Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Real Estate
Reply to "Massive home addition causes confusion in Fairfax County neighborhood"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]One of the provisions the Zoning Administrator must consider is if the variance will be “detrimental to the use or enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity” This is where the bulk of the county’s response was. Think the homeowner has a hard time proving that his addition doesn’t impact the use or enjoyment of his neighbors. Enjoyment is very subjective and I can tell you I absolutely wouldn’t enjoy my property if I lived next to that. It’s a hard argument to make that the neighbors are not negatively impacted. [/quote] I don't agree. If the structure, which was otherwise compliant, was 7 inches narrower, the enjoyment by the neighbors would be identical. Their enjoyment issues go to the size of the structure itself, which the county approved and which was with the zoning/building code rules. [/quote] Agree that the neighbors (and I think there is a lot more than 1 impacted), enjoyment is similar whether it is 7inches or not. BUT the neighbors enjoyment was not a consideration in the approval process when the homeowner followed building code. He did not build to code and seeks a variance. Now, neighbors use and enjoyment is a consideration and taken into account with the variance request. With a variance, homeowners right to build doesn’t automatically get a pass because it was fine before. With the variance, the community gets a say and there is a lot of public opposition to this project. It’s going to be an interesting case. Hope the homeowner gets a better lawyer than he did contractor. The contractor letter submitted about hardship with the variance request was awful. I’m also surprised that the county is dealing with Mr. Nguyen and addressing him as the homeowner. He is not the homeowner of record on the tax pages.[/quote] You are talking to a brick wall. The PP doesn't want to understand that any variance or exception is going to let the BZA consider additional factors outside of the distance into the setback. The homeowner should already have a lawyer. He's in over his head with a board that has decades of experience. [/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