Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the aerial photos, the addition doesn't extend much beyond the original back of the home. To the extent there is a setback violation, it certainly wouldn't be new. How were the neighbors able to live in their home without that full 8 feet?

The property line may not be a straight line, so while the structure might be built on a straight line, that doesn't mean that it mets the entire set back if the property line isn't straight.

Right, but the point is that the rear of the structure only seems to extend 5 feet further back than the original structure. If the new structure is crosses the 8ft line, then the original one did, too. There's no significant difference here.

There certainly can be a difference. If the actual property line is different from the line the contractor was following, then the new foundation could be crossing over the setback line. Hard to tell without looking at a survey.

The owner/son/GC admitted in an interview I saw that the “contractor” used the fence to measure for the set back assuming it was the property line but in fact it wasn’t identical to the property. Hence why the addition is in violation of the set back requirement and is too close.

If the fence has been used as the de facto property line for many years, it seems pretty hard to credibly claim the neighbors are harmed by the encroachment.

Um, no, that’s not the way it works. If you are the owner/contractor, you really need to get good advice from someone who knows what they’re talking about. The fence does not determine the property line. The property lines exist whether or not there is a fence on a property. Only a professional survey can show where the real property lines are.

Just out of curiosity, who put the fence up? Was there a survey with stakes marking the property corners? How do we know the fence is actually on the property boundaries?

It looks like the fence was put up by the neighbors.

It doesn’t matter. A professional survey will show the property lines. Posters need to go to law school apparently to understand real property, zoning and land use law. OMG

It doesn't change the property line, but it does hurt the credibility of a claim that the neighbors will be affected by the 6 inches.

No, it doesn’t affect the credibility of the “claim” at all. Because all that matters is where the actual property line is and whether or not the extension of the house is over the setback line. The county zoning laws are what matter here.

The point of the above post is that a fence is not a property line. Only a survey can show where the property lines are.

It does, because that's part of what's considered for granting a special permit.

Is and expert you are paying for advice telling you this?

Are you having a stroke, Courtney?

Maybe the homeowner can try to file for adverse possession to get that land that they've been taking care of for years.

Are you the owner of the house where the addition is being built? This is a very odd answer.

Still wondering whether the owner is getting real advice or just reading the zoning code.

No, I'm not the owner. And I agree that the owner needs to involve a lawyer here.

If you’re not the owner, why are you pinging on the owner of the house next door? What made you think the post you were responding to was made by her?

I wrote the post you responded to and I am not the next door homeowner, just a Fairfax county resident who is interested in how this project is being handled by the county. I’ve talked to a number of people who don’t live in the immediate neighborhood where this situation is happening, but are wondering what the resolution will be and what effect it might have on the neighborhood and the property values there. No one is having a stroke, but there is a lot interest in the outcome here.

The neighbor made this a thing by going online and trying to rile people up. That's my issue. She wasn't complaining about a lack of wind bracing, or even encroachment over the setback. Originally, she had no reason to think this violated any rules. She was instead complaining because she doesn't like how it looks. And that's fine- you certainly don't have to like everything you see or everything your neighbor does. And people will naturally complain.

But there's a big difference between complaining to your friends versus 1) posting online to rally people against a community member and 2) going to the media.

This really doesn't look like a case where she's trying to kill her neighbor's project because something was done improperly. Instead it looks like she's been hoping to find a technicality to kill a project is otherwise substantively allowed. I think that's a crappy thing to do. If she wanted that sort of control over her neighbors, she should have bought a house somewhere with an HOA.

I have no doubt that several posts in this thread are from Courtney and people closely associated with her.

Did the homeowners have to get their neighbors to sign off on their plans? Did she know of them before they were approved? In my HOA you have to have neighbor permission.

I don’t blame Courtney. All of the neighbors property values are in the toilet due to this monstrosity.

They don't live in an HOA, so no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

That particular fence has been there prior to both owners. How do you know the “intent” of the preexisting fence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


If you’re not the owner, why are you pinging on the owner of the house next door? What made you think the post you were responding to was made by her?

