Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These multiple Greenbriar residents are CRYING making statements. I’m rolling my eyes.

These people should’ve bought in an HOA, especially since Fairfax County is majority HOAs.

Ignorant comment. HOAs were just starting to become common in the late 60s when Greenbriar was developed. And a *lot* of the homeowners here have been there since then.

That doesn’t justify crying over an ugly home addition on the block. People need to get a grip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These multiple Greenbriar residents are CRYING making statements. I’m rolling my eyes.

These people should’ve bought in an HOA, especially since Fairfax County is majority HOAs.

Ignorant comment. HOAs were just starting to become common in the late 60s when Greenbriar was developed. And a *lot* of the homeowners here have been there since then.

That doesn’t justify crying over an ugly home addition on the block. People need to get a grip.

this is why my house in another state does not allow Grouper Homes. They actually have a permit for someting called "Mother/Daugher" occupancy. It is renewed annually. And your neihbors within 200 feet of house has right to approve or deny it.

Without multi generational households, combined with no basement bedrooms allowed, no second kitchen allowed. And homes are only allowed to park max of one car per household on street added to a set amount of property has to be free and added in height requirements that need approval it is a nice place to live. And no HOAs, these are Zoning laws.

This town needs to do this or become a slum in 10-15 years. My old neighborhood took these protections back in 1968 when this junk first started happening. The neighborhood next to it looks like a war zone,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the guy got taken in by an extremely unscrupulous contractor.

This guy IS the extremely unscrupulous contractor

[Anonymous]

Anyone know what the next step is? Will the homeowner appeal this ruling? If he doesn’t appeal, will he have to take it down?

[Anonymous]

Did the homeowner say he tried to get a lawyer, but no lawyer he talked to would take the case?

Is it possible that no lawyer whatsoever would help this guy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone know what the next step is? Will the homeowner appeal this ruling? If he doesn’t appeal, will he have to take it down?

From what I've gathered, homeowner gets to spend a lot of money either in the Circuit Court appealing this ruling, or modifying the existing structure to come into compliance. I think modifying the existing structure would basically have to be a teardown and rebuild given the issue at hand, plus the wind bracing problem. Since he built over an existing part of the house, even just tearing it down would still require some part of the building to be rebuilt to complete the structure.

[Anonymous]

No sympathy at all to the HO. He brought this on himself.

[Anonymous]

Anybody know if the homeowner will have to get a new permit? And therefore may be prevented from constructing the “wall” on second try?

Or, does the original permit for the wall stand, even with full tear down, and thus allowing a rebuild following setback and other requirements? If so, for how long is the original permit valid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that’s super interesting about this hearing is that it turns out the homeowner actually did use a contractor who misrepresented himself as licensed but previously had his licensed taken away for telling people they had to put down owner as contractor and pull their own permits. That’s a huge mitigating factor for the homeowner.

The HO is shady. If he thought he was using a legit contractor, he should never signed the permitting paperwork with that he was contractor. He certified that he was the contractor in all the permitting paperwork. Not buying is naive persona

Not everyone has the same sophistication or experience as you. It takes most of us learning our lesson the hard way to start checking things like that.

Please. This isn't someone fresh off the boat with no English. Dude was just trying to get this done as cheaply as possible.

+1. Yup. Im an immigrant. Trust me, Immigrants are financially savvy. They fully know there is no license (or permits) and perfectly ok because it costs $$ when you hire unlicensed or those that do side work. They are hardly innocent - and I think it’s illegal to hire unlicensed firms anyhow. I don’t feel any sorry for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anybody know if the homeowner will have to get a new permit? And therefore may be prevented from constructing the “wall” on second try?

Or, does the original permit for the wall stand, even with full tear down, and thus allowing a rebuild following setback and other requirements? If so, for how long is the original permit valid?

Typically a permit is good for 6 months. I have no idea if the stop work orders extends that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did the homeowner say he tried to get a lawyer, but no lawyer he talked to would take the case?

Is it possible that no lawyer whatsoever would help this guy?

Any lawyer with experience would take this on if the homeowner could pay the bill.

[Anonymous]

Mr Nguyen not as innocent as he appears.

[Anonymous]

I was listening to the hearing while working. I believe the board told the homeowner to work with the county to find the best path forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that’s super interesting about this hearing is that it turns out the homeowner actually did use a contractor who misrepresented himself as licensed but previously had his licensed taken away for telling people they had to put down owner as contractor and pull their own permits. That’s a huge mitigating factor for the homeowner.

The HO is shady. If he thought he was using a legit contractor, he should never signed the permitting paperwork with that he was contractor. He certified that he was the contractor in all the permitting paperwork. Not buying is naive persona

Not everyone has the same sophistication or experience as you. It takes most of us learning our lesson the hard way to start checking things like that.

Please. This isn't someone fresh off the boat with no English. Dude was just trying to get this done as cheaply as possible.

+1. Yup. Im an immigrant. Trust me, Immigrants are financially savvy. They fully know there is no license (or permits) and perfectly ok because it costs $$ when you hire unlicensed or those that do side work. They are hardly innocent - and I think it’s illegal to hire unlicensed firms anyhow. I don’t feel any sorry for him.

The contractor misrepresented that he was licensed and previously had his licensed revoked for misconduct. Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mr Nguyen not as innocent as he appears.

Exactly. The county brought up his two other projects that were not permitted - the garage conversion, which they let go since it was part of the massive 3 story addition. The second project that was unpermitted was the patio/porch in the back which they incorporated into the house.