Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County in the case of In Re: Appeal of Thiokol Corporation from the Board of Commissioners of Bristol Township, No. 78-6375-11-5.
John A. Van Luvanee, Eastburn and Gray, for appellant.
Clyde W. Waite, with him Leonard B. Sokolove, Sokolove, Pechter, Stief & Waite, for appellee.
President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Mencer, Craig and MacPhail. Opinion by President Judge Crumlish, Jr. Judge MacPhail concurs in the result only. Judge Palladino did not participate in the decision in this case.
Thiokol Corporation appeals a Bucks County Common Pleas Court decision*fn1 which dismissed a substantive
challenge to the Bristol Township Zoning Ordinance. We affirm.
Thiokol, owner of a 134-acre tract primarily zoned M-2-Heavy Manufacturing,*fn2 submitted a substantive challenge to the Zoning Ordinance and a proposed curative amendment in accordance with Sections 609.1 and 1104(1)(b) of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Act of July 31, 1968, P.L. 805, as amended, 53 P.S. §§ 10609.1, 11004(1)(b). After extensive hearings, the Bristol Township Commissioners rejected Thiokol's challenge. The court below affirmed.
Thiokol contends that the Zoning Ordinance is unconstitutionally exclusionary for failing to provide its "fair share" of acreage within the Township for single family semi-detached homes or townhouses. We disagree.
Since no additional evidence was taken below, our scope of review is limited to a determination of whether the Board of Commissioners abused its discretion or committed an error of law. Warwick Land Development Corp. v. Board of Supervisors of Warwick Township, 31 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 450, 376 A.2d 679 (1977).
We discern no abuse of discretion or error of law and affirm on the able opinion of Judge Bortner, Thiokel Corp. ...