Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/07/2017

Home

October 25, 2017 I Volume 11 I Issue 20 Zoning Bulletin was met, concluding that San Francisco had "gone no further than nec- essary in seeking to meet its ends," when regulating commercial speech but not noncommercial speech. The court found "no constitutional infir- mity in [Article 6's] failure to regulate every sign that it might have reached." The court concluded that the distinctions drawn in Article 6 between commercial and noncommercial speech directly advanced San Francisco's substantial interests of safety and aesthetics. See also: Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Service Com- mission of New York, 447 U.S. 557, 100 S. Ct. 2343, 65 L. Ed. 2d 341, 6 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1497, 34 Pub. Util. Rep. 4th (PUR) 178 (1980). Use Property owner builds and maintains race cars as a hobby at residential property Town says such use does not constitute a permitted "accessory use" to residence Citation: DiMattia v. Zoning Hearing Board of East Whiteland Town- ship, 2017 WL 3399931 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017) PENNSYLVANIA (08/09/17)—This case addressed the issue of whether a property owners' daily use of the property to build and maintain race cars, as a hobby activity, qualified as a permitted acces- sory use in a residential district. The Background/Facts: Alexander DiMattia and Nancy E. DiMat- tia (the "DiMattias") owned property (the "Property") in an R-1 Low Density Residential Zoning District ("R-1 District") in East Whiteland Township (the "Township"). On the Property was a single-family detached residence, two carriage houses, and a pole barn garage. The DiMattias rented the residence to tenants, but did not rent out the car- riage houses or pole barn. The DiMattias used the pole barn for race car building and repair, which was a hobby of Tony DiMattia. Tony DiMat- tia worked on the race cars on the Property nearly every day, sometimes for "as much as 12 hours per day and often into the night." In November 2014, following complaints from neighbors, the Township's Code Enforcement Officer ("CEO") issued to the DiMattias a Notice of Violation. Among other things, the Notice of Violation as- serted that the DiMattias use of the Property for "working on race cars" was a violation of the provisions of the Township's Zoning Ordinance, as it was not a permitted use in the R-1 District. The Zoning Ordinance limited the permitted uses in an R-1 District to single-family detached 8 © 2017 Thomson Reuters