# SOCIETY CREATED TO REDUCE URBAN BLIGHT v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

> Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · September 27, 2006 · 908 A.2d 967

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9651721

## Case

- **Full name:** SOCIETY CREATED TO REDUCE URBAN BLIGHT (SCRUB), Mary Cawley Tracy, Friends of Logan Square, Center City Residents Association (CCRA), Friends of FDR Park, Duncan Civic Association, Councilman David Cohen, Christopher Jurek, Jean Gavin and Phil Straus, Appellants v. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, City of Philadelphia and Preston Ship & Rail, Inc.; Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight (SCRUB), Mary Cawley Tracy, Friends of Logan Square, Center City Residents Association (CCRA), Friends of FDR Park, Duncan Civic Association, Councilman David Cohen, Christopher Jurek, Jean Gavin and Phil Straus v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, City of Philadelphia and Preston Ship & Rail, Inc., Appeal of Preston Ship & Rail, Inc.
- **Court:** Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** September 27, 2006
- **Citations:** 908 A.2d 967; 2006 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 510; 2006 WL 2741636
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Colins
- **Judges:** Colins, McGinley, Ner, Friedman, Leadbetter, Simpson, Leavitt
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9651721

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- declining to apply the Home Rule Act retroactively to a zoning appeal that commenced prior to the effective date of the amendment

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9651721. Public record. Not legal advice.