10A Action 2011 0718 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Board of Zoning Adjustments Regular Meeting Minutes .Tune 2, 2011 Agenda No. 11-06 Page S of 8 while staff makes suggestions to applicants throughout the process, they don't get involved in redesigning proposals. In response to a question from Vice Chair Houston about the distance of the eastern wall from the garage, Planner Hamer said that the project would not have gone out for review to the neighbors if it had not complied with all applicable setback requirements, including structure -to - structure. Planner Hamer also confirmed that the roof rises a maximum of 2 feet from the wall line to the peak. Member Palma said that there appears to be considerable space on the back of the property and wondered if the addition might be limited to one story. Planner Hamer acknowledged that there is room to add to the home in a number of ways, but the Planning Department's role is to ensure that a project proposed meets regulatory and design criteria, not to make suggestions about how to design a project. With no additional comments from Board Members, Chair Daly invited the appellant to make his presentation. The Metaxas' attorney, Jeffrey Allen, 436 - 14th Street, Suite 1400, Oakland, approached the lectern with Mr. Harry Metaxas. Mr. Allen stated that the issue is not about who is the most gracious neighbor, not about whether a family with small children needs more space in their home and has the right to develop it, and not even about balancing the rights of the two families. He pointed out that that Mr. and Mrs. Metaxas have lived in the house and worked in this community for more than 25 years. What this is about, Mr. Allen stated, is a City official who failed to do his job properly and competently. He said that the work done by the City official who approved the applicant's proposal was so far below acceptable standards as to constitute an abuse of the discretion given to him by ordinance. He said that the intent of Zoning Code Section 2-580 (H) is to prevent modifications from appearing out of scale with the relative structures in the community and also to minimize the interference that they create to existing structures. He drew the Board's attention to Section 2-580 (11)(4), in particular, noting that it is inconceivable to him that anyone could have done more to maximize the effects and the impact on the Metaxas property than the person who designed the proposed modification to 908 Dowling Boulevard. He said that it deprives the Metaxas property of privacy, as well as light and warmth from the sun, and that the windows on the proposed extension look directly down into his den's sliding glass doors. Looking to the right from those windows, he noted, a person would see the Metaxas' backyard. As an example of how the ZEO abused his discretion, Mr. Allen cited the window proposals the ZEO recommended. If slider windows have opaque glass on the bottom, he stated, it doesn't protect neighbor privacy when they slide open from side to side. Furthermore, there would be nothing to prevent either the current or subsequent owner from replacing the opaque glass with clear glass so they don't even have to open the windows to look out. Mr. Allen said that what's happened is that the owners of 908 Dowling want to build onto their home in the least expensive way, which is understandable, but the problem is that they're shifting the economic burden to Mr. and Mrs. Metaxas. He said that due to the loss of privacy, the Metaxases will suffer a significant loss in the value of their property, referring to letters from three brokers who say so. Mr. Metaxas, who noted he is a professional architect, built a model to show the impact of the proposed changes to the neighboring property on his home and presented it to the Board Members. He said that with the second story next door, there would be no sunlight on his patio or in his family room until 10:00 or 11:00 a.m. Mr. Metaxas also used Photoshop to fill in the wall