[VA] Dispute between neighbors in Del Ray

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the architect bought the lot next to him and managed to wedge 3 houses on 1/2 acre - that is pretty dense and would require the houses be distributed around the lot. At least one of them was going end up in the far corner of the lot from the roads, since this is a corner lot. The house has view of the rear of three house surrounding it, as well as views into the back of the townhouses on Nelson Ave. If you buy a house with those kinds of views, do you really have a right to complain?

It looks like there is a driveway to the builders house than runs behind or along the new houses. All in all, a pretty screwy setup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's his right to build it that way. He was issued a permit. The problem is with the Lineham's house. It was built in what would normally be a backyard. That's where people put garage's, garden sheds, old cars, etc. If I build a house that is on top of your backyard, does that mean I now have a right to tell you what you can put in your backyard?

Did you miss the fact that Gaver Nichols himself was the architect who built their house on top of his backyard?

I do not get how he put the Linehams house right on the property line in the first place. The house is turned sideways so he used some kind of easement that lets the "sides" be on the property line? It is very bizarre and there must be some real hate going on between those neighbors.

I'm not fond of my neighbors, but I would never construct something that would diminish their property value. How are the Linehams going to sell that house now, without a very steep discount?

This is why I am saying these people need to knock it over and rebuild. If for no other reason than to not have to look at a cinder block wall. That architect is evil.

[Anonymous]

[quote=

I'm not fond of my neighbors, but I would never construct something that would diminish their property value. How are the Linehams going to sell that house now, without a very steep discount?

This is why I am saying these people need to knock it over and rebuild. If for no other reason than to not have to look at a cinder block wall. That architect is evil.

Yes, I agree. At least, there's the land value.

[Anonymous]

Since you guys don't know the neighborhood or the people, here are a couple points of information. First, Gaver Nichols is probably one of the people most responsible for turning the Del Ray neighborhood from a run down white-trashy neighborhood into one of the hottest neighborhoods for young professional families in the DC area. He is a fantastic architect who risked and invested his own money over decades into creating a vision for an entire part of Alexandria. He is certainly no run of the mill HGTV-type flipper.

But, as anyone who knows him or considered hiring him, he is pretty much a jerk who insists on his way or the highway. That's not necessarily an uncommon thing with very good architects, but it is a little more unusual for those who do middle class residential work. He's clearly beefing with the neighbors who just couldn't buy into his vision for the little compound he created. It's all and all a pretty petty vendetta. I'm guessing his worst personality characteristics are becoming more evident with age.

Those of you who think he used his influence on a city task force 7 years ago to facilitate this nasty vendetta are just dead wrong. First, it would be a pretty good bit of fortune telling to know that the neighbors would renovate 5 years later in a way to piss him off. And he advanced the changes to be able to spite them years later. Second, there are really good reasons for the set back limit changes in a very dense city like Alexandria. It's not like the task force got to enact recommendations without lots of public hearings and a series of city council votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since you guys don't know the neighborhood or the people, here are a couple points of information. First, Gaver Nichols is probably one of the people most responsible for turning the Del Ray neighborhood from a run down white-trashy neighborhood into one of the hottest neighborhoods for young professional families in the DC area. He is a fantastic architect who risked and invested his own money over decades into creating a vision for an entire part of Alexandria. He is certainly no run of the mill HGTV-type flipper.

But, as anyone who knows him or considered hiring him, he is pretty much a jerk who insists on his way or the highway. That's not necessarily an uncommon thing with very good architects, but it is a little more unusual for those who do middle class residential work. He's clearly beefing with the neighbors who just couldn't buy into his vision for the little compound he created. It's all and all a pretty petty vendetta. I'm guessing his worst personality characteristics are becoming more evident with age.

Those of you who think he used his influence on a city task force 7 years ago to facilitate this nasty vendetta are just dead wrong. First, it would be a pretty good bit of fortune telling to know that the neighbors would renovate 5 years later in a way to piss him off. And he advanced the changes to be able to spite them years later. Second, there are really good reasons for the set back limit changes in a very dense city like Alexandria. It's not like the task force got to enact recommendations without lots of public hearings and a series of city council votes.

I live in the neighborhood and am familiar with the people involved. Agree with this description of Gaver (although I might quibble a bit with the description of his abilities as "fantastic" - we were unimpressed when interviewing him for a big project years ago - our opinion was that his skill level was not enough to justify dealing with him as a person. I recognize that others may feel differently).

I think what is problematic here is that the developed property is subject to an Special Use Permit that expressly calls for shared open space. The only reason he was allowed to build the houses that way was because of the Special Use Permit application that described a shared space ideal. The family in this story bought into that vision and lived peacefully that way. They are not the people who planted things and landscaped in a way that irritated Gaver - the neighbors on the other side did that. And after that, Gaver himself put in divider plantings after previously saying he would keep the space open. The Linehans have been stuck in the middle of his disputes with various surrounding neighbors. While they did to a renovation, that window has always been there -- the reno just changed the location of rooms on the interior. He just got irritated that they used someone other than him. Bottom line is that he wanted to control everything about the three houses next to his even after they sold.

