Reply to Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]There is finally an update that provides a clearer view of the setback zoning issues. The homeowner requested administrative approval from the Zoning board in December, and the request for relief was denied. The homeowner filed for an appeal of this decision today (Jan 16, 2025). One can view the supporting documents in the "attachment" section on the PLUS ACA-Accela Citizen Access site.

Some key comments from the denial letter:

[i]While additional encroachment to stay within the ten-percent, you state that installation of vinyl siding on the addition will result in a final setback "around" 7.3 feet, you acknowledge that both the dimension of the vinyl siding and the final setback are both approximated. In this case, the measurements at hand are so close to the ten-percent limit that there is practically no room for further error or uncertainty. As a result, the Zoning Administrator is unable to applicable side yard setback.[/I]

[i]As approved in Building Permit satisfied the intent of the Ordinance in that it met all required standards for construction in a by-right scenario as shown. However, given the request for an administrative reduction of the side yard setback, the addition is now subject to additional scrutiny as it relates to its impact on other property in the immediate vicinity…  is considerably taller than the homes typically found in Greenbrier, including your original residence. In reviewing your request for an administrative yard reduction, staff cannot find that the addition supports the intent of promoting "orderly and controlled development of the County.”. The overall height and design of the addition is inconsistent with the dwellings found on the immediately adjacent properties to the northwest and southeast.[/I] - This remark flies in direct contraction to some of the posters who supported the addition that claimed because the building was approved, its cohesion with the community didn't matter.

[i]While your request lays out some basis of hardship as it relates to increased construction costs and the timeliness of construction activities due to the delays associated with noncompliance, these are solely financial in nature or matters of convenience. The Zoning Administrator cannot find that you have sufficiently proven unreasonable hardship in this instance, as you have not presented any information that shows modification of the addition to conform with the approved setback is not feasible, from either a cost or a practical perspective.[/I]

The appeal will now take place at a public hearing. While this is not over in any way, the homeowner now has a higher hurdle to overcome in seeking approval. Unfortunately for all involved, the structure will continue to languish, although this is probably a preferable outcome as it preserves some hope of the structure being demolished, versus having it be permanent.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics