Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can assure you that C didn't have knowledge of this thread until very recently. I highly doubt she is sitting around responding to anything here.

As a resident of this community, I can tell you that your allegations about C "riling people up" are completely false. I have gone over and over the posts on our Facebook group and I see nothing of the sort. She reached out asking a simple question, and other residents have been nothing but helpful and supportive of each other. That is very much the way our neighborhood is. No one was trying in any way to turn neighbor against neighbor. Quite a few of us, including the well known realtors in our neighborhood, are very concerned about this project. If C hadn't contacted the county, someone would have. But it is NOT mob mentality or follow the leader in any way. I know I have personally shot down comments on FB posts regarding the news stories that took an anti-immigrant approach to this. That is NOT who we are - our neighborhood is incredibly diverse and we love it. At this point, the ire is mostly directed at the county approving this and not doing due diligence. They put EVERYONE, including the homeowners building the addition, in a crappy spot. The people I have talked to and posts I have seen all seem to hope for an outcome here that doesn't punish or hurt anyone in any significant way.

I personally think the homeowner isn't being truthful, but I don't know the guy personally. This is just based on the docs I have seen from this post and elsewhere, as well as his interview. Something in my gut is telling me this isn't on the up and up. I can't prove anything at this point, and I am hoping this comes to a quick resolution for everyone.

But please stop with your ridiculous allegations about our neighborhood being "riled up".

Going to the media and publicly shaming the homeowner doesn't seem like a great way to effectuate this alleged goal.

Even if the next door neighbor had never made a peep about it, people were going to notice this large addition that doesn’t look like anything else in the neighborhood and start asking questions sooner or later. Blaming the neighbor is silly.

You are very naive if you thought a three story tower-shaped building could be constructed in a neighborhood of cape cods and split levels without anyone saying, “Whoa, what the heck is this?” It wouldn’t have taken long for people to realize this addition was likely going to have a negative effect on their property values and start asking a lot of questions. And then when the county inspections were being done, they would have noticed all the discrepancies and a stop-work would have been issued in any event.

So, no, don’t blame the neighbor for the problems that have ensued.

It had been there for months but didn't go viral until Courtney gave a news interview...

The whole neighborhood supported Courtney in giving the interview. The fact that the story went viral is indicative of how truly atrocious this addition is. The news outlets could have found anybody in the neighborhood to interview and I think the story would have gone just as viral. The aerial video footage is shocking. I'm amazed that anybody would fault Courtney for giving an interview about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can assure you that C didn't have knowledge of this thread until very recently. I highly doubt she is sitting around responding to anything here.

As a resident of this community, I can tell you that your allegations about C "riling people up" are completely false. I have gone over and over the posts on our Facebook group and I see nothing of the sort. She reached out asking a simple question, and other residents have been nothing but helpful and supportive of each other. That is very much the way our neighborhood is. No one was trying in any way to turn neighbor against neighbor. Quite a few of us, including the well known realtors in our neighborhood, are very concerned about this project. If C hadn't contacted the county, someone would have. But it is NOT mob mentality or follow the leader in any way. I know I have personally shot down comments on FB posts regarding the news stories that took an anti-immigrant approach to this. That is NOT who we are - our neighborhood is incredibly diverse and we love it. At this point, the ire is mostly directed at the county approving this and not doing due diligence. They put EVERYONE, including the homeowners building the addition, in a crappy spot. The people I have talked to and posts I have seen all seem to hope for an outcome here that doesn't punish or hurt anyone in any significant way.

I personally think the homeowner isn't being truthful, but I don't know the guy personally. This is just based on the docs I have seen from this post and elsewhere, as well as his interview. Something in my gut is telling me this isn't on the up and up. I can't prove anything at this point, and I am hoping this comes to a quick resolution for everyone.

But please stop with your ridiculous allegations about our neighborhood being "riled up".

Thank you. It's so easy to make this fight into something it's not, on both sides of the issue.

Personally I hope that the new structure gets torn down, even if just on an apparently "minor" issue (missing 6 inches of setback), because the poor neighbor doesn't deserve such a tall building blocking out her light, and the county should have had rules on the books to avoid this in the first place. I blame the owner who initiated construction for not following the Golden Rule, more than I blame the county. Surely unspoken social etiquette and adherence to a tacit communal code matter regardless of where you originally come from. I'm an Asian foreigner, yet I would never even think of building something so intrusive to my neighbors! Perhaps this owner is a little autistic, and not sensible to unspoken rules, but I'm not going to speculate. We do need explicit rules, for people like him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

There are additions on several homes in the neighborhood. Some are beautifully done, and there are a few that aren't but still resemble a house. No other cape cods with a giant attached lego piece.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

There are additions on several homes in the neighborhood. Some are beautifully done, and there are a few that aren't but still resemble a house. No other cape cods with a giant attached lego piece.

No one is owed cohesive neighborhood architecture. Live in an HOA if you want that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

I think there was initially a question as to whether the plan complied with the setback requirement but since the neighborhood is zoned R3 cluster, the setback documented on paper was acceptable.

It does seem clear that there are some violations, such as a probable six inch setback violation because of the absence of a survey. That's not okay, and the homeowner is going to have to go through the variance process (may not be the proper term) as a result. But it's obvious that people are angry that it's a three-story rectangular structure with a flat roof. Not that it's six inches too wide.

