Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Greenbriar is a mess. Has anyone actually driven through it?! Shudders. One of DS's team mates lived there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was on NBC4 today. They interviewed the neighbor and the owner. The owner is now claiming the extension is so his aging parents can live with them.

Found the link. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/addition-to-fairfax-county-home-sparks-debate-about-changing-building-rules/4017643/?amp=1

I like his pointed "in our culture we don't send our parents to the nursing home." NO, we build three story accommodations for them with a rabbit Warren of tiny bedrooms, multiple kitchens and baths for them to "play with their grandkids" in. The nerve.

I'm from a native, ethnic culture, been here over 40 years. This man is a slimeball. He is using his "culture" as some sort of shield to justify all of this. Of course he is not sending his parents to the nursing home - the home belongs to them, not him and he hopes to get it after they pass. This is the way it works. I agree with others here that everyone is in cahoots - the parents and kids. They want to build an apt building and run a commercial operation - albiet all cash with zero taxes paid. GTFO

He knows that this is Generic Whitey's Achilles heel -- hypersensitivity to other cultures combined with insecurity about their own perceived lack of culture. He will get away with it just because of this.

This got buried 80 pages ago but seems to be the tactic the owners are taking. When all else fails, racism!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Greenbriar is a mess. Has anyone actually driven through it?! Shudders. One of DS's team mates lived there.

There is nothing wrong with the neighborhood. It isn’t shiny and new, but it isn’t “a mess”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was on NBC4 today. They interviewed the neighbor and the owner. The owner is now claiming the extension is so his aging parents can live with them.

Found the link. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/addition-to-fairfax-county-home-sparks-debate-about-changing-building-rules/4017643/?amp=1

I like his pointed "in our culture we don't send our parents to the nursing home." NO, we build three story accommodations for them with a rabbit Warren of tiny bedrooms, multiple kitchens and baths for them to "play with their grandkids" in. The nerve.

I'm from a native, ethnic culture, been here over 40 years. This man is a slimeball. He is using his "culture" as some sort of shield to justify all of this. Of course he is not sending his parents to the nursing home - the home belongs to them, not him and he hopes to get it after they pass. This is the way it works. I agree with others here that everyone is in cahoots - the parents and kids. They want to build an apt building and run a commercial operation - albiet all cash with zero taxes paid. GTFO

He knows that this is Generic Whitey's Achilles heel -- hypersensitivity to other cultures combined with insecurity about their own perceived lack of culture. He will get away with it just because of this.

This got buried 80 pages ago but seems to be the tactic the owners are taking. When all else fails, racism!

He didn't say racism. But don't be naive- there's absolutely a racist component to the opposition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenbriar is a mess. Has anyone actually driven through it?! Shudders. One of DS's team mates lived there.

There is nothing wrong with the neighborhood. It isn’t shiny and new, but it isn’t “a mess”

I wouldn't call it a mess, but it looks like a middle middle class neighborhood filled with 1950s-1960s split levels, some of which are quite poorly maintained. People are melting down about architectural cohesion when the neighborhood architecture isn't even nice.

[Anonymous]

Greenbriar is wonderfully diverse. There might be some racists among us, but I assure you that the heritage of the homeowner is not the issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenbriar is a mess. Has anyone actually driven through it?! Shudders. One of DS's team mates lived there.

There is nothing wrong with the neighborhood. It isn’t shiny and new, but it isn’t “a mess”

I wouldn't call it a mess, but it looks like a middle middle class neighborhood filled with 1950s-1960s split levels, some of which are quite poorly maintained. People are melting down about architectural cohesion when the neighborhood architecture isn't even nice.

It was built in the late 60s-early 70s

What is wrong with a middle class neighborhood?

Are there some properties that aren’t well maintained? Sure. No HOA, remember?

[Anonymous]

Looking at the permit site, Courtney has been filling vexatious complaints for months. The staff has probably lost sympathy for her.

You'll get a lot of leeway for your first complaint, but once you get past 3, you better make sure your complaint has merit. Where did she get the idea the house needed a firewall?

