residents of the apartment house.” Id. The defendant committed only a “minor act of vandalism” on a car in the parking lot. Id. In contrast, the defendants in Roth created a hazardous condition because altercations could have occurred. Roth, 531 A.2d at 1137. A physically offensive condition, within the meaning of § 5503(a)(4), “encompasses direct assaults on the physical senses of members of the public.” Williams, 574 A.2d at 1164. “A defendant may create such a condition if she sets off a ‘stink bomb’, strews rotting garbage in public places, or shines blinding lights in the eyes of others.” Id. Likewise, a physically offensive condition can occur where the defendant invades the physical privacy of the victim. Id. (citing Commonwealth v. Young, 370 Pa.Super. 42, 535 A.2d 1141 (1988) (<HOLDING>), appeal denied, 518 Pa. 649, 544 A.2d 961
holding that proof of control was not required where the injury arose from the condition of the work place created by or known to the contraetor holding that two male defendants created a physically offensive condition by entering a bathroom stall and confronting a woman sitting on a toilet holding construction company had actual notice of dangerous condition that its employees created holding that contractor owed general negligence duty to thirdparty by dangerous condition contractor created on road holding judges offensive comments made on television show fully protected by first amendment