ISSUE 1: Substantive Validity Challenge for the Agricultural Preservation District

​

In 2022, a resident looking to further subdivide their 11.8-acre property filed a zoning validity challenge for the Agricultural Preservation District (AP). They claim that a .10 density multiplier in the AP is unduly restrictive.

​

What is a zoning validity challenge?

 

In 1926, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case of the City of Euclid, Ohio v. Amber Realty Co. that zoning ordinances, regulations and laws are a legitimate use of a community’s police powers so long as the regulations provide a benefit to public welfare. While zoning was ruled by the Supreme Court to be an appropriate use of a community’s policing power, the validity of any zoning ordinances can be subjected to legal challenges. Common validity challenges include spot zoning, fair share, exclusionary, substantive due process, irrationality, and equal protection.

​

In regard to zoning, the courts have interpreted substantive due process to mean that land use controls must advance legitimate governmental interests that serve the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Substantive due process requires that:

​

1. There is a valid public purpose for the regulation;

2. The means adopted to achieve that purpose is substantially related to it; and,

3. The impact of the regulation upon the individual not be unduly harsh.

 

Determining whether the regulation serves the general welfare of the community is the primary issue to consider in regard to substantive due process.

​

What actions has the township taken to date?

​

• Amendments to the AP and Rural Conservation (RC) Districts were considered by the Planning Commission. If approved, the amendments would have increased allowed densities for all AP and RC parcels across the township. 

• The BOS contemplated a settlement with the resident.

• The Zoning Hearing Board heard the case and denied a special exception.

• The Township now intends to defend the constitutionality of the current Zoning Ordinance (ZO). They hired John Snook, one of the key authors of the current ZO, to create a historical narrative of the intent and purpose of the AP district. (John also served as an expert witness for EVA in the Ruth Fam case.)  

• On January 2, 2024, the new BOS approved hiring attorney John Rice to serve as a Zoning and Planning consultant. Mr. Rice will lead the township's efforts in responding to this challenge.   

​

What's Next?

​

• The case will be in front of the ZHB in late February.

​

ISSUE 2: Zoning Rewrite / Zoning Ordinance Task Force

​

The Township is in the process of revising the Zoning Ordinance with the help of Chester County Vision Partnership Grant Program. In early 2022, the Board of Supervisors formed an Ordinance Task Force to assist in the technical components and give feedback and direction for the revised text. 

 

The Ordinance Task Force, comprised of volunteers from various Boards and Commissions, Township Staff and Professionals and a community member, meets regularly to work on the draft text. The entire process is expected to take approximately 2 years to complete. 

​

It was originally communicated that the revised text would be shared with the public, but the exact timing and process for public participation has not been communicated. Our concerns were heightened upon learning that a a large majority of the text revisions have been completed. But, it seems the entire effort may be put on hold based on a decision by the newly seated BOS on January 2, 2024 to revisit the current Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan).

​

New Leadership, New Plan

​

A Comp Plan provides a vision for the future of the community along with the steps that are needed to make that vision a reality. It is the basis for land use regulations and provides a nexus between the community's future vision and the regulation of private property. In other words, the Comp Plan serves as a key guide in the establishment of the ZO. 

​

While a formal announcement has not been made, we expect the rewrite initiative to be put on hold. We fully support this decision, but also believe the township must take action in the short-term to address issues with the ZO that expose us to unintended risk.