Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY v. MARSHALL TOWNSHIP BOARD SUPERVISORS (05/04/83)

decided: May 4, 1983.

ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, APPELLANT
v.
MARSHALL TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in case of Atlantic Richfield Company v. Marshall Township Board of Supervisors, No. S.A. 735-81.

COUNSEL

Victor R. Delle Donne, with him, Joel P. Aaronson, Baskin and Sears, P.C., for appellant.

Burton C. Duerring, for appellee.

Judges Blatt, Williams, Jr. and Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.

Author: Blatt

[ 74 Pa. Commw. Page 101]

The Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) appeals here an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County quashing ARCO's appeal because there had been no appealable adjudication made by the Marshall Township Board of Supervisors (Township).

ARCO, which owns a tract of land in the Township which is the site of a service station, wanted to add a mini-market to the station, and it sought Township approval of this addition. Several other corporate enterprises, including McDonald's and the Bob Evans Corp., likewise had proposed developments of their own at the same intersection where the station was located.*fn1 The Township and several neighboring municipal bodies employed a firm of traffic consultants to study the area and submit a traffic impact report relating to the intersection concerned, among others, and with Bob Evans Corp. and McDonald's

[ 74 Pa. Commw. Page 102]

    agreeing to pay a proportionate share of the cost of the study and of any necessary improvements. The agreement also provided that any new developers in the area would be required to participate. At a Township meeting on April 2, 1980 ARCO, through its representative, Mr. Allshouse, agreed that it would "participate in the costs of the traffic study . . . and will pay their proportionate share of any improvements -- turning lanes, lights, etc."*fn2 The Township then granted ARCO's request for variances as to setback and curb cuts, with conditions later reduced to writing by letter of April 17, 1980. The only condition imposed by the Township which is relevant to this appeal is as follows:

You agreed to participate in the engineering planning study for traffic control at the Route 19-Freeport Road intersection and to forward a check in the amount of $1,200 to pay for your portion of this study. You also agreed to pay for any improvements to be made at this intersection such as traffic signals, stacking and turning lanes, etc. emanating from this study. (Emphasis added.)

The Township also said:

If these conditions are satisfactory to you and your company, including your subsidiary which operates the facility, would you please return the original signed by the appropriate officer and have his signature attested to by your Corporate Secretary. We, in turn, will release to you the proper zoning and building permits at our earliest convenience.

ARCO filed an appeal in the court of common pleas on October 1, 1980 from the Township's insistence upon the above ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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