The recent case of Goldstein v. The Zoning Hearing Board of the Township of Lower Merion filed April 21 by the Commonwealth Court emphatically illustrates the importance of not disregarding the mandates of local ordinances when constructing additions or new structures on one’s real estate. As we shall soon see, neither the long-standing nature of a nonconformity, the expense of compliance, nor the acquiescence of one’s immediate neighbors will afford relief to the landowner when a hardship is not directly tied to a pre-existing unique physical condition on one’s property.
According to the court’s opinion, William and Frances Goldstein constructed a pool house on their property in 1982. The pool house violated the Lower Merion Township Ordinance regulating aggregate side set back requirements by 2.51 feet. Remarkably, the township never cited the landowners for the violation. Twenty-four years later, in 2006, the landowners began construction of an addition to the west side of their home that violated the aggregate side setback by 11.5 feet. The permit for the addition was contingent upon resolving the status of the non-conforming pool house.
