Statute Annotations › Virginia › Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2280

Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2280

Zoning regulations: the cases that interpreted this section

Jurisdiction
Virginia
Case notes
8
Cited in passing
15
Citing cases indexed
26
Case dates
2000–2012
Screened through
2012-01-13
Courts' treatment: live
No reviewed case has held this section invalid, preempted, superseded or repealed.
This reflects what the reviewed cases said, not legislative action: a later amendment or repeal by the legislature would not appear here unless a reviewed case discussed it.

23 citing cases reviewed of 26 in the citation index: 8 interpreted the section (annotated below), 15 cited it only in passing. Cases filed after 2012-01-13 may not have been reviewed yet.

Have a situation under Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2280?

These notes show how courts have ruled. Ask about your specific facts and see which of these rulings apply, with citations you can check.

Regulation of structure size, height, bulk, and location

Section 15.2-2280 authorizes local governments to regulate structures’ size, height, bulk, and related physical characteristics, including when evaluating a tower’s design.

USCOC of Virginia RSA 3, Inc. v. Montgomery County Board of Supervisors · filed 2003-10-09

It is sufficient to say that Virginia law provides, in a statute not at issue in Rowe, that local governments may regulate the "size, height, area, bulk, location, erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, maintenance, razing, or removal of structures." Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2280 (emphasis added). No matter what zoning practices are actually prohibited because of an undue emphasis on aesthetic values, Virginia law specifically authorizes the consideration of factors such as size, height, and bulk. The Board's consideration of the height of the proposed tower, therefore, is proper. In addition, the Board's consideration of the more visually intrusive lattice design, which implicates the size and bulk of the proposed tower, is also proper. Because the consideration of these factors is authorized by Virginia law, the district court erred in concluding that the Board engaged in an invalid zoning practice.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 15.2-2280 permits a locality to require houses in residential districts to be oriented so their front or main facades face the street.

Curzio Construction, Inc. v. Zoning Appeals Board · filed 2003-11-15

The Town Council had the authority to enact Town Zoning Ordinance §§ 175-15(C) and 17548(A). Virginia Code § 15.2-2280 provides that a locality, in its zoning ordinance: ... The Town could require houses on lots in residential districts to be oriented on the lot so that the front or main facade faced the street.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 15.2-2280 authorizes localities to regulate building height through zoning ordinances.

Owens v. City Council of Norfolk · filed 2008-03-07(2)

In Va. Code § 15.2-2280, the General Assembly granted political subdivisions authority to enact zoning ordinances dividing territory into specific districts and regulating land use therein, including, specifically, height limitations.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Local zoning authority

Section 15.2-2280 authorizes a locality to regulate waterfront piers extending into a tidal tributary when the piers are within its jurisdiction.

Jennings v. BD. OF SUP'RS OF NORTHUMBERLAND · filed 2011-04-21

In Code § 15.2-2280, the General Assembly expressly granted localities the authority to zone "the territory under its jurisdiction." ... Thus, we hold that the circuit court did not err in concluding that the County's zoning authority "embrace[s]" the entirety of Jennings' proposed construction, even the portion that "extend[s] into the Chesapeake Bay['s] tidal tributaries," i.e., Cockrell's Creek.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 15.2-2280 authorizes localities to regulate land use through zoning ordinances, including limits on how long visitors may stay at campgrounds.

Staples v. Prince George County · filed 2010-11-02

To conclude this issue then, the Court finds that Ordinance 50-76 and Condition # 4 do not violate Dillon’s Rule, because the County has within its authority, pursuant to its police power and the power given unto it in Va. Code §§ 15.2-2280 and 15.2-2286(A)(3), the discretion to establish length-of-stay restrictions for visitors at local campgrounds.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 15.2-2280 authorizes localities to regulate land uses, building limits, lot areas, and excavation through zoning.

