The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC) permits planned residential developments (PRD) as a means of “approving large developments which override[ ] traditional zoning controls and permit[ ] the introduction of flexibility into the design of larger developments." Appeals from final plan approval of a PRD where an appeal from tentative plan approval was not taken are generally prohibited. When appealing, appellant must state the grounds for appeal in the notice of appeal and unstated claims are waived.
Pennypacker v. Ferguson Twp., 167 A.3d 209 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017)
Date of Decision: 5/17/17
View Case Details »
Petitions to intervene after entry of a decree may be approved in extraordinary circumstances. In addition, “extraordinary circumstances” refers to an oversight or action on the part of the court or where the judicial process results in the losing party’s lack of knowledge of the entry of final judgment, so that the commencement of the running of the appeal time is not known to the party.
Pendle Hill v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Nether Providence Twp., 134 A.3d 1187 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016)
Date of Decision: 3/10/16
View Case Details »
Applicant waived its right to challenge an objector's standing on appeal where the applicant failed to challenge the objector's standing before the zoning hearing board.
Thompson v. Zoning Hearing Bd., 963 A.2d 622 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009).
View Case Details »
Commonwealth Court has original jurisdiction for challenges filed by the Attorney General to township ordinances under the ACRE statute.
Commonwealth v. Locust Twp., 968 A.2d 1263 (Pa. 2009).
View Case Details »
Settlement agreement cannot allow for development of property that was not the subject of the land use decision that was appealed.
BPG Real Estate Investors-Straw Party II, L.P. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 990 A.2d 140 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010).
View Case Details »
Doctrine of collateral estoppel applied in appeal of variance where the trial court previously ruled upon a similar variance application for the same property.
Ulsh v. Zoning Hearing Bd., 22 A.3d 244 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011).
View Case Details »
Renumbering of section numbers from time of advertisement to time of adoption does not violate due process rights. Failure to record an ordinance in the ordinance book within the statutorily required time period renders the ordinance ineffective, but not invalid.
Bartkowski Inv. Group v. Bd. of Comm’rs of Marple Twp., 18 A.3d 1259 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011).
View Case Details »
When reviewing a deemed approval, the trial court must not conduct appellate review; rather, de novo review is required and the trial court must make its own findings.
DeSantis v. Zoning Hearing Bd., 53 A.3d 959 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2012)
View Case Details »
Trial court may not order objector to post bond where the appeal to the trial court was filed by the applicant rather than the objector.
PPM Atl. Renewable v. Fayette County Zoning Hearing Bd., 623 Pa. 134 (Pa. 2013).
View Case Details »
Transfer of objector's property during pending appeal resulted in objector's loss of standing and dismissal of appeal.
Bradley v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of the Borough of New Milford, 63 A.3d 488 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2013).
View Case Details »