At a minimum, I would request that they install temporary fencing during construction to prevent trespassing and property damage (and possibly to address safety concerns?). As for the actual zoning, are they seeking approval for any encroachment other than the setback? What is the required setback?

Sorry to hear about your disappointment. Good luck getting it worked out.

Our community has restrictions on the angle from property line to top of roof, which were created because your situation was coming up repeatedly. It doesn't help 100%, but does limit the "damage". Does your community have such restrictions?

Would you be okay with the raised roof but no long dormer on your side?

Thanks for your suggestion. We have discussed temporary fencing with them and they agreed to that (although we are skeptical of all their commitments). We plan to request any such commitments be in writing with signatures notarized. I believe the required sideyard is 8 feet and they are under 7 feet now.

newbie14- it has to be very disconcerting to see the roof of your neighbor's house being raised that much. Oddly, we have the same issues with our new build, but in reverse. My side neighbor enjoyed the visual space of our once empty lot as part of her side/backyard and was very upset when she saw the foundation going in. It is very monolithic on her side- but a lot of that has to do with the slope of our lot and the way we were forced to engineer the foundation. She complained... bigtime- to the HOA, but we met code and the arch. committees approval so there was nothing she could do at the time. Thing is, in our case- that lot was up for sale for years and no one wanted it, so the two neighbors affected by our build could have bought it (cheaply, I might add) at any time since 1985.
I suspect I will hear more complaints but the point is- I don't hold it against her. I understand completely. So, I think it is well within your rights to raise your concerns to the city and HOA and see if you can mitigate any damge to your light and privacy. If you do it from the prospective of property value being lost, that may aid your cause as well. This was certainly not a case of laxity on your part where someone built fresh on a vacant lot. They should be required to get a variance if they are not complying with code, after all.

I know in my area the Fire Department also has to approve any modifications to non-conforming structures. A taller home beside you could also be more of a fire hazard for your home in the even of a fire.
I wouldn't want this addition next to me even if the neighbors did get mad.

You need to attend the Zoning Board meeting and voice your concerns during public comment. I think you will find the board to have a sympathetic ear.

As bpathome suggested, you might check whether there are daylight plane requirements in addition to the setback. Is the house itself in the setback or is only the chimney encroaching?

I would guess a zoning board would be sympathetic to an argument that any addition should not compound the non-conforming aspect of their house. For example, your neighbors could design their addition so that no part of the addition touches the portion of the house that is in the setback. Or perhaps they could eliminate or shorten the long dormer?

I think the best way to approach the possible issue of blocking light is to ask if it has been determined or can be determined what effect the height of the addition will have on sunlight with regards to your house. Not just that you are sure it is going to have a negative impact.

I live in a dense urban area and almost every addition to any existing property is non-conforming because existing properties are almost all already nonconforming to current building practices and standards.

I went to a zoning hearing a few years back because I was making an offer on a house and suddenly the house next door (and these houses are all attached) had a demolition notice on it.

One street over someone had applied for permits for a back addition that was actually smaller than some that had been approved in the past, and a neighbor was fighting him tooth and nail regarding his addition. She was not the next door neighbor, but one removed.

Her objections were that 1) it was going to block light from her property and (2) it was going to have a negative effect on water runoff by decreasing ground permeability even more and (3) various and sundry other objections including blocking a view (the view is nothing really)

The homeowner who was under 30, brilliant, and had a relatively hefty budget, having sold some computer aps and software, came back with satellite photos and official studies refuting her claims of blocking sun, and engineering studies showing that what he planned to do would actually have a positive effect on water runoff, and other evidence against her other objections.

In the mean time he bought the house behind his because if he tore that house down his addition would suddenly be "conforming" because of the increased lot size/setback requirements if he combined lots. There is nothing here that really prevents you from tearing anything down unless it is on the historic register.

As for the changes in the neighbors view, it has generally been determined in this location that you don't own the view you see from your windows to the extent that you can stop the neighbors from building something that blocks it, as long as it conforms or is approved with regard to everything else.

My point is that the neighbor did not really have anything that backed up the allegations re: light blocking, water runoff, etc. and the homeowner was able to officially refute her objections, and when she continued to object, she was somewhat dismissed as a PITA who did not want her neighbor to improve his house for some personal reason.
Particularly when she was willing to force his hand in tearing down a house (which would have disrupted a very pleasant line of attached houses). He came off as very reasonable despite the fact he was willing to demolish another house to get what he wanted, and she came off as Unreasonable because she could not really back up her objections.

Who advised you that the board doesn't like to hear objections? The neighbor? It is precisely their job to hear objections and alternate viewpoints because, once they approve a variance, they can't go back and it sets precedence for future changes.

