Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/07/1997

Home

Page 8 - September 25, 1997 Z.B. Yost claimed the board's decision should have been" deemed favorable to him, since the board gave him only the meeting's minutes and failed to issue written findings. Yost also claimed the decision should be favorable to him because the board failed to timely give him a copy of its decision. The trial court did not hear any additional evidence, but upheld the board's decision. The court found the borough had the authority to impose reasonable restrictions on an expansion of a nonconforming use. Yost appealed. DECISION: Judgment removed; returned to the trial court. Yost was not entitled to a favorable decision, but the case had to be returned to the trial court. The trial court had to instruct the zoning board to issue specific findings of fact and law supporting its denial of Yost's appeal. The zoning board's failure to give written findings together with its failure to promptly give Yost a copy of its decision could not be deemed a decision in Yost's favor. Under state law, a zoning board's inaction was not a decision in favor of anyone but the "applicant." Yost was a landowner but was not an applicant for development. To the contrary, Yost was before the board appeal- ing his enforcement notice for alle~edly failing to apply for the required certificate. However, even though the appellate record had the complete testimony before the board, the court had to have a written statement of the board's necessary findings of fact, conclusions of law, and reasons for its decision. The zoning board did not make specific findings but instead relied on its Oct. 19 minutes as the basis for its denial of Yost's appeal. The trial court did not hear any additional evidence, so there was insufficient detail in the record to enable the appellate court to review the board's decision. see also: Leech v. Cater, 388 A.2d 1137 (1978). Upper Saucon Township v. Zoning Hearing Board of Upper Saucon Township, 583 A.2d 45 (1990). FEEDBACK Are there any special issues affecting your city or town that you would like to see covered in Zoning Bulletin? If so, send your idea to: Michael J ung, Esq. Quinlan Publishing Company 23 Drydock Ave. Boston, MA 02210-2387 fax (617) 345-9646 e-mail: mjung@quinlan.com Please indicate whether we can include your letter in our bulletin, along with a request for responses from other municipalities that may have already dealt with your problem. 101