Appeals from the Order of the Agricultural Lands Condemnation Approval Board in case of In The Matter of: Wallace Township Municipal Authority, Land of Carl and Sally Maenak, dated April 1, 1986.
Albert P. Massey, Jr., with him, Richard L. Cantor and Sean A. O'Neill, Lentz, Cantor, Kilgore & Massey, Ltd., for petitioners/respondents, Carl L. Maenak and Sarah S. Maenak, h/w.
Gerald T. Osburn, Acting Chief Counsel, with him, John B. Hannum, Jr., for respondent, Agricultural Lands Condemnation Approval Board.
William H. Lamb, with him, Nancy C. M. Balliet, Lamb, Windle & McErlane, P.C., for respondent/petitioner, Wallace Township Municipal Authority.
Judges Craig and Doyle, and Senior Judge Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.
[ 107 Pa. Commw. Page 335]
Carl L. Maenak and his wife, Sarah S. Maenak (the Maenaks) and the Wallace Township Municipal Authority (Authority) have filed separate petitions for review*fn1 from the order of the Agricultural Lands Condemnation
[ 107 Pa. Commw. Page 336]
Approval Board (Board). We have consolidated these petitions for review by a prior order and will address and dispose of the issues raised therein in this opinion.
The relevant factual background of this matter is essentially undisputed by the parties. The Maenaks own approximately fifty-two acres of land (the property) in the village of Glenmoore, Wallace Township, Chester County against which the Authority instituted condemnation proceedings. The Authority proposes to use the property for a spray irrigation waste disposal project (project).*fn2 After the Authority had obtained a writ of possession for the property, the Maenaks filed preliminary objections nunc pro tunc in the common pleas court, contending that the Authority had failed to seek approval of the Board pursuant to Section 306 of The Administrative Code of 1929 (Code).*fn3 The Authority then agreed to request a Board hearing, which was subsequently requested and held.
[ 107 Pa. Commw. Page 337]
The Board, at the hearing, with all of the parties in attendance, received testimony and argument from the parties, and thereafter issued the following order:
AND NOW, this 1st day of April, 1986, the Board having received a request on February 10, 1986 from the ...