Marshall v. City of Philadelphia
626 Pa. 385
| Pa. | 2014Background
- Archdiocese filed 2010 application to convert Nativity B.V.M. School to 63-unit low-income senior housing in Philadelphia's Port Richmond.
- L&I denied the permit for multiple zoning deficiencies, including use in an R-10A district, parking, and dimensional standards.
- Archdiocese appealed to the ZBA for use and dimensional variances; ZBA held evidentiary hearing January 5, 2011.
- ZBA unanimously granted the variances, finding overwhelming community support and unique property hardship.
- Commonwealth Court reversed in unpublished 2012 memorandum, applying an incorrect hardship standard and substituting its own judgment.
- Supreme Court granted allowance of appeal to address whether Commonwealth Court plainly misapplied the standard and imperiled HUD funding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper standard for unnecessary hardship in use variances | Marshall (Appellee) argued HUD funding and community support prove hardship | Archdiocese contends hardship exists due to unique property and prohibition on permitted uses | Commonwealth Court misapplied hardship standard; no error in the ZBA’s determination |
| Whether the property showed unique hardship and feasibility of permitted uses | Archdiocese showed unique physical structure and non-conforming status | Appellee argued Archdiocese failed to show inability to use any permitted use | ZBA findings supported unique hardship and feasibility findings; reversal improper |
| Parking variance justification | Archdiocese argued parking plan would not adversely affect community; signs removed for school hours. | Archdiocese did not prove infeasibility of meeting parking requirements | ZBA’s parking rationale supported by findings; Commonwealth Court erred in requiring infeasibility proof |
| Judicial deference to ZBA findings | Commonwealth Court erred by substituting its judgment for ZBA’s | ZBA acted within discretion based on evidence | Court reversed properly; but Supreme Court held ZBA’s findings supported; Commonwealth Court erred in standard of review |
| Waiver issue regarding dimensional variances | Archdiocese did not raise dimensional issues before ZBA; question waived | Waiver should not bar review if error in law | Dimensional variance issue waived; not properly before Commonwealth Court |
Key Cases Cited
- East Torresdale Civic Association v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of Philadelphia County, 536 Pa. 322 (1994) (three-part variance criteria; unique hardship; minimum variance; public welfare)
- Hertzberg v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh, 554 Pa. 249 (1998) (unnecessary hardship methods; multiple factors, not valueless requirement)
- Valley View Civic Association v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 501 Pa. 550 (1983) (hardship not limited to valueless property; multiple factors considered)
- O’Neill v. Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment, 384 Pa. 379 (1956) (reconstruction not required; nonconforming to more desirable nonconforming use permissible)
- Weitzel v. Zoning Hearing Board, 77 Pa.Cmwlth. 108 (1983) (recognizes hardship evaluation for nonconforming structures)
- Logan Square Neighborhood Association v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of City of Philadelphia, 32 Pa.Cmwlth. 277 (1977) (use variance hardship context for nonconforming structure; demolition not always required)
- Davis v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 78 Pa.Cmwlth. 645 (1983) (use variance standards and evidence sufficiency)