As far as I can tell, the complaints here seem more emotional and psychological than substantive. Not everything has to be pleasant to your eyes.

It seems like this addition is unpleasant in many people's eyes (based on comments here). If I were the neighbor I would appeal my tax assessment because no way would I pay 10K in taxes (or close to that) to live next to that. Their house value is most definitely impacted and it's the fault of the county. The assessed value is no longer valid on their house.

Someone should call ICE.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't live in the community in question, but I am watching this carefully because I also live in a community with no HOA in Fairfax County. This is scary to see in a county that I think of as both well funded and "competent". However my thinking is changing quickly on the competent part.

Reading all this and more makes us feel sketch on Fairfax County. Check out 3405 Kimberly Dr, Falls Church. Google shows addition build in process in 2007. Years later exterior looks done. Permit search shows single family and open stuff now on trusses.

Fairfax County does not publish delinquent tax lists as does Arlington County or FX towns like Vienna
FX has this stuff on a board of supervisors agenda with a total for 2024 tax year only Info as list to BOS at the meeting:
real estate- 11.9m + for one tax year only. Arlington less than $185k for 5 years
personal property - 16.7m+

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6 beds and 6 bathrooms doesn’t scream apartment building to you?

Certainly not. Do you understand what an apartment building is?

When that is all that is in the addition?

Apparently the pp believes apartment units don't need things like kitchens or entrances.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6 beds and 6 bathrooms doesn’t scream apartment building to you?

Certainly not. Do you understand what an apartment building is?

When that is all that is in the addition?

Anonymous wrote:6 beds and 6 bathrooms doesn’t scream apartment building to you?

Certainly not. Do you understand what an apartment building is?

Anonymous wrote:I have numerous SFHs in my neighborhood with as many or more. That’s what adds value in renovations. Remember, most or all of the neighbors said they’d be fine with the addition if it was done more tastefully. The same size but wrapping around the back of the house and not being three floors.

That's just emphasizes that this is really about aesthetics, not substance. But your purchase gave you rights over your own property, not your neighbor's. This is something you should have considered when selecting the location- either go somewhere with bigger lots or a neighborhood with an authoritarian HOA.

Otherwise, how kind of those other people to say they wouldn't mind a far more expensive addition. Are they willing to pay for the difference? I doubt the homeowner found this layout ideal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t seen many neighbors come out in support of this addition. Even the big realtor in the neighborhood is helping the woman next door with information.

Most of us are in shock that the county could possibly allow this. The height and the closeness to property lines seems insane.

Closeness? It isn't any closer than the original structure based on the pictures. It's tall, but a 2 story house with a sloped roof is probably going to be just as tall.

IIUC, the height and setback rules adjust together. The higher the structure, the farther from the property line it is supposed to be.

That's not correct for the principal structure.

Anonymous wrote:I have numerous SFHs in my neighborhood with as many or more. That’s what adds value in renovations. Remember, most or all of the neighbors said they’d be fine with the addition if it was done more tastefully. The same size but wrapping around the back of the house and not being three floors.

If it didn’t resemble a la Quinta, sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t seen many neighbors come out in support of this addition. Even the big realtor in the neighborhood is helping the woman next door with information.

Most of us are in shock that the county could possibly allow this. The height and the closeness to property lines seems insane.

Closeness? It isn't any closer than the original structure based on the pictures. It's tall, but a 2 story house with a sloped roof is probably going to be just as tall.

IIUC, the height and setback rules adjust together. The higher the structure, the farther from the property line it is supposed to be.

I have numerous SFHs in my neighborhood with as many or more. That’s what adds value in renovations. Remember, most or all of the neighbors said they’d be fine with the addition if it was done more tastefully. The same size but wrapping around the back of the house and not being three floors.

Anonymous wrote:Have they bulldozed that monstrosity yet?

Maybe we’ll get lucky and it will blow over

6 beds and 6 bathrooms doesn’t scream apartment building to you?

Anonymous wrote:Zoning is all about aesthetics. So stop pretending that how things look doesn't matter. It's simply a matter of degrees. So much of the world is just hideously ugly, and I've seen enough of it to know that rules matter, unless you want to live in a dystopian hellhole.

Begging you to cite a source for this one. Zoning is about land usage. As set forth in the permit application, this house would continue to be used a single-family one (i.e. one unit of housing).

Have they bulldozed that monstrosity yet?