Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

APPEAL THIOKOL CORPORATION FROM BOARD COMMISSIONERS BRISTOL TOWNSHIP. THIOKOL CORPORATION (04/08/82)

COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


decided: April 8, 1982.

IN RE: APPEAL OF THIOKOL CORPORATION FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF BRISTOL TOWNSHIP. THIOKOL CORPORATION, APPELLANT

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.

COUNSEL

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.

Author: Crumlish

[ 66 Pa. Commw. Page 26]

Thiokol Corporation appeals a Bucks County Common Pleas Court decision*fn1 which dismissed a substantive

[ 66 Pa. Commw. Page 27]

    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. ยงยง 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. Appeal, Pa. D. & C.3rd (1980).

Order

The decision of the Bucks County Common Pleas Court, No. 78-6375-11-5, dated May 30, 1980, is affirmed.

Judge MacPhail concurs in the result only.

Judge Palladino did not participate in the decision in this case.

Disposition

Affirmed.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.