Therres v. Zoning Hearing Board of the Borough of Rose Valley, 947 A.2d 226 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008).
A notice of appeal was quashed for failing to set forth the basis for the appeal.
In 2005, Developer purchased Lot 13 from a property owner who owned Lots 13 and 14 under a recorded plan. Subsequently, Developer received a building permit and Neighbors appealed the issuance of the building permit to the Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB). The ZHB denied the Neighbors’ appeal.
Neighbors then appealed to the trial court, and Developer filed a notice of intervention and filed a petition to quash the notice of appeal. The trial court granted the petition to quash on the basis that the notice of appeal was insufficient. On appeal to the Commonwealth Court, Neighbors argued that their notice of appeal complied with MPC Section 1003-A(a) requiring that a notice of land use appeal “concisely set forth the grounds” for the appeal.
In granting Developer’s petition to quash the notice of appeal, the Commonwealth Court addressed the sufficiency of Neighbors’ notice of appeal. A notice of appeal must set forth the facts that form the basis of the claim or at least incorporate by reference the ZHB’s findings and conclusions and assert that they were not supported by the record evidence or were erroneous as a matter of law. Here, Neighbors’ notice of appeal simply incorporated the ZHB’s findings without alleging any other basis for the appeal.
No liability is assumed with respect to the use of information contained in this website. Laws may be amended or court rulings made that could affect a particular procedure, issue, or interpretation. The Department of Community & Economic Development assumes no responsibility for errors and omissions nor any liability for damages resulting from the use of information contained herin. Please contact your local solicitor for legal advice.