Appeal by Grande Land, L.P. from the Decisions of the North Manheim Twp. ZHB Dated June 28, 2016
228 C.D. 2017
Pa. Commw. Ct.Nov 17, 2017Background
- Grande Land owns a 12.9-acre parcel in North Manheim Township (R-2 zoning) and sought a special-exception to build a 72-unit multi‑family apartment complex.
- The proposed site plan showed eight buildings, public water and sewer access, and stated ~25.5% open space on the 12.9‑acre tract; Grande Land also agreed to maintain two adjacent common parcels (7.1 and 4.3 acres).
- At the Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) hearing Grande Land introduced a Planning Module (prepared by a prior developer), site and lighting plans, and surveyor testimony (Bensinger) that public sewer was available and open space requirements were met.
- ZHB denied the application, finding Grande Land failed to show DEP approval/adequate sewage disposal evidence, failed to prove building lengths did not exceed the 128‑ft maximum, and that open space calculations improperly included basins/wetlands and sloped areas >20%.
- The trial court affirmed the ZHB. On appeal, this Court reviewed whether the ZHB/trial court erred as a matter of law or abused discretion.
- Court held: ZHB erred on sewage (504.2) and building‑length (504.4(a)) issues, but did not err on open‑space (504.4(j)); trial court’s denial of the application was affirmed because the open‑space failure was a proper ground for denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant/ZHB/Intervenors' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Section 504.2 required DEP approval for sewage at special‑exception stage | Grande: ordinance requires showing a type of sewage system acceptable to DEP; site evidence and Planning Module suffice and DEP approval can be conditioned later | ZHB/Intervenors: Planning Module is outdated and does not show DEP approval or capacity for 72 units; applicant must show DEP approval as prerequisite | Held: Applicant need only show it will use a method "regularly approved by DEP" (Drumore Crossings). ZHB erred in ruling Grande Land failed 504.2 |
| Whether Grande Land proved proposed building lengths comply with 128‑ft maximum (504.4(a)) | Grande: Site and Lighting Plans (admitted into evidence) show building dimensions comply | ZHB/Intervenors: No testimony established lengths; ZHB not required to search exhibits; dimensions may change | Held: Exhibits in the record showed none of the buildings exceed 128 ft. ZHB erred in finding noncompliance |
| Whether proposed common open space meets 25% and excludes prohibited features (504.4(j)) | Grande: Calculations on the 12.9‑acre tract meet requirement; wetlands need not be excluded; Township will accept maintenance/dedication | ZHB/Intervenors: Testimony was equivocal; exhibits show detention basins and steep slopes (>20%) within designated open space; no evidence of required perpetual preservation agreement | Held: ZHB’s finding that open space calculation was unsupported by substantial evidence stands. Grande Land failed to meet 504.4(j), and this suffices to affirm denial |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Drumore Crossings, L.P., 984 A.2d 589 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (applicant satisfies ordinance by showing proposed sewage method is one regularly approved by DEP; specific DEP permit need not be presented at zoning stage)