I wrote the post you responded to and I am not the next door homeowner, just a Fairfax county resident who is interested in how this project is being handled by the county. I’ve talked to a number of people who don’t live in the immediate neighborhood where this situation is happening, but are wondering what the resolution will be and what effect it might have on the neighborhood and the property values there. No one is having a stroke, but there is a lot interest in the outcome here.


The neighbor made this a thing by going online and trying to rile people up. That's my issue. She wasn't complaining about a lack of wind bracing, or even encroachment over the setback. Originally, she had no reason to think this violated any rules. She was instead complaining because she doesn't like how it looks. And that's fine- you certainly don't have to like everything you see or everything your neighbor does. And people will naturally complain.

But there's a big difference between complaining to your friends versus 1) posting online to rally people against a community member and 2) going to the media.

This really doesn't look like a case where she's trying to kill her neighbor's project because something was done improperly. Instead it looks like she's been hoping to find a technicality to kill a project is otherwise substantively allowed. I think that's a crappy thing to do. If she wanted that sort of control over her neighbors, she should have bought a house somewhere with an HOA.

I have no doubt that several posts in this thread are from Courtney and people closely associated with her.

I have been following this thread. I do not know Courtney or anyone in her neighborhood. In fact I live miles away, but am in Fairfax County. I think Courtney has a right to free speech and a right to use the internet and media just like anyone else. I don't think she has control over her neighbor at all. Fairfax County will be the final arbiter in all of this (and it has turned out that there is a setback issue which she may or may not have known or suspected).

I think that almost anyone who has seen a picture of this addition would be concerned and have sympathy for Courtney. Whether you think it's crappy that she has the right to complain is your problem. She has that right. She was not wrong to ask the county to review the construction because, quite frankly, the county's reputation in regard to zoning is on the line here.

Your post just emphasizes the problem. The decisions should be made based on what the laws actually say, not what you wish they said. It's pretty clear that this has always been about about the design, not perceptions of construction quality or the setback. But as much as you might not like the design according to your personal aesthetic, it follows the laws of the county. Given the complexity of laws and regulations in modern society, do you really think it's a good idea for the government to use unrelated technicalities to punish legal activities in response to public political pressure? I would hope you'd see the tremendous danger in that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

That particular fence has been there prior to both owners. How do you know the “intent” of the preexisting fence?

Among other ways, look at the original permit.

Does it really precede the owners of the addition? The fence doesn't look that old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

That particular fence has been there prior to both owners. How do you know the “intent” of the preexisting fence?

Haven't they lived there 30+ years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

Good luck with getting your neighbor to contribute for maintenance of the common wall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


If you’re not the owner, why are you pinging on the owner of the house next door? What made you think the post you were responding to was made by her?

I wrote the post you responded to and I am not the next door homeowner, just a Fairfax county resident who is interested in how this project is being handled by the county. I’ve talked to a number of people who don’t live in the immediate neighborhood where this situation is happening, but are wondering what the resolution will be and what effect it might have on the neighborhood and the property values there. No one is having a stroke, but there is a lot interest in the outcome here.


The neighbor made this a thing by going online and trying to rile people up. That's my issue. She wasn't complaining about a lack of wind bracing, or even encroachment over the setback. Originally, she had no reason to think this violated any rules. She was instead complaining because she doesn't like how it looks. And that's fine- you certainly don't have to like everything you see or everything your neighbor does. And people will naturally complain.

But there's a big difference between complaining to your friends versus 1) posting online to rally people against a community member and 2) going to the media.

This really doesn't look like a case where she's trying to kill her neighbor's project because something was done improperly. Instead it looks like she's been hoping to find a technicality to kill a project is otherwise substantively allowed. I think that's a crappy thing to do. If she wanted that sort of control over her neighbors, she should have bought a house somewhere with an HOA.

I have no doubt that several posts in this thread are from Courtney and people closely associated with her.

I have been following this thread. I do not know Courtney or anyone in her neighborhood. In fact I live miles away, but am in Fairfax County. I think Courtney has a right to free speech and a right to use the internet and media just like anyone else. I don't think she has control over her neighbor at all. Fairfax County will be the final arbiter in all of this (and it has turned out that there is a setback issue which she may or may not have known or suspected).

