Virginia Supreme Court Directs Circuit Court to Determine Whether HFFI Can Appeal Demolition of Historic Structure
The decision, which the National Trust for Historic Preservation calls "a victory for historic preservation," finds that the Court of Appeals was wrong to allow a lower court to dismiss the case.
By Adele Uphaus
MANAGING EDITOR AND CORRESPONDENT
Email Adele
In a ruling handed down late last month, the Virginia Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeals was wrong to uphold a Circuit Court decision to dismiss an appeal brought by the Historic Fredericksburg Foundation, Inc. based on the organization’s alleged lack of standing.
The December 30, 2025, decision in Historic Fredericksburg Foundation, Inc. v. The City Council for the City of Fredericksburg, et al. states that the Circuit Court must make its own determination of whether HFFI has “standing,” or the legal right to be heard in court.
HFFI is seeking to appeal the City of Fredericksburg’s decision to permit the demolition of a designated historic building located 46 feet from their headquarters, but has been denied standing by City Council, the Circuit Court, and the Court of Appeals.
The structure at the center of the case is an outbuilding built between 1910 and 1912 for John W. Masters, a local lumber dealer, and located at 204 Lewis Street, on the same property as the Charles Dick House. According to research compiled and conducted by Danae Peckler for an article on the structure, it was occupied by Andrew Parker, a Black carriage driver working for the Masters family, and another Black servant, 17-year-old Sarah Carter.
In 2019, the owners of the land on which the Charles Dick House and the subject structure stand applied to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) for a certificate of appropriateness to demolish the structure. They submitted several reports prepared by engineering firms, finding that the building was unsafe and in poor condition.
The city also hired a structural engineer, who agreed that building “had deteriorated and outlined a six-step process for repairing it, including the first step of repairing the [attached] retaining wall,” according to HFFI’s appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court.
The ARB issued a certificate allowing the demolition of the structure, which HFFI then appealed to City Council, arguing that it was “aggrieved” by the decision because it has “a direct, substantial, immediate, and pecuniary interest” in preserving it, and that demolition would “have a direct and substantial negative impact on the value of the HFFI Property located approximately 46-feet away (the Lewis Store at 1200 Caroline Street)” and “would have a detrimental effect on the ‘overall historic character and feeling of this portion’” of the historic district, according to the appeal.
Peckler wrote in the HFFI blog post that, “Preserving this resource and other quirky buildings like it in our community is one of the best ways to protect our distinctive historic character and explore the kinds of diverse stories about our historic landscape.”
“If we are to lose historic buildings that contribute to Fredericksburg’s unique built environment, then let it be through a careful, defined, substantive process that explores all options, prudently considers alternatives for repair and adaptive reuse, and respects the centuries of inhabitants who have left our community with a heritage so rich,” she wrote.
City Council and subsequently the Circuit Court denied HFFI’s appeal, citing “HFFI’s lack of legal authority or ‘standing’ to bring the appeal” to Council because the organization did not meet the definition of being “an aggrieved party,” and in December of 2024, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court’s decision.
The Virginia Supreme Court, however, determined that the Court of Appeals was wrong to dismiss the case based on HFFI’s lack of standing before Council. Rather, it should have considered whether the organization has judicial standing in Circuit Court.
The justices remanded the case back to Circuit Court with instructions to evaluate whether HFFI has standing to bring the case.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed an amicus brief with the Virginia Supreme Court in support of HFFI’s appeal, focusing on “the potential ramifications of the case for historic preservation advocates in Virginia,” according to a press release.
“If the Court of Appeals decision had been left in place by the Virginia Supreme Court, local governments would gain the power to prevent historic preservation organizations from challenging their demolition decisions by denying them standing,” the press release states. “The National Trust’s legal advocacy team participated in this litigation to help fight for the right of historic preservation organizations to enforce compliance with historic preservation laws, and to have their cases heard in court. This is directly relevant to the National Trust’s congressional charter to ‘facilitate public participation’ in historic preservation.”
HFFI president David James said in a statement provided to the Advance that, “Due process under the Law takes time.”
“We are still going through that process,” he said. “We strongly feel that we will prevail on our right to ‘standing.’ Understanding that the final court decision has not been rendered has to make you think, if HFFI does not have standing, then who does? That is why we are going through this process.”
The National Trust is “prepared to resume our involvement if the Circuit Court denies Historic Fredericksburg Foundation's standing again, but given the Virginia Supreme Court's new instructions we believe that we have prevailed on this crucial issue,” according to its press release.
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past year, our reporting was:
First to break the story of Stafford Board of Supervisors dismissing a citizen library board member for “misconduct,” without informing the citizen or explaining what the person allegedly did wrong.
First to explain falling water levels in the Rappahannock Canal.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Our media group also offers the most-extensive election coverage in the region and regular columnists like:
And our newsroom is led by the most-experienced and most-awarded journalists in the region — Adele Uphaus (Managing Editor and multiple VPA award-winner) and Martin Davis (Editor-in-Chief, 2022 Opinion Writer of the Year in Virginia and more than 25 years reporting from around the country and the world).
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
This article is published under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND. It can be distributed for noncommercial purposes and must include the following: “Published with permission by FXBG Advance.”
Strong analysis of the standing issue. That flip from whether HFFI has 'standing before Council' to judicial standing in Circuit Court matters alot more than it might seem. The 46-foot proximity argument is interesting because courts usually struggle with how close is close enough for property value claims. Back when my old neighborhood fought a zoning change, distance was the thing that killed our case. The preservation angle here seems stronger tho.