The Wedderburn sisters signed a deal with a developer that ultimately fell through. In 2002, they signed one with Elm Street Development, agreeing to sell the land to the McLean firm if Elm Street could get the approvals for a residential project.
Elm Street teamed with Falls Church developer JCE Inc., which owns five acres adjacent to the property.
The Wedderburn family's decision to sell Midgetville -- eight overgrown acres along the Washington & Old Dominion trail in Vienna -- has sparked an emotional battle.
(Dayna Smith - The Washington Post)
|
|
The original development plans for the combined 13 acres called for 29 homes, up to 6,000 square feet each, on quarter-acre lots clustered on the site, with two large areas left undeveloped and a buffer along the W&OD trail -- totaling about four acres of open space. Developers pledged to landscape along the property line of the W&OD trail to screen the homes' rear yards from the trail. The county Planning Commission staff had recommended approval of the original plan.
But opponents say that the amount of open space is exaggerated, since one of those areas is actually for a storm water management pond. In all, they say, the project crams too many homes on the land compared with surrounding neighborhoods, which feature smaller homes spread across half-acre lots.
"It's too big," said Levey. "What we're seeing . . . is ignoring the history and the topography of the site."
Some government bodies have also expressed concern about the project.
The Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority has said that the buffer area between the homes and the bike trail property line -- in some places just 30 feet -- is inadequate. And the town of Vienna says it is concerned about the increased traffic load on its streets.
In June, the developers withdrew their plan and said they would resubmit a joint proposal within the next few weeks that they hope will resolve some of the concerns of opponents of the project.
But zoning lawyer Greg Riegle, a spokesman for the project, pointed out that the developers' original proposal calls for an average of just over two homes an acre -- about the same as, or less than, the density of surrounding neighborhoods. It is less than what is shown on the county's comprehensive plan, which calls for two to three dwelling units an acre there.
"We think -- and have always thought -- that these 29 houses fit well into the community," said Riegle.
The land is zoned for one home an acre, and opponents are organizing an effort to get the county's comprehensive plan reduced to that level on the property.
James Perry, a principal with Elm Street Development, said the density of the proposed project "is in the middle of what is already out there" in the surrounding communities.
But the developers, who met with homeowners in May, have failed to mollify neighbors. Two dozen neighboring homeowners urged county planning commissioners at a May public hearing to reject the deal. Residents have also met with Supervisor Linda Q. Smyth (D-Providence) and Providence planning commissioner Kenneth A. Lawrence to lobby against the project.
"It would change the entire complexion of the area," said Stu Vogt, who has lived in a neighborhood adjoining the property since 1966.