[Anonymous]

When you’re in a car accident that is someone else’s fault and your car gets devalued because it has an accident on its record you can get compensation for the devaluation. It’s called a diminished value claim and it happens all the time in car accidents. I wonder if all the neighbors could sue Mike (or whoever actually owns the home) for diminished value of their houses due to this monstrosity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

I think there was initially a question as to whether the plan complied with the setback requirement but since the neighborhood is zoned R3 cluster, the setback documented on paper was acceptable.

It does seem clear that there are some violations, such as a probable six inch setback violation because of the absence of a survey. That's not okay, and the homeowner is going to have to go through the variance process (may not be the proper term) as a result. But it's obvious that people are angry that it's a three-story rectangular structure with a flat roof. Not that it's six inches too wide.

Three stories with a flat, not slanted, roof is a lot of bulk looming so close to another house can definitely be a safety risk. Fire is the most obvious risk that springs to mind. That can be a pretty scary thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you’re in a car accident that is someone else’s fault and your car gets devalued because it has an accident on its record you can get compensation for the devaluation. It’s called a diminished value claim and it happens all the time in car accidents. I wonder if all the neighbors could sue Mike (or whoever actually owns the home) for diminished value of their houses due to this monstrosity.

That's not a cognizable claim in the American legal system.

[Anonymous]

^To be clear, I meant it's not cognizable in this circumstance, where they haven't violated any laws or created a legal nuisance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Even if so, there are steps along the way where the county needs to inspect. This wasn’t happening and things that could have been caught earlier in the building process were not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

There are additions on several homes in the neighborhood. Some are beautifully done, and there are a few that aren't but still resemble a house. No other cape cods with a giant attached lego piece.

No one is owed cohesive neighborhood architecture. Live in an HOA if you want that.

This is definitely a case where someone may have originally followed the letter of law, but not spirit.

That is neither here nor there at this point. The county put all parties in a bad spot when they weren’t doing their jobs and now there is an even bigger mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the media was contacted, it finally got the county off their butts

again, the county put everyone in this position

The PLAN complied with county rules, so it should have been approved. The plan is as objectionable to the neighbor as the current structure, even if there are now deviations from the plan.

Is it completely clear that the plan complied? I thought there were some questions about that.

And the builders are not following the plan that was approved, so issues would have ensued.

Really, someone was going to bring this to the attention of at least the local media at some point. Are there other structures exactly like this one in that neighborhood that no one objected to? If not, it should have been obvious for the design that this would be noticed and questions would be asked.

There are additions on several homes in the neighborhood. Some are beautifully done, and there are a few that aren't but still resemble a house. No other cape cods with a giant attached lego piece.

No one is owed cohesive neighborhood architecture. Live in an HOA if you want that.

This is definitely a case where someone may have originally followed the letter of law, but not spirit.

That is neither here nor there at this point. The county put all parties in a bad spot when they weren’t doing their jobs and now there is an even bigger mess.

What do you perceive the spirit of "the law" (i.e. the zoning and building code) to be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can assure you that C didn't have knowledge of this thread until very recently. I highly doubt she is sitting around responding to anything here.

As a resident of this community, I can tell you that your allegations about C "riling people up" are completely false. I have gone over and over the posts on our Facebook group and I see nothing of the sort. She reached out asking a simple question, and other residents have been nothing but helpful and supportive of each other. That is very much the way our neighborhood is. No one was trying in any way to turn neighbor against neighbor. Quite a few of us, including the well known realtors in our neighborhood, are very concerned about this project. If C hadn't contacted the county, someone would have. But it is NOT mob mentality or follow the leader in any way. I know I have personally shot down comments on FB posts regarding the news stories that took an anti-immigrant approach to this. That is NOT who we are - our neighborhood is incredibly diverse and we love it. At this point, the ire is mostly directed at the county approving this and not doing due diligence. They put EVERYONE, including the homeowners building the addition, in a crappy spot. The people I have talked to and posts I have seen all seem to hope for an outcome here that doesn't punish or hurt anyone in any significant way.

I personally think the homeowner isn't being truthful, but I don't know the guy personally. This is just based on the docs I have seen from this post and elsewhere, as well as his interview. Something in my gut is telling me this isn't on the up and up. I can't prove anything at this point, and I am hoping this comes to a quick resolution for everyone.

But please stop with your ridiculous allegations about our neighborhood being "riled up".

Thank you. It's so easy to make this fight into something it's not, on both sides of the issue.

Personally I hope that the new structure gets torn down, even if just on an apparently "minor" issue (missing 6 inches of setback), because the poor neighbor doesn't deserve such a tall building blocking out her light, and the county should have had rules on the books to avoid this in the first place. I blame the owner who initiated construction for not following the Golden Rule, more than I blame the county. Surely unspoken social etiquette and adherence to a tacit communal code matter regardless of where you originally come from. I'm an Asian foreigner, yet I would never even think of building something so intrusive to my neighbors! Perhaps this owner is a little autistic, and not sensible to unspoken rules, but I'm not going to speculate. We do need explicit rules, for people like him.

The golden rule? What's that? Maximize your neighbor's resale value at your own family's expense? That's not a rule.