How have courts interpreted the doctrine of commercial use in the context of a residential driveway?

Cited as opposing this doctrine is Borough of Prospect Park v. McClaskey, 1943, 151 Pa.Super. 467, 30 A.2d 179, where it was held that the use of a driveway in a commercial zone to take supplies into the yard of a brick manufactory in an industrial zone and to haul bricks out was not such an accessory use to the industry as to violate an ordinance. The reason is expressed as follows, 30 A.2d at page 181: 'A driveway for the purpose of affording means of passage to trucks is equally advantageous and suitable for commercial as for industrial purposes.' It is significant that the court also said: '* * * it is conceivable that the public use of a private driveway lying within a residential district in connection with a public garage located in an adjoining commercial district may so change the character of the driveway as to render its public use prohibitive as 'a commercial use' * * *'.