I think that almost anyone who has seen a picture of this addition would be concerned and have sympathy for Courtney. Whether you think it's crappy that she has the right to complain is your problem. She has that right. She was not wrong to ask the county to review the construction because, quite frankly, the county's reputation in regard to zoning is on the line here.

Your post just emphasizes the problem. The decisions should be made based on what the laws actually say, not what you wish they said. It's pretty clear that this has always been about about the design, not perceptions of construction quality or the setback. But as much as you might not like the design according to your personal aesthetic, it follows the laws of the county. Given the complexity of laws and regulations in modern society, do you really think it's a good idea for the government to use unrelated technicalities to punish legal activities in response to public political pressure? I would hope you'd see the tremendous danger in that.

It's clear in the county report that the construction is of poor quality, failing to follow approved construction methods. But hey, it's standing, let's give the builder a pass because it's just a technicality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


If you’re not the owner, why are you pinging on the owner of the house next door? What made you think the post you were responding to was made by her?

I wrote the post you responded to and I am not the next door homeowner, just a Fairfax county resident who is interested in how this project is being handled by the county. I’ve talked to a number of people who don’t live in the immediate neighborhood where this situation is happening, but are wondering what the resolution will be and what effect it might have on the neighborhood and the property values there. No one is having a stroke, but there is a lot interest in the outcome here.


The neighbor made this a thing by going online and trying to rile people up. That's my issue. She wasn't complaining about a lack of wind bracing, or even encroachment over the setback. Originally, she had no reason to think this violated any rules. She was instead complaining because she doesn't like how it looks. And that's fine- you certainly don't have to like everything you see or everything your neighbor does. And people will naturally complain.

But there's a big difference between complaining to your friends versus 1) posting online to rally people against a community member and 2) going to the media.

This really doesn't look like a case where she's trying to kill her neighbor's project because something was done improperly. Instead it looks like she's been hoping to find a technicality to kill a project is otherwise substantively allowed. I think that's a crappy thing to do. If she wanted that sort of control over her neighbors, she should have bought a house somewhere with an HOA.

I have no doubt that several posts in this thread are from Courtney and people closely associated with her.

I have been following this thread. I do not know Courtney or anyone in her neighborhood. In fact I live miles away, but am in Fairfax County. I think Courtney has a right to free speech and a right to use the internet and media just like anyone else. I don't think she has control over her neighbor at all. Fairfax County will be the final arbiter in all of this (and it has turned out that there is a setback issue which she may or may not have known or suspected).

I think that almost anyone who has seen a picture of this addition would be concerned and have sympathy for Courtney. Whether you think it's crappy that she has the right to complain is your problem. She has that right. She was not wrong to ask the county to review the construction because, quite frankly, the county's reputation in regard to zoning is on the line here.

Your post just emphasizes the problem. The decisions should be made based on what the laws actually say, not what you wish they said. It's pretty clear that this has always been about about the design, not perceptions of construction quality or the setback. But as much as you might not like the design according to your personal aesthetic, it follows the laws of the county. Given the complexity of laws and regulations in modern society, do you really think it's a good idea for the government to use unrelated technicalities to punish legal activities in response to public political pressure? I would hope you'd see the tremendous danger in that.

It's clear in the county report that the construction is of poor quality, failing to follow approved construction methods. But hey, it's standing, let's give the builder a pass because it's just a technicality.

When you issue a stop work order in the middle of framing, you're going to find "violations."

Come on, we all know that's not the issue here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


If you’re not the owner, why are you pinging on the owner of the house next door? What made you think the post you were responding to was made by her?

I wrote the post you responded to and I am not the next door homeowner, just a Fairfax county resident who is interested in how this project is being handled by the county. I’ve talked to a number of people who don’t live in the immediate neighborhood where this situation is happening, but are wondering what the resolution will be and what effect it might have on the neighborhood and the property values there. No one is having a stroke, but there is a lot interest in the outcome here.


The neighbor made this a thing by going online and trying to rile people up. That's my issue. She wasn't complaining about a lack of wind bracing, or even encroachment over the setback. Originally, she had no reason to think this violated any rules. She was instead complaining because she doesn't like how it looks. And that's fine- you certainly don't have to like everything you see or everything your neighbor does. And people will naturally complain.

