Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in the case of Frank N. Pyle v. Municipality of Penn Hills, No. GD 84-13283.
Alfred C. Maiello, with him, Lee V. Price, for appellant.
Wayne DeLuca, with him, August C. Damian, Damian & DeLuca, for appellee.
Judges Craig and Barry (p), and Senior Judge Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.
[ 102 Pa. Commw. Page 221]
Landowner Frank N. Pyle appeals from a declaratory judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County*fn1 which determined that a 1980 zoning ordinance amendment of the Municipality of Penn Hills, imposing a time limit upon conditional use approvals, was applicable to a conditional use approval which the landowner had acquired in 1979. Trial Judge Standish determined that the municipality properly refused to issue a building permit to the landowner in 1983 because his conditional use approval had expired under the terms of the amendment. We affirm.
On October 26, 1977, the landowner had applied for conditional use approval to construct a multi-family residential
[ 102 Pa. Commw. Page 222]
development on his 9.5-acre tract of land which was located within a single-family residential district. The municipal council denied his application and the zoning hearing board affirmed that denial.
On July 17, 1979, the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County reversed the board's decision and ordered that the landowner's conditional use application be granted.
On March 26, 1980, the municipality enacted amendatory Zoning Ordinance No. 1617, Section 13.3.B, which provides:
An approved conditional use shall be completed within two (2) years following the date of approval. However, the Planning Department may grant an extension of time if the landowner or his agent requests such an extension, and if good cause for the extension is shown. There are no other exceptions to this rule. If, at the end of the two (2) year period, the conditional use is not completed, and if no extension has been granted, the approval of the conditional use shall be null and void.
On October 5, 1983, the landowner applied for a building permit to begin construction of the multi-family residential development, consistent with the conditional use approval. The municipality denied the landowner's application for a building permit because, under Ordinance 1617, the landowner's approval for a ...