Nace v. New Cumberland Zoning Hearing Board, 34 Pa. D. & C.5th 453

Nace applied May 1, 2011 for a zoning permit to convert a detached garage into an efficiency apartment.
Borough issued the permit on Nov 22, 2011; the permit was revoked May 31, 2012 for failure to meet parking requirements.
Nace appealed the revocation; an evidentiary hearing was held Aug 23, 2012 and the Board denied reinstatement on Sep 27, 2012.
Nace filed an appeal to the court on Oct 29, 2012; the Board’s record was certified on Nov 21, 2012; arguments were heard June 21, 2013.
The Conversion would require two additional paved parking spots adjacent to the garage; neighbors raised safety, drainage, and emergency-vehicle access concerns.
The Board found the alley narrow and congested, with insufficient site distance for safe backing into the alley, and that safety would be adversely affected.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Nace expended substantial unrecoverable funds.	Nace contends incurred unrecoverable costs in reliance on the permit.	Board found most costs were non-substantial or recoverable and that some funds were after revocation.	No substantial unrecoverable funds proven.
Whether the permit created an adverse effect on public safety.	Evidence showed potential safety risks from expanded parking and alley use.	Board found adverse safety impact supported by neighbor testimony and lack of counter-evidence.	Substantial evidence supports adverse public safety effects; Board’s decision affirmed.
Whether Nace established all elements of a vested-right claim.	Five elements apply; substantial unrecoverable funds and adverse effect must be proven.	Only elements 3 and 5 were contested; others not satisfied.	Nace failed to prove the vesting criteria; no vested right.

E. Hempfield Twp. v. Brubaker, 828 A.2d 1184 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (vested rights require substantial unrecoverable expenditures)
Koziel v. Borough of Waynesboro, 551 A.2d 383 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1988) (expenditure can be substantial; recoverability matters)
Petrosky v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Upper Chichester, 402 A.2d 1385 (Pa. 1979) (five-element vesting framework)
Roseberry Life Ins. Co. v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of City of McKeesport, 664 A.2d 693 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995) (burden of proof on the owner in vested-right analysis)
Lecky v. Lower Southampton Twp. Zoning Hearing Bd., 864 A.2d 593 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (substantial evidence standard for review)
Mirkovic v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Smithfield Twp., 613 A.2d 662 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1992) (burden on owner to show lack of contrary proof)