When can a municipality enforce a new zoning ordinance? And what happens to a developer’s application that is filed just hours before a new law takes effect?

The Commonwealth Court answered those questions in its recent decision in Smith Land & Improvement Corp. v. Swatara Township Zoning Hearing Board, which clarifies the rules around zoning authority and conditional use applications.

Background

Smith Land owns three properties in Swatara Township that were zoned for general commercial use, which allowed for certain businesses, including warehousing, with the Township’s approval. In 2017, the Township passed an ordinance allowing warehousing as a conditional use.

However, the township commissioners began reconsidering the zoning rules in February 2022 with a motion to explore repealing the original ordinance. By April 6, 2022, they passed a new ordinance that made warehousing no longer allowed in the area.

On the same day the new ordinance was passed, Smith Land filed its application to build warehouses on its properties — just hours before the new law took effect. The township’s zoning officer denied the application, citing the new law.

The ZHB later upheld the officer’s decision to deny the conditional use application and the Court of Common Pleas upheld the ZHB’s decision. 

Court’s Reasoning

On appeal to the Commonwealth Court, justice prevailed in favor of the property owner.  First, the court found that the ZHB erred as a matter of law when it concluded that the Zoning Officer had authority under the Municipalities Planning Code to deny a Conditional Use Application..

The court also found that the “pending ordinance doctrine” must yield where statutory language in the MPC creates an exception that renders the doctrine inapplicable to a given situation.

As a result, the court held that, as long as conditional use application was filed prior to a pending ordinance’s enactment, and the application will qualify as a land development or a subdivision, then the governing body is prohibited from applying the pending ordinance.

In short, the court held that the pending ordinance doctrine was not applicable to the timely filed conditional use application.

If you have any questions concerning this case or the process to obtaining zoning approvals, contact Rob Gundlach at 215.918.3636 or rgundlach@foxrothschild.com.