The Diocese of Scranton owned property located over a “split-lot” – meaning that a portion of the property zoned R-1 was located in Edwardsville Borough and a portion of the property zoned R-3 was located in Kingston Borough. The Catholic Social Services Housing Corporation proposed to demolish a church building on the property that had not been used for some time, to add on to school, and to develop a 30-unit apartment building to house recent military veterans. The proposal would place the housing units in both municipalities. Although all, or at least 18 units, could have been constructed within Kingston Borough as a permitted use in the R-3 zoning district, the organization decided not to do so for aesthetic considerations. They applied to Edwardsville Borough for a use variance, which after a hearing, was denied. The appeals court affirmed the determination of the trial court and zoning hearing board because the applicant failed to establish that the lot as a whole was unsuitable for purposes permitted by the current zoning. The Court noted that the test for a use variance is “not whether the owner’s proposed use of the property is more desirable or even the best use, but whether the property may be used in a reasonable manner within the restrictive provisions of the ordinance.” The court further noted that “merely because the property falls within two different boroughs and is subject to different zoning ordinances does not lessen the standard that the property as a whole must be rendered near valueless before a use variance can be granted.”
Catholic Social Services Housing Corporation v Zoning Hearing Board of Edwardsville Borough, 2011 WL 1196096 (Pa. Cmwlth 3/31/2011).
The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/1516CD10_3-31-11.pdf
