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.

YOUNG MEN & WOMEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION v. MONROEVILLE BOROUGH COUNCIL (ET AL. (04/16/68)

decided: April 16, 1968.

YOUNG MEN & WOMEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION
v.
MONROEVILLE BOROUGH COUNCIL (ET AL., APPELLANT)



Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Oct. T., 1967, No. 250, in case of Young Men & Women's Hebrew Association and Irene Kaufmann Centers v. Borough Council of Monroeville.

COUNSEL

Zeno Fritz, for appellants.

David W. Craig, with him Baskin, Boreman, Sachs, Gondelman & Craig, for appellee.

Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Brien and Roberts, JJ. Opinion by Mr. Justice Musmanno. Mr. Chief Justice Bell took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Author: Musmanno

[ 429 Pa. Page 284]

The Young Men & Women's Hebrew Association and Irene Kaufmann Centers, a nonprofit corporation, owning approximately 106 acres of land in Monroeville, situate in an R-2 District, zoned as a "One-Family Residence" area, applied to the Borough of Monroeville for a "conditional use" of its land as a nonprofit recreation area. The borough's planning commission, after due study, recommended approval of the application, allowing entrance into the property from Rosecrest Drive, and a one-way exit into Brinton Avenue, both these thoroughfares abutting the plaintiff's property.

After a public hearing, the borough council approved the plaintiff's application for "conditional use" of its land, as requested, but imposed 18 specific conditions to be complied with in the use of the property as a recreation area and in the issuance of building permits.

Condition No. 14, the only one involved in this litigation, provided: "That the sole entrance and exit to the premises shall be from Jamison Lane at the U. S. Steel property. Any items on the said plans Exhibits 'A-1' and 'A-2' showing entrance or access roads into the said premises from any other direction or at any other point other than as set forth in this paragraph are hereby specifically deleted and disapproved."

Since the plaintiff's property does not extend to Jamison Lane, Condition No. 14 meant that the members of the plaintiff's organization could only reach and exit from the recreation area by passing over private

[ 429 Pa. Page 285]

    property, over which the plaintiff has no right of passage.

When the plaintiff made application to the zoning officer for building permits free of Condition No. 14, the application was refused, and the plaintiff filed an action of mandamus in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County asking that the council and the zoning officer be ordered to issue the necessary permits which would allow the "conditional use" authorized by council.

The court invalidated Condition No. 14 and ordered the defendants to issue the requested permits. In the court below a Harry E. Hitson, Jr., and Charlene E. Wilson were permitted ...


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.