And, of course, she repeated the racist tropes that this must really be an apartment. She complained about a second kitchen, apparently not bothering to read closely enough to see the old kitchen is being removed.

Reading her complaints, and noting her writing style, I have no doubt many of the comments here are from Courtney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenbriar is a mess. Has anyone actually driven through it?! Shudders. One of DS's team mates lived there.

There is nothing wrong with the neighborhood. It isn’t shiny and new, but it isn’t “a mess”

I wouldn't call it a mess, but it looks like a middle middle class neighborhood filled with 1950s-1960s split levels, some of which are quite poorly maintained. People are melting down about architectural cohesion when the neighborhood architecture isn't even nice.

It was built in the late 60s-early 70s

What is wrong with a middle class neighborhood?

Are there some properties that aren’t well maintained? Sure. No HOA, remember?

Surely you knew there wasn't an HOA when you bought the home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Greenbriar is a mess. Has anyone actually driven through it?! Shudders. One of DS's team mates lived there.

There is nothing wrong with the neighborhood. It isn’t shiny and new, but it isn’t “a mess”

I wouldn't call it a mess, but it looks like a middle middle class neighborhood filled with 1950s-1960s split levels, some of which are quite poorly maintained. People are melting down about architectural cohesion when the neighborhood architecture isn't even nice.

It was built in the late 60s-early 70s

What is wrong with a middle class neighborhood?

Are there some properties that aren’t well maintained? Sure. No HOA, remember?

Absolutely nothing wrong with it. I’d live there. But it’s extra weird to be shaken up about aesthetics when there aren’t many aesthetics to begin with. It’s not as though this is some luxe enclave with custom homes being totally ruined by an ugly addition (though I wouldn’t consider that a persuasive argument either).

[Anonymous]

Design control is one of the most common functions and purposes of an HOA. If you buy a house in a neighborhood without one, it should be obvious what benefits and risks you take on. You get more flexibility to do what you want with your home, but that also means your neighbors get that same flexibility.

There are plenty of single family homes in neighborhoods with HOAs. If anything, it is hard to find reasonably priced homes in the suburbs without one.

The underlying screw-up seems to be people wanting the control of an HOA but not buying into one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The homeowner changed his approved plans from a garage to a window/door at the 1st floor front of the home. The homeowner applied for this as an Amendment to his original permit but the county has not approved it yet. However, the homeowner has already constructed the addition in this front area in a way he’s seeking in the amendment. There are now steps built going from the old garage space (now door/window) to the driveway. Obviously not going to be a garage.

Those steps come further out into the front yard than the original plans. The original approved permit showed the plans at a 21 ft front setback, so county approved as meeting the front setback requirements.

Now with the garage redesign and added steps, is the homeowner still within the County’s 20 ft minimum for the front setback?

So is tge homeowner just deliberately building whatever he wants in complete violation of zoning laws and in contradiction to his permits, with a plan to just get approval after the fact?

So can everyone else doing renovations in Fairfax County use the same method?

Momentarily setting aside the side setback, everything else that has been brought up seems to be correctible. There seems to be just enough room for a second parking spot. And if there are stairs going into the new addition that create a new setback problem, those could be removed.

The side sideback isn't correctible. It is a mistake that never should have happened, but it did. It would be a grossly disproportionate response to require a teardown over 6 inches, both in this case and in general. If there's really a concern about encouraging such mistakes, a better deterrent would be a fine, not a teardown when there is no meaningful impact. I don't think that's a realistic concern, though.

County rezoning has mandated tear downs for much less.

Yeah, a pp cited sheds. Except sheds can be (relatively) easily moved. Got any examples involving houses or businesses?

There's probably a reason it doesn't happen with large builds. There is a very real possibility that the county will say tear it down, and a responsible builder will take measures to avoid a five or six figure mistake.

So no examples?

No. The cost of making a mistake is too high, so no one rolls the dice.