Madison v. Loudoun County Board of Supervisors · filed 2006-01-27

Localities may, through the power to zone, regulate, restrict, permit, prohibit, and determine land uses, building limitations, lot area restrictions, and excavation of natural resources. Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2280.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Private right of action

Section 15.2-2280 gives localities zoning authority but does not give private parties a cause of action based solely on a zoning ordinance violation.

Fields v. Elkins · filed 2000-05-02

The zoning laws give authority to localities to regulate the use of property. Va. Code § 15.2-2280. The legislation provides a comprehensive scheme for this regulation, including civil penalties (§ 15.2-2209) as well as injunctive or other appropriate relief to abate or correct any violations (§ 15.2-2208). Nowhere in the legislative scheme can any language be found from which the Court could find a legislative intent to create a private cause of action to enjoin violations of the local zoning ordinances.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Delegation to planning commissions

Section 15.2-2280 does not authorize a locality to delegate approval of departures from its zoning ordinance to a planning commission.

Sinclair v. NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC · filed 2012-01-13

The Defendants nevertheless argue that Code §§ 15.2-2280 and 15.2-2286 provide broad authority to localities for the administration and enforcement of zoning ordinances. They assert that the county’s delegation to the planning commission is consistent with this broad authority. We disagree. ... It has not, however, authorized local governing bodies to delegate to planning commissions approval of departures from zoning ordinances or any other powers to administer or enforce an existing zoning ordinance.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
15 more cases cited this section only in passing

These cases mention the section without interpreting it (a string cite, a footnote, background). Listed so you can see the full citation record, not just the annotated rulings.

T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, the court cited § 15.2-2280 only as general background for local zoning authority while deciding claims under the Telecommunications Act; it did not construe, apply, or decide any issue about this statute. opinion →
WAG MORE DOGS, LLC v. Artman, the court cites § 15.2-2280 only in a string cite supporting the validity of the County's zoning standards; it does not interpret, apply, or decide anything about the statute itself. opinion →
Town of Madison, Inc. v. Ford, the court cites the section as the Town’s authority to enact zoning ordinances while deciding whether the ordinance met the state constitution’s voting record requirement. opinion →
Board of Supervisors v. Countryside Investment Co., the court cites the section to clarify that its ruling on subdivision ordinances does not affect the County's zoning authority. opinion →
Hill v. Hanover County Board of Supervisors, the court cites the section to describe the county’s conceded zoning authority while deciding whether the denial of rezoning was reasonable. opinion →
Pima Gro Systems, Inc. v. King George County Board of Supervisors, the court cites the section as the start of a broader reference to local zoning authority while holding that the county could not authorize a prohibited use through a private agreement. opinion →
Wolfe v. Board of Zoning Appeals, the court cites § 15.2-2280 as authority for local zoning ordinances while deciding the zoning administrator’s standing under other provisions. opinion →
Martin v. Hanover County Board of Supervisors, the court cites the section to describe the county’s conceded zoning authority while deciding whether the rezoning denial was proper. opinion →
Van Tran v. Gwinn, the court cites § 15.2-2280 as the County's authority to enact the zoning ordinance while deciding whether the ordinance is constitutional. opinion →
Recyc Systems, Inc. v. Spotsylvania County, the court cites the section as general zoning authority and voids the county’s biosolids ordinance because it conflicts with state law. opinion →
BOARD OF SUP'RS v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, the court cited § 15.2-2280 to explain the county's zoning authority while deciding standing under § 15.2-2314. opinion →
Miller v. Highland County, the court cites § 15.2-2280 to illustrate the division of zoning authority between a locality and its governing body while deciding who must be named in a challenge to a zoning decision. opinion →
Covel v. Town of Vienna, the court cites the section as background authority for local zoning power without deciding a rule under it. opinion →
Anderson v. DELORE, the court cited the section as statutory context while holding that the zoning ordinances did not create a private right of action. opinion →
Schefer v. City Council of Falls Church, the court cites the section as the source of local zoning authority while deciding the uniformity rule in § 15.2-2282. opinion →

Which of these rulings fit your facts?

Describe your situation under Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2280. Ezel checks it against the cases on this page and answers with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace