Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Zoning Bulletin <br /> <br />enact new legislation that altered the criteria by which the application <br />could be approved or denied. <br />The court emphasized that the goal-post statute required that the ap- <br />plicable approval or denial criteria not change with respect to the ap- <br />plication as filed, or as supplemented within a limited period of time. If <br />after that time, the substance of an application-the facts-changed in <br />a material way, the goal-post statute did not apply, said the court. That <br />was because a change in the facts altered the nature of the application in <br />a way that changed the manner in which existing law applied to it. The <br />court found that Burk's death was such a change in facts that caused ex- <br />isting laws to have a different effect. When he died, the applicant was no <br />longer Burk, but was Jerry, said the court. Since Jerry did not have Mea- <br />sure 37 waivers, Burk's death caused existing laws to operate differently. <br />Therefore, the court concluded that the goal-post statute did not operate <br />. to preserve Burk's waivers. <br /> <br />See also: Sunburst II Homeowners Ass'n v. City of West Linn, 101 Or. <br />App. 458, 790 P.2d 1213 (1990). . <br /> <br />Case Note: The court also found there was no support for Jerry's <br />contention that, when Burk filed his development application, the <br />goal-post statute "vested" Burk's Measure 37 waivers so that, when <br />he died, they passed to his estate. The court found that Burk failed <br />to cite any case law or provision of the county ordinance that might <br />support his argument. <br /> <br />Grounds for Denial-Township denies plan <br />for development of subdivision due to lack of <br />sewer servIce <br /> <br />Developer argues town should have approved plan <br />conditioned on provision of sewer service . <br /> <br />Citation: McGrath Canst;, Inc. v. Upper Saucon Tp. Bd.' of Supervisors,. <br />2008 WL 2356851 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008) <br /> <br />McGrath Homes Construction, Inc. (McGrath) was a real estate de- <br />velopment company. It sought to develop land it owned in the township. <br />It submitted a preliminary plan to the township's Board of Supervisors <br />(the Board), seeking approval of a proposed 124 single-family residential <br />lot subdivision (the Plan). <br />The proposed development was in an area that, under the township's <br />official sewage facilities plan (the Act 537 Plan), required all sewer hook- <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />@2008 Thomson Reuters/West <br /> <br />92 <br /> <br />\ <br />1 <br />I <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />i <br />,- <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />, <br />; <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />, <br />j <br />1 <br />~ <br /> <br />i <br />) <br />