Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin May 25, 2015 1 Volume 9 1 Issue 10 <br />Case Note: <br />Southern States had also raised a. constitutional challenge to the County zoning <br />ordinance before the superior court. However, the superior courtfailed to address that <br />challenge. The appellate court held that because a decision on the constitutional issue <br />had the potential to affect Rivenvood Associates' lawsuit against Southern States, the <br />court had to vacate the superior court's judgment and remand the case for consider- <br />ation of the constitutional challenge. The appellate court explained that "[a] ruling in <br />favor of [Riverwood Associates] on the constitutionality of the 1993 zoning ordinance <br />[would resolve] the case at the trial -court level and render[] the characterization of <br />the 2004 EPD permit application moot, while a ruling in favor of Southern States, i.e., <br />that the ordinance [was] unconstitutional, would then necessitate resolution of the <br />2004 permit -application issue." <br />Case Note: <br />The appellate court also held that genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether <br />Southern States' application submitted to the EPD in 2004 constituted a new permit <br />such that any vested rights resulting from the 1989 application were waived. The ap- <br />pellate court explained that "should [Riverwood Associates] prevail in a trial on the <br />merits of whether or not the 2004 EPD permit application was a new application, the <br />constitutionality of the 1993 zoning ordinance would be rendered moot, whereas the <br />question of constitutionality would still require resolution should Southern States <br />prevail." <br />Public Utilities—State Utility <br />Commission says switching station is <br />"Transmission Line" and thus <br />exempt from local zoning under <br />state utility act <br />Opponents of utility project argue switching station is <br />subject to local zoning regulations <br />Citation: BASF Corp. v. State Corp. Corn'n, 2015 WL 1727294 (Va. 2015) <br />VIRGINIA (04/16/15)—This case addressed the issue of whether utility <br />"switching stations" are subject to local zoning ordinances or whether switch- <br />ing stations constitute a part of a "transmission line" and are thus exempt from <br />local zoning ordinances pursuant to Code § 56-46.1 of the Virginia Utility Fa- <br />cilities Act. <br />The Background/Facts: In 2012, Virginia Electric and Power Company <br />© 2015 Thomson Reuters 7 <br />