Part of zoning decision appealed
A couple with an award-winning garden that includes a gazebo earlier this month asked Washington County Court to take a look at Peters Township’s denial of their appeal of a zoning violation notice.
When Richard and Ruth Bosco of Abbey Brook Lane built their home on 1.27 acres in 2009, they included the gazebo and relied on the word of their builder who called it a “landscape feature” that did not require a building permit because it could be disassembled and moved.
The township issued a notice of zoning violation in August 2015, and the Boscos requested a hearing before the Peters zoning board. The attorney for the Boscos noted in court documents that the township zoning code does not define the term “gazebo” and claimed that “a gazebo does not fall within the definition of ‘structure'” in the code because it did not have a fixed location on the ground, nor was it attached to something that has a fixed location.
If the gazebo does not meet the definition of a structure, neither would it relate to the sections of the zoning code on setback requirements or the application of setbacks to structures, the attorney argued.
The zoning hearing board convened late last year to hear the case, and the Boscos took the position that “uncontroverted evidence established that the gazebo was bolted to a wooden deck not attached to the ground and, with the use of heavy equipment and disturbance to mature plantings and grading in a new location, could be moved at great expense and thus did not have a fixed location.”
They cited the state’s Municipalities Planning Code, which states that “any doubt in the interpretation of any restriction of a zoning ordinance shall be interpreted in favor of the property owner and against any implied extension of the restriction.”
The Boscos also claim that “statements, actions and decisions by the zoning hearing board and zoning officer” violated their constitutional and due process rights under the Pennsylvania and United States constitutions.”
A 2011 Peters Patch.com story posted in August 2011 noted that the Lexington Court Garden Club gave its Calla Lily Award to Ruth Bosco for what was termed a “truly remarkable garden” that “stretches around her expansive property, which sits in a cul-de-sac. … A veritable rainbow of colors blooms across her landscape created by the dozens of species of flowers and other plant life she has reared there. … The yard’s gazebo, fish pond, bocce court and pair of reclined outdoor lounge chairs allow Bosco and her family and guests to enjoy each other while enjoying the outdoors.”
The Boscos noted that no one from the township or homeowners’ association complained about the gazebo, which they described as “an attractive yard feature … that enhances the beauty of the property.” The use of heavy equipment to remove the gazebo, built by an Amish company, would cost about $6,000.
The zoning hearing board unanimously ruled that the gazebo is a structure, but that it could remain on its site in the Boscos’ yard.
The Boscos are appealing the ruling that the gazebo is a structure. In the part of the zoning hearing board’s 3-2 decision that the Boscos did not appeal to court, the local board allowed the gazebo to remain in place but set deadlines for the Boscos to apply for all necessary permits. Township records show they had not requested a building permit as of Tuesday morning.
The Boscos’ attorney, Robert Blumling, could not immediately be reached for comment.