Municipalities — Zoning — Non-conforming use — Change — Variance.
In this zoning case, in which it appeared that a non-conforming use of the property was permissible, that the tenant had used it for a different and prohibited non-conforming use for a period of five years and had then applied for a variance to permit such use, which application was refused by the zoning board of adjustment; and that action was sustained by the court below upon the ground that no unnecessary hardship had been established and that the zoning board of adjustment had not abused its discretion or committed any positive error of law, it was Held that the order dismissing the appeal should be affirmed.
OPINION PER CURIAM, March 16, 1959:
The judgment in the above captioned case is affirmed on the opinion of Judge SPORKIN of Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Philadelphia County.