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.

RICHARD B. TUCKER v. ZONING BOARD ADJUSTMENT CITY PITTSBURGH AND LESLIE D. BERRENT (11/25/81)

decided: November 25, 1981.

RICHARD B. TUCKER, JR. ET AL., APPELLANTS
v.
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH AND LESLIE D. BERRENT, APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in the case of Richard B. Tucker, Jr. and Alice R. Tucker, his wife; Ronald L. Bencke and Mary Bencke, his wife; and Hans G. Fleischner and Leslie R. Fleischner, his wife v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh and Leslie D. Berrent, No. SA 1345 of 1979.

COUNSEL

Richard B. Tucker, III, Tucker, Arensberg, Very & Ferguson, for appellants.

Samuel B. Roth, with him D. R. Pellegrini, for appellees.

Judges Mencer, MacPhail and Palladino, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Mencer.

Author: Mencer

[ 62 Pa. Commw. Page 616]

Richard B. Tucker, Jr., and other persons have appealed from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County which affirmed the grant of a dimensional zoning variance by the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh (Board) to Leslie and Barbara Berrent (owners). We reverse.

The owners' property is located in a residential zoning district in the 14th Ward of the City of Pittsburgh at the corner of Aylesboro Avenue and Murdock Street. The property contains two structures. The first is a 2 1/2-story single-family dwelling which faces onto Aylesboro Avenue. The second structure is a two-story carriage house which faces onto an alley which intersects Murdock Street. The record indicates that the second story of the carriage house was last tenanted in 1949 by a chauffeur who worked for the occupants of the 2 1/2-story dwelling. The first story is used as a garage.

The owners have applied for a dimensional variance so that they may enlarge the carriage house and turn it into a single-family residence. The planned addition will not comply with applicable front, rear, and side yard requirements or lot restrictions. The owners have also filed a subdivision plan which is not involved in this appeal.

At the time of this application, Section 2903, subsection 2A, of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Pittsburgh provided that the Board could grant a variance from the provisions of the ordinance

     where strict application would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship that would deprive the owner of the reasonable use of the land or structures involved, but in no other case. No variance in the strict application

[ 62 Pa. Commw. Page 617]

    of any provisions of this ordinance shall be granted by the Board unless it finds:

(1) that there are special circumstances or conditions, fully described in the findings of the Board, applying to the land or structure for which the variance is ...


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.