Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/03/1995

Home

Page 6 -- September 15, 1995 Z.B. Nonconforming Use-- Country Club Seeks to Rebuild Old Maintenance Shed Trettel v. Zoning Hearing Board of Harrison To~w~ship, 658 A.2d 741 (Pennsylva~ffa) I995 Trettel owned residential property next to the Brackenridge Heights Country Club in Harrison Township, Pa. The club had a decrepit, 60-year-old mainte- nance shed on its property, 14 feet from Trettel's property line. Although a zoning ordinance required a 70-foot setback, the shed was a valid nonconform- ing use because it predated the ordinance. In 1991, the club asked the township for permission to demolish the shed and build a new one. The township granted the club a building permit which stated that the new shed had to be built on exactly the same site. The permit also set forth the new shed's dimensions -- the wall parallel to Trettel's prop- erty tine would remain the same size; the sides perpendicular to the line still started 14 feet from Trettel's property, but would extend 10 more feet toward the club's golf course. Trettel appealed the permit's issuance to the township's zoning hearing board. After a hearing, the board upheld the permit. Trettel appealed to court, arguing that under the zoning ordinance, recon- struction of a nonconforming structure was permitted only if the structure was damaged by fire, flood, explosion, or other casualty. Nevertheless, the trial court affirmed. Trettel appealed again. The appeals court reversed. It held the shed could not be rebuilt because it was not destroyed by a casualty. The country club appealed, arguing other parts of the ordinance gave the board discretion to allow nonconforming uses to continue even when not destroyed by casualty. DECISION: Reversed. The appeals court improperly overt~trned the decision that the shed could be rebuilt. The board could allow nonconforming uses to continue, change, or expand if the surrounding neighborhood would not suffer. The board found that the new shed was not an unreasonable extension of the old shed and that Trettel's welfare would not be any more affected by it. The new shed was very similar to the old in position, size, and use. Expansion of Use -- Ordinance Amendment Allows Nonconforming Amusement Piers to Expand Nickels v. City of Wildwood, 658 A.2d 291 (New Jersey) 1995 According to its zoning ordinance, throughout its existence, the city of Wildwood, N.J., depended on tourism as its economic base. Its most valuable resources were its beach and its ocean vista. The city's policy was to keep the ocean view from its boardwalk unobstructed and to allow beachgoers the con- tinued use of the beach and ocean. Therefore, its zoning ordinance prohibited development east of the boardwalk. The city's resort commercial zone included a narrow strip of land running north to south. To its east was the Atlantic Ocean; to its west was the city's