Negligence on the part of the owner is not an accepted reason to allow a hardship variance. This is a 100% self created issue on the part of the owner due to his failure to undertake proper surveys, have the site staked out pre-construction, and then confirmatory measurements once the slab had been laid down. The irony here is tremendous in that the owner's cost cutting has now spiraled their costs out of control and put the project at significant risk of being torn down. To think, had the owner been willing to spend $15k on survey work, they would not be in this position.

Setbacks exist for a reason, and in this case they are especially pertinent for good reason - fire safety. Just because the setback limit is 8 feet, does not mean one needs to build up to the 8 foot line - doing so opens up the greater possibility of setback violations when you consider things such as roof eaves, siding, gutters, etc.

The owner also has their hands full on remedying the items uncovered in the wind bracing inspecting. While inspection failures are common amongst all types of projects, including ones done by premier contractors, the wind bracing inspection report for this project does show some serious deficiencies.

The report comments are public on the Fairfax access portal:

"Work is incomplete and does not match approved plans. OK to install temporary weatherproofing to protect materials. While temporary weatherproofing may be installed; all weatherproofing must be removed prior to the next wind bracing inspection. Additional deficiencies have been identified. A Stop Work Order will be issued. Deficiencies Identified: 1. Foundation anchors missing in various locations throughout. 2. Not all fastening of sheathing complete. Some panels still loose. 3. Nail pattern incorrect at majority of braced wall panels throughout. 4. Interior braced walls not complete missing sheathing in various locations. 5. Header has not been installed at first floor front opening. 6. Strong wall panels not installed. 7. Opening layout has changed from approved plans. 8. Need to install blocking at seams of sheathing to fasten sheathing. 9. Unable to access upper floors and cannot verify wall to roof attachment or upper interior braced walls. 10. With respect to zoning compliance, based on the wall check survey prepared by Larry N. Scartz and dated October 29, 2025, the northwest corner of the addition is located only 7.4 feet from the northern side property line, where an 8-foot side yard setback is required for the R-3 Cluster District pursuant to Section 2102.6.B. of the Zoning Ordinance."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

If they built the addition but six inches narrower, would the neighbors be equally angry?

That doesn't matter. If the dude has violated any codes, then the addition isn't legal. Whether neighbors like it or not is a moot point.

If the county deems it legal in the end, there is little to be done at that point. The addition stays, hate it or not. Now, we can all watch to make sure OTHER codes/laws aren't being violated. Any problems caused for other properties can certainly be dealt with, as well. But, the next step is to continue to pursue changes to code to make sure other neighborhoods don't see something similar happen.

You can fix most code violations.

Building codes, permitting-I may not be using the exact word because I’m not deep into county permits and/or legalese. But if it isn’t as was approved by the county, whether the neighbors like it or not is of no consequence

Neighbor input is of no consequence if the homeowner opts to fix the code violations (setback and wind bracing so far).

Neighbor input DOES come into play if the homeowner seeks a variance or special permit.

The ball is in the homeowner’s court on which path he seeks. Either way it is going to take more money and more time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

If they built the addition but six inches narrower, would the neighbors be equally angry?

That doesn't matter. If the dude has violated any codes, then the addition isn't legal. Whether neighbors like it or not is a moot point.

If the county deems it legal in the end, there is little to be done at that point. The addition stays, hate it or not. Now, we can all watch to make sure OTHER codes/laws aren't being violated. Any problems caused for other properties can certainly be dealt with, as well. But, the next step is to continue to pursue changes to code to make sure other neighborhoods don't see something similar happen.

You can fix most code violations.

Great. Then fix the code violations. The homeowner acting as the GC seems to be trying to do the project on the cheap. Fixing code violations cost $$$.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jerks! Just because something is technically legal doesn’t mean your not terrible for doing it.

Right, what Courtney is doing is terrible. She should be ashamed of herself every moment between now and when she's forced to move out.

There is no legal reason as to why she would be forced to move out. Since her property value will tank she probably can’t move out. She has every right to be furious.

She's sitting on a half million in equity. She'll be ok when she moves.

Why do neighbors have to move? This is dumb.

Also, have you done the math on a move up in this area lately? We bought in this neighborhood when the bigger models were in the mid-$400ks. That was a little over 14 years ago now. Even though our home has appreciated $500K or so, so have all the other homes. We'd have to sink all the profit and more into a move up. So, now you're talking $1M+ homes at an interest rate 2.5-3X what we currently have (we refinanced to do some remodeling and such during the pandemic) We don't want to move further out. Our incomes have NOT doubled or more in this time. And we have no intention of moving somewhere else - this is where jobs are for us.

You act like moving is a very simple thing to do. Maybe YOU have that kind of income flexibility. Most of us do not.

I thought the addition made the neighbor's house unlivable. Won't she have to move?

It didn’t make her house unlivable but it did reduce the value of it and it will be a lot less pleasant to live there dealing with that addition and all that it brings.

It will reduce the value of all the houses on that street, including that of the family building the three story addition. Poetic justice that the builder is going to lose money, I suppose, but it is so unfortunate for all the other neighbors who are affected by an action they had no say in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jerks! Just because something is technically legal doesn’t mean your not terrible for doing it.

Right, what Courtney is doing is terrible. She should be ashamed of herself every moment between now and when she's forced to move out.

There is no legal reason as to why she would be forced to move out. Since her property value will tank she probably can’t move out. She has every right to be furious.

She's sitting on a half million in equity. She'll be ok when she moves.

Why do neighbors have to move? This is dumb.

Also, have you done the math on a move up in this area lately? We bought in this neighborhood when the bigger models were in the mid-$400ks. That was a little over 14 years ago now. Even though our home has appreciated $500K or so, so have all the other homes. We'd have to sink all the profit and more into a move up. So, now you're talking $1M+ homes at an interest rate 2.5-3X what we currently have (we refinanced to do some remodeling and such during the pandemic) We don't want to move further out. Our incomes have NOT doubled or more in this time. And we have no intention of moving somewhere else - this is where jobs are for us.

You act like moving is a very simple thing to do. Maybe YOU have that kind of income flexibility. Most of us do not.

I thought the addition made the neighbor's house unlivable. Won't she have to move?

That comment tells a lot about the kind of person you are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

If they built the addition but six inches narrower, would the neighbors be equally angry?

That doesn't matter. If the dude has violated any codes, then the addition isn't legal. Whether neighbors like it or not is a moot point.

If the county deems it legal in the end, there is little to be done at that point. The addition stays, hate it or not. Now, we can all watch to make sure OTHER codes/laws aren't being violated. Any problems caused for other properties can certainly be dealt with, as well. But, the next step is to continue to pursue changes to code to make sure other neighborhoods don't see something similar happen.

You can fix most code violations.

Building codes, permitting-I may not be using the exact word because I’m not deep into county permits and/or legalese. But if it isn’t as was approved by the county, whether the neighbors like it or not is of no consequence

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jerks! Just because something is technically legal doesn’t mean your not terrible for doing it.

Right, what Courtney is doing is terrible. She should be ashamed of herself every moment between now and when she's forced to move out.

There is no legal reason as to why she would be forced to move out. Since her property value will tank she probably can’t move out. She has every right to be furious.

She's sitting on a half million in equity. She'll be ok when she moves.

Why do neighbors have to move? This is dumb.

Also, have you done the math on a move up in this area lately? We bought in this neighborhood when the bigger models were in the mid-$400ks. That was a little over 14 years ago now. Even though our home has appreciated $500K or so, so have all the other homes. We'd have to sink all the profit and more into a move up. So, now you're talking $1M+ homes at an interest rate 2.5-3X what we currently have (we refinanced to do some remodeling and such during the pandemic) We don't want to move further out. Our incomes have NOT doubled or more in this time. And we have no intention of moving somewhere else - this is where jobs are for us.

You act like moving is a very simple thing to do. Maybe YOU have that kind of income flexibility. Most of us do not.

I thought the addition made the neighbor's house unlivable. Won't she have to move?

It didn’t make her house unlivable but it did reduce the value of it and it will be a lot less pleasant to live there dealing with that addition and all that it brings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jerks! Just because something is technically legal doesn’t mean your not terrible for doing it.

Right, what Courtney is doing is terrible. She should be ashamed of herself every moment between now and when she's forced to move out.

