James D. and Beverly H. Turner - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
               On October 14, 1999, the ARB reviewed petitioner’s                     
          application for the Grist Mill Woods subdivision.  The ARB                  
          understood that the development plan provided a sufficient buffer           
          between the subdivision and the Grist Mill and that lot 30 would            
          be donated to the Grist Mill.  Although the ARB was concerned               
          about the potential for tree loss, ultimately the plans were                
          approved.                                                                   
               The Conservation Easement and Income Tax Deduction                     
               On December 6, 1999, the same day FAC closed on its sale of            
          the Grist Mill property to MVD, FAC executed a conservation                 
          easement deed, which was recorded on December 7, 1999.  The deed            
          contained a description of the historical sites adjacent to the             
          Grist Mill property and indicated that MVLA and the Board wished            
          FAC to limit construction of the property to 30 single-family               
          residential lots.  It contained the further statement that even             
          though FAC could have built 62 lots based on a PDH subdivision,             
          it voluntarily agreed to limit developing the Grist Mill property           
          to 30 lots to better serve the historic and scenic nature of the            
          Grist Mill.  Despite the assertion that 62 lots could have been             
          built, the Grist Mill property was zoned R-2 and no plan for PDH            
          zoning had been approved or was pending before Fairfax County.              
          Neither the Fairfax County Attorney’s Office nor MVLA reviewed              
          the deed, and the purported grantee of the conservation easement            
          did not sign or acknowledge the deed.                                       






Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011