In Appeal of Chester County Outdoor, the Applicant filed a substantive validity challenge alleging that provisions in the East Pikeland Township Zoning Ordinance unlawfully excluded off-site advertising signs (i.e., billboards).

The ZHB sustained the validity challenge and then extensive litigation ensued following the denial of the Applicant’s permit application; whereupon, the Commonwealth Court concluded that the Applicant was entitled to site-specific relief and remanded the matter back to the Chester County Court of Common Pleas.

Initially, the trial court concluded that the Township met its burden and demonstrated that the proposed billboard would pose a risk to the health, safety and welfare of the public.

Nevertheless, additional hearings were held to consider appropriate site alternatives. Following additional testimony, and based on modifications made by the Applicant to the location and configuration of the proposed billboard, the trial court held the following:

• The newly proposed billboard alleviates the Court’s concerns regarding visual lines for drivers and traffic conditions at the proposed intersection.
• The Township did not meet its burden of demonstrating that the newly proposed billboard would pose a risk to the health, safety and welfare of the public.
• The Applicant is entitled to the relief requested and approval of their newly configured billboard at the revised location.

For any questions concerning this case, or the process to obtain zoning relief for any off premises signs (including billboards and digital monuments), please feel free to contact Rob Gundlach at 215-918-3636 or rgundlach@foxrothschild.com.