Pennsylvania court tells zoning board to test whether a smaller plan avoids a steep-slope variance
The Commonwealth Court set aside a ruling against Toll's 64-home Chester County plan but ordered the zoning board to decide whether its hardship came from the land or from the plan's density.
Home builders who need a variance to put a road across steep slopes in Pennsylvania may have to show that a smaller, conforming project would face the same obstacle, not only the plan they prefer. On August 31, 2026, the Commonwealth Court, in an opinion by Judge Stella M. Tsai in Fields v. Upper Uwchlan Twp. Zoning Hearing Bd., No. 1472 C.D. 2024 (Pa. Cmwlth. Aug. 31, 2026), vacated a trial court order that had reversed a variance granted to Toll Mid-Atlantic LP Company, Inc. (“Toll”) and sent the case back so the zoning hearing board can decide whether Toll faced the “unnecessary hardship” required by section 910.2(a) of the Municipalities Planning Code (“MPC”), 53 P.S. § 10910.2(a).
Fields v. Upper Uwchlan Twp. Zoning Hearing Bd., No. 1472 C.D. 2024 (Pa. Cmwlth. Aug. 31, 2026); 53 P.S. § 10910.2(a)