Summary
In Horsham Township Council v. Mintz, 39 Pa. Commw. 408, 395 A.2d 677 (1978), this court held that a referendum provision of a home rule charter was not applicable to ordinances relating to land use planning and zoning enacted pursuant to authority of the MPC because it violated section 302(a)(10) of the HRCL.
Summary of this case from Beh v. City of ScrantonOpinion
Argued September 27, 1978
December 26, 1978.
Municipalities — Home Rule Charter — Referendum — Repeal of ordinance — Zoning — Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Act 1968, July 31, P.L. 805.
1. A provision of a home rule charter establishing procedures for the submission to the electorate of the issue of whether to repeal a municipal ordinance is inapplicable to ordinances relating to land use planning and zoning enacted pursuant to authority of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Act 1968, July 31, P.L. 805. [410]
Argued September 27, 1978, before President Judge BOWMAN and Judges CRUMLISH, JR., WILKINSON, JR., MENCER, BLATT, DiSALLE and CRAIG. Judges ROGERS and MacPHAIL did not participate.
Appeal, No. 567 C.D. 1977, from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County in case of Ronald S. Mintz and Philip Miller, t/a Wichard-Miller Joint Venture, a partnership v. Horsham Township Council and Richard Brown, Horsham Township Manager, No. 76-15063.
Complaint in mandamus in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County to compel processing of conditional use application under zoning ordinance. Relief granted. STANZIANI, J. Defendants appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Affirmed.
Gerald Hamburg, with him Hamburg, Rubin, Mullin Maxwell, for appellant.
Richard P. McBride, with him Power, Bowen Valimont, for appellees.
William H. Lamb, with him Lamb, Windle McErlane, for amicus curiae, Concerned Home Rule Municipalities: Elk Township, Peters Township, Radnor Township, and Upper Providence Township.
The council and manager of Horsham Township, Montgomery County (appellants) have appealed from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County directing them to process a conditional use application filed by Ronald S. Mintz and Philip Miller, in accord with Horsham Township Ordinance No. 1089. Appellants were also ordered to terminate proceedings initiated pursuant to the Horsham Township Home Rule Charter providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 1089 or, if not repealed, submission of the issue of whether to repeal the ordinance to the electorate.
This appeal presents the issue as to whether a provision of a home rule charter by which a petition may be filed requiring the governing body of the municipality to determine whether or not to repeal a municipal ordinance and, if not so repealed, placing the repeal issue before the electorate may be applied to ordinances relating to land use planning and zoning. The court below concluded that such a referendum provision of a home rule charter was not applicable to ordinances relating to land use planning and zoning.
We have carefully reviewed the authorities cited and the arguments advanced in this appeal and do hereby affirm the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County on the able opinion of Judge STANZIANI written for that court and reported at 102 Montg. Co. L.R. 314 (1977). See Williams v. Rowe, 3 Pa. Commw. 537, 283 A.2d 881 (1971).
ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of December, 1978, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, dated February 16, 1977, as amended March 9, 1977, directing the appellants herein to process a certain conditional use application filed by Ronald S. Mintz and Philip Miller and to cease proceedings initiated pursuant to Section 502 of the Horsham Township Home Rule Charter relative to Horsham Township Ordinance No. 1089, is hereby affirmed.