Allowing patrons to engage in sexual activity was not an accessory use to the operation of a restaurant.
MAJ Entertainment, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Philadelphia, 947 A.2d 841 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008).
Pearson v. Newlin Township ZHB, 765 A.2d 1187 (Pa. Commw., January 19, 2001).
"Family" may be legally defined as "[a] person living independently or a group of persons living as a single household unit using housekeeping facilities in common, but not to include more than three persons unrelated by blood, marriage or adoption" in a zoning ordinance.
Schwartz v. Phila. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 126 A.3d 1032 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015).
A church has the burden of showing that its daycare center is a fundamental religious activity under the Commonwealth’s Religious Freedom Protection Act.
Ridley Park United Methodist Church v. Ridley Park Borough Zoning Hearing Board, 2007 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 134
COMMUNICATIONS TOWER: NOT A 'PUBLIC UTILITY'
Pennsylvania Cellular Telephone Corp. v. Buck Township ZHB, 127 F.Supp. 2d. 635 (M.D. Pa., January 17, 2001).
Methadone clinic constituted a medical office for the treatment of patients under the zoning ordinance definition.
THW Group, LLC v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 86 A.3d 330 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2014).
Log processing does not fit within the MPC’s definition of a “forestry use” where the property does not contain a forest and trees are not cultivated on the property.
Stoltzfus v. Eden Township Zoning Hearing Board,
937 A.2d 548 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007).
A school district may be subject to municipal zoning regulation by requiring submission and approval of a special exception.
Council Rock School District v Wrightstown Township Zoning Hearing Board, 709 A. 2d 453, Pa. Cmwlth. 1998.
Mulching operation is neither a forestry nor an agricultural use.
Tinicum Twp. v. Nowicki, 99 A.3d 586 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2014).
City of Hope v. Sadsbury Twp. Zoning Hearing Board,
2005 WL 3662591 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006)