Miravich v. Township of Exeter
2010 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 570
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2010Background
- Metropolitan Development Group sought Preliminary Subdivision and Land Development approval for 26 lots; Metrodev V intervened as landowner.
- Township Board of Supervisors approved the plan in 2008 after consideration by Planning Commission and meetings, with minutes but no verbatim transcript.
- Protestants, adjacent landowners, received no notice and did not attend the Board or Planning Commission proceedings.
- Within 30 days of approval, Protestants filed a land use appeal; Landowner intervened and sought a bond under MPC §1003-A(d).
- Common pleas dismissed the appeal for lack of standing because Protestants did not appear in proceedings; Protestants appealed.
- Court held Protestants had standing as aggrieved adjacent property owners and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do Protestants have standing to appeal the subdivision decision? | Miravich arguing Protestants are aggrieved adjacent owners. | Township contends lack of appearance defeats standing. | Yes; Protestants have substantive standing as aggrieved adjacent owners. |
| Should Leoni procedural standing apply to Board appeals from subdivision decisions? | Procedural Leoni rule governs standing before the Board. | Leoni procedures do not apply to subdivision/land development appeals. | No; Leoni procedural rule does not apply; substantive standing governs. |
| Are MPC procedural distinctions between ZHB and governing-body appeals controlling here? | ZHB-style procedures ensure notice and appearance; inherent protections. | Board proceedings have different procedures; no strict appearance requirement. | Yes; Board proceedings require only substantive standing, not ZHB-like appearance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Leoni v. Whitpain Township Zoning Hearing Board, 709 A.2d 999 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1998) (standing requires appearance or objection; substantive and procedural aspects discussed)
- In re Application of Rouse & Assoc. Ship Road Land Ltd. Partnership, 161 Pa. Cmwlth. 52, 636 A.2d 231 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1993) (establishes substantive standing for adjacent property owners)
- Edwards Eng'g Corp. v. Davies, 471 A.2d 119 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1984) (notes on subdivision/land development hearing procedures)