Three-Way Dispute Over Trees Settled

Couple, Builder, County Agree to Plant 20 Evergreens Safe for 4 Blind Children

The 20 trees represent a compromise over Fairfax County's demand that the builder, NV Homes, plant more than 100 trees on the Bartlings' 1.6-acre lot. (By Jahi Chikwendiu -- The Washington Post)

An Oakton couple in a dispute with their builder and Fairfax County over trees around their new home is planning to move in today after 49 days in a hotel.

Joe and Karen Bartling have reached an agreement with Fairfax and NV Homes of McLean to plant 20 evergreen trees in their back yard, and they believe the trees will not be obstacles to their four blind children, the couple's attorney said yesterday.

"It's a species without sharp needles, and the needles are actually very soft," the lawyer, Gorham S. Clark, said. "So if you bump up against one, it won't prick your skin and hurt you."

The 20 trees, plus an undisclosed settlement to the Bartlings from NV Homes, represent a compromise over the county's demand that the builder plant more than 100 trees on the couple's 1.6-acre lot in the Estates at Oakton Hollow. The builder cut down a dozen too many mature trees during construction and cleared trees on another lot it might develop, and the Bartlings' lot had an ideal topography to replace them, county officials said. Fairfax requires builders in such residential developments as Oakton Hollow to preserve trees on 20 percent of the property. The subdivision has four homes.

The Bartlings balked at adding the trees, calling them obstacles for the disabled children they adopted. The couple also said so many trees would have prevented them from putting in a long-planned swimming pool and other amenities for their children in the back yard.

The Bartlings, notified of the tree requirement 24 hours before their scheduled closing last month, moved to an efficiency apartment in Chantilly. At one point, NV Homes asked them to sign a document agreeing to accept and maintain the trees and never cut them down. The Bartlings refused. The builder also threatened to terminate their contract and resell the $2.2 million estate after the couple demanded $250,000 in compensation.

James Sack, NV Homes's general counsel, declined to comment yesterday. Joe and Karen Bartling also declined to comment, citing a requirement of their agreement with the builder.

"We're glad that this was able to be worked out," county spokeswoman Merni Fitzgerald said.

Clark said the young evergreens will not need to be propped up by stakes and wire -- a safety concern of the Bartlings -- because the species has a relatively well-developed root system. The trees, six feet tall now, will be planted in front of a row of mature hickories and oaks the builder left at the edge of the property. The evergreens will act as replacements for the trees NV Homes felled illegally, violating the county's limits on clearing and grading. But the evergreens will not contribute to the overall 20 percent tree cover in the subdivision, Fitzgerald said. The builder has found other locations for those trees.

The Bartlings will be required to keep the evergreens until NV Homes is released from bond. "But I think they're going to keep the trees after that," Clark said.