declining to apply the Home Rule Act retroactively to a zoning appeal that commenced prior to the effective date of the amendment
How later courts described this case
- declining to apply the Home Rule Act retroactively to a zoning appeal that commenced prior to the effective date of the amendment
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DISSENTING OPINION BY
President Judge COLINS.
I respectfully dissent. I fear the majority has allowed the esthetic unpleasantness of billboard clutter to cloud its legal judgment. Section 17.1 of the law known as the First Class City Home Rule Act, 1 53 P.S. § 13131.1 (Act 193), clearly states that city taxpayers that are not detrimentally harmed by a decision of the zoning hearing board are not aggrieved persons for purposes of appeal. The Pennsylvania Constitution does not guarantee continued standing once the General Assembly has *980 spoken. Act 198 makes it clear that taxpayers who are not individually harmed by a zoning decision do not fall within the definition of aggrieved persons. I would grant Preston Ship & Rail’s motion to quash as the taxpayers no longer have standing to appeal.
Judge LEADBETTER joins in this dissent.
. Act of April 21, 1949, P.L. 665, as amended, added by Section 2 of the Act of November 30, 2004, P.L. 1523.