Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county, after finally coming out to inspect, found the setback issue.

A further inspection by the county found the wind bracing problems. Many neighbors and others who have seen the story did comment on the construction quality, so that was also a concern. Just because it wasn’t in the media doesn’t mean there wasn’t any worry about that.

The county is finally providing some oversight, which the neighborhood is happy about.

The appearance of the structure is hard to separate from the issues of concern. As someone noted, this same structure in the back of the existing structure would not have been as concerning, as the setback, drainage, etc issues would not have been as much of a danger for surrounding properties.

What new drainage problems do you think are plausible? Much of the footprint was part of the existing structure, and the remaining part had a parking pad/driveway. In addition, the lot slopes away from Courtney's.

It's all pretext. They said themselves they didn't care about the addition until the third floor went up.

By building 10 feet taller, the rain has 10 feet less to fall, so less water will evaporate on the way down.

Or something. Facts obviously don't matter here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.

Oh please. They don't care about the structure being required to add additional wall braces (it failed a wind bracing test). They want to throw up every road block to try to make completing this addition impossible because they think it's ugly.

If it was really about wanting to prevent a boarding situation, they would just wait and see what the neighbors do, since the county has very strict rules on group living situations. It would be shut down right away. Again, they think they have the right to block construction of something they find ugly.

Ok hedge funder.

lol I wish.

I’m just a person with miserable neighbors.

Weird how you cap for the hedge funds then.

Anonymous wrote:Here's what the permit says:

Project Description:
Three Story Addition on Concrete Slab
New 3 story addition on slab attached to existing SFD that exceeds 100% of the existing footprint. Ground floor with covered front porch w/step, 1 car front load garage, bedrooms. Kitchen located in original portion of home to be demolished/removed prior to final inspection approval.

https://plus.fairfaxcounty.gov/CitizenAccess/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Building&TabName=Building&capID1=REC25&capID2=00000&capID3=00RB7&agencyCode=FFX&IsToShowInspection=

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.

Oh please. They don't care about the structure being required to add additional wall braces (it failed a wind bracing test). They want to throw up every road block to try to make completing this addition impossible because they think it's ugly.

If it was really about wanting to prevent a boarding situation, they would just wait and see what the neighbors do, since the county has very strict rules on group living situations. It would be shut down right away. Again, they think they have the right to block construction of something they find ugly.

Ok hedge funder.

lol I wish.

I’m just a person with miserable neighbors.

Weird how you cap for the hedge funds then.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county, after finally coming out to inspect, found the setback issue.

A further inspection by the county found the wind bracing problems. Many neighbors and others who have seen the story did comment on the construction quality, so that was also a concern. Just because it wasn’t in the media doesn’t mean there wasn’t any worry about that.

The county is finally providing some oversight, which the neighborhood is happy about.

The appearance of the structure is hard to separate from the issues of concern. As someone noted, this same structure in the back of the existing structure would not have been as concerning, as the setback, drainage, etc issues would not have been as much of a danger for surrounding properties.

What new drainage problems do you think are plausible? Much of the footprint was part of the existing structure, and the remaining part had a parking pad/driveway. In addition, the lot slopes away from Courtney's.

It's all pretext. They said themselves they didn't care about the addition until the third floor went up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.

Oh please. They don't care about the structure being required to add additional wall braces (it failed a wind bracing test). They want to throw up every road block to try to make completing this addition impossible because they think it's ugly.

If it was really about wanting to prevent a boarding situation, they would just wait and see what the neighbors do, since the county has very strict rules on group living situations. It would be shut down right away. Again, they think they have the right to block construction of something they find ugly.

Ok hedge funder.

lol I wish.

I’m just a person with miserable neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county, after finally coming out to inspect, found the setback issue.

A further inspection by the county found the wind bracing problems. Many neighbors and others who have seen the story did comment on the construction quality, so that was also a concern. Just because it wasn’t in the media doesn’t mean there wasn’t any worry about that.

The county is finally providing some oversight, which the neighborhood is happy about.

The appearance of the structure is hard to separate from the issues of concern. As someone noted, this same structure in the back of the existing structure would not have been as concerning, as the setback, drainage, etc issues would not have been as much of a danger for surrounding properties.

What new drainage problems do you think are plausible? Much of the footprint was part of the existing structure, and the remaining part had a parking pad/driveway. In addition, the lot slopes away from Courtney's.

Anonymous wrote:The county, after finally coming out to inspect, found the setback issue.

A further inspection by the county found the wind bracing problems. Many neighbors and others who have seen the story did comment on the construction quality, so that was also a concern. Just because it wasn’t in the media doesn’t mean there wasn’t any worry about that.

The county is finally providing some oversight, which the neighborhood is happy about.

The appearance of the structure is hard to separate from the issues of concern. As someone noted, this same structure in the back of the existing structure would not have been as concerning, as the setback, drainage, etc issues would not have been as much of a danger for surrounding properties.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.

Oh please. They don't care about the structure being required to add additional wall braces (it failed a wind bracing test). They want to throw up every road block to try to make completing this addition impossible because they think it's ugly.

If it was really about wanting to prevent a boarding situation, they would just wait and see what the neighbors do, since the county has very strict rules on group living situations. It would be shut down right away. Again, they think they have the right to block construction of something they find ugly.

Ok hedge funder.

lol I wish.

I’m just a person with miserable neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.

Oh please. They don't care about the structure being required to add additional wall braces (it failed a wind bracing test). They want to throw up every road block to try to make completing this addition impossible because they think it's ugly.

If it was really about wanting to prevent a boarding situation, they would just wait and see what the neighbors do, since the county has very strict rules on group living situations. It would be shut down right away. Again, they think they have the right to block construction of something they find ugly.

Ok hedge funder.

Anonymous wrote:

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.

Oh please. They don't care about the structure being required to add additional wall braces (it failed a wind bracing test). They want to throw up every road block to try to make completing this addition impossible because they think it's ugly.

If it was really about wanting to prevent a boarding situation, they would just wait and see what the neighbors do, since the county has very strict rules on group living situations. It would be shut down right away. Again, they think they have the right to block construction of something they find ugly.

They are asking the county to actually do inspections as they are supposed to. One of the inspections did find violations, hence the stop work order. The neighbors are not tying him up in litigation-the county, as it rightfully should, is doing ITS job to make sure codes and what not are being followed.