In In re McGlynn, 974 A.2d 525 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), an applicant filed a conditional use application seeking to build a mobile/manufactured home park. Public notice of the first hearing on the application appeared in the local newspaper of general circulation in the township twice, but the publications occurred four days apart rather than five days apart as required by Section 908(1) of the MPC, 53 P.S. 10908(1). In McGlynn, the Court held the objectors' actual notice of the proceedings relating to the zoning application at issue was crucial to a Matthews evaluation. Moreover, with regard to Challengers' claimed lack of notice of the zoning ordinance or any amendment made on the night of adoption, the trial court offered Challengers an opportunity for a hearing on their procedural validity challenge, which Challengers declined.