Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259 (2026)

Designated agent to act on proposed final plat

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. 1. Except as otherwise provided in subdivisions 2 and 3, the designated agent shall act on any proposed plat within 60 days after it has been officially submitted for approval by either approving or disapproving the plat in writing, and giving with the latter specific reasons therefor. The designated agent shall thoroughly review the plat and shall make a good faith effort to identify all deficiencies, if any, with the initial submission. However, if approval of a feature or features of the plat by a state agency or public authority authorized by state law is necessary, the designated agent shall forward the plat to the appropriate state agency or authority for review within five business days of receipt of such plat. The state agency shall respond in accord with the requirements set forth in § 15.2-2222.1, which shall extend the time for action by the designated agent, as set forth in subsection B. Specific reasons for disapproval shall be provided to the applicant either in a separate document or on the plat itself and shall (i) identify all deficiencies in the plat that caused the disapproval by referencing specific duly adopted ordinances, regulations, or policies and (ii) identify all modifications or corrections as will permit approval of the plat. The designated agent shall act on any proposed plat that it has previously disapproved within 45 days after the plat has been resubmitted for approval.

2. The approval of plats, site plans, and plans of development solely involving parcels of commercial or residential real estate by a designated agent shall be governed by subdivision 3 and subsections B, C, and D. For the purposes of this section, the term "commercial" means all real property used for commercial or industrial uses, and the term "residential" means all real property used for single-family or multifamily use.

3. The designated agent shall act on any proposed plat, site plan or plan of development within 40 days after it has been officially submitted for approval by either approving or disapproving the plat in writing, and giving with the latter specific reasons therefor. The designated agent shall not delay the official submission of any proposed plat, site plan, or plan of development by requiring presubmission conferences, meetings, or reviews. The designated agent shall thoroughly review the plat or plan and shall in good faith identify, to the greatest extent practicable, all deficiencies, if any, with the initial submission. However, if approval of a feature or features of the plat or plan by a state agency or public authority authorized by state law is necessary, the designated agent shall forward the plat or plan to the appropriate state agency or agencies for review within five business days of receipt of such plat or plan. The state agency shall respond in accord with the requirements set forth in § 15.2-2222.1, which shall extend the time for action by the designated agent, as set forth in subsection B. Specific reasons for disapproval shall be provided to the applicant either in a separate document or on the plat or plan itself and shall (i) identify all deficiencies in the plat or plan that caused the disapproval by referencing specific duly adopted ordinances, regulations, or policies and (ii) identify, to the greatest extent practicable, modifications or corrections that will permit approval of the plat or plan.

In the review of a resubmitted proposed plat, site plan or plan of development that has been previously disapproved, the designated agent shall consider only deficiencies identified in its review of the initial submission of the plat or plan that have not been corrected in such resubmission and any deficiencies that arise as a result of the corrections made to address deficiencies identified in the initial submission. In the review of the resubmission of a plat or plan, the designated agent shall (i) identify all deficiencies with the proposed plat or plan that caused the disapproval by referencing specific duly adopted ordinances, regulations, or policies and (ii) identify all modifications or corrections that will permit approval of the plat or plan. Upon the second resubmission of such disapproved plat or plan, the designated agent's review shall be limited solely to the previously identified deficiencies that caused its disapproval.

All deficiencies identified during a third or subsequent resubmission of any plat, site plan, or plan of development shall be provided concurrently to the applicant and the director of planning or the equivalent official having supervisory authority over the agent. Within 14 days of receipt, such director or equivalent official shall either:

1. Approve the plat, site plan, or plan of development as submitted;

2. Permit the applicant to address any deficiencies deemed minor by the director or equivalent official, and resubmit the plat, site plan, or plan of development for administrative approval. The director or equivalent official shall complete the administrative approval within seven days of receipt of the resubmission; or

3. Disapprove the resubmission, and identify all deficiencies that caused the disapproval by referencing specific duly adopted ordinances, regulations, or policies and identify all modifications or corrections that will permit approval of the plat, site plan, or plan of development.

The designated agent shall act on any proposed plat, site plan or plan of development that it has previously disapproved within 30 days after the plat or plan has been modified, corrected and resubmitted for approval. The failure of a designated agent to approve or disapprove a resubmitted plat or plan within the time periods required by this section shall cause the plat or plan to be deemed approved. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the locality's designated agent, with the concurrence of all applicable local reviewing agencies, may administratively approve any resubmitted site plan or subdivision plat that the designated agent deems to be in compliance with local ordinances and state law.

