Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/01/1999

Home

Page 4- April 10, 1999 Z.B. '~ 118 machine. The van had advertising slogans painted on the sides. Reardon con- ducted all his business in the van or at customers' businesses, and he kept his entire inventory in the van or at a shipping warehouse. Reardon wanted to buy a house in a residential district in McCandless, Pa. His fiancde asked the zoning officer if the town's zoning ordinance would pro- hibit Reardon from parking his van in a residential area. The zoning officer said the town had "no firm rule. but strongly encouraged people not to park [such vehicles] in residential areas." Reardon bought the house anyway and began parking his van behind it. Though he didn't conduct any business at his house, neighbors complained to the town that Reardon was operating a business there. After investigating, the zoning officer ordered Reardon to stop using his house for commercial purposes. Reardon appealed to the zoning board, arguing he didn't conduct any busi- ness at his house and didn't use it as a work address. He also claimed he was entitled to a variance by estoppel--essentially a variance based on the town's own actions. The factors to consider for such a variance were: whether there was a long period of municipal failure to enforce the law and acquiescence in the illegal use; whether the owner acted in good faith and relied innocently on the validity of the use; whether the owner made a substantial expenditure in reliance on his or her belief the use was permitted; and whether denial of the variance would impose unnecessary hardship, such as the cost to demolish an existing building. Reardon also claimed parking his van behind his house was an accessory use and entitled him to a home occupation permit. The board affirmed the zoning officer's cease and desist order, finding Reardon was operating a business from his home. The board noted Reardon consistently made several trips home during his work hours and regularly re- ceived work-related packages at home..The board denied. Reardon's requests for a variance and a home occupation permit. Reardon appealed to court, arguing the board improperly concluded that simply parking his van behind his house amounted to operating a business there. The court affirmed the board's decision, finding there was more than enough evidence to find Reardon was operating a business from his home. Reardon appealed again. DECISION: Affirmed. The town properly ordered Reardon to stop using his residence for com- mercial purposes. The zoning board reasonably concluded Reardon was conducting a busi- ness from his home. The van was at the house several times a day, and business packages were delivered there. When commercial equipment was parked at a residence, part of the commercial enterprise was transferred to the residence -- and Reardon admitted his van contained all of the equipment he needed for running 'his business.