But there's a big difference between complaining to your friends versus 1) posting online to rally people against a community member and 2) going to the media.

This really doesn't look like a case where she's trying to kill her neighbor's project because something was done improperly. Instead it looks like she's been hoping to find a technicality to kill a project is otherwise substantively allowed. I think that's a crappy thing to do. If she wanted that sort of control over her neighbors, she should have bought a house somewhere with an HOA.

I have no doubt that several posts in this thread are from Courtney and people closely associated with her.

I have been following this thread. I do not know Courtney or anyone in her neighborhood. In fact I live miles away, but am in Fairfax County. I think Courtney has a right to free speech and a right to use the internet and media just like anyone else. I don't think she has control over her neighbor at all. Fairfax County will be the final arbiter in all of this (and it has turned out that there is a setback issue which she may or may not have known or suspected).

I think that almost anyone who has seen a picture of this addition would be concerned and have sympathy for Courtney. Whether you think it's crappy that she has the right to complain is your problem. She has that right. She was not wrong to ask the county to review the construction because, quite frankly, the county's reputation in regard to zoning is on the line here.

Your post just emphasizes the problem. The decisions should be made based on what the laws actually say, not what you wish they said. It's pretty clear that this has always been about about the design, not perceptions of construction quality or the setback. But as much as you might not like the design according to your personal aesthetic, it follows the laws of the county. Given the complexity of laws and regulations in modern society, do you really think it's a good idea for the government to use unrelated technicalities to punish legal activities in response to public political pressure? I would hope you'd see the tremendous danger in that.

It's clear in the county report that the construction is of poor quality, failing to follow approved construction methods. But hey, it's standing, let's give the builder a pass because it's just a technicality.

When you issue a stop work order in the middle of framing, you're going to find "violations."

Come on, we all know that's not the issue here.

Give me a break - continuing the framing is not going to resolve the setback issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

That particular fence has been there prior to both owners. How do you know the “intent” of the preexisting fence?

Haven't they lived there 30+ years?

Nope - only 15 years. The Nguyen/Pham family purchased in 2010 according to the county real estate records.

The fence belongs to the neighbors based on the photos - eg it’s the same fence that goes around their whole yard. Earlier pictures show no fence in the side yard of 4210.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the fence. Very often the fences are not built directly on the property lines. They are typically built several inches back to prevent any encroachment issues.

Unless its intended to be a common wall between the properties.

That particular fence has been there prior to both owners. How do you know the “intent” of the preexisting fence?

Among other ways, look at the original permit.

Does it really precede the owners of the addition? The fence doesn't look that old.

Wrong again. Fairfax County does not require permits for residential fences.

From the county…..Building Permits are not typically required for fences of any height. However, if a fence is required for
pedestrian safety or as a barrier for a swimming pool, a building permit is required. https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/code/sites/code/files/assets/documents/pdf/fences_and_walls_residential.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


If you’re not the owner, why are you pinging on the owner of the house next door? What made you think the post you were responding to was made by her?

I wrote the post you responded to and I am not the next door homeowner, just a Fairfax county resident who is interested in how this project is being handled by the county. I’ve talked to a number of people who don’t live in the immediate neighborhood where this situation is happening, but are wondering what the resolution will be and what effect it might have on the neighborhood and the property values there. No one is having a stroke, but there is a lot interest in the outcome here.


The neighbor made this a thing by going online and trying to rile people up. That's my issue. She wasn't complaining about a lack of wind bracing, or even encroachment over the setback. Originally, she had no reason to think this violated any rules. She was instead complaining because she doesn't like how it looks. And that's fine- you certainly don't have to like everything you see or everything your neighbor does. And people will naturally complain.

But there's a big difference between complaining to your friends versus 1) posting online to rally people against a community member and 2) going to the media.

This really doesn't look like a case where she's trying to kill her neighbor's project because something was done improperly. Instead it looks like she's been hoping to find a technicality to kill a project is otherwise substantively allowed. I think that's a crappy thing to do. If she wanted that sort of control over her neighbors, she should have bought a house somewhere with an HOA.

