Lower Providence Zoning Board OKs three variances, denies request to legalize garage bathroom connection

Gary Brown, chair of the Lower Providence Township Zoning Hearing Board, presided over an October meeting in which the board granted three variances for residential additions and an in‑law suite and denied an application to amend a prior restriction on a detached garage bathroom.

The board voted to permit Joshua L. and Karen Benson (Docket Z‑25‑21) to build a two‑story addition at 687 Sunnyside Avenue with a 6.4‑foot side‑yard setback where the R2 district normally requires 20 feet. Joshua L. Benson, the homeowner, told the board the house was built in 1979 and said the nonconformity predates his ownership: "the hardship is pre‑existing and not created by the homeowner," he said, describing a narrow 90‑foot lot, an in‑ground pool and interior layout constraints that make shifting the addition impractical. The board’s approval was tied to construction matching the plans and testimony entered into the record.

The board also granted Rian(Rihanna) and Todd Serpico (Docket Z‑25‑22) a variance to build a 1,218‑square‑foot in‑law suite at 2839 Eagleville Road, exceeding the ordinance cap of 800 square feet for accessory living units. Todd Serpico described the request as a caregiving measure for aging parents and said the larger footprint was to accommodate a second resident and assisted‑care needs. "An in‑law suite would allow them to live independently while still being close enough for us to provide that daily assistance," Serpico told the board. The approval is subject to the specific requirements of §143‑6.2 P1–P14 and the condition that construction conform to the submitted drawings and testimony; the board emphasized the ordinance’s annual reporting requirements and that the kitchen must be removed if the unit later ceases to serve the intended occupants.

The board denied an application by Mark and Carol Gilpatrick (Docket Z‑25‑23) to amend a October 23, 1998 decision that had prohibited water or sewer connections to a detached garage at 2943 Eagleville Road. The Gilpatricks acknowledged a bathroom had been installed decades after the 1998 decision and that lines were tied into their house plumbing; they said they were seeking formalization of the condition before selling. The board declined to change the prior ruling and encouraged the property owners to work with township staff on compliance measures such as capping or disconnecting the lines if required by the earlier decision. As Mark Gilpatrick explained during the hearing, "we put a bathroom in the garage... we had no idea that we thought that was okay," and the board relied on the original decision language in denying the amendment.

Finally, the board granted Jason and Rachel Long (Docket Z‑25‑24) relief to build an addition at 2909 Pheasant Run Road with a 17.4‑foot side‑yard setback where 20 feet is required. Architect Tom Campbell (Hearth Builders) testified the 308‑square‑foot addition is sited to minimize disturbance to the front yard and to avoid the existing 1970s pool, and the Longs provided a neighbor email indicating no objection. Campbell said the design keeps the addition ‘‘one foot back from the current exterior’’ to reduce nonconformity and that impervious and building coverage would remain in compliance.

Votes at a glance - Z‑25‑13 (HTC Associates): continuance to December 17, 2025 — approved (board motion). - Z‑25‑15 (Julio Cerello): continuance to November meeting — approved (board motion). - Z‑25‑21 (Joshua L. & Karen Benson): variance for 6.4 ft side‑yard setback — granted; construction per submitted plans. - Z‑25‑22 (Rian/Rihanna & Todd Serpico): variance for 1,218‑sq‑ft in‑law suite (800 sq ft permitted) — granted subject to §143‑6.2 P1–P14 and plan compliance. - Z‑25‑23 (Mark & Carol Gilpatrick): request to amend 1998 decision to permit garage sewer connection — denied (board motion); township advised to work on disconnection/capping if required. - Z‑25‑24 (Jason & Rachel Long): variance for 17.4 ft side‑yard setback — granted; construction per submitted plans.

What it means and next steps The decisions allow three property owners to proceed with additions that the board found met the variance criteria under local law, while preserving an earlier enforcement condition in a long‑standing decision regarding a garage bathroom. Applicants whose variances were granted were reminded that approvals are conditioned on building per the plans and complying with other township and state regulations; the Serpicos were specifically reminded of the annual reporting obligation that accompanies permitted in‑law suites. Property owners seeking to alter or reactivate restricted facilities (for example, the Gilpatricks’ garage bathroom) were instructed to coordinate with township code enforcement on any required disconnection or permitting steps.

The Zoning Hearing Board announced its next meeting for Tuesday, November 25.