport hazard-zoning ordinance, the Court noted the permissive nature of Section 5912's title-"Power to adopt airport zoning regulations"--and concluded that the Section represented "a grant of authority, not a legislative mandate." The Court's opinion strongly suggests that it interprets Section 5912 as "directory, not mandatory." The Court found that the Township's existing zoning ordinance met the Act's substantive airport hazard-zoning prescriptions. Specifically, the Court cited Section 5915(c) for the proposition that a municipality can satisfy the act if it incorporates "by reference any provision of any model zoning ordinance or other similar guidelines suggested or published by the FAA." The existing ordinance incorporated by reference Federal Aviation Authority airport hazard-zoning guidelines and thus, the Court concluded, the Township did not need to adopt a new ordinance or amend its existing ordinance. 
|