The Connection

Much has been written already in this paper and in other forums about the proposed development of four large houses on the property on Seminary Road known as the Karig Forest. We will try not to add unnecessarily to what has already been said by concerned neighbors, public-spirited fellow citizens of Alexandria and subject matter experts who have examined the question. However, we do want to add our voices to urge the City Council to remand this matter back to the Planning and Zoning Commission so that the important environmental consequences of the Karig Forest development can be adequately considered and, hopefully, a proper plan to mitigate those consequences can be adopted.

We live in one of the homes immediately downstream of the steep slope on which the developer proposes to build one of the four homes (and potentially the largest of the four). We were present for the original Planning Commission hearing where the current plan was approved. We waited more than five hours for the opportunity to speak on this subject (which occurred sometime after midnight). Virtually all parties present that night (including all but one of the neighboring property owners as well as the developer) agreed that there was a better, more appropriate plan for siting the houses that would result in reduced environmental impact, less tree loss, and avoidance of undue construction on the potentially unstable slope at the south end of the property.

Nonetheless, because the developer was insisting on a decision that night, the Planning Commission brushed aside the legitimate concerns of downstream property owners (as well as the neighboring congregation of Temple Beth-El) and insisted on pushing through a less desirable plan to avoid any delay in getting the project built. Infuriatingly, when it became apparent that the developer’s application was incomplete, the Planning Commission bent over backwards to approve the project while allowing the developer to supplement the record afterwards. The commission showed no such consideration for the citizens who were simply requesting that a more environmentally accommodating plan be approved instead, even if that might entail a short delay in processing the application.

We are among multiple neighboring property owners who have appealed the decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council. We urge the council to take a closer look at this project and, in particular, consider which is more important — woodenly applying bureaucratic rules to reach a result that did not have to happen — as the Planning Commission did — or taking affirmative actions to protect a uniquely valuable environmental resource while still meeting the long-run needs of the developer and the property owner. It seems to us the council faces an acid test of where its priorities truly lie.

Steve and Anne Reed

Alexandria