Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Updating Antiquated Zoning Ordinances: Educate. Evaluate. Amend.

By Esch McCombie on May 21, 2018
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

This Blog previously discussed the headaches created for municipalities and their residents when zoning ordinances are not updated to account for short-term rentals, such as AirBNB and VRBO. But what do municipalities need to do to update their zoning ordinances? What thought processes should be followed? And what other new uses are primed to create – or are already creating – interpretational issues like those created by short-term rentals? This post, and others that will follow, answers those questions. After reading this post, I encourage you to go back and read our prior posts on two short-term rental cases that are case studies for what happens when zoning ordinances are not updated to account for new uses. In addition, please continue to check back over the following months as I introduce our readers to new uses that may not be adequately considered by municipal zoning ordinances.

In general, Pennsylvania is a state known as a defender of property rights. Indeed, all valid and legal uses must be permitted somewhere in a municipality and, where a valid and legal use is not provided for, the zoning ordinance may be determined to be exclusionary. Such an ordinance may be found to be de jure (on its face) or de facto (when applied) exclusionary. But in either case, the exclusionary ordinance is invalid and unconstitutional. Under Pennsylvania law, the remedy for an applicant who proves a zoning ordinance is exclusionary sometimes is site specific relief for his or her use. Meaning, the use is permitted in whatever zoning district the applicant proposed, so long as it otherwise complies with the requirements of the relevant zoning district. To avoid such an outcome, many municipalities employ a “catch all” provision for uses not provided. Those provisions may permit such uses in any zoning district by special exception or conditional use if the proposed use meets the objective criteria established under the catch all provision. Even there, though, the municipality’s hands often are tied with respect to the location (from a zoning district perspective) of the excluded use. So, what is a municipality to do?

Municipalities should take a few steps. First, municipal officials and staff should stay up to date on new uses. Simply understanding the basics of newer uses, such as agritourism, urban agriculture, small cell sites, and medical marijuana processing and dispensing will help the municipality identify issues. Then, municipal leaders and staff must determine whether the use is to be encouraged or discouraged in the municipality. Each municipality has different community planning goals. Accordingly, what is encouraged in a larger college borough might be discouraged in a rural township. However, it is critical, even for uses to be discouraged, to be permitted somewhere.

Along those same lines, it might be appropriate to include additional regulations for a specific use. It is here, though, where municipalities must be careful. Ordinances regulating the use of private land must be rational, not arbitrary or capricious, and must be reasonably related to the protecting the public health, safety and welfare. Those concepts rest at the heart of our land use law. Regulations for a use that are too restrictive are unconstitutional. So, the municipality must perform a balancing act. Less regulation weakens the municipality’s control over the use but is less likely to be found unconstitutional or preempted by state or federal statutes, while more regulation may force conformance with the governing body’s vision for the municipality but might be unenforceable as unconstitutional or preempted.

In the end, the best approach is to make an informed decision. Governing bodies must understand new uses so that they can determine where to permit the use and how to regulate it, if at all. Further, understanding new uses often creates new opportunities for municipalities as something that was once feared becomes favored.

Please feel free to contact any member of the McNees Wallace & Nurick Land Use Group for assistance with any land use or development issues and/or if you have any questions regarding this post.

Esch McCombie

Esch is an an at McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC in Harrisburg, PA.  He is a member of the Firm’s Real Estate Practice Group, Oil & Natural Gas Group and the Pipeline & Oil/Gas Infrastructure Group.

He focuses his practice on land use…

Esch is an an at McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC in Harrisburg, PA.  He is a member of the Firm’s Real Estate Practice Group, Oil & Natural Gas Group and the Pipeline & Oil/Gas Infrastructure Group.

He focuses his practice on land use matters and permit approvals at the municipal, county and state level. His work includes reaching favorable zoning and land development outcomes by way of variances or waivers, special exceptions or conditional uses, zoning amendments and challenges to ordinances, and negotiations with municipalities and other government agencies throughout Pennsylvania. In addition, he works on storm water management and transportation issues that often arise with land use matters. On a national level, Esch conducts zoning and land use due diligence associated with mergers and acquisitions and the purchase or sale of properties and businesses. He has assisted commercial, industrial and residential developers, educational institutions, pipeline and other oil and gas related companies, telecommunication companies, and small business owners and start-ups. Esch has received favorable determinations, decisions and approvals for large warehouse and distribution centers, residential communities of all types, urban redevelopment projects, craft breweries and event venues, car dealerships, pipeline projects, and coal to natural gas conversion projects.

While in law school, Esch served as a Senior Editor of the Penn State Law Review, was the Dickinson School of Law Liaison to the Carlisle Borough Council, Carlisle, PA, and was a judicial intern to the Honorable Christopher C. Conner, U.S. District Court. Prior to his legal career, Esch spent seven years working in the claims department of a Fortune 500 insurance company.

Esch currently serves on the McNees Hiring Committee, is Co-Editor of the McNees Land Use Blog, and is President of the Board of Directors of the Carlisle Theatre.

Read more about Esch McCombieEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Real Estate & Construction
  • Blog:
    McNees Land Use Blog
  • Organization:
    McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo