City of Fairfax Loses RPA Battle

A recent court decision in Chappell, et al. v. Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Fairfax gives hope to landowners that when a locality clearly makes an error in designating an RPA on their land, the landowner can have the error corrected.

In this case, the official RPA map promulgated by the City of Fairfax in 1999 had no RPA near the property, and studies by Wetland Studies and Solutions, Inc. (WSSI) confirmed that no RPA features were present.

Yet, political pressure from adjacent landowners caused the RPA maps available on-line to be changed (without any public notice) and led to the City Planning Commission's denial of a by-right subdivision plan. A subsequent appeal to the City BZA was unsuccessful.

The political situation was succinctly summarized in the Circuit Court's decision:

"The Petitioners' proposed subdivision of the property was met with opposition from neighbors who preferred that the property be kept as open space. For example, one neighbor wrote to the City opposing the development of the property because '[o]ur neighborhood has always used that as a park and enjoyed it as a nature preserve. It is an area where children play and people walk their dogs.' Record, p. 15. On November 12, 2002, the City Council voted to condemn the property, because, to quote the Mayor, 'if we didn't go the condemnation route, [the property] would have been redeveloped by right.'"

The BZA's decision was appealed to the Fairfax Circuit Court, which concluded, "that the BZA erred in affirming the zoning administrator's determination that there exists RPA on the Petitioner's property."

If you have any concerns or questions about RPA designations on your property, contact Mike Rolband, P.E., P.W.S., Mark Headly, P.W.S., Bill Nell, P.E., or Dan Lucey, P.E.