T. Marchenko v. The ZHB of Pocono Twp., Monroe County, PA, and Pocono Twp.
147 A.3d 947
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2016Background
- Marchenko purchased a single-family home in Pocono Township (R-1 district) and listed it for short-term rentals to help pay expenses; she lived at the property a majority of days (114 of first 185 days) but rented it 71 days.
- Township zoning officer issued a notice of violation alleging the short-term vacation rentals violated the R-1 district rules (Section 402) permitting only single-family dwellings.
- Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) found the rental activity amounted to a transient use and classified it as a "lodge," a transient dwelling accommodation permitted only in the RD district, and denied Marchenko’s appeal.
- Trial court affirmed the ZHB, citing Pennsylvania Supreme Court authority limiting transient uses in single-family zones.
- Commonwealth Court reversed: it held the Ordinance’s definition of "single-family dwelling" (occupied by one family) and the fact Marchenko primarily used the home herself meant short-term, successive rentals to a single family at a time were not per se excluded and the ZHB improperly labeled the use a "lodge."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Marchenko) | Defendant's Argument (Township/ZHB) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether successive short-term occupancies to different families are inconsistent with a "single-family dwelling" use | Short-term rentals do not change that the property is primarily a single-family dwelling occupied by Marchenko most of the time; ordinance does not prohibit occasional rentals | Successive short-term occupancies are transient and thus incompatible with the single-family concept; Albert supports limiting transiency in single-family zones | Court held the rentals were consistent with the single-family dwelling definition here because Marchenko primarily occupied the home and the ordinance does not expressly forbid such rentals |
| Whether the rental activity constitutes a prohibited "lodge" (transient dwelling accommodation) | The ordinance does not define "lodge"; ZHB relied on inapplicable dictionary definitions (including verb forms and a noun meaning tied to outdoor activities); Marchenko’s primary residence use distinguishes her situation from a purpose-built transient accommodation | ZHB and Township treated the short-term rentals as a lodge/transient accommodation not allowed in R-1 | Court held the ZHB erred: the cited dictionary definitions were inapplicable and the record did not support treating Marchenko’s intermittent rentals as a lodge prohibited in R-1 |
Key Cases Cited
- Albert v. Zoning Hearing Board of North Abington Township, 854 A.2d 401 (Pa. 2004) (transiency incompatible with single-family dwelling where resident composition lacks stability)
- Riverfront Development Group, LLC v. City of Harrisburg Zoning Hearing Board, 109 A.3d 358 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015) (zoning language construed to give landowner benefit of least restrictive use)
- Header v. Schuylkill County Zoning Hearing Board, 841 A.2d 641 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (doubts about undefined zoning terms resolved in favor of landowner)
- Patricca v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh, 590 A.2d 744 (Pa. 1991) (ordinance words construed by common and approved usage)