## Facts

- The City of Hampton regulated land use to implement the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, including designating Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas that contain Resource Protection Areas (RPAs) and associated buffer zones.
- In 2008, the City amended its zoning ordinance to redefine the RPA buffer by making inclusion in the federal Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) a determinative criterion for inclusion in the buffer.
- Marble Technologies, Inc. and Shri Ganesh, LLC owned land designated within the CBRS.
- Because of the amendment, the owners’ land was treated as within the RPA buffer based on CBRS status, increasing development restrictions even if the property did not otherwise meet the Board’s RPA criteria.
- The owners sued for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging the amendment exceeded municipal authority under the Act and violated Dillon’s Rule.
- The circuit court dismissed the request for injunctive relief and entered judgment for the City, upholding the amendment.

## Issues

1. Whether the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and related regulations expressly or impliedly authorize a locality to use CBRS inclusion as a criterion for designating land within a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area, specifically an RPA buffer.
2. Whether, under Dillon’s Rule, Hampton exceeded its delegated powers by supplementing the Board’s criteria with a federal designation not contained in the statutory/regulatory scheme.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the circuit court and remanded.
- The Court held that localities are not expressly or impliedly authorized to use CBRS inclusion as a criterion for designating Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas.
- Because the amendment relied on an unauthorized criterion, it exceeded Hampton’s delegated zoning authority and could not stand.

## Legal Principles

- Under Dillon’s Rule, Virginia localities possess only powers (1) expressly granted, (2) necessarily or fairly implied from express grants, or (3) essential and indispensable; reasonable doubt is resolved against local authority.
- The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act delegates to the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board the power to promulgate criteria that local governments must use to determine the ecological and geographic extent of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas.
- A locality implementing the Act may not substitute or add independent criteria for designation of RPAs and buffers when the Act and the Board’s regulations do not authorize those additions.
- A zoning amendment conflicts with the Act when it makes a non-authorized factor determinative for Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area designation.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Virginia invalidated Hampton’s zoning amendment because the City lacked statutory authority to use CBRS designation to define an RPA buffer; the Act required reliance on the Board’s criteria, and Dillon’s Rule barred the City from adding an ungranted criterion.


Marble Techs., Inc. v. City of Hampton, 279 Va. 409, 690 S.E.2d 84 (Va. 2010)