In Cherry Valley Associates v. Stroud Township Board of Supervisors, 109 Pa. Commw. 246, 530 A.2d 1039 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987), the trial court denied the petition to intervene filed by a group of property owners in the vicinity of a proposed planned unit, concluding that the intervenors did not have the requisite legally enforceable interest to intervene under Pa. R.C.P. No. 2327(4) and that, even if they did have such interests, those interests would be adequately represented by the Township's board of supervisors. This court upheld the trial court's determination on appeal, agreeing that the intervenors' alleged legally enforceable interests were adequately represented by the board. Cherry Valley. In doing so, the Court also rejected the proposed intervenors' assertion that, because they were asserting their private interests, they were not adequately represented by the board of supervisors. In fact, the Court concluded that the aggrieved developer's appeal from the denial of a conditional use permit was not the proper forum for the proposed intervenors to assert their private interests. Id.