The Appellant would have been permitted to install audio-visual amusement devices as a matter of right in his place of amusement in the old H-Business Zoning District. As such, the property was a conforming use under the 1925 Ordinance which allowed places of amusement, recreation or assembly in the H-Business Zoning District.
The use of 34 Brookline Boulevard since before 1925 has been for indoor recreation and amusement facilities. There is no constitutionally protected right to change a nonconforming use to another use which is also not allowed by the zoning ordinance moreover, an additional nonconforming use may not generally be appended to an existing nonconforming use. In a zoning case involving recognition of a nonconforming use, when the trial court takes no additional evidence, review by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania is limited to determining whether the zoning hearing board abused its discretion or committed an error of law. It is from the trial court's decision that the Township appeals. No additional testimony was presented to the trial court however, it reversed the Board's order and ordered that Applicant be granted the license. The Applicant then appealed the Board's order to the court of common pleas where the Township intervened. The Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) of the Township denied the application for the amusement license and Applicant appealed to the Township Zoning Hearing Board (Board) which affirmed the CEO's determination.
Daley (Applicant) applied for an amusement license under Ordinance 1788 of 1980 (Ordinance), Haverford Township (Township) Delaware County, Pennsylvania, to permit the installation of four or more electronic amusement devices at his movie theater located at 34 Brookline Boulevard in the Township.
0 kommentar(er)
