applicable. First as the- Township correctly points out-the purported issue of whether the road went through “unenclosed woodlands” was not mentioned at any point during the proceedings before the trial court. WLCI is not permitted now to raise the issue for the first time on appeal. See Burkett v. Smyder, 369 Pa.Super. 519, 535 A.2d 671, 673-74 (1988) (“Clearly, the applicability of 68 P.S. § 411 is a defense that should have been advanced during the pre-trial stage of this case. By failing to raise the defense at the appropriate phase, Appellants have effectively waived it for appellate consideration.”) (Citation omitted). Moreover, the issue is waived because WLCI also failed to raise the issue in its 1925(b) statement. See Commonwealth v. Hill, 609 Pa. 410,16 A.3d 484, 494 (2011) (<HOLDING>); Lang v. Department of Transportation, 13 A.3d
holding that issue not raised in a statement filed pursuant to parap 1925b is waived for purposes of appeal holding that in order to preserve their claims for appellate review appellants must comply whenever the trial court orders them to file a statement of matters complained of on appeal pursuant to pa rap 1925b any issues not raised in a parap 1925b statement will be deemed waived holding any issues not raised in a rule 1925b statement will be deemed waived holding that issues   not explicitly raised in the statement of questions involved are  waived holding issues raised in notice of appeal but not briefed are deemed waived