When the setback rules were changed, there was no provision for properties that were subject to or adjacent to properties subject to Special Use Permits. SUPs by definition trump the default rules. In this case, the change in the setback default rule that allowed the permit to issue defeats the Special Use Permit. Had the city reviewed the SUP and the representations made in connection with that SUP, it would have never issued the permit. Gaver absolutely understood that loop hole at the time. Whether he knew then that he would build in this way, I don't know - but his volatile interactions with the various neighbors absolutely go back that far. He also has a history of skirting the rules and then just paying a small fine, since the city rarely makes anyone demolish a structure already built. My guess is these guys are out of luck, unfortunately. It's too bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this will be great for that guy's business. If he's that vindictive with his neighbors, can you imagine being a client? I wouldn't hire that guy in a million years.

+100

Looks like he took his website down. He is still on Houzz though...

If I were the neighbor I'd set up a website documenting all of the nutty stuff he does. So potential clients who search on him will know to run away.

Can they sue the county/zoning board because this change (of his, that they allowed) is making their house unsellable?

That neighbor would be getting into lawsuit territory, here. Better to stay out of it and let it go.

OK - the neighbor can just sue the county/zoning board. They can pass on the indisputable facts about the nut job to me and I'll happily post it.

You don't understand. You can't just make sh*t up about people. It doesn't work that way, without ramifications.

There's a fucking article in the post you moron.

Clearly your hostility is not working for you. Good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this will be great for that guy's business. If he's that vindictive with his neighbors, can you imagine being a client? I wouldn't hire that guy in a million years.

Bet you couldn't hire him in a million years.

+1

I don't think he relies on neighborhood business - likely a non issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you guys don't know the neighborhood or the people, here are a couple points of information. First, Gaver Nichols is probably one of the people most responsible for turning the Del Ray neighborhood from a run down white-trashy neighborhood into one of the hottest neighborhoods for young professional families in the DC area. He is a fantastic architect who risked and invested his own money over decades into creating a vision for an entire part of Alexandria. He is certainly no run of the mill HGTV-type flipper.

But, as anyone who knows him or considered hiring him, he is pretty much a jerk who insists on his way or the highway. That's not necessarily an uncommon thing with very good architects, but it is a little more unusual for those who do middle class residential work. He's clearly beefing with the neighbors who just couldn't buy into his vision for the little compound he created. It's all and all a pretty petty vendetta. I'm guessing his worst personality characteristics are becoming more evident with age.

Those of you who think he used his influence on a city task force 7 years ago to facilitate this nasty vendetta are just dead wrong. First, it would be a pretty good bit of fortune telling to know that the neighbors would renovate 5 years later in a way to piss him off. And he advanced the changes to be able to spite them years later. Second, there are really good reasons for the set back limit changes in a very dense city like Alexandria. It's not like the task force got to enact recommendations without lots of public hearings and a series of city council votes.

I live in the neighborhood and am familiar with the people involved. Agree with this description of Gaver (although I might quibble a bit with the description of his abilities as "fantastic" - we were unimpressed when interviewing him for a big project years ago - our opinion was that his skill level was not enough to justify dealing with him as a person. I recognize that others may feel differently).

I think what is problematic here is that the developed property is subject to an Special Use Permit that expressly calls for shared open space. The only reason he was allowed to build the houses that way was because of the Special Use Permit application that described a shared space ideal. The family in this story bought into that vision and lived peacefully that way. They are not the people who planted things and landscaped in a way that irritated Gaver - the neighbors on the other side did that. And after that, Gaver himself put in divider plantings after previously saying he would keep the space open. The Linehans have been stuck in the middle of his disputes with various surrounding neighbors. While they did to a renovation, that window has always been there -- the reno just changed the location of rooms on the interior. He just got irritated that they used someone other than him. Bottom line is that he wanted to control everything about the three houses next to his even after they sold.

When the setback rules were changed, there was no provision for properties that were subject to or adjacent to properties subject to Special Use Permits. SUPs by definition trump the default rules. In this case, the change in the setback default rule that allowed the permit to issue defeats the Special Use Permit. Had the city reviewed the SUP and the representations made in connection with that SUP, it would have never issued the permit. Gaver absolutely understood that loop hole at the time. Whether he knew then that he would build in this way, I don't know - but his volatile interactions with the various neighbors absolutely go back that far. He also has a history of skirting the rules and then just paying a small fine, since the city rarely makes anyone demolish a structure already built. My guess is these guys are out of luck, unfortunately. It's too bad.

Tall plantings or fence usually indicates a problem in existence. Perhaps the neighbor aggravated the wrong guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this will be great for that guy's business. If he's that vindictive with his neighbors, can you imagine being a client? I wouldn't hire that guy in a million years.

the article points out that he moved his business to operate out of another state. New Jersey? Connecticut? something like that

Yes, and building max square footage on his lot to increase value. He's already converted the existing garage into a "home office" or second home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this will be great for that guy's business. If he's that vindictive with his neighbors, can you imagine being a client? I wouldn't hire that guy in a million years.