Typically around here, if there is a real issue, a neighbor will go to other neighbors and enlist support to get enough objections so the board will turn it down.

Further, I would document with dates and pics any damage or changes made that affect your land directly....they can be held responsible for replacing trees, etc. if they get damaged.

We needed a variance to build so we went to the neighbors with drawings and plans and explained everything and got their buy-in. When we went to the town, there were no objections.

I think what the OP meant is that the board is hesitant to grant a variance if there is any objection? That's how I read it.

Thank you for the many helpful comments and suggestions. They helped me think more about all sides of the issue and I will be sure to keep them in mind as this process goes forward. Thank you again.

If you don't stand up for yourself, and what you want, then how do you expect to ever get something you want?

Absolutely anything and EVERYTHING should be in writing and notarized--maybe even recorded...

Good luck.

If the side yard set back is 8 ft (you should find out for sure) and the existing house is now set back 7 ft (you need to verify this too) the addition must be set back 1 ft from the existing wall in order to avoid the need for a variance.

If you oppose the 1 ft encroachment and are successful ( and I think you would be), it would not benefit you very much.

The more important issue is the height of the addition. It appears the intention is to claim it is a 2 1/2 story house and that the mid point of the new end gable meets the height limit. I would check the definition of building height and the zoning restrictions for new shed dormers. They should be required to be held back from the ends of the house or they could be used to effective violate the zoning height limit.

What I'm saying is the design looks like a sleazy attempt to circumvent the intent of the zoning ordinance and that should be obvious to the board of appeals; you can be sure they have seen this kind of thing many times before.

I would not worry too much about the side yard setback but I would hammer them hard on the oversized dormers and excessive building height. If the height of the house is limited to 2 1/2 stories, you can argue that if the ceilings of the new upper level dormers are full height all the way to the lower floor exterior walls then that portion of the house is 3 stories. Tell them if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, its a duck.

If you are uncertain about how the board of appeals works go to some of the public hearings. The board is always reluctant to grant a variance that can be used to claim a precedent for other houses. They can grant relief for certain kinds of special situations and unusual conditions if they constitute hardships not shared by other properties but they don't have the authority to rewrite the ordinance. I have seen neighbors sue a board and win. However, is the relief can be granted by a special permit from the town that is a different matter.

Get the survey of the neighbor's property from the public file at the building department and read the ordinance carefully. Also get the other elevations of the house to see the length of the dormers.

Agree with what Reonvator said, with the exception that you need to understand your local rules-- in our town if a house or lot is non-conforming in any way a variance is required for any change to the building that affects more than a trivial number of square feet-- so here the setback issue would trigger the need for a variance for work done on any part of the house, or even on an outbuilding.

Attend a few meeting of your ZBA if at all possible to see how they work. If you have concerns, which you do, it is completely reasonable to raise those concerns at the meeting. Both things that violate a bylaw and aspects like appearance, conformance with the neighborhood, and subjective impact are fair game. You mayor may not win completely, but you are very likely to have your most serious issues mitigated. Neighborhoods can quickly turn into architectural disasters if no one ever speaks up and your zoning board isn't vigilant (not a problem where I live!). Our recent addition is on a non-conforming lot and we visited all of our abutters with our plans in hand to discuss our plans and hear and address their concerns prior to going to the board, as a result a couple of them showed up at the ZBA meeting to support our request, something that surprised and pleased the Board.

To require a variance for changes to a house that do not violate the zoning ordinance or increase the non-conformance of a non-conforming setback is beyond the authority of a municipality under the state enabling act where I live. It is chilling to think that such a thing could be possible anywhere.

Almost all existing non-conforming features of houses and lots are due to the zoning ordinance being written after the house was legally built. A municipality cannot punish a homeowner for an aspect of a house that was legal at the time it was built.

The building department can have that kind of retroactive control over property but usually only for life safety issues like smoke detectors.

We had support of our neighbours for a third floor, AND precedent of other 3 story houses on the street, and we STILL had to justify it to the city planning department. I think the board would take your arguments very seriously.

Regardless of whether you support the build or not, around here, you are simply not allowed to use your neighbour's property to build your house. Period. Sometimes it's easier, and you can ask permission to access the neighbour's yard, And the neighbour can choose to grant that permission. But if the neighbour has not given that permission, and can prove that the construction crews are trespassing, the build can be shut down and the homeowner fined. I'd look into the rules in your area. You may not have to get their promises of consideration for your private property, the city may handle it for you.

It doesn't sound like you have a great relationship with the neighbour to begin with. I don't think you have anything to lose by objecting to their build.