Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

VAN SCIVER v. ZONING BOARD ADJUSTMENT (07/02/59)

July 2, 1959

VAN SCIVER, APPELLANT,
v.
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT



Appeal, No. 175, Jan. T., 1959, from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1958, No. 564, in case of Edwin P. Van Sciver v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, City of Philadelphia. Order reversed. Proceedings on appeal from decision of zoning board of adjustment refusing to grant permit. Order entered dismissing appeal, opinion by SPORKIN, J. Petitioner appealed.

COUNSEL

John T. Curtin, for appellant.

Mattew W. Bullock, Jr., Assistant City Solicitor, with him James L. Stern, Deputy City Solicitor, and David Berger, City Solicitor, for appellee.

Before Bell, Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Bok and Mcbride, JJ.

Author: Mcbride

[ 396 Pa. Page 648]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE MCBRIDE

We have for review an order dismissing an appeal from the Zoning Board of Adjustment of Philadelphia.

The structure involved is a one-story, garage type building of brick and cinder block construction located in a district zoned "A" Commercial. The latest use of the premises was as a storeroom for the owner's adjacent confectionery.

Appellant, the lessee of the property, sought a registration permit intending to install what is commonly referred to as a "laundromat" equipped with thirty coin operated automatic washers and ten automatic dryers. The items to be cleaned would be handled solely by the customers themselves. The applicant proposed operating the laundromat twenty-four hours a day seven days a week and it was to be unattended except for daily visits by a porter and a coin collector and periodic visits by a maintenance man.

The zoning board conducted a hearing at which the sole testimony was that of James Mitchell, an expert on the operation and maintenance of laundromats, statements by counsel for the applicant, and a petition signed by residents in the neighborhood in support of the application. The application was treated as a request for a variance, and a use registration permit was granted, conditioned on a limitation of business hours to the period between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday and the requirement that some one be on duty during all hours of operation. The applicant's

[ 396 Pa. Page 649]

    appeal to the court below challenging these restrictions was dismissed.

Appellant has maintained throughout that (1) A laundromat is a "Hand laundry or agency" within the meaning of ยง 14-303(m)*fn1 of the Code of General Ordinances of the City of Philadelphia ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.