COMMONWEALTH COURT HOLDS THAT A TOWNSHIP HAS A DUTY TO REVIEW LAND DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN GOOD FAITH
Does a municipality have an obligation to review development plans in good faith?
Recently, the Commonwealth Court answered that question with a resounding in Honey Brook Estates v. Honey Brook Township, 132 A3d 611 (Pa.Cmwlth.2016). The facts there showed that in 2005 the developer purchased a forty-acre parcel zoned to permit multi-family dwellings. Six months, Honey Brook Township began the process of rezoning the property to prohibit permit multi-family development for the property. Before Honey Brook Township adopted its ordinance that would have frustrated the developer’s plans, the developer filed a Preliminary Subdivision and Land Development Plan proposing 78 townhouse units for the property.
Instead of forwarding the plan to the local planning commission for review, the township engineer refused to accept the filing finding it incomplete because the filing did not include an estimate of the improvement costs; because the submission lacked an erosion and sedimentation control plans; because the submission did not include sewage planning modules and a required checklist; etc. The developer addressed these shortcoming filing an amended that addressed the five missing items. Following the filing of the revised submission several days later, Honey Brook Township adopted the ordinance that made the developer’s plans zoning non-compliant.
On these facts, the Commonwealth Court held unambiguously that a municipality has a duty to act in good faith when it processes an application for subdivision and land development plan approval. The Court held that the duty of good faith includes discussing matters involving technical requirements or ordinance interpretation with the applicant and giving the applicant a reasonable opportunity to respond to objections and the right to file revised plans.
The Commonwealth Court further held that a landowner has a vested right to develop property in accordance with the zoning in effect at the time that the land owner files its application and that a municipality does not have the right to deny an application based upon a change in zoning that enacted after the applicant submits its application even if the change in zoning was technically pending at the time of the filing of the preliminary subdivision and land development plan.
The most significant part the holding in Honey Brook Estates v. Honey Brook Township was the Court’s holding that a developer/applicant has a right to revise its plans to meet technical objections raised during the review process noting that a municipality acts in bad faith if it denies the developer the opportunity to cure deficiencies in the submission.
Honey Brook Estates provides developers with a powerful tool to resist those municipalities that are hostile to development making clear to such municipalities that they cannot override a landowner’s fundamental right to develop property in accordance with valid ordinances and that they have a duty to act in good faith. The holding in Honey Brook Estates underscores the advisability of engaging a capable land use attorney during the planning stage of any development project.