In recent years, communities have been re-evaluating zoning ordinances in hopes of spurring economic development during uncertain times. Sometimes the process is self-initiated by a local governing body, but more often a developer leads the charge by requesting alterations to zoning provisions in order to maximize development potential. But zoning changes present many risks that can place development plans in jeopardy if procedural requirements are not followed. The best advice for developers and their attorneys is to work with local solicitors to make sure the rules for enacting zoning amendments are followed.
Unfortunately, those rules are not always easy to identify and/or interpret, and attorneys representing developers need to be aware of evolving case law regarding land-use issues. In December, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Messina v. East Penn Township, No. J-46-2011 (Pa. Dec. 17, 2012), a case involving the validity of a zoning ordinance in light of alleged procedural defects that occurred prior to enactment of the ordinance. This case offers guidance for developers seeking zoning changes to accommodate development.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
