Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. I J~rry'F.DI.. -vves~a_vi':~9.ii~.iiii~C 1~...49.:"3~.Jl~O~do.~: ~: <br /> <br />,.::: :~: ~~gIl11 <br /> <br />: <br /> <br />..-' <br /> <br />. ::.:: -: _n ::_. .. <br /> <br />-- S.E.2d .... <br />..- S.E.2d ..... 2007 WL 1651100 (Va.) <br />(Cite as: --- S.E.2d --) <br /> <br />Adams Outdoor Advertising, L.P. v. Board of Zoning <br />Appeals of City of Virginia Beach <br />Va.,2007, <br />Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. <br />Supreme Court of Virginia. <br />ADAMS OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, L.P.. et al. <br />v. <br />BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF the CITY OF <br />VIRGINIA BEACH. <br />Record No. 061272. <br /> <br />June 8. 2007. <br /> <br />Background: Billboard owner sought review of <br />decision by city board of zoning appeals that <br />installation oran electronic message board enlarged a <br />lawful nonconfonning billboard in violation of city <br />ordinance. The Circuit Court, City of Virginia Beach, <br />William R. O'Brien, 1., upheld decision. Billboard <br />owner appealed. <br /> <br />Holdinll: The Supreme Court, Cvnthia D. Kinser. J.. <br />held that installation of electronic message board <br />enlarged billboard in violation orcity ordinance. <br /> <br />Affirmed. <br /> <br />ill Zoning and Planning 414 €=>679 <br /> <br />414 Zoning and Planning <br />4t4X Judicial Review or Relief <br />414XICl Seope of RevIew <br />414XlC)3 Presumptions <br />414k679 k. Rebuttal of Presumptions, <br />Most Cited Cases <br />Although an appealing party may rebut the <br />presumption of correctness of a decision by city <br />board of zoning appeals by proving by a <br />preponderance of the evidence tbat the board <br />erred in its decision, that evidentiary standard <br />pertains only to questions about the sufficiency of <br />the record to prove a particular fact. West's <br />V.C.A. & 15.2.2314. <br /> <br />Page I <br /> <br />414 Zoning and Planning <br />414X Judicial Review or Relid <br />414X(C) Scope of Review <br />414XrClIln General <br />414k60S k.. Decisions of Boards or <br />Officers in General. Most Cited Cases <br />In reviewing a decision by the city board of zoning <br />appeals, when the issue before tbe circuit court <br />was a question of law, such as the meaning of <br />certain terms used in comprehensive zoning <br />ordinance, the petitioners had the burden of <br />proving that the board either applied erroneous <br />principles of law or that its decision was plainly <br />wrong and in violation of the purpose and intent <br />of the zoning ordinance. <br /> <br />ill Zoning and Planning 414 €=>745.1 <br /> <br />414 Zoning and Planning <br />414X Judicial Review or Relief <br />414X(E) Further Review <br />414k745 Scope and Extent of Review <br />414k745.1 k. In General. Most Cited <br />Cases <br />On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Court <br />applies a presumption of correctness to the circuit <br />court's determination affirming the city board of <br />zoning appeals' decision. <br /> <br />HI Zoning and Planning 414 €=>233 <br /> <br />ill Zoning and Planning <br />414V Construction, Operation and Effed <br />414VfAl In General <br />414k233 k. Meaning of Language. Most <br />Cited Cases <br />When construing a zoning ordinance and its <br />undefined terms, a court gives such terms their <br />plain and natural meaning. <br /> <br />ill Zoning and Planning 414 ~231 <br /> <br />414 Zoning and Planning <br />414V Construction, Operation and Effect <br />414VfAl In General <br />414k23t k. Construction of Regulations <br />in General. Most Cited Cases <br />Although a court gives consideration to the <br />purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance, it is <br />not permitted to extend the ordinance provisions <br />by interpretation or eonstruetion beyond such <br />iI:) 2007 ThomsonlWesl. No Claim to Orig, U.S. Govt, Works. <br /> <br />ill Zoning and Planning 414 €=>605 <br /> <br /> <br />