3 ms·

My God, a staircase without a handrail? What's next, riding a bicycle without a helmet? Better bulldoze the whole complex.

eesmith 8y ago
Just because the homeowner is rich and has a notable and (to many) beloved structure doesn't mean that the owner is exempt from code enforcement. The court document is 19CIV01442 , available from https://odyportal-ext.sanmateocourt.org/Portal-External/DocumentViewer/Embedded/vI5AkbEndBN7vAadKfurXGwfZ92AEOzPk_O5jHQtl_00bNPym2MiYsIBrHiKN59htpcKRIIRSVKqa5XeZdIe1v6E_qVnOLdHuDRaiFZOHRs1?p=0 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.
- humbledrone 8y ago
  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.
  - eesmith 8y ago
    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.

eesmith 8y ago

Just because the homeowner is rich and has a notable and (to many) beloved structure doesn't mean that the owner is exempt from code enforcement. The court document is 19CIV01442 , available from https://odyportal-ext.sanmateocourt.org/Portal-External/DocumentViewer/Embedded/vI5AkbEndBN7vAadKfurXGwfZ92AEOzPk_O5jHQtl_00bNPym2MiYsIBrHiKN59htpcKRIIRSVKqa5XeZdIe1v6E_qVnOLdHuDRaiFZOHRs1?p=0 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.

humbledrone 8y ago
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.
- eesmith 8y ago
  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.