|
Rickert v. Latimore Twp. Board of Supervisors,
869 A.2d 1086 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005)
Following a township's rezoning of certain property, owners of the affected property challenged the validity of the zoning changes on procedural grounds. The zoning hearing board affirmed the validity of the zoning changes. The court of common pleas reversed. The township's board of supervisors appealed to the Commonwealth Court, arguing that the board had complied with Sections 607 and 608 of the Municipalities Planning Code when it enacted the changes.
The Commonwealth Court affirmed the decision of the court of common pleas that the ordinance was "fatally flawed" because the township had failed to post notices along certain areas that were to be changed by the rezoning as required by the MPC.
The Commonwealth Court also opined that:
1) the drafting collaboration between the Supervisors and the Planning Commission did not violate the MPC;
2) the published notice did not mislead the public by characterizing the change as an amendment rather than a new ordinance;
3) it disagreed with the lower court's finding that the change amounted to a new ordinance rather than an amendment and, importantly, rejected the factors used below to make such a determination including the "quantum of changes," the presence or absence of "strike/add" notations, or express language indicating repeal of a prior ordinance and;
4) it is not error for a municipality to characterize a change as an amendment, rather than a new ordinance, regardless of the scope of the change, when the municipality has a prior zoning ordinance already in effect, so long as the municipality uses labels in its notices that are consistent with those used in the proposed ordinance itself and consistently follows the procedure for an amendment set forth in the MPC.
DISCLAIMER:
This site is designed to provide summary review of selected Pennsylvania and Federal Court decisions related to land use and land use controls. The information contained herein, although produced by professionals, is not intended to render any legal service. Nor should the materials herein be utilized as a substitute for professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the service of an attorney or other professional should be sought. DCED makes no representations, warranties or guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information provided herein.
Back to Top |