Notwithstanding the approval or deemed approval of any proposed plat, site plan or plan of development, any deficiency in any proposed plat or plan, that if left uncorrected, would violate local, state or federal law, regulations, mandatory Department of Transportation engineering and safety requirements, and other mandatory engineering and safety requirements, shall not be considered, treated or deemed as having been approved by the designated agent. Should any resubmission include a material revision of infrastructure or physical improvements from the earlier submission or if a material revision in the resubmission creates a new required review by the Virginia Department of Transportation or by a state agency or public authority authorized by state law, then the designated agent's review shall not be limited to only the previously identified deficiencies identified in the prior submittals and may consider deficiencies initially appearing in the resubmission because of such material revision.

B. Any state agency or public authority authorized by state law making a review of a plat forwarded to it under this article, including, without limitation, the Virginia Department of Transportation and authorities authorized by Chapter 51 (§ 15.2-5100 et seq.), shall complete its review within 30 days of receipt of the plat upon first submission and within 30 days for any proposed plat that has previously been disapproved, provided, however, that the time periods set forth in § 15.2-2222.1 shall apply to plats triggering the applicability of said section. The Virginia Department of Transportation and authorities authorized by Chapter 51 (§ 15.2-5100 et seq.) shall allow use of public rights-of-way dedicated for public street purposes for placement of utilities by permit when practical and shall not unreasonably deny plat approval. If a state agency or public authority authorized by state law does not approve the plat, it shall comply with the requirements, and be subject to the restrictions, set forth in subsection A, with the exception of the time period therein specified. Upon receipt of the approvals from all state agencies and other agencies, the designated agent shall act upon a plat within 20 days.

C. If the designated agent fails to approve or disapprove the plat within the timeframes prescribed in this section, the subdivider, after 10 days' written notice to the designated agent, may petition the circuit court for the locality in which the land involved, or the major part thereof, is located, to decide whether the plat should or should not be approved. The court shall give the petition priority on the civil docket, hear the matter expeditiously in accordance with the procedures prescribed in Article 2 (§ 8.01-644 et seq.) of Chapter 25 of Title 8.01 and make and enter an order with respect thereto as it deems proper, which may include directing approval of the plat.

D. If the designated agent disapproves a plat and the applicant contends that the disapproval was not properly based on the ordinance applicable thereto, or was arbitrary or capricious, he may appeal to the circuit court having jurisdiction of such land and the court shall hear and determine the case as soon as may be, provided that his appeal is filed with the circuit court within 60 days of the written disapproval by the designatedagent.

Code 1950, §§ 15-789, 15-967.10; 1952, c. 333; 1962, c. 407, § 15.1-475; 1964, c. 498; 1975, c. 641; 1977, c. 10; 1978, c. 283; 1979, c. 111; 1980, c. 73; 1986, c. 483; 1989, cc. 471, 495; 1990, c. 171; 1992, c. 843; 1993, c. 846; 1996, c. 353; 1997, c. 587; 2003, c. 716; 2007, c. 202; 2008, c. 855; 2015, c. 420; 2018, c. 670; 2024, c. 346; 2025, cc. 100, 594.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: James v. City of Falls Church, 694 S.E.2d 568 (Va. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

James v. City of Falls Church, 694 S.E.2d 568 (Va. 2010). · cites it 14× “29 as well as Code § 15.2-2259, the Planning Commission has the authority to approve subdivision plats.”

Bd. of Zoning Appeals v. CaseLin Sys., Inc., 501 S.E.2d 397 (Va. 1998). · cites it 2× “1-475(B)(1) (now Code § 15.2-2259) requires that local commissions act on proposed subdivision plats “officially submitted for approval.”

Sansom v. Bd. of Supervisors, 514 S.E.2d 345 (Va. 1999). · cites it 4× “1-475(B)(1) (now § 15.2-2259(A)), the County Administrator wrote the following reasons for denial on Sansom’s subdivision plat: Denied by Madison County Board of Supervisors on April 2, 1997, under Article 1, Article 4-1-4, Article 4-3-1, Article 4-4-6 and Article 5-3 due to…”

Hanover Cnty. v. Bertozzi, 504 S.E.2d 618 (Va. 1998). · cites it 2× “1-475(B)(3) (now Code § 15.2-2259(C)) which provides, in pertinent part: If a local commission or other agent disapproves a plat and the subdivider contends that such disapproval was not properly based on the ordinance applicable thereto, or was arbitrary or capricious, he may…”

Sinclair v. New Cingular Wireless Pcs, LLC, 727 S.E.2d 40 (Va. 2012). · cites it 2× “2-2255, and to consider subdivision plats and preliminary subdivision plats submitted for approval, Code §§ 15.2-2259 and 15.2-2260. It has not, however, authorized local governing bodies to delegate to planning commissions approval of departures from zoning ordinances or any…”

Sansom v. Bd. of Sup'rs of Madison Cnty., 514 S.E.2d 345 (Va. 1999). · cites it 4× “1-475(B)(1) (now § 15.2-2259(A)), the County Administrator wrote the following reasons for denial on Sansom's subdivision plat: Denied by Madison County Board of Supervisors on April 2, 1997, under Article 1, Article 4-1-4, Article 4-3-1, Article 4-4-6 and Article 5-3 due to…”

Shilling v. Jimenez, 597 S.E.2d 206 (Va. 2004). “2-2258 (power of planning commission to act on plats); §§ 15.2-2259, -2260, -2261(B)(1) and -2271(1) (various powers of governing body with respect to plats).”

