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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Legally the height of the structure is not an issue. The issue is the structure (including its height) is too close to the property line.

The utilization and enjoyment of the neighbors was always an issue, even when it was being built to code. So to answer your question, does 7 inches really impact the neighbors enjoyment. The answer is absolutely yes.

That’s why the BOS looked into it and is reviewing building ordinances as a whole to make sure this type of project doesn’t happen again. However, legally the county could not use the neighbors enjoyment and utilization as a reason to deny the project. Under a variation the neighbors and community become part of the considerations for approval.[/quote]

If the 7 extra inches of width really impacts the neighbors' enjoyment, the opinion doesn't state that anywhere. To the contrary, the opinion expressly states that they were considering the structure as a whole, not just the variance. This is why the opinion is vulnerable. [/quote]

The negative impact to the neighbor is addressed in the letter. This is the quote from the letter…

“in particular, the property to the northwest closest to the right side yard in question is negatively impacted
due to the looming nature and "wall effect" created by an addition of this height and bulk; that impact is further
aggravated given the addition's failure to meet the proposed setback of 8.5 feet.”

[/quote]

Please link to the denial letter. I read what PP quoted, and it does not address the impact of the setback variance requested.

Assuming what you say is true, then the opinion is stronger given that they actually addressed that. The bare conclusion is dubious though. The "wall effect" exists either either way, and there is no explanation as to how the "wall effect" is exacerbated by a 7-inch change in the width of a structure, nor why the "wall effect" impacts the neighbor's enjoyment in a legally cognizable way, given OP's entitlement to build a three-story structure as a matter of right. 
[/quote]

The OPs “entitlement” to build the structure that tall ended when he crossed over the setback allowances. And he’s still entitled to build a 3 story structure as a matter of right  (at least for now) within the setback allowances.

Once he crossed over the setback allowances, there is more scrutiny and others  property rights are now considered in addition to the homeowners.

[b]The County has determined as the letter stated “ the Zoning Administrator is unable to determine that the addition as currently designed is not detrimental to the use and enjoyment of other properties in the immediate vicinity.” 
[/b]
And the Zoning Administrator must determine if setback variance “will not be detrimental to the use or enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity”. This is one of the qualifying considerations of the zoning ordinances. The Zoning Administrator has to make an assessment on the impact to the neighbors.[/quote]

I'm not sure this is the appropriate standard of review, particularly since the requested variance is within the 10% buffer zone in which variances are routinely granted. [/quote]

Then what is the appropriate standard of review?

Read the letter it’s one of about 7 things they consider, including hardship to the homeowner. Section 5100.2.D(11)(c) of the Zoning Ordinance

PS - the front of the house is over the setback allowance as well, it’s just not as egregious as the back corner.[/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