I always like seeing this house when I drive the 280. It’s one of those landmarks I recognize as a signal I’m getting close to home.
The owners should start a Kickstarter for a legal defense fund or something. Call it “Keep Hillsborough Weird!” The owners are likely rich already if they own a home in that area, but I don’t like the idea of a rich city strong arming a homeowner to change their house to something more “normal” if there’s no real safety issues. Live and let live.
You write "if there’s no real safety issues". The article says there have indeed been safety issues.
> Some of those improvements created life-safety hazards, including a staircase without a handrail, that required immediate correction, he argued in the court filing.
Plus,
> The town issued stop work orders, but Fang continued to make improvements without the requisite permits, ... due to their height, some of the prehistoric metal animals qualified as “unenclosed structures” and required planning approval and a building permit.
> The Landscaping Improvements and Other Improvements required various approvals from Hillsborough, including planning review and building permits. Mrs. Fang installed all of the improvements without planning approvals and without building permits, except for a very limited permit for a low wall in the front of the property.
If you live in a place which requires planning review, then you need to submit your changes to planning review. Yes, your neighbors might fight it. But this is one of those cases where it isn't easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.
At the very least, do your best to get the planning review and if that fails then go ahead and make the changes. It could well be that 80% of the neighbors want the change, but violating the law makes it easy for the other 20% to object and force the changes to be undone.
Another claim is:
> the failure to apply for building and encroachment permits for the deck, retaining wall, stairs, driveway extension, driveway gate and columns, and parking strip (the “Other Improvements”) did not allow Town staff to determine their structural integrity, to ensure that safety features are in place; or to achieve compliance with applicable standards. As a result, potentially dangerous conditions exist on ghe deck and parking areas and other improvements may not satisfy Code requirements.
That is, the staircase without a handrail is an obvious code violation. We do not know how many other violations exist.
If you live in a place with required building inspections then you have to have your buildings be inspected.
The thing is, none of the neighbors actually care about the staircase with no handrail. They just want what they consider to be an eyesore to go away, and they're using code/law as a tool to get that.
It may well be that the owner has some real safety issues, etc, and I think it's great to fix those. But it's a dick move to use those as leverage to get rid of an "ugly" house.
But that response is entirely predictable, which is why ignoring building codes in order to bypass the neighbors' preferences is the wrong way to start.
I know the daughter of the architect. The few times she's posted about neighborhood drama related to this house on Facebook, I'm always very impressed by how many people come out that both know and have fond memories of this house.
I do think it's pretty ugly, but that ain't a valid reason to get rid of it IMO. If your property values (the only thing these stuck up NIMBY types care about) go down because God forbid there's an ugly house nearby, then said value was probably inflated to begin with.
"it won't change the culture of the city." they said.
Everything unique about the bay area is dead or on life support. And now they're going to drown this house with bureaucracy for failing to blend in with the crowd.
The owners should start a Kickstarter for a legal defense fund or something. Call it “Keep Hillsborough Weird!” The owners are likely rich already if they own a home in that area, but I don’t like the idea of a rich city strong arming a homeowner to change their house to something more “normal” if there’s no real safety issues. Live and let live.
The weird homes and cars are always fun to look at and give a city character. Like that car in Pacifica with all the squirrel statues glued all over it: http://www.reallyweirdstuff.com/squirlywhirlyartcar.htm
> Some of those improvements created life-safety hazards, including a staircase without a handrail, that required immediate correction, he argued in the court filing.
Plus,
> The town issued stop work orders, but Fang continued to make improvements without the requisite permits, ... due to their height, some of the prehistoric metal animals qualified as “unenclosed structures” and required planning approval and a building permit.
The court document is 19CIV01442 , available from https://odyportal-ext.sanmateocourt.org/Portal-External/Docu... . One claim is:
> The Landscaping Improvements and Other Improvements required various approvals from Hillsborough, including planning review and building permits. Mrs. Fang installed all of the improvements without planning approvals and without building permits, except for a very limited permit for a low wall in the front of the property.
If you live in a place which requires planning review, then you need to submit your changes to planning review. Yes, your neighbors might fight it. But this is one of those cases where it isn't easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.
At the very least, do your best to get the planning review and if that fails then go ahead and make the changes. It could well be that 80% of the neighbors want the change, but violating the law makes it easy for the other 20% to object and force the changes to be undone.
Another claim is:
> the failure to apply for building and encroachment permits for the deck, retaining wall, stairs, driveway extension, driveway gate and columns, and parking strip (the “Other Improvements”) did not allow Town staff to determine their structural integrity, to ensure that safety features are in place; or to achieve compliance with applicable standards. As a result, potentially dangerous conditions exist on ghe deck and parking areas and other improvements may not satisfy Code requirements.
That is, the staircase without a handrail is an obvious code violation. We do not know how many other violations exist.
If you live in a place with required building inspections then you have to have your buildings be inspected.
It may well be that the owner has some real safety issues, etc, and I think it's great to fix those. But it's a dick move to use those as leverage to get rid of an "ugly" house.
"it won't change the culture of the city." they said.
Everything unique about the bay area is dead or on life support. And now they're going to drown this house with bureaucracy for failing to blend in with the crowd.