In this zoning appeal out of Montgomery County, the Commonwealth Court addressed whether, under the Municipalities Planning Code (“MPC”) the filing of a mandatory sketch plan created a vested right such that any future zoning applications had to be reviewed under the zoning ordinance in effect when the sketch plan was filed. In affirming the trial court’s decision, the Commonwealth Court concluded the MPC created a vested right which applied to both the then existing subdivision and land development ordinance (“SALDO”) and zoning ordinance.
This case required the Commonwealth Court to review the evidence from a borough council meeting regarding a proposed land development plan and conditional use application. The court held that the applicant presented sufficient evidence to show that the plans complied with the applicable ordinance, and the objector failed to meet its burden of proving otherwise. Furthermore, the court ruled that a dispute over an easement, which was raised by the objector, can only be heard in court, not at a council or zoning hearing board meeting.