In a contentious meeting last week in Lake Anne to hear the latest Fairfax County consultant recommendations for new heavy density, the heartiest applause of the evening resulted from the question “If we were a town, would our community’s land use be determined by Fairfax County or could we approve it ourselves?” and the response that “No, if you were a town, Fairfax County approval would not be required” — followed by thunderous applause. Ironically, self-government is what Founder Robert Simon intended from the start, and in fact bought the rights to when he purchased the land that would become America’s premier planned community, Reston.

THE BEGINNING
Robert E. Simon, Jr. brought his vision to the Virginia countryside west of Washington 45 years ago. In this New Town, as it was called, he brought new concepts into a cohesive unit where a person could spend his or her whole life in a place designed for living, working and playing. He envisioned it as a self-governing community, a town.
Mixed-use development was unknown — homes were built in one place, retail and office buildings in another and manufacturing or industrial facilities in yet another. The uses were, by tradition, kept physically separate. Not in Reston.
Town houses and apartments were exclusively for the inner cities — not for suburban developments. Single family, detached homes were the rule outside major urban centers. Not in Reston.
Developers did not allow people of different skin color (or religious faiths or ethnicity in many cases) to buy homes or live next door to each other in a single development, especially below the Mason-Dixon Line. Reston would be different.

UNIQUE GOALS: NEW TOWN
Along with these unique and unifying innovations, Mr. Simon set forth goals to guide development of Reston and its future. His seven goals are in the front section of the Reston phone book. They include:
“That the widest choice of opportunities be made available for the full use of leisure time. This means that the New Town should provide a wide range of cultural & recreational facilities as well as an environment for privacy.
“By providing the fullest range of housing styles & prices - from high-rise efficiencies to townhouses and detached houses - housing needs can be met at a variety of income levels. This kind of mixture permits residents to remain rooted in the community … as their housing needs change. This also results in the heterogeneity that spells a lively & varied community.
“That the importance & dignity of each individual be the focal point for all planning, & take precedence for large-scale concepts.
“That people be able to live & work in the same community.
“That beauty, structural & natural, is a necessity of the good life and should be fostered.”
Mr. Simon envisioned his carefully crafted community as a cohesive, self-governing entity in order to protect it and assure that it endured for generations to follow. However, in the process of fulfilling Fairfax County regulations for development of his 7,000 acres, Simon was warned by county officials [See video-“Reston - Past, Present and Future”] not to incorporate Reston as a self-governing town or the county would make the processes of getting sewer and other permits very difficult. Thus, Fairfax County blocked incorporation for Simon’s New Town, although the land on which Reston was established had been granted authority to incorporate by the Commonwealth of Virginia under a previous owner. The pragmatic founder opted not to risk the county’s ire by incorporating at the outset. Thus, local control was thwarted

SELF-GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES
Since Reston was founded, the issue of governance has arisen twice as the community grew. These efforts faltered as one interest or another convinced a majority that a town would cost residents more in taxes or that the time was not right.
Two major studies were conducted, the first in the late 1970s, the second 10 years later. The first study resulted in the state legislature approving a referendum on whether to become a town. The referendum was held and was defeated by about a 3-2 margin. Several factors appear responsible for the defeat:
1. The developer was still “in charge,” so there was no opportunity to transfer facilities to the town to reduce after-tax costs to homeowners. The time was not right.
2. There was no clear statement of the services the town would provide.
3. The draft charter provided review by, and a veto for, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors for all but the most trivial town actions - a much more restrictive charter than those of neighboring Herndon and Vienna.
The second study considered a broader range of alternatives. In addition to looking at a town option, it looked at the economics of becoming a city, a much more ambitious undertaking that would include taking on police, fire and rescue, and schools. It also considered adding the parks and recreation functions of the homeowners’ association (Reston Association) to the Small Tax District that had been established to fund the Reston Community Center. The 1988 study found that the town option:
* was politically and economically feasible (as a city was not)
* provided direct political representation (as an expanded tax district did not)
* was the least costly for residents.
However, due to opposition of a significant part of the business community (expressed as concern about possibly increased property taxes) as well as Fairfax County officials, residents never had an opportunity to vote on study results.

LAKE ANNE UPDATE: Supervisor [Catherine] Hudgins closed off discussion of a new consultant team’s recommended comprehensive plan guidelines, claiming that the community had had sufficient input over two years. In fact, the community had no input into the consultant team’s findings until Wednesday night — and there was sharp disagreement with her team’s new proposals which doubled the density of anything discussed with the community in focus groups, the economic study or the charette. County staff is already writing the new plan based not on community inputs, but on the supervisor’s new consultant team’s report. And, so it goes ….