Crown Communications v. Zoning Hearing Board

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• describing zoning board’s decision that 375-foot communications tower would be a nuisance
• describing zoning board's decision that 375-foot communications tower would be a nuisance
• provider of mobile cellular service not a \public utility\ under the Public Utility Code
• private, nonregulated business not public utility, therefore not entitled to variance
• if an applicant wishes to raise a validity challenge at any time during a zoning hearing board proceeding, even if only as an alternative theory, it must make this known in a public notice prior to the meeting in accordance with § 916.1 of the MPC

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).