Lake Adventure Community Ass'n v. Dingman Township Zoning Hearing Board
79 A.3d 708
Pa. Commw. Ct.2013Background
- Landowner owns Lake Adventure Community property in Dingman Township; the Township approved a 1977 recreational subdivision with a special exception for RVs.
- Restrictive covenants define ‘recreational vehicle’ to include travel trailers and a catchall ‘temporary living unit’ approved by Landowner’s committee.
- Landowner allowed slide-out RVs (8 feet wide on road, 12 feet wide when set up) and later 12-Wide RVs (12 feet wide on road).
- June 2011 SALDO amendment defined RVs and prohibited those requiring a special highway moving permit; 12-Wide RVs thus effectively barred.
- Landowner filed a land use appeal challenging the Ordinance as substantially invalid and sought a variance for the Property.
- ZHB hearings (Sept/Oct 2011) accepted Landowner and Township evidence; trial court later struck the special-permit exclusion as not substantially related to the end goal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the special highway permit exclusion is substantially related to zoning goals | Landowner argues exclusion is discriminatory and unrelated to environmental concerns. | Township contends distinction is rational to limit occupancy and protect infrastructure. | 11 Pa. 12-Wide RVs cannot be singled out; provision invalid as not substantially related. |
| Whether the Ordinance creates discriminatory treatment of similar RVs | 12-Wide RVs and Slide-Out RVs are similarly situated and both under 400 sq ft. | Different transport requirements justify differential treatment. | Disparate treatment lacks rational basis; Geiger-like reasoning applies; invalid. |
| Standard of review for trial court without new evidence | Court should assess whether ZHB erred in law or abused discretion. | Review limited to legal error or manifest abuse of discretion. | Trial court’s reversal affirmed; proper scope of review maintained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Geiger v. Zoning Hearing Board of Township of North Whitehall, 510 Pa. 231 (1986) (arbitrary distinctions between mobile and on-site homes struck down)
- C & M Developers, Inc. v. Bedminster Township Zoning Hearing Board, 578 Pa. 2 (2002) (arbitrary or discriminatory distinctions fail police-power rationality)
- In re Heritage Building Group, Inc., 977 A.2d 606 (Pa.Cmwlth.2009) (scope of review for lack of evidence and legal error)
- Burger v. The Zoning Hearing Board of the Municipality of Penn Hills, 85 Pa.Cmwlth. 601 (1984) (hearsay corroboration standards for evidence in zoning disputes)