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.

BOROUGH WEST MIFFLIN v. ZONING HEARING BOARD BOROUGH WEST MIFFLIN ET AL. (11/08/82)

decided: November 8, 1982.

BOROUGH OF WEST MIFFLIN, APPELLANT
v.
ZONING HEARING BOARD OF THE BOROUGH OF WEST MIFFLIN ET AL., APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in case of Borough of West Mifflin v. Zoning Hearing Board of the Borough of West Mifflin v. John Columbus and Joseph Columbus, t/d/b/a Columbus Brothers, No. SA 1174 of 1981.

COUNSEL

Donald C. Fetzko, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

Thomas Kratzenberg, with him Raymond Radakovich, for intervenors, John Columbus and Joseph Columbus, t/d/b/a Columbus Brothers.

Judges Rogers, Blatt and Craig, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 69 Pa. Commw. Page 605]

In this zoning case, the Borough of West Mifflin, Allegheny County, has appealed from an order of the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County which affirmed the West Mifflin Borough Zoning Hearing Board's approval of a sign painted on the side of a building owned by Columbus Brothers, the landowners who have intervened in the case.

According to the record and the borough's statement of facts, with which the landowners agree, the property is in a district zoned I-2 Restricted Industrial. Under Section 501.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, governing all signs throughout the borough, business signs advertising goods or services provided on the same premises are allowed, but the provision prohibits business signs which exceed eighty square feet in area and also states:

Signs shall not be painted directly on the surface of any building.

During May, 1981, the landowners had the sign, 760 square feet in area, painted on the side of their industrial

[ 69 Pa. Commw. Page 606]

    building. A few days after the painting of the sign, on May 14, 1981, the borough issued a certified mail notice of violation to the landowners, citing Section 501.3, and sent a second notice of violation on May 30, received by the property owners on July 1. After that second notice, the landowners applied to the zoning hearing board for a special exception to authorize the sign. The zoning hearing board gave approval of the sign by a decision containing no finding of facts or explanation of its rationale.

The borough appealed to the common pleas court, pointing out that Section 402.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, applicable to the I-2 Restricted Industrial District, allows light ...


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.