Fairfax County v. Town of Fairfax, 4999

Decision Date30 November 1959
Docket NumberNo. 4999,4999
Citation111 S.E.2d 428,201 Va. 362
PartiesCOUNTY OF FAIRFAX v. TOWN OF FAIRFAX Record
CourtVirginia Supreme Court

Frank L. Ball and Robert J. Fitzgerald, Commonwealth's Attorney, for the appellant.

Calvin Van Dyck (E. A. Prichard, on brief), for the appellee.

JUDGE: SPRATLEY

SPRATLEY, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

The Town of Fairfax instituted this proceeding on December 31, 1957, seeking to extend its corporate limits by annexing 5,070.15 acres of land in Fairfax County, adjacent to the town in all four directions, chiefly on the north, east and south.

Fairfax County and numerous intervenors, freeholders not residing in the Town of Fairfax nor in the area proposed to be annexed, opposed the annexation. On the other hand, a large number of freeholders living in the area sought to be annexed, filed thirty-one separate petitions asking that their area be annexed to the town. No resident of the area sought to be annexed appeared in opposition to annexation.

The trial court, composed of Paul E. Brown, senior resident Judge of Fairfax County, Hamilton Haas, Judge of the Twenty-fifth Judicial Circuit, and J. Jordan Temple, Judge of the Third Judicial Circuit, entered a unanimous decree granting the town a total area of 2,224.90 acres, subject to defined terms and conditions imposed upon the town. The trial court, in its opinion, held that the town had failed to establish sufficient desirability and expediency for the inclusion of the area south of the town and the farthermost part of the area north of the town and therefore reduced the area sought to be annexed to the amount of the acreage granted.

The county, on appeal, assigns eleven grounds of error to the action of the trial court. They are mostly covered in its contentions: (1) That the town failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that is was necessary or expedient for it to annex any of the territory sought; (2) That there was shown no community of interest between the town and the area granted to it; (3) That the interests of the county would suffer irreparable loss and damage by reason of the annexation; and, (4) That the court erred in giving weight to the fact that no residents of the area affected opposed its annexation to the town.

None of the freeholders opposing annexation joined in the appeal. The town does not object to the failure of the court to grant it all of the territory sought. It asserts that the decree entered was fair and equitable.

The county argues that the development and administration of its whole area is of paramount importance, and can be best accomplished by keeping the county intact as a unit rather than by dividing it into a number of political units, which have grown in population from without rather than from within. It points out that it is operating under the county excutive form of government, and is financially stable and progressive. It claims that it is rendering adequate service to its residents; and that annexation is not in the best interest of the town or the county. It also complains that if the town becomes a city, because of population increase resulting from annexation, the county will suffer great financial harm.

The record containing the pleadings and evidence consists of 533 printed pages and there are 90 exhibits consisting of maps, tables and charts. Since the finding of the trial court in favor of the town is based on evidence taken ore tenus, we will state the evidence from the stand-point most favorable to it. Henrico v. City of Richmond, 177 Va. 754, 782, 15 S.E.2d 309, 318; Falls Church v. Board of Supervisors, 193 Va. 112, 119, 68 S.E.2d 96.

The Town of Fairfax, an old and historical courthouse town, was first incorporated in 1874. Its present boundaries, irregular in shape, were fixed in 1892, and have since remained unchanged. It is distant about fourteen miles southwest from the City of Washington, D.C. Prior to 1930, its growth in residents was small; but located in the direct line of a great influx of population, due to the increased activities of the Federal government in and around the metropolitan area of the National Capital, its population thereafter repidly increased. Between 1951 and 1958, it grew from 1,946 to approximately 6,800, representing an increase of 249%. In the same time, the county, with a land area of 400 square miles, grew from a rural farming community to a great urban area with a density of more than 1,000 persons per square mile in certain sectors, and more than 500 per square mile in the county as a whole, an increase of approximately 111%.

