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]This is a quote from the denial letter of what the homeowner thought:

Although the addition is unfinished, you explain in your request that the finished wall will be done in "standard vinyl siding — approximately one inch in thickness," resulting in a final right side yard setback that “will be around 7.3 feet."[/quote]

Vinyl siding isn't that thick, typically a projection of 3/4”. I suppose the corner trim could project 1". Again, someone should have submitted a drawing. [/quote]

There’s insulation under the siding, which adds some more thickness. I suppose one could cheap out on the insulation to save bulk, but then you’d be paying extra on heat and air conditioning every month. 
[/quote]

Insulation? What's that?[/quote]

Haha, right- they’re doing this as cheaply as possible. Who needs insulation?
[/quote]

They do make insulated vinyl siding. It's better than nothing, but that's not "standard." However, what is standard vinyl siding? There's no end of styles and shapes.

Again, tell the BZA exactly what you are installing and include the product documentation. Completely self-inflicted problem leaving "standard vinyl siding" up to the BZA's imagination. [/quote]

Didn’t help himself with his contractors letter either to describe his hardship (also one of the criteria to assess a variance). The contractor said:

“ As the Engineer/contractor overseeing the project, I confirm that relocating the right side wall of the addition would be extremely difficult and costly. The existing structure is integrated into the foundation, and removal would risk structural integrity. Rebuilding would increase costs substantially and present safety challenges. Thus, we recommend
proceeding with the structure as is.

If the structure were required to move in by 6 inches to 1 foot, it would necessitate dismantling key load-bearing elements, impacting the foundation. This would require re-pouring concrete footer, re-framing, and altering structural supports. This extensive work
would not only escalate costs by tens of thousands but also introduce safety risks and structure integrity during demolition and reconstruction. For these reasons, we strongly advise against such a move.”

The county’s response to the hardship consideration was:

“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.”

[/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