Miscellaneous

In re Jerrehian

Zoning boards are not permitted to add requirements that are not specifically mentioned in the zoning ordinance. The Court also stated the party asserting merger of one lot to another that is noncompliant with certain zoning requirements must prove the land owner’s intent to merge those lots by “overt, unequivocal, physical manifestation” of such intent.

In re Jerrehian, 155 A.3d 674 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016)

Date of Decision: 3/6/17


View Case Details »

1050 Ashbourne Assocs., LLC v. Cheltenham Twp. Bd. of Comm’rs

Section 917 of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC) is not a statute of limitations, but an entitlement to file a land development plan within six months or longer of the granting of a special exception, as may be provided in the governing ordinances.

1050 Ashbourne Assocs., LLC v. Cheltenham Twp. Bd. of Comm’rs, 167 A.3d 828 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017)

Date of Decision: 8/1/17


View Case Details »

Stingray, L.P. v. Concord Township Zoning Hearing Board (2009)

A township may not utilize the most restrictive map in determining existence and location of a floodplain, but instead must comply with the plain language of the zoning ordinance; and a developer may not force a municipality to accept dedication of a private road as public.

Stingray, L.P. v. Concord Township Zoning Hearing Board, 975 A.2d 1208 (Pa. Commw. 2009).

Date of Decision: 6/3/09


View Case Details »

In re: Agricultural Security Area in East Lampeter Township (2009)

Irrespective of municipal planning and zoning for agricultural preservation, a municipality is without discretion to deny a request for creation of an agricultural security area under the Agricultural Security Law when the property satisfies the soils, zoning and agricultural use factors set forth in the Act.

In re: Agricultural Security Area in East Lampeter Township, 974 A.2d 1213 (Pa. Commw. 2009).

Date of Decision: 5/27/09


View Case Details »