The town is serviced by four arterial primary highways and other roads of lesser grade, which afford easy access to all parts of the metropolitan area of Washington and other sections of this Commonwealth. In recent years, there has been an extensive commercial and residential development in the territory adjoining the town, which has brought the establishment of large commercial enterprises, consisting of supermarkets, branch banks, and shopping centers, all identified with the town by name, post office, and telephone.

The increase in population confronted the town with many problems, and it employed a town engineer in 1953, to aid it in solving its growing municipal difficulties. In 1956, it adopted the town manager form of government and enlarged and improved its governmental organization and municipal activities. It has had a municipal water system since 1935. In 1954, it prepared for future expansion and growth by making plans to enlarge its well water supply with a permanent water system project by building a dam on Goose Creek in Loudoun County to impound a large supply of water. The county did not assist or aid in this project. Board of Supervisors v. Town of Fairfax, 199 Va. 612, 101 S.E.2d 519.

A sewerage system was established in the town in 1935. In 1953, a new sewage treatment plant serving 5,000 people was constructed, and since 1955 this plant has been extended to a capacity of 2,000,000 gallons per day, enabling it to serve 20,000 people, which is said to have the highest efficiency of any similar plant in the State.

The town is serving water to most of the people living within the area to be annexed and sewers for a majority of those within that area. From each of those sources it realizes a considerable net income; and on the other hand, the county has made no provision nor presented any plans for serving that area with either water or sewers.

The town is operating under a budget control and fiscal system in keeping with the growth of its administrative operations and facilities. It is in a sound financial condition and has been able to carry out all its projects, utilities and other municipal services and still stay well below its debt limitation. In addition to its sewerage and water systems, its municipal services include police protection, trash and garbage collection, street maintenance and construction, and street lighting and cleaning. Notwithstanding the rendering of those services within its present borders and in its outside area, it has reduced its tax rate from $1.00 per $100 valuation in 1950 to a 45cents rate in 1957.

There is little acreage within the present town limits available for the expansion and growth expected under prevailing conditions. It is clear that the availability of its sewerage and water systems and other municipal services rendered have had much to do with the growth of the population immediately adjacent to it, a growth larger than in sectors of the county further removed.

With the exception of police and fire protection and schools, the county has provided little service to the area proposed to be annexed. It supplies no fire hydrants; whereas, the town has installed 180 in the town and in the annexed area. The town contributes funds to support county-wide fire protection, and provides free water to the unit located in the town which serves it and its immediate adjacent area. The residents of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Holt v. City of Richmond
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • May 3, 1972
    ...practices law against Negro candidates. 4 This phrase was construed by the Supreme Court of Virginia in County of Fairfax v. Town of Fairfax, 201 Va. 362, 111 S.E.2d 428, 432 (1959), as "In determining whether annexation is necessary and expedient for a city or town, factors to be considere......
  • Citizens Com. to Op. Annex. v. City of Lynchburg, Va., Civ. A. No. 75-0009-L.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia
    • August 11, 1975
    ...Va. 216, 198 S.E.2d 780 (1973); City of Alexandria v. County of Fairfax, 212 Va. 437, 184 S.E.2d 758 (1971); County of Fairfax v. Town of Fairfax, 201 Va. 362, 111 S.E.2d 428 (1959). Reviewing the Virginia annexation statute in the light of the gloss added by these cases and also taking int......
  • Rockingham County v. City of Harrisonburg
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • September 9, 1982
    ...v. Fairfax, 212 Va. 437, 184 S.E.2d 758 (1971); Higgins v. Roanoke, 212 Va. 399, 184 S.E.2d 815 (1971); Fairfax County v. Town of Fairfax, 201 Va. 362, 111 S.E.2d 428 (1959). Although the City is economically sound today, expert testimony justifies the City's contentions that it is approach......
  • City of Roanoke v. Roanoke County
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • March 4, 1963
    ...and expediency of' annexation. Recently, in Rockingham County v. Timberville, 201 Va. 303, 110 S.E.2d 390, and in Fairfax County v. Town of Fairfax, 201 Va. 362, 111 S.E.2d 428, we discussed those principles and tests in some detail. See also Henrico v. City of Richmond, 177 Va. 754, 15 S.E......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT