NVHomes, a unit of NVR Inc., is proposing to develop 306 stacked townhomes on about 10% of the 166-acre Reston National Golf Course, sparking vocal opposition from local groups.
One area of concern is that there isn’t proper oversight over these proposed developments, promoted as “Evolution18” by the golf course.
“306 dwelling units and a commercial recreation complex would be decided without the studies that ordinarily attach to a project this size. That isn’t an oversight,” said Michele Hudnall, a Reston resident and president of a local homeowners’ association.
Regarding plans beyond the housing, Hudnall added that there’s no photometric study for a proposed lighted multi-story driving range, no defined boundary for night play, and no noise analysis. And, she said that the current applications for residential property aren’t being filed properly.
“In June 2012, the Zoning Administration Division advised the owner’s counsel that redeveloping this property to residential would first require a Comprehensive Plan amendment, then a development plan amendment, then a PRC [Planned Residential Community] Plan. That determination has never been reversed. The current applications are the third step, filed without the first two,” she said.
Reston National didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Hudnall suggested that the long-time success of Reston could be undermined by this proposal.
“Reston will continue to be studied in textbooks as the country’s first planned community — either as a continued success evolving through governed growth, or for its demise in setting precedent across the county. Governed growth is what’s at stake for Fairfax County. Not saving a single golf course,” she said.
Hudnall said the plan undermines the vision of Robert E. Simon, founder of Reston, and a system of “governed growth.”
“Bob Simon needed something the county’s zoning couldn’t do at the time, and the county created the PRC district in 1962 to make Reston possible as the country’s first planned community. Fifty-five years later, the community that produced the governing growth instruments and process is the test case for whether they still mean anything in this county,” Hudnall explained.
In the end, Hudnall said she isn’t against development, but she fiercely questions the process.
“I’m not opposed to development. Reston has approved many rezonings and millions of square feet through this process since 2014. What I’m advocating is governed growth — the county decides where density goes, what open space is protected, what infrastructure comes with it, and then holds everyone to it. Including itself,” she concluded.
Rescue Reston, a volunteer-led grassroots organization, advocates for the preservation of Reston’s green spaces. Its comments to the Fairfax County Times were developed with input from the Rescue Reston Board of Directors, South Course Committee Chair Jessie Williams, and other community volunteers involved in Reston development issues.
“Our group of Reston citizens and volunteers appreciates Reston’s growth in the right places,” they said. But they object to Reston National’s residential development plans, arguing that the zoning basis for the proposal is outdated.
“The owners of Reston National Golf Course claim a right to build based on 1966 zoning — but Rescue Reston’s analysis shows that zoning was superseded in 1971,” they said, with a cap of 13 people per acre on the land. They said any development will require an amendment to move forward.
“Notably, in the mid-2000s, the County’s then-planning administrator informed the very lawyers who now represent the owners that no development can occur on Reston National Golf Course unless the Reston Comprehensive Plan is amended,” they explained.
Rescue Reston said the proposal conflicts with founder Robert E. Simon Jr.’s vision of a “live, work, and play” community built around “concentrated development and concentrated open space,” a principle embedded in Reston’s Planned Residential Community (PRC) zoning district.
The group added that preserving open space remains central to Reston’s character and appeal, arguing that “removing planned open space is not necessary to meet housing goals” and that the proposal “strikes directly at the character of our community.”
Rescue Reston expects leaders to abide by Reston covenants and refuse redevelopment.
“We expect our county officials on the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to respect the Comprehensive Plan for Reston and Reston’s PRC zoning, and to say no to the application to develop housing on Reston National Golf Course,” they concluded.
Rescue Reston set up a website portal – rescuereston.org/advocacy – for community members to communicate their objection to the proposal to the County Planning Commissioners and Supervisors.
Reston Citizens Association President Lynne Mulston said the golf course’s open space benefits the community through wildlife habitat, tree canopy, and recreation, while supporting the “increasingly popular game of golf.”
Mulston called the redevelopment plan a “dangerous precedent” that would undermine the Reston Comprehensive Plan, community wishes, and Hunter Mill Supervisor Walter Alcorn’s stated opposition absent “overwhelming community support.” She said RCA expects county leaders to uphold both Alcorn’s position and the comprehensive plan.
The RCA also argued that redevelopment would conflict with Reston’s identity as a “biophilic community” that connects residents with nature.
“Redevelopment of the golf course would completely destroy Reston,” going against Simon’s founding principles and potentially jeopardizing Reston’s status as a Biophilic Community, Mulston said, noting the community joined the Biophilic Cities Network in 2018.
In a joint statement, Reston Association Board President Travis Johnson and CEO Peter Lusk told the Fairfax County Times that the association has told the local planning commission that any change to the golf course “requires a change to the Reston Master Plan before any rezoning amendment application.”
Johnson and Lusk said they support open space and warn against encroaching on homes if the redevelopment passes.
“The quality of life that our members expect is a community that includes development that makes sense, and green space for the enjoyment of all who live in Reston. The proposal includes townhomes to be built 20 ft. from existing homes. A reduction in green space and infringing on current members’ homes is not development that makes sense,” they said.
Johnson and Lusk also bring up environmental concerns. “The environmental impacts are plentiful. The 168 acres that currently make up the golf course absorb rainfall, slow stormwater runoff, and reduce erosion before the stormwater reaches our lakes. The Reston Master Plan makes preservation of the natural environment in the watershed a priority. Redeveloping the golf course would replace this green infrastructure with impervious surfaces, which undermines those objectives,” they said.
The Reston Association has a message for county leaders, urging them to protect Reston values. “We know that our County leaders will make the right decisions for Reston,” said Johnson and Lusk.
“In our view, there are no positive outcomes related to this proposal,” they concluded.