Except it does happen. A post-construction example in Arlington:

V-11945-23-UP-1: A use permit request by Kohlmark Builders, Inc. on behalf of Stuart and Norma Jean Young, the owners, to permit a rear setback of 24.6 feet to the building wall (sunroom) instead of 25 feet to the building wall (sunroom) as required, and to permit a left side setback of 4.6 feet to the screened A/C units instead of 5 feet to the A/C units as required; re: after the fact approval of sunroom wall and A/C units to an existing one-family detached dwelling in the R-5 zoning district, on the premises known as 1007 18th Street South (Arlington Ridge).

https://www.arlingtonva.us/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/commissions/documents/bza/minutes-2024/may-15-2024-bza-minutes-final.pdf

Amusingly, Arlington considers:

WHEREAS, the BZA has determined that the modification is compatible with development in
the surrounding neighborhood and that the structure’s overall footprint size and placement are
similar to comparable structures on other properties surrounding the lot in question and the
proposal would help preserve natural land form, historical features and/or significant trees.

That would be a problem in this specific case.

Again, "modification" refers to the setback reduction, not the entire project.

The use of the word structure in the BZA's decision is a clear reference to the building addition that was created by the project. Your intentional misreading isn't cute.

Go ahead and try that in your comments to the BZA, and definitely don't bother consulting a lawyer first.

Why would I parrot the BZA's words back to them? Again, this is the BZA speaking as part of its ruling on a setback:

BZA has determined that the modification is compatible with development in
the surrounding neighborhood and that the structure’s overall footprint size and placement are
similar to comparable structures on other properties

The BZA of Arlington clearly considers more than just "would this impact the neighboring property." These holistic approaches to zoning gives the County leeway to make almost any ruling. It's not my lawyer that needs to address these issues, but the builder's. I am sure he is self-represented though because that's cheaper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The homeowner changed his approved plans from a garage to a window/door at the 1st floor front of the home. The homeowner applied for this as an Amendment to his original permit but the county has not approved it yet. However, the homeowner has already constructed the addition in this front area in a way he’s seeking in the amendment. There are now steps built going from the old garage space (now door/window) to the driveway. Obviously not going to be a garage.

Those steps come further out into the front yard than the original plans. The original approved permit showed the plans at a 21 ft front setback, so county approved as meeting the front setback requirements.

Now with the garage redesign and added steps, is the homeowner still within the County’s 20 ft minimum for the front setback?

So is tge homeowner just deliberately building whatever he wants in complete violation of zoning laws and in contradiction to his permits, with a plan to just get approval after the fact?

So can everyone else doing renovations in Fairfax County use the same method?

Momentarily setting aside the side setback, everything else that has been brought up seems to be correctible. There seems to be just enough room for a second parking spot. And if there are stairs going into the new addition that create a new setback problem, those could be removed.

The side sideback isn't correctible. It is a mistake that never should have happened, but it did. It would be a grossly disproportionate response to require a teardown over 6 inches, both in this case and in general. If there's really a concern about encouraging such mistakes, a better deterrent would be a fine, not a teardown when there is no meaningful impact. I don't think that's a realistic concern, though.

County rezoning has mandated tear downs for much less.

Yeah, a pp cited sheds. Except sheds can be (relatively) easily moved. Got any examples involving houses or businesses?

There's probably a reason it doesn't happen with large builds. There is a very real possibility that the county will say tear it down, and a responsible builder will take measures to avoid a five or six figure mistake.

So no examples?

No. The cost of making a mistake is too high, so no one rolls the dice.