Bet you couldn't hire him in a million years.

+1

I don't think he relies on neighborhood business - likely a non issue.

A simple google search would reveal you are wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you guys don't know the neighborhood or the people, here are a couple points of information. First, Gaver Nichols is probably one of the people most responsible for turning the Del Ray neighborhood from a run down white-trashy neighborhood into one of the hottest neighborhoods for young professional families in the DC area. He is a fantastic architect who risked and invested his own money over decades into creating a vision for an entire part of Alexandria. He is certainly no run of the mill HGTV-type flipper.

But, as anyone who knows him or considered hiring him, he is pretty much a jerk who insists on his way or the highway. That's not necessarily an uncommon thing with very good architects, but it is a little more unusual for those who do middle class residential work. He's clearly beefing with the neighbors who just couldn't buy into his vision for the little compound he created. It's all and all a pretty petty vendetta. I'm guessing his worst personality characteristics are becoming more evident with age.

Those of you who think he used his influence on a city task force 7 years ago to facilitate this nasty vendetta are just dead wrong. First, it would be a pretty good bit of fortune telling to know that the neighbors would renovate 5 years later in a way to piss him off. And he advanced the changes to be able to spite them years later. Second, there are really good reasons for the set back limit changes in a very dense city like Alexandria. It's not like the task force got to enact recommendations without lots of public hearings and a series of city council votes.

I live in the neighborhood and am familiar with the people involved. Agree with this description of Gaver (although I might quibble a bit with the description of his abilities as "fantastic" - we were unimpressed when interviewing him for a big project years ago - our opinion was that his skill level was not enough to justify dealing with him as a person. I recognize that others may feel differently).

I think what is problematic here is that the developed property is subject to an Special Use Permit that expressly calls for shared open space. The only reason he was allowed to build the houses that way was because of the Special Use Permit application that described a shared space ideal. The family in this story bought into that vision and lived peacefully that way. They are not the people who planted things and landscaped in a way that irritated Gaver - the neighbors on the other side did that. And after that, Gaver himself put in divider plantings after previously saying he would keep the space open. The Linehans have been stuck in the middle of his disputes with various surrounding neighbors. While they did to a renovation, that window has always been there -- the reno just changed the location of rooms on the interior. He just got irritated that they used someone other than him. Bottom line is that he wanted to control everything about the three houses next to his even after they sold.

When the setback rules were changed, there was no provision for properties that were subject to or adjacent to properties subject to Special Use Permits. SUPs by definition trump the default rules. In this case, the change in the setback default rule that allowed the permit to issue defeats the Special Use Permit. Had the city reviewed the SUP and the representations made in connection with that SUP, it would have never issued the permit. Gaver absolutely understood that loop hole at the time. Whether he knew then that he would build in this way, I don't know - but his volatile interactions with the various neighbors absolutely go back that far. He also has a history of skirting the rules and then just paying a small fine, since the city rarely makes anyone demolish a structure already built. My guess is these guys are out of luck, unfortunately. It's too bad.

Thanks for the explanation, I'm a neighborhood resident and didn't know all of this. Gaver Nichols sounds like a terrible person and I would never hire him after reading about this. I wonder if there's any chance this publicity will put some pressure on the city zoning office to do something about this? If not, I hope the publicity will at least hurt his business.

[Anonymous]

I live in an inside-the-beltway neighborhood of single family homes on 1/7th acre lots. Gentrification is marching our way and I'm afraid this scenario will play out in some form in my neighborhood (although the appreciation to date is nice). A few us are discussing pushing back hard if people start pushing for exemptions on their plans for additions/tear downs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this will be great for that guy's business. If he's that vindictive with his neighbors, can you imagine being a client? I wouldn't hire that guy in a million years.

Bet you couldn't hire him in a million years.

+1

I don't think he relies on neighborhood business - likely a non issue.

A simple google search would reveal you are wrong.

Google tells me that his only business is in his neighborhood? No. No, it does not. If Google answered everything, you might be able to tie your own shoes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in an inside-the-beltway neighborhood of single family homes on 1/7th acre lots. Gentrification is marching our way and I'm afraid this scenario will play out in some form in my neighborhood (although the appreciation to date is nice). A few us are discussing pushing back hard if people start pushing for exemptions on their plans for additions/tear downs.

The blowback is hard on new builds inside the beltway, but that is not discouraging them. New builds are quickly outnumbering the old homes, which simply are not worth renovating. For a little more money than a makeshift add-on, you can have new, so that is what people are doing. Whether or not you like it, there is nothing you can do about it. Though I suppose if you were completely irrational, it would become quite a large chip on your shoulder. It is undoubtedly better for your health to let it go. You can try rallying with your fellow old house homeowners, but you are quickly outnumbered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this will be great for that guy's business. If he's that vindictive with his neighbors, can you imagine being a client? I wouldn't hire that guy in a million years.

Bet you couldn't hire him in a million years.

+1

I don't think he relies on neighborhood business - likely a non issue.

A simple google search would reveal you are wrong.

How the hell is it even possible he is relying on that neighborhood, if the man moved his business out of state?