Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I drove by earlier this week at night. Lights were on in the original structure so it appears they are still living there with no heat this week. There was Tyvekhouse wrap applied from the inside covering all the windows in the addition.

?? Do they seriously not have heat? Can someone find out if they are OK? This is an unreal CF of bad decisions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Yes, obviously, the mistakes have already been made, but it’s important to recognize that the mistakes were the result of very poor decisions. Why were those poor decisions made? Were the decision makers trying to save money and did not do good research? Did they not realize that cutting corners could end up costing so much more in the long run? Did they not educate themselves about construction and how to go about building an addition correctly?

It’s too bad this happened and it can be a good lesson to others in the future, I guess.

First mistake, using a builder (the one that wrote the letters on behalf of the homeowner) that has a revoked professional license with the state.

Huge mistake on a project of this size.

I agree!

But the point is, this addition is going to be built. This isn't about mitigating the impact on neighbors- nobody honestly thinks moving this 6-12 inches back will change things. This is about punishing the homeowner for poor choices.

I think as much as it sucks, he needs to tear it down.

This isn't just one accidental mistake of an inch or two.

There are multiple, deliberate, dramatic unpermitted changes between the approved plans and the actual structure.

It is important to enforce the rules so that going forward, creating something completely different than your approved plans doesn't happen on other renovations

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Yes, obviously, the mistakes have already been made, but it’s important to recognize that the mistakes were the result of very poor decisions. Why were those poor decisions made? Were the decision makers trying to save money and did not do good research? Did they not realize that cutting corners could end up costing so much more in the long run? Did they not educate themselves about construction and how to go about building an addition correctly?

It’s too bad this happened and it can be a good lesson to others in the future, I guess.

First mistake, using a builder (the one that wrote the letters on behalf of the homeowner) that has a revoked professional license with the state.

Huge mistake on a project of this size.

I agree!

But the point is, this addition is going to be built. This isn't about mitigating the impact on neighbors- nobody honestly thinks moving this 6-12 inches back will change things. This is about punishing the homeowner for poor choices.

I believe it’s about more than the 6-12 inches now. Apparently the board can now look at other aspects because it has entered the appeal stage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Yes, obviously, the mistakes have already been made, but it’s important to recognize that the mistakes were the result of very poor decisions. Why were those poor decisions made? Were the decision makers trying to save money and did not do good research? Did they not realize that cutting corners could end up costing so much more in the long run? Did they not educate themselves about construction and how to go about building an addition correctly?

It’s too bad this happened and it can be a good lesson to others in the future, I guess.

First mistake, using a builder (the one that wrote the letters on behalf of the homeowner) that has a revoked professional license with the state.

Huge mistake on a project of this size.

I agree!

But the point is, this addition is going to be built. This isn't about mitigating the impact on neighbors- nobody honestly thinks moving this 6-12 inches back will change things. This is about punishing the homeowner for poor choices.

Anonymous wrote:I drove by earlier this week at night. Lights were on in the original structure so it appears they are still living there with no heat this week. There was Tyvekhouse wrap applied from the inside covering all the windows in the addition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Update:

The Board of Zoning Appeals will be holding a public hearing on April 29th at 9 am to discuss the application to allow this build to continue.

Materials related to the appeals application can be found here:

https://plus.fairfaxcounty.gov/CitizenAccess/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Zoning&TabName=Zoning&capID1=REC26&capID2=00000&capID3=0053H&agencyCode=FFX

Can the public speak at the hearing? I’d like to support the appellant.

You don't have standing.

That wasn’t the question. I don’t know if the BZA appeal incorporates public or neighbor comment given that zoning variances often incorporate community input. I don’t know if the appeals here are closed records since this isn’t court.

You absolutely can speak!

There is information on the Fairfax BZA website:

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/planning-development/board-zoning-appeals/speaker-signup

Just make sure to be mindful of the speaker registration deadlines for the meeting. Any and all - for and against - should utilize their right to comment publicly!

Thank you! I would love to make a short and sweet comment.

Stand up and call the board racist. That will make them see the light.

They're Deomcrats. It'll work. Their sense of guilt and desire for self-flagellation due to historical inequities which must be remedied in the here and now for long-gone victims will carry the day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Yes, obviously, the mistakes have already been made, but it’s important to recognize that the mistakes were the result of very poor decisions. Why were those poor decisions made? Were the decision makers trying to save money and did not do good research? Did they not realize that cutting corners could end up costing so much more in the long run? Did they not educate themselves about construction and how to go about building an addition correctly?

It’s too bad this happened and it can be a good lesson to others in the future, I guess.

First mistake, using a builder (the one that wrote the letters on behalf of the homeowner) that has a revoked professional license with the state.

Huge mistake on a project of this size.

I agree!

But the point is, this addition is going to be built. This isn't about mitigating the impact on neighbors- nobody honestly thinks moving this 6-12 inches back will change things. This is about punishing the homeowner for poor choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Update:

The Board of Zoning Appeals will be holding a public hearing on April 29th at 9 am to discuss the application to allow this build to continue.