Except it does happen. A post-construction example in Arlington:

V-11945-23-UP-1: A use permit request by Kohlmark Builders, Inc. on behalf of Stuart and Norma Jean Young, the owners, to permit a rear setback of 24.6 feet to the building wall (sunroom) instead of 25 feet to the building wall (sunroom) as required, and to permit a left side setback of 4.6 feet to the screened A/C units instead of 5 feet to the A/C units as required; re: after the fact approval of sunroom wall and A/C units to an existing one-family detached dwelling in the R-5 zoning district, on the premises known as 1007 18th Street South (Arlington Ridge).

https://www.arlingtonva.us/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/commissions/documents/bza/minutes-2024/may-15-2024-bza-minutes-final.pdf

Amusingly, Arlington considers:

WHEREAS, the BZA has determined that the modification is compatible with development in
the surrounding neighborhood and that the structure’s overall footprint size and placement are
similar to comparable structures on other properties surrounding the lot in question and the
proposal would help preserve natural land form, historical features and/or significant trees.

That would be a problem in this specific case.

Again, "modification" refers to the setback reduction, not the entire project.

The use of the word structure in the BZA's decision is a clear reference to the building addition that was created by the project. Your intentional misreading isn't cute.

Go ahead and try that in your comments to the BZA, and definitely don't bother consulting a lawyer first.

Why would I parrot the BZA's words back to them? Again, this is the BZA speaking as part of its ruling on a setback:

BZA has determined that the modification is compatible with development in
the surrounding neighborhood and that the structure’s overall footprint size and placement are
similar to comparable structures on other properties

The BZA of Arlington clearly considers more than just "would this impact the neighboring property." These holistic approaches to zoning gives the County leeway to make almost any ruling. It's not my lawyer that needs to address these issues, but the builder's. I am sure he is self-represented though because that's cheaper.

Sure. I love that path. Definitely stick to it. No need to talk to an attorney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was on NBC4 today. They interviewed the neighbor and the owner. The owner is now claiming the extension is so his aging parents can live with them.

Found the link. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/addition-to-fairfax-county-home-sparks-debate-about-changing-building-rules/4017643/?amp=1

I like his pointed "in our culture we don't send our parents to the nursing home." NO, we build three story accommodations for them with a rabbit Warren of tiny bedrooms, multiple kitchens and baths for them to "play with their grandkids" in. The nerve.

I'm from a native, ethnic culture, been here over 40 years. This man is a slimeball. He is using his "culture" as some sort of shield to justify all of this. Of course he is not sending his parents to the nursing home - the home belongs to them, not him and he hopes to get it after they pass. This is the way it works. I agree with others here that everyone is in cahoots - the parents and kids. They want to build an apt building and run a commercial operation - albiet all cash with zero taxes paid. GTFO

He knows that this is Generic Whitey's Achilles heel -- hypersensitivity to other cultures combined with insecurity about their own perceived lack of culture. He will get away with it just because of this.

This got buried 80 pages ago but seems to be the tactic the owners are taking. When all else fails, racism!

He didn't say racism. But don't be naive- there's absolutely a racist component to the opposition.

Nope. Neighbors would still hate it if a redneck from West Virginia did it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was on NBC4 today. They interviewed the neighbor and the owner. The owner is now claiming the extension is so his aging parents can live with them.

Found the link. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/addition-to-fairfax-county-home-sparks-debate-about-changing-building-rules/4017643/?amp=1

I like his pointed "in our culture we don't send our parents to the nursing home." NO, we build three story accommodations for them with a rabbit Warren of tiny bedrooms, multiple kitchens and baths for them to "play with their grandkids" in. The nerve.

I'm from a native, ethnic culture, been here over 40 years. This man is a slimeball. He is using his "culture" as some sort of shield to justify all of this. Of course he is not sending his parents to the nursing home - the home belongs to them, not him and he hopes to get it after they pass. This is the way it works. I agree with others here that everyone is in cahoots - the parents and kids. They want to build an apt building and run a commercial operation - albiet all cash with zero taxes paid. GTFO

He knows that this is Generic Whitey's Achilles heel -- hypersensitivity to other cultures combined with insecurity about their own perceived lack of culture. He will get away with it just because of this.

This got buried 80 pages ago but seems to be the tactic the owners are taking. When all else fails, racism!

He didn't say racism. But don't be naive- there's absolutely a racist component to the opposition.

So you genuinely think that there would be no opposition to this project if a white person were building it?