Brookfield Washington, L.L.C. v. The Cnty. of Fairfax, Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 10× “2-2258 and Code § 15.2-2259. 2 LDS initially rejected Brookfield’s subdivision plan on multiple grounds.”

KSS One, LLC v. Henrico Cnty., Virginia, Bd. of Supervisors of Henrico Cnty. (Va. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “” Code § 15.2-2259(A)(1)-(3) (emphasis added).”

Bertozzi v. Hanover Cnty., 544 S.E.2d 340 (Va. 2001). · cites it 3× “1-475(B)(3) (now Code § 15.2-2259(C)). As pertinent, the statute provided: "If a local commission or other agent disapproves a plat and the subdivider contends that such disapproval was not properly based on the ordinance applicable thereto, or was arbitrary or capricious, he…”

Sterling Land Corp. v. Plan. Comm'n, 51 Va. Cir. 307 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 2000). “2-2260, which applies to preliminary plats, tracks the language pertaining to final plats provided for in § 15.2-2259. This language has been held to be sufficiently broad to permit a trial court to approve a final plat if the evidence supports either of Plaintiff’s allegations,…”

— Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259(3) — 1 case

Brookfield Washington, L.L.C. v. The Cnty. of Fairfax, Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2025). “2-2258 and Code § 15.2-2259. 2 LDS initially rejected Brookfield’s subdivision plan on multiple grounds.”

— Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259(A) — 3 cases

James v. City of Falls Church, 694 S.E.2d 568 (Va. 2010). “29 as well as Code § 15.2-2259, the Planning Commission has the authority to approve subdivision plats.”

Sansom v. Bd. of Supervisors, 514 S.E.2d 345 (Va. 1999). “1-475(B)(1) (now § 15.2-2259(A)), the County Administrator wrote the following reasons for denial on Sansom’s subdivision plat: Denied by Madison County Board of Supervisors on April 2, 1997, under Article 1, Article 4-1-4, Article 4-3-1, Article 4-4-6 and Article 5-3 due to…”

Sansom v. Bd. of Sup'rs of Madison Cnty., 514 S.E.2d 345 (Va. 1999). “1-475(B)(1) (now § 15.2-2259(A)), the County Administrator wrote the following reasons for denial on Sansom's subdivision plat: Denied by Madison County Board of Supervisors on April 2, 1997, under Article 1, Article 4-1-4, Article 4-3-1, Article 4-4-6 and Article 5-3 due to…”

— Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259(A)(1) — 2 cases

KSS One, LLC v. Henrico Cnty., Virginia, Bd. of Supervisors of Henrico Cnty. (Va. Ct. App. 2023). “” Code § 15.2-2259(A)(1)-(3) (emphasis added).”

Brookfield Washington, L.L.C. v. The Cnty. of Fairfax, Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2025). “2-2258 and Code § 15.2-2259. 2 LDS initially rejected Brookfield’s subdivision plan on multiple grounds.”

— Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259(A)(3) — 1 case

KSS One, LLC v. Henrico Cnty., Virginia, Bd. of Supervisors of Henrico Cnty. (Va. Ct. App. 2023). “” Code § 15.2-2259(A)(1)-(3) (emphasis added).”

— Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259(C) — 4 cases

Hanover Cnty. v. Bertozzi, 504 S.E.2d 618 (Va. 1998). “1-475(B)(3) (now Code § 15.2-2259(C)) which provides, in pertinent part: If a local commission or other agent disapproves a plat and the subdivider contends that such disapproval was not properly based on the ordinance applicable thereto, or was arbitrary or capricious, he may…”

Bertozzi v. Hanover Cnty., 544 S.E.2d 340 (Va. 2001). “1-475(B)(3) (now Code § 15.2-2259(C)). As pertinent, the statute provided: "If a local commission or other agent disapproves a plat and the subdivider contends that such disapproval was not properly based on the ordinance applicable thereto, or was arbitrary or capricious, he…”

— Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2259(D) — 2 cases

James v. City of Falls Church, 694 S.E.2d 568 (Va. 2010). “29 as well as Code § 15.2-2259, the Planning Commission has the authority to approve subdivision plats.”

Brookfield Washington, L.L.C. v. The Cnty. of Fairfax, Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2025). “2-2258 and Code § 15.2-2259. 2 LDS initially rejected Brookfield’s subdivision plan on multiple grounds.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.