Return to story

Stafford prevails over Crucible

June 6, 2009 12:36 am

BY JONAS BEALS

The Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled that The Crucible does not have a vested right to build an anti-terrorism training facility on agriculturally zoned property off Mount Olive Road in Stafford County.

The decision, released Thursday, overturned a Circuit Court ruling that would have allowed the facility to be built on 198 acres without a conditional-use permit. If The Crucible wants to use the property, officials must now go through a public hearing and approval process.

"I don't think everyone recognized the significance of this case," Hartwood Supervisor Joe Brito said yesterday. "It would have dictated state law, and would have allowed determinations to be made behind closed doors--out of the public eye."

The case has been ongoing since 2004. The Crucible purchased the Mount Olive Road property to expand an existing operation off Jack Ellington Road in south- ern Stafford. Officials approached the zoning administrator to see whether their facility, which they classified as a school, would be allowed by-right in an agricultural zoning district. What they received was a letter that stated schools were allowed, but that determination was "subject to change." The Crucible moved ahead and spent approximately $1 million to get the project started.

Meanwhile, the Stafford County Board of Supervisors amended the zoning laws to require a public hearing for schools in agricultural areas.

According to the Supreme Court ruling, The Crucible was remiss in relying on the determination by the zoning administrator. It did not constitute "a significant governmental act" and therefore did not guarantee The Crucible had vested property rights, which would have made the project immune to changes in the zoning laws.

"All over the state, developers and landowners call their zoning administrators and ask 'Can I do x or y?'" said attorney Sharon Pandak, who represented Stafford in the case. "That does not indicate any approval by the government itself. It is excellent that the Supreme Court has determined that's not enough."

Essentially, the ruling states that a landowner or developer needs more formal approval from a government agency to guarantee vested property rights--an approved site plan or a proffered rezoning, for example.

"I think it's a significant decision for Stafford," County Attorney Joe Howard said. "But it is also significant beyond Stafford--now local governments have guidance on what constitutes a 'significant governmental act.'"

The ruling could be a significant roadblock for landowners, according to Clark Leming, the lawyer who represented The Crucible in the case.

"There is something inherently unfair about the process," Leming said. "How does a landowner know when they've gone far enough that the government can't change the rules on them? Why should a landowner spend over $1 million to find out whether they can do something with their property?"

Leming advised that there is another lawsuit pending in Circuit Court that could aid The Crucible. It alleges the board's decision to change the zoning ordinance was arbitrary, capricious and potentially discriminatory.

The fate of that case is unknown. For now, the county is happy to be on the winning side of the Supreme Court decision.

"It truly preserves the public process and the governmental process," Pandak said.

It is the outcome Brito has been waiting for.

"Justice has been served," he said. "This is a real victory for the citizens of Hartwood, Stafford County and the state of Virginia."

Jonas Beals: 540/368-5036
Email: jbeals@freelancestar.com