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.

A. J. GROSEK & ASSOCIATES v. ZONING HEARING BOARD MONTROSE BOROUGH AND CONCERNED CITIZENS MONTROSE (09/13/82)

decided: September 13, 1982.

A. J. GROSEK & ASSOCIATES, APPELLANT
v.
THE ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MONTROSE BOROUGH AND CONCERNED CITIZENS OF MONTROSE, BARBARA CLIFFORD AND ELEANOR MCKEAGE, APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Susquehanna County in case of A. J. Grosek & Associates v. Zoning Hearing Board of Montrose Borough v. Concerned Citizens of Montrose, Barbara Clifford and Eleanor McKeage, No. 1980-385 C.P.

COUNSEL

James E. Davis, Farr, Davis, Turrell & Fitze, for appellant.

Robert G. Dean, with him Andrew Hailstone, Henkelman, Kreder, O'Connell & Brooks, for appellees.

President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Rogers and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.

Author: Rogers

[ 69 Pa. Commw. Page 40]

This is an appeal by A. J. Grosek & Associates (Grosek) from a decision and order of the Court of Common Pleas of Susquehanna County affirming a decision by the Zoning Hearing Board of Montrose Borough (Board) to deny Grosek's request for a special exception to the Montrose zoning ordinance. We reverse.

Grosek filed its application for a special exception with the Board on December 18, 1979. The project for which the exception is sought calls for the construction of seventy apartment units of low to middle income housing in a town house arrangement on a 13.6 acre tract of land in Montrose. Following a public hearing held on January 31, 1980, the Board made the following findings and denied the exception request:

1. That the A. J. Grosek & Assoc. Co. has not demonstrated due cause for this Special Exception to be granted, and

2. That the plans submitted as evidence by the applicant had no dimensions as required by Section 4.400, Regulations regarding Exceptions, subsections regarding Apartments and Conversions, and Regulations for Multi-Family Dwellings, page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Borough of Montrose, and

3. That the property values of surrounding properties and all other rental properties in the community will be adversely affected by creating noncompetitive housing, and

4. That no evidence was presented as to whether the site will be adequately landscaped and maintained, and

5. That the proposed multi-family housing will jeopardize the public health, safety, welfare, and convenience in that it will create ...


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.