Opinion ID: 3011942
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The History of the Relevant Zoning Ordinance

Text: In 1977, The Township developed a Comprehensive Plan for development within the Township. [337a]. As part of this Comprehensive Plan, The Township enacted Ordinance No. 1469, which established a V-Residence District. Article III, S 301. [477a, 512a]. In the V-Residence District, pursuant 7 to S 301.2, certain uses were permitted as of right: singlefamily detached dwellings, tilling of the soil, township administrative buildings, public libraries, public parks, play or recreational areas, or any similar uses operated by the Township or other governmental agencies. [512a]. Other uses, such as churches, rectories, parish houses, convents, monasteries and other similar institutions, were permitted as special exceptions; the ZHB may grant aspecial exception to certain predetermined uses and in so doing it may attach conditions to the grant of the exception in order to preserve the purpose of the zoning ordinance. On March 8, 1990, The Township enacted Ordinance No. 1676, which amended S 301.2 of Ordinance No. 1469 (the V-Residence District). [806a]. The amendment, as it pertains to the issues in this case, eliminated all uses by right except single-family detached dwellings, and accessory uses on the same lot that are customarily incidental to single-family dwellings. [806a]. All of the uses previously permitted by special exception, including religious uses, were eliminated. The purpose of this amendment, as stated in the Legislative Intent of the Ordinance, was to create a low density area for single-family detached dwelling units. [806a]. On May 9, 1996, The Township re-classified its zoning ordinances pursuant to Ordinance No. 1753 (the Ordinance). [977a]. This Ordinance changed the designation of The Township’s low density residential district from V-Residence to R-1 Residential.[999a]. Section 301 of the Ordinance permitted the following uses in R-1 by right: agriculture, livestock, single family detached dwellings, conservation and recreation preserve. [1000a]. Uses permitted by special exception include: kennel (defined at 1074a), riding academy, municipal complex (defined [at 1094a] to include municipal administration buildings, libraries, police barracks, or road maintenance facilities), outdoor recreation (defined in Article IV, section 706(G)(6) of the 1996 Ordinance to include public or private miniature golf courses, swimming pools, ball courts, tennis courts, ball fields, trails, and similar uses, . . . [o]utdoor recreation shall[also] include any accessory use, such as snack bar, pro shops, club 8 houses, country clubs), emergency services, and utility facilities (defined [at 1108a] to include, inter alia, train stations and bus shelters). The stated purpose of the R-1 Residential District was to provide low density, single family, neighborhoods. [1000a]. Churches and other religious institutions, except those that are legal, nonconforming uses, are not permitted in R-1 Residential Districts.1 Although religious institutions are not explicitly excluded by the language of the Ordinance, they are de jure excluded from that particular zone because they are not specifically listed among the uses that may apply for special exceptions. Apparently, the only option for a religious institution wishing to locate in an R-1 Residential District is to apply for a variance with the ZHB. According to the Ordinance, a variance is a grant of relaxation by the [ZHB] from the dimensional and use regulations of th[e] Ordinance, when such action will not be considered contrary to the public interest, and where, owing to conditions unique to the property, and not resulting from the actions or situation of the applicant, a literal enforcement of this code would result in undue and unnecessary hardship. [997a]. The variance standard is very different from the special exception standard because it requires the applicant to demonstrate unnecessary hardship, which requires evidence that: (1) the physical features of the property are such that it cannot be used for a permitted purpose; or (2) that the property can be conformed for a permitted use only at a prohibitive expense; or (3) that the property has no value for any purpose permitted by the zoning ordinance. Hertzberg v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 554 Pa. 249, 721 A.2d 43, 47 (1998). In contrast, for an application to merit a special exception, it need only establish that the zoning _________________________________________________________________ 1. A non-conforming use is defined as: A building, lot, structure, sign or use, which lawfully existed prior to the adoption, revision or amendment of this Ordinance, but does not comply with zoning use or district regulations by reasons of adoption, revision, or amendment of this Ordinance. [993a; see also 1191a]. Of the 36 churches and synagogues currently operating in the Township, 29 of them are legal, nonconforming uses outside of the CS, M, and A-O Districts. 25 of those places of worship are located in residential districts. 9 ordinance allows the use and that the particular use applied for is consistent with the public interest. Ryan, Pennsylvania Zoning Law and Practice, Vol. 2 SS 5.1.2, 6.1.5; Heck v. Zoning Hearing Bd., 39 Pa. Commw. 570, 397 A.2d 15 (1979). If that showing is made, the special exception must be granted, though appropriate conditions may be attached. Religious institutions are permitted in the Township under the Ordinance in the CS-Community Service District. [1024a]. In fact, the CS-District was specifically designed to provide for, inter alia, the religious needs of the Township community. [1024a]. The Township has provided for other institutional uses that are excluded from the R-1 Residential District in the CS-District, including hospitals, schools, and community service centers. Religious institutions are also permitted in the M-Mixed Use District [1028a], and, by special exception, in the A-O Apartment/Office District. [1019a].