Nearly 800 Homes Could Be Built On Golf Course Thanks To $8.5M Payment

RESTON, VA — The owners of Reston National Golf Course have offered to pay the Reston Association $8.5 million as part of an alternate plan in case the county rejects its proposal to redevelop the golf course property.

Attorney Mark Looney, who represents Virginia Investment Partners 2019, LLC (“VIP”), the owner of the Reston National Golf Course, and NVR, Inc., made the offer to the RA Board of Directors and Reston CEO Mac Cummins in a letter dated May 2. On Monday, Board President Travis Johnson confirmed to Patch that all the board members had seen the letter. (See the full text of Looney's letter at the bottom of this story.)

Earlier this year, the golf course owners proposed an amendment to the Reston Planned Residential Community District as part of Fairfax County’s Site Specific Plan Amendment process.

The owners seek to build 288 townhouse units on 14 acres of the 166-acre golf course property. They contend that a zoning decision from 1966 approved those 14 acres for medium density residential development, which is about 20 dwelling units per acre.

If this development is approved, the property owners could update the facilities at the 60-year-old golf course in order to make it economically viable.

“Plan B” proposes amending the comprehensive plan to change the zoning of the entire 166-acre property from golf course to mixed-use, dedicating 80 acres to open space that could be used by the Reston community as parkland. The remaining 86 acres would be redeveloped into residential neighborhoods.

The proposals differ in the number of residential units and Reston Association membership, with Plan B including new members and Virginia Investment Partners agreeing to pay an annexation fee to the association, according to the letter. They would also pay RA the monthly HOA fees to offset the capital expenditures the association might accrue in order to serve hundreds of new homeowners.

Based on similar HOA annexations in Fairfax County, the golf course owners anticipated the annexation fee would amount to be several thousand dollars per unit, the letter says

For example, if 850 new homes were annexed by RA and the fee was $5,000 per unit, the developer would be contributing a total of $4,250,000. Likewise, if the per-unit contribution were doubled to $10,000 that would mean RA could receive an $8,500,000 fee, the letter says. The final annexation fee would be negotiated during the rezoning process.

As justification for the proposed development, Looney told a crowd of several hundred people at an April 7 town hall meeting in Reston that the 60-year-old golf course was no longer financially viable for the owners.

“I'm telling you that from the ownership perspective, change has to occur on this property,” he said, adding that the owners planned to pursue the PRC amendment even if the current proposal is rejected.

Last month, county staff recommended that the golf course proposal not move forward in the current SSPA program, although the nomination could be reconsidered during a future SSPA cycle.

"We can say with near certainty that, if it is not added to the work program, the opportunity to develop a meaningful relationship with the Reston Association would be lost," Looney said, in the letter. "We will thereafter continue to pursue the PRC Plan."

The Fairfax County Planning Commission has two SSPA markup sessions scheduled for May 15 and 22. The board of supervisors is scheduled to make the final vote on the SSPA nominations at its June 10 meeting.

The agenda for Thursday's RA Board meeting includes an action item from Cummins regarding the upcoming SSPA markup sessions.

"As the CEO, I believe it is important that our positions are made known regarding the golf course, and residential units joining RA," he said. "These represent already adopted policy positions of the Association, and either myself or President [Travis] Johnson should testify to this at the County. The Land Use Committee has not made any recommendations relative to SSPAs and this step in the process."

An RA spokeswoman told Patch on Monday that RA's longstanding policy with regard to golf courses is stated in Land Use Resolution 6. That policy remains unchanged.

This is the full text of Mark Looney's May 2 letter sent to the Reston Association Board of Directors.

Dear Reston Association Board of Directors:

I’m writing on behalf of Virginia Investment Partners 2019, LLC (“VIP”), the owner of the Reston National Golf Course, and NVR, Inc. (“NVR”), regarding the future use and development of the Reston National Golf Course property. As you may know, our firm will soon submit a PRC Plan to modernize the golf course amenity offerings and reroute the course for the development of approximately 288 new homes on 14 acres of the golf course property. As an alternative to the proposed PRC Plan, we submitted a SSPA nomination to Fairfax County under which roughly half the Reston National Golf Course property could be permanently preserved as open space and/or public uses while redeveloping the other half with residential dwelling units. The SSPA nomination provides the property owner, Reston Association, Fairfax County and the Reston community with a vehicle to discuss whether the now sixty-year-old golf course represents the best use of the property for the next sixty years.

In late February, our team offered to meet with Reston Association’s Land Use Advisory Committee (“LUAC”) to present these two proposals and to discuss the potential benefits to Reston Association of the SSPA nomination. That meeting never occurred. Had we been able to meet with the LUAC, we would have explained that, if the SSPA nomination is permitted to move forward through Fairfax County’s planning and zoning review process and results in the property being rezoned for residential uses, we expect to request those new homes be annexed into and become dues-paying members of the Reston Association. We also anticipate the Reston Association would request that NVR pay an “annexation fee” to the Association, in addition to the monthly HOA fees, to offset capital expenditures that may be needed for Reston Association to properly serve hundreds of new homeowners.

Based on our experience with similar HOA annexations elsewhere in Fairfax County, we expect the annexation fee could be in the range of several thousand dollars per unit depending on the types of capital expenditures required to properly support these new homes and without impacting the HOA fees paid by existing association members. As an example, if 850 new homes are annexed into Reston Association, and the annexation fee is $5,000 per unit, that could result in a total contribution of $4,250,000. If the annexation fee is $10,000 per unit, that could result in a total contribution to Reston Association of $8,500,000. The final annexation fee amount would be negotiated in the context of other obligations, improvements and facilities required by Fairfax County as part of the rezoning process.

As you know, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote on June 10, 2025, to adopt the work program for the 2025 Countywide Site-Specific Plan Amendment nominations. To the extent the Reston Association sees merit in furthering the conversation about the opportunities presented by this SSPA proposal, now is the time to communicate that interest.

Neither we nor you can predict the ultimate outcome if this SSPA nomination is added to the County’s work program. But we can say with near certainty that, if it is not added to the work program, the opportunity to develop a meaningful relationship with the Reston Association would be lost. We will thereafter continue to pursue the PRC Plan. We welcome an opportunity to discuss these proposals with the Board of Directors at your

Mark Looney