16717 Chirco Drive appeal

The appellant detailed privacy concerns about windows overlooking his family's pool, shadow impacts on the yard, and argued the addition's mass is out of character, offering design alternatives to relocate or reorient the addition.

The property owner argued the project is modest and compatible, presented shadow and sight-line studies, offered frosted glazing for one window, and asked the commission to uphold the approval.

A neighbor directly across the street said he supports the project, noting plenty of two-story homes already in the neighborhood and no intrusion concerns.

A longtime Benedict Lane resident said the addition is far too tall for the area and asked the commission to negotiate something compatible, citing a prior street-design mistake on Benedict Lane.

A co-owner of the home said appellants' latest requests go beyond guidelines into personal redesign preferences, and that this is the family home planned for elderly parents — asking the commission to respect their good-faith efforts.

In rebuttal, the appellant argued his suggestions require no major redesign, disputed the applicant's neighborhood outreach claims, and said the rental status of his home is irrelevant to the privacy concerns.