In a decision that may greatly increase civic groups' ability to fight billboards and unwanted development, Commonwealth Court has ruled that groups and individuals can be entitled to legal standing in zoning matters even if they are not neighbors to the property.
They just have to be taxpayers, according to the decision handed down this week in Harrisburg.The ruling was a particular victory for the Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight (SCRUB), a group that fights illegal billboards, and the Center City Residents Association. The groups turned to the Commonwealth Court after they were denied the right to a Court of Common Pleas appeal of zoning variances granted for four billboards at the Food Distribution Center in South Philadelphia.
The advocates' suit was brought against the city, the city's Zoning Board of Adjustment, and Procacci Bros. Sales Corp., the landowner that sought the variances.This week's ruling ordered the case back to Common Pleas, granting the civic groups their appeal after all.
But the parties involved say the case and the ruling go beyond the issue of billboards.``This is truly a victory for access to the courts and basic democracy,'' said Robert M. Jaffe, special counsel to City Councilman David Cohen who assisted the activists in the case.
``This has been an issue of power,'' Jaffe said. Developers, monied property owners, and their lawyers, he said, have long been able to get around citizens' concerns and criticism if the people didn't live or have a business close enough to the property in question.Judith Eden, cochair of the Center City Residents Association's zoning committee, said the decision was ``a total plus'' for all kinds of civic groups.
``This definitely clears out the swamp of the technicalities that were used to just dispose of cases,'' she said.Eden said she had been allowed to address the city Zoning Board, only to have concerns seem to be discounted on the basis of proximity.
Proximity is a criteria for legal standing under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Codes, but the Commonwealth Court held that those provisions do not pertain to Philadelphia.Mary Schmidt, a spokeswoman for the city Law Department, said the possibility of appeal ``is under review.''
The ruling also has its critics.``This decision concerns me because it opens a door to all sorts of protests in any area you can think of,'' said Common Pleas Judge Stephen E. Levin, the jurist who had quashed SCRUB and Center City's appeal and may now hear the remanded case. Now, he posited, almost anyone could have ``the right under law to override the entire neighborhood's feeling.''
Those involved in the activists' case, however, said that at times, even being part of a neighborhood had not been enough to get listened to. And Samuel Stretton, lawyer for SCRUB, doubted the ruling would open the floodgates to frivolous lawsuits and challenges, as he said he has heard. Serious zoning challenges are too expensive and time-consuming, he said. He said that SCRUB had challenges pending to several billboard variances, and that they may be helped by the recent decision.For SCRUB founder Mary Tracy, the ruling is a long-awaited victory.
``I really am happy,'' she said. ``You hope the law will come through for you, and when it does, it gives you confidence in the system.''Procacci officials and their attorney, Carl Primavera, could not be reached for comment.