I have no doubt that several posts in this thread are from Courtney and people closely associated with her.

I have been following this thread. I do not know Courtney or anyone in her neighborhood. In fact I live miles away, but am in Fairfax County. I think Courtney has a right to free speech and a right to use the internet and media just like anyone else. I don't think she has control over her neighbor at all. Fairfax County will be the final arbiter in all of this (and it has turned out that there is a setback issue which she may or may not have known or suspected).

I think that almost anyone who has seen a picture of this addition would be concerned and have sympathy for Courtney. Whether you think it's crappy that she has the right to complain is your problem. She has that right. She was not wrong to ask the county to review the construction because, quite frankly, the county's reputation in regard to zoning is on the line here.

Your post just emphasizes the problem. The decisions should be made based on what the laws actually say, not what you wish they said. It's pretty clear that this has always been about about the design, not perceptions of construction quality or the setback. But as much as you might not like the design according to your personal aesthetic, it follows the laws of the county. Given the complexity of laws and regulations in modern society, do you really think it's a good idea for the government to use unrelated technicalities to punish legal activities in response to public political pressure? I would hope you'd see the tremendous danger in that.

It's clear in the county report that the construction is of poor quality, failing to follow approved construction methods. But hey, it's standing, let's give the builder a pass because it's just a technicality.

When you issue a stop work order in the middle of framing, you're going to find "violations."

Come on, we all know that's not the issue here.

Give me a break - continuing the framing is not going to resolve the setback issue.

From your previous post(s), your issue isn't really with the setback. It's with the design and height.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at the aerial photos, the addition doesn't extend much beyond the original back of the home. To the extent there is a setback violation, it certainly wouldn't be new. How were the neighbors able to live in their home without that full 8 feet?

The property line may not be a straight line, so while the structure might be built on a straight line, that doesn't mean that it mets the entire set back if the property line isn't straight.

Right, but the point is that the rear of the structure only seems to extend 5 feet further back than the original structure. If the new structure is crosses the 8ft line, then the original one did, too. There's no significant difference here.

There certainly can be a difference. If the actual property line is different from the line the contractor was following, then the new foundation could be crossing over the setback line. Hard to tell without looking at a survey.

The owner/son/GC admitted in an interview I saw that the “contractor” used the fence to measure for the set back assuming it was the property line but in fact it wasn’t identical to the property. Hence why the addition is in violation of the set back requirement and is too close.

If the fence has been used as the de facto property line for many years, it seems pretty hard to credibly claim the neighbors are harmed by the encroachment.

Um, no, that’s not the way it works. If you are the owner/contractor, you really need to get good advice from someone who knows what they’re talking about. The fence does not determine the property line. The property lines exist whether or not there is a fence on a property. Only a professional survey can show where the real property lines are.

Just out of curiosity, who put the fence up? Was there a survey with stakes marking the property corners? How do we know the fence is actually on the property boundaries?

It looks like the fence was put up by the neighbors.

It doesn’t matter. A professional survey will show the property lines. Posters need to go to law school apparently to understand real property, zoning and land use law. OMG

It doesn't change the property line, but it does hurt the credibility of a claim that the neighbors will be affected by the 6 inches.

No, it doesn’t affect the credibility of the “claim” at all. Because all that matters is where the actual property line is and whether or not the extension of the house is over the setback line. The county zoning laws are what matter here.

The point of the above post is that a fence is not a property line. Only a survey can show where the property lines are.

It does, because that's part of what's considered for granting a special permit.

Is and expert you are paying for advice telling you this?

Are you having a stroke, Courtney?

Maybe the homeowner can try to file for adverse possession to get that land that they've been taking care of for years.

That requires 15 years in Virginia. If the title of the property keeps flipping between two people, that's not going to count.

On a side note, does anyone know what the point of flipping ownership between two people is?

My spouse and I own our house as joint tenants- is there some kind of advantage to putting it in one of our names for a few years and then the other name for a few years? Why would this be done by homeowners?

Also curious about this- what’s the meaning behind flipping the property between people?