IN THE MATTER OF THE

1. The Applicant/Owner is Richard Yingst, 7100 Fishing Creek Valley Road, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17112.

2. The subject property is part of Bradford Estates Phase I, located at the intersection of Route 22 and relocated Jonestown Road.

3. The tax parcel numbers for the subject property are 68-028-042 and 68-028-115.

4. The subject property is located in the Village (V) zoning district.

5. Approximately one year ago a subdivision plan for Bradford Estates Phase I was approved by the Township Supervisors and recorded.

6. The portion of the Subdivision Plan at issue is the area depicted as Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8 all of which adjoin Lot C-11. Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8 are unimproved whereas Lot C-11 is improved with two structures, and is used for offices, apartments, and a towing business operating under a variance which expires March 3, 2002.

7. Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8 are to be developed as commercial use lots and to the south of Lots C-7 and C-8 is an adjoining residential use area along which is a 50 feet wide buffer yard in conformance with Section 195-122.C.(3) of the Zoning Ordinance.

8. Because of the mixed use on Lot C-11, both residential and commercial, the Zoning Officer determined that it was necessary to have a 50 feet wide buffer yard on each of the adjoining Lots around Lot C-11 to separate the residential use from the commercial use on the adjoining Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8.

9. Lots C-5, C-6 and C-7 are irregularly shaped and contain steep slopes.

10. Because the apartments located on Lot C-11 are located on the second floor, screening will be of reduced benefit.

11. Admitted into evidence as Exhibits 1 through 3 were three drawings of the subject properties.

12. The testimony and Exhibits demonstrated that strict conformance with the 50 feet wide buffer yard would make Lots C-5, C-6 and C-8 not buildable because of the open space dictated by the 50 feet wide buffer yard along Lot C-11 and the requisite building set back lines and the 50 feet wide buffer yard along the southern side of Lot C-8 where it adjoins the residential use area.

13. Admitted into evidence as Exhibit No. 4 was a copy of Ordinance 1999-12 adopted by the Supervisors on September 7, 1999 establishing the requirements for a 50 feet wide buffer yard between residential and commercial uses.

14. Admitted into evidence as Exhibit No. 5 was a copy of Note 13 from the preliminary plan for Bradford Estates Phase I indicating that the uses were not yet identified for the lots and that they would be included on the Land Development Plan to be submitted in the future.

15. Admitted into evidence as Exhibit No. 6 was a document entitled Zoning District - Village outlining the set backs, and other requirements within the Village District applicable to the subject property.

16. Admitted into evidence as Exhibit No. 7 was a copy of notes from the pre-application conference held on October 25, 2001 in which the Township Engineer participated and discussed the buffer yard requirements with the Developer.

17. The preliminary plan for the subject property was submitted one month after the Supervisors adopted Ordinance 1999-12 which established the requirements for a 50 feet wide buffer yard between residential and commercial uses.

18. The Zoning Ordinance also requires that within the 50 feet wide buffer zone Level Three screening be utilized.

19. However, due to the steep slopes and other unique circumstances with respect to the subject lots, it is not practical, feasible or necessary to utilize the Level Three screening which is to develop an opacity to a height of 30 feet upon maturity of the landscape plantings.

20. Applicant testified that all lots could be buildable and he would be satisfied to provide a 25 feet wide buffer yard around Lot C-11 on Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8.

21. Applicant indicated he was not requesting relief by variance from the Level Three screening requirements on the south of Lot C-11 on Lot C-8.

22. Applicant testified that because of the topography and other conditions of the Lots, that he could provide for Level Two screening on the east and north of Lot C-11 on Lots C-5, C-6 and C-7.

23. Notice of the public hearing held on January 10, 2002 was properly advertised, notice was posted at the Municipal Building, the subject property was properly posted and all adjoining property owners were notified by Certified Mail.

24. There was no opposition from other property owners to the requested variances.

25.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Section 195-122.C.(3) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a buffer yard of 50 feet between commercial uses and residential uses and also requires Level Three screening within the buffer yard.

2. Applicant is requesting a variance from the buffer yard requirements to permit a buffer yard of 25 feet surrounding Lot C-11 on Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8.

3. Applicant also is requesting a variance from the Level Three screening requirements of the Ordinance to permit Level Two screening along the east and north of Lot C-11 on Lots C–5, C-6 and C-7.

4. Section 195-199 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 910.2 of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code allow the Zoning Hearing Board to act on requests for variances and to grant such requests under certain conditions of hardship and may attach such reasonable conditions and safeguards as it may deem necessary to implement the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance.

5. The requested variance to reduce the width of the buffer yard from 50 feet to 25 feet is necessary to enable the reasonable use and development of Lots C-5, C-6 and C-8 which are not buildable otherwise, even though the lots appeared on a Subdivision Plan approved by the Supervisors in December of 1999.

6. The subject property has existing topographical features of steep slope associated with Lots C-5, C-6 and C-7.

7. Because of the impact of the building set back lines, in conjunction with restriction of parking within buffer yards, and the interplay with a 50 feet wide buffer yard in strict conformance with the Ordinance, Lots C-5, C-6 and C-8 would not be buildable and would be useless.

8. The variance, if authorized, would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property nor would they be detrimental to the public welfare.

DECISION

In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in view of the evidence and testimony presented to the Zoning Hearing Board, it is the decision of the Board that:

A. The interpretation of the Zoning Officer requiring the 50 feet wide buffer yard around Lot C-11 is affirmed;

B. The requested variance from the buffer yard requirements is hereby GRANTED, permitting a 25 feet wide buffer yard around Lot C-11 on Lots C-5, C-6, C-7 and C-8; and

C. The requested variance from the requirement to provide Level Three screening is granted with respect to the 25 feet wide buffer around Lot C-11 on the east and north, on Lots C-5, C-6 and C-7, where Level Two screening shall be planted within the buffer yard. Level Three screening shall be planted within the buffer yard along the south of Lot C-11 on Lot C-8 and approximately 43 feet of Lot C-7.

The denial of the Appeal from the Zoning Officer’s interpretation and the variances were approved by unanimous vote of the Zoning Hearing Board Members.

DATE: WEST HANOVER TOWNSHIP ZONING HEARING BOARD

Brian F. Jacobeen

Ruth C. Shields

Norma J. Gruber