Today's one-liner: "The shortest way to the distinguishing excellence of any writer is through his hostile critics." Richard LeGallienne
Local Government TV
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Commonwealth Court: Judge Simpson Explains Special Exceptions
This case involved a student housing facility for 8 Bloomsburg University pupils. A small army of objectors was opposed, but failed to produce evidence that there would be adverse impacts not generally demonstrated by this type of use.
6 comments:
You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.
Interesting read.
ReplyDeleteBernie:
ReplyDeleteThanks for bringing this to my attention. I am always interested in how to defend a neighborhood against special exceptions, which Mickey K says are never special, and never exceptions. This does shed some light on how to defend against them, although defending against them is an up hill battle.
Al
Al, Judge Simpson said it in his opinion, too.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the "law is the law" guy when you need him?
ReplyDeleteMKT
Bernie, Judge Simpson must have heard it from Mickey K! This case certainly points out that a Special Exception is a cake walk. - Al
ReplyDeleteI wish I could take credit for that Al. I am predated by about 50 years of case law.
ReplyDeleteMKT