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.

FREEMAN Z. KRUM AND CHRISTOPHER J. KRUM v. MONTOUR COUNTY ZONING HEARING BOARD (11/18/82)

decided: November 18, 1982.

FREEMAN Z. KRUM AND CHRISTOPHER J. KRUM, APPELLANTS
v.
THE MONTOUR COUNTY ZONING HEARING BOARD, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montour County in case of Freeman Z. Krum and Christopher J. Krum v. The Montour County Zoning Hearing Board, No. 592-1980.

COUNSEL

Thomas Arthur James, Jr., for appellants.

Michael D. Wintersteen, for appellees.

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

Author: Rogers

[ 70 Pa. Commw. Page 77]

Freeman Z. Krum and his adult son Christopher here appeal from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montour County affirming a decision of that county's Zoning Hearing Board refusing the petitioners' application for a certificate of nonconformance.

The issue before the Zoning Hearing Board was whether the Krums' predecessor in title had used the three acre property in suit as a "junkyard or solid waste collection center" before the adoption in October,

[ 70 Pa. Commw. Page 781972]

of the county's zoning ordinance. Evidence pertinent to this issue was adduced at a hearing conducted by the Board on July 10, 1980. Briefly, Freeman Krum and a Mr. Robert Wilson Confer testified that junk, primarily scrap metals, discarded appliances, and abandoned autos, had been collected and stored on the property beginning in the early 1940's. Mr. Krum, Sr. further testified that his predecessor in title continuously between that period and the enactment of the zoning ordinance conducted a commercial enterprise on the property in which such junk and scrap were purchased and resold.

An historic account in diametric opposition to that of Mr. Krum, Sr. was given by Harold M. Shultz, and John Fetteroff, two longtime residents of the township. Each testified that he had viewed the property on a daily basis throughout the preceding thirty or more years and that, although some articles of personal property may have been there stored out-of-doors, at no time prior to the enactment of the ordinance was the property used as a junkyard or anything similar. Mr. Shultz testified as follows:

Q: I believe that you also testified that you have been a bus driver for 35 years and drove past this property?

A: Twice a day.

Q: So it was twice a day for ...


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.