Materials related to the appeals application can be found here:

https://plus.fairfaxcounty.gov/CitizenAccess/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Zoning&TabName=Zoning&capID1=REC26&capID2=00000&capID3=0053H&agencyCode=FFX

Can the public speak at the hearing? I’d like to support the appellant.

You don't have standing.

That wasn’t the question. I don’t know if the BZA appeal incorporates public or neighbor comment given that zoning variances often incorporate community input. I don’t know if the appeals here are closed records since this isn’t court.

You absolutely can speak!

There is information on the Fairfax BZA website:

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/planning-development/board-zoning-appeals/speaker-signup

Just make sure to be mindful of the speaker registration deadlines for the meeting. Any and all - for and against - should utilize their right to comment publicly!

Thank you! I would love to make a short and sweet comment.

Stand up and call the board racist. That will make them see the light.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Update:

The Board of Zoning Appeals will be holding a public hearing on April 29th at 9 am to discuss the application to allow this build to continue.

Materials related to the appeals application can be found here:

https://plus.fairfaxcounty.gov/CitizenAccess/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Zoning&TabName=Zoning&capID1=REC26&capID2=00000&capID3=0053H&agencyCode=FFX

Can the public speak at the hearing? I’d like to support the appellant.

You don't have standing.

That wasn’t the question. I don’t know if the BZA appeal incorporates public or neighbor comment given that zoning variances often incorporate community input. I don’t know if the appeals here are closed records since this isn’t court.

You absolutely can speak!

There is information on the Fairfax BZA website:

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/planning-development/board-zoning-appeals/speaker-signup

Just make sure to be mindful of the speaker registration deadlines for the meeting. Any and all - for and against - should utilize their right to comment publicly!

Thank you! I would love to make a short and sweet comment.

Stand up and call the board racist. That will make them see the light.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Yes, obviously, the mistakes have already been made, but it’s important to recognize that the mistakes were the result of very poor decisions. Why were those poor decisions made? Were the decision makers trying to save money and did not do good research? Did they not realize that cutting corners could end up costing so much more in the long run? Did they not educate themselves about construction and how to go about building an addition correctly?

It’s too bad this happened and it can be a good lesson to others in the future, I guess.

First mistake, using a builder (the one that wrote the letters on behalf of the homeowner) that has a revoked professional license with the state.

Huge mistake on a project of this size.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Yes, obviously, the mistakes have already been made, but it’s important to recognize that the mistakes were the result of very poor decisions. Why were those poor decisions made? Were the decision makers trying to save money and did not do good research? Did they not realize that cutting corners could end up costing so much more in the long run? Did they not educate themselves about construction and how to go about building an addition correctly?

It’s too bad this happened and it can be a good lesson to others in the future, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Update:

The Board of Zoning Appeals will be holding a public hearing on April 29th at 9 am to discuss the application to allow this build to continue.

Materials related to the appeals application can be found here:

https://plus.fairfaxcounty.gov/CitizenAccess/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Zoning&TabName=Zoning&capID1=REC26&capID2=00000&capID3=0053H&agencyCode=FFX

Can the public speak at the hearing? I’d like to support the appellant.

You don't have standing.

That wasn’t the question. I don’t know if the BZA appeal incorporates public or neighbor comment given that zoning variances often incorporate community input. I don’t know if the appeals here are closed records since this isn’t court.

You absolutely can speak!

There is information on the Fairfax BZA website:

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/planning-development/board-zoning-appeals/speaker-signup

Just make sure to be mindful of the speaker registration deadlines for the meeting. Any and all - for and against - should utilize their right to comment publicly!

Thank you! I would love to make a short and sweet comment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.

Even if you think that, those mistakes were already made. Given where they are right now, every plausible path still involves the addition being built substantively as planned. The question is just how much it's going to cost them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the side setback is the only issue then the house will stay. It's either the architect, surveyor, or builder that will eat the cost of correcting it, not the homeowner. Either way, the addition is going to exist.

That is incorrect, it is the homeowner that bears all of the liability here as they were acting as the general contractor. Had they used a licensed GC instead of going at it themselves, they would have a path to recourse to potential recoup the loss. That being said, the project would not be in the situation it is in had they engaged professional help.

I would not be so sure about the addition staying for sure. There is a higher onus on the homeowner to get an appeal approved, and even then if the appeal is approved, anyone else with standing (not a very strict bar) can bring the matter to the circuit court. This will be tied up in process for a while.

Even if the appeal is denied, they'll move the wall rather than just giving up. Expensive, but doable.

Yes, probably, given past actions. It would be throwing good money after bad, but they don’t seem to care.

The problems arose from trying to do the project as cheaply as possible, but now they’ll have to spend so much more. It could have been nicer and more comfortable for the family if they had just done it correctly from the beginning.

They'd be spending money either way. Moving the wall will be much cheaper than any other option that would give them a similar amount of space.

Sure, but it certainly was not the smartest idea in the world to try to get this past the permit office in the first place. And it would have been less (in both money and loss of respect in the community) to have just followed the rules. The whole project has been penny wise and pound foolish.