There is no legal reason as to why she would be forced to move out. Since her property value will tank she probably can’t move out. She has every right to be furious.

She's sitting on a half million in equity. She'll be ok when she moves.

Why do neighbors have to move? This is dumb.

Also, have you done the math on a move up in this area lately? We bought in this neighborhood when the bigger models were in the mid-$400ks. That was a little over 14 years ago now. Even though our home has appreciated $500K or so, so have all the other homes. We'd have to sink all the profit and more into a move up. So, now you're talking $1M+ homes at an interest rate 2.5-3X what we currently have (we refinanced to do some remodeling and such during the pandemic) We don't want to move further out. Our incomes have NOT doubled or more in this time. And we have no intention of moving somewhere else - this is where jobs are for us.

You act like moving is a very simple thing to do. Maybe YOU have that kind of income flexibility. Most of us do not.

I thought the addition made the neighbor's house unlivable. Won't she have to move?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

If they built the addition but six inches narrower, would the neighbors be equally angry?

That doesn't matter. If the dude has violated any codes, then the addition isn't legal. Whether neighbors like it or not is a moot point.

If the county deems it legal in the end, there is little to be done at that point. The addition stays, hate it or not. Now, we can all watch to make sure OTHER codes/laws aren't being violated. Any problems caused for other properties can certainly be dealt with, as well. But, the next step is to continue to pursue changes to code to make sure other neighborhoods don't see something similar happen.

You can fix most code violations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

If they built the addition but six inches narrower, would the neighbors be equally angry?

That doesn't matter. If the dude has violated any codes, then the addition isn't legal. Whether neighbors like it or not is a moot point.

If the county deems it legal in the end, there is little to be done at that point. The addition stays, hate it or not. Now, we can all watch to make sure OTHER codes/laws aren't being violated. Any problems caused for other properties can certainly be dealt with, as well. But, the next step is to continue to pursue changes to code to make sure other neighborhoods don't see something similar happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jerks! Just because something is technically legal doesn’t mean your not terrible for doing it.

Right, what Courtney is doing is terrible. She should be ashamed of herself every moment between now and when she's forced to move out.

There is no legal reason as to why she would be forced to move out. Since her property value will tank she probably can’t move out. She has every right to be furious.

She's sitting on a half million in equity. She'll be ok when she moves.

Why do neighbors have to move? This is dumb.

Also, have you done the math on a move up in this area lately? We bought in this neighborhood when the bigger models were in the mid-$400ks. That was a little over 14 years ago now. Even though our home has appreciated $500K or so, so have all the other homes. We'd have to sink all the profit and more into a move up. So, now you're talking $1M+ homes at an interest rate 2.5-3X what we currently have (we refinanced to do some remodeling and such during the pandemic) We don't want to move further out. Our incomes have NOT doubled or more in this time. And we have no intention of moving somewhere else - this is where jobs are for us.

You act like moving is a very simple thing to do. Maybe YOU have that kind of income flexibility. Most of us do not.

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

If they built the addition but six inches narrower, would the neighbors be equally angry?

Why do you think setback isn’t what neighbors will discuss if a hearing happens? The setback is part of the objection - it is too close to another property. That may be among other things, but it is one of the problems.

I'm confused what a variance would accomplish. While it wouldn't be cheap to modify the structure to move the outer wall, doing so would be cheaper than tearing it down and rebuilding something else. You'd just end up costing them more money making it look even worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing the term "variance" is being used loosely. This seems to pretty clearly fit under the special permit process, no?

Sure, but that process is (potentially) lengthy and invites feedback from nearby property owners. There are no guarantees. I had the approval of my impacted neighbor before I ever applied for my special permit and it still took months and was not guaranteed.

It's not guaranteed per se, but there's a clear precedent that would be hard for them to ignore.

Is there a clear precedent that has a similar number of neighbors objecting to the project?

The objections aren't over the six inches, so they aren't really relevant.

Except that it's doubtful a variance will be allowed/granted, given the weight of public opinion against this construction.

The county attorney will tell them they need to approve it, since they've approved all the other ones. There's no reasonable basis to reject this based on the ordinances in place.