Scott v. City of Philadelphia, Zoning Board of Adjustment & FT Holdings L.P.

Summary

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that FT Holdings, L.P.’s challenge to John Scott’s standing to appeal a Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment decision was not waived by its failure to raise the challenge before the Board. The Court remanded for consideration of whether Scott had a substantial, direct, and immediate interest sufficient to establish standing under the Philadelphia Home Rule Act.

Holdings

1. FT Holdings did not waive its challenge to Scott's standing by failing to raise it before the Philadelphia Zoning Board. Because standing to appeal the Board's decision could not be determined until after the decision was issued, FT timely raised the challenge in the trial court.
2. Participation in a Philadelphia zoning hearing does not automatically confer standing to appeal the Board's decision to the trial court or make the participant necessarily aggrieved.
3. Municipalities Planning Code provisions and cases applying them do not govern Philadelphia zoning appeals, which are controlled by the Philadelphia Home Rule Act and Philadelphia Zoning Code.
4. South of South Street Neighborhood Ass'n v. Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment is disapproved to the extent it holds that participation before the Philadelphia Board without objection makes an objector necessarily aggrieved or waives a landowner's standing challenge.

Questions Presented

1. Whether FT Holdings waived its challenge to Scott's standing by failing to raise the challenge before the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment.
2. Whether Scott's participation before the Philadelphia Zoning Board automatically made him an aggrieved person entitled to appeal the Board's decision under the Philadelphia Home Rule Act.
3. Whether the Commonwealth Court improperly applied Municipalities Planning Code precedent to a Philadelphia zoning appeal.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded