In our first post of this three-post series on parking (available here) we discussed Richard Florida’s informative, but not surprising, article which states “American cities devote far too much space and far too many resources to parking.”  Location, ownership and management of existing parking spaces are significant issues impacting parking in communities, and our first post focused on their impacts based on the current approach to parking regulations taken by most communities.  The current approach is unsustainable, as it contributes to sprawl and increases costs.  In this post, we will explore some of the factors causing and impacting the current general approach to parking regulations – specifically with respect to urban reuse and mixed-use projects.

More often than not, communities’ parking requirements, located in zoning ordinances, are onerous enough to derail desirable urban reuse and mixed-use projects.  Most communities’ requirements generally reflect a more suburban approach to parking that is reflective of planning and development trends of the 1950s and 1960s (i.e., separation of uses with an emphasis on accommodating automobiles).

In reviewing several Pennsylvania “urban” municipal zoning ordinances, a few common parking concepts and provisions become evident.
Continue Reading

On October 24, 2018, the Lancaster County Board of Commissioners will consider the adoption of Places2040, the new proposed comprehensive plan for Lancaster County.  Prepared by the Lancaster County Planning Commission (“LCPC”) and designed to replace Envision Lancaster County, the County’s current comprehensive plan, Places2040 seeks to establish land use and planning policy to guide the next 20 years of development in Lancaster County. Adoption of the proposed Plan would complete a 3-year planning process that engaged County residents, government entities and targeted stakeholders. Only 94 pages in length, Places2040 is surprisingly concise when compared to typical comprehensive plans and is centered around 5 “Big Ideas”: 1) Creating Great Places; 2) Connecting People, Place & Opportunity; 3) Taking Care of What We Have; 4) Growing Responsibly; and 5) Thinking Beyond Boundaries.

As Lancaster County continues to grow, one of the focuses of the Plan is establishing a path for the County to absorb and accommodate a projected population increase of 100,000 people between 2015 and 2040.  Some of the Plan’s recommendations include
Continue Reading

Most of us have heard the “Big Yellow Taxi” song that includes the memorable line “they paved paradise and put up a parking lot.”  But what if that paradise is not completely lost and communities started reclaiming their paradise by taking a different approach to their parking regulations?  This is the first in a three-post series discussing the current approach to parking regulations and solutions communities, especially urban communities, should consider to “right-size” their parking requirements to reflect a more sustainable approach.

Richard Florida, a well-respected expert in urban studies, recently posted an interesting article entitled Parking Has Eaten American Cities.  In his post, Florida discusses a recent study by Eric Scharnhorst of the Research Institute for Housing America confirming the findings of previous studies “that American cities devote far too much space and far too many resources to parking.” 
Continue Reading

Meeting deadlines is something we all strive for. Whether you’re handing in a project at work, or meeting someone for coffee, making yourself aware of the time is something we do every day. And failure to meet such deadlines creates the potential for undesirable consequences. The same is true for municipalities and developers, as failure by either party to familiarize themselves with the time-restraints imposed by the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (the “MPC”) for zoning hearings can create major headaches. This post is the second post of a four-part series (Post 1Post 3, Post 4 to come) and follows our review, in Post 1, of the notice requirements that a board must follow prior to a zoning hearing.  This post explores two important deadlines to which a board must adhere.

Under Section 908(1.2) of the MPC, the initial hearing before a board must commence within 60 days from the date the board receives the application, unless the applicant agrees in writing to an extension of time. If the board fails to meet this requirement, one of two things can happen.
Continue Reading

In today’s Legal Intelligencer, Scott Gould and Steve Mazura discuss the most recent round of permits for small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) in Pennsylvania, related potential impacts on development, and creative approaches to stormwater management.  The full article is available at the link provided above and excerpts are below.  The article is definitely worth a read for all developers, municipal officials and staff, and land use professionals.

“The most recent round of permits for small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) in Pennsylvania requires municipalities with MS4s to regulate stormwater in a manner that will impact development. MS4 municipalities with stormwater systems that discharge into ‘impaired’ waters must develop and implement pollution reduction plans (PRPs) to demonstrate measurable reductions in pollutant discharges, including those impaired waters with total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), or ‘pollution budgets,’ established for them. For the first time, the permit scheme
Continue Reading

This is the second post in a two-post series on the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”), with which developers and water companies see the return of a tax policy with negative consequences for development.  Effective this year, advances for construction (“Advances”) and Contributions in Aid of Construction (“CIAC”) for water systems are treated as taxable income.  Essentially, water companies must include in taxable income the contributed property or cash needed to connect a development to a water system.  This tax adds significant costs to developers when water companies pass the tax to developers.  At the same time, more work is created for water companies which must gross up Advances and CIAC (together, “A/CIAC”) and later recalculate those costs based on the actual cost of construction and gross up refunds.  This post provides insight on ways to mitigate the negative effects of the TCJA on development in Pennsylvania.
Continue Reading

There is no doubt the best development occurs when developers and development professionals are able to work with municipal leaders and staff on a project.  So, it is for the benefit of all when developers and development professionals find ways to engage and help educate municipal leaders and staff in the area of land use.

Many professionals involved in commercial real estate and land development (development professionals) attend and teach educational seminars offered by private developer-focused organizations such as Urban Land Institute (ULI), NAIOP, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and state bar associations.  We attend or teach those training and educational seminars for personal and professional reasons, including to: (i) gain additional skills or deepen our knowledge base; (ii) keep up with the latest and emerging trends; (iii) give back to and improve the profession; (iv) network and market; and, of course (v) fulfill our continuing educational credit obligations.

For similar reasons, municipal officials and staff, who review and act on land development plans, zoning amendments, challenges and other forms of relief, attend and participate in the same or similar training and educational seminars. 
Continue Reading

With the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”), developers and water and wastewater companies see the return of a tax policy that has significant consequences for both groups.  This is the first post in a two-post series discussing the history of “Advances” and “CIAC” and the practical effect of the TCJA on construction, dedication and utilization of water lines in Pennsylvania.  In short, the cost of doing business just increased for developers, while water companies once again are saddled with additional work.  This post provides background and history while a second post will provide insight on working through the issues.
Continue Reading

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.
Continue Reading