Narrative Opinion Summary
This case involves an appeal by the Borough of Southmont against a decision by the Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County, which reversed a Southmont Zoning Hearing Board ruling regarding a zoning ordinance that effectively excluded billboards. Lamar Advertising sought to construct two billboards in Southmont's Commercial District, which were initially denied due to height limitations and a prohibition on off-premise signs. Lamar challenged the ordinance as de jure exclusionary, arguing it made billboard compliance economically unfeasible. The trial court found the ordinance unconstitutional for excluding billboards without demonstrating a substantial relationship to public health or welfare and granted Lamar relief. On appeal, the Borough contended the trial court exceeded its discretion, but the court held it could make independent findings under the Municipalities Planning Code, emphasizing site-specific relief was warranted given the lack of evidence from Southmont on adverse community impacts. The trial court's decision was upheld, allowing Lamar to proceed with the billboard construction, citing the necessity to exceed size and height restrictions for effective communication, while Southmont failed to substantiate claims of potential negative impacts. Judge Wojcik did not participate in the decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Industry Standards in Zoning Disputessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Evidence of standard billboard sizes was considered relevant, with the court deciding on size requirements based on what is necessary to effectively convey a commercial message.
Reasoning: Lamar provided evidence indicating that standard billboard sizes are 300 square feet for regular billboards and 600 square feet for highway billboards.
Judicial Review of Administrative Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that it is not bound by the zoning hearing board's administrative findings and can independently determine appropriate relief based on the evidence.
Reasoning: The trial court, not the zoning hearing board, is empowered under Section 1006-A(c) of the MPC to make independent findings and determine appropriate relief, without being bound by the administrative findings of the zoning hearing board.
Municipalities Planning Code and Judicial Discretionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The trial court exercised its discretionary powers under the Municipalities Planning Code to provide relief to Lamar despite the zoning board's findings.
Reasoning: The trial court emphasized its discretionary powers under the Municipalities Planning Code to provide relief for zoning ordinance challengers.
Zoning Ordinances and De Jure Exclusionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court assessed whether the Southmont Zoning Ordinance's blanket prohibition on off-premise billboards constituted de jure exclusion, ultimately finding it unconstitutional.
Reasoning: The trial court found Section 903-A5 of the Zoning Ordinance unconstitutional for excluding billboards, as Southmont did not demonstrate a substantial relationship between the exclusion and public health, safety, morality, or general welfare.