This chapter is intended to encourage localities to improve the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of their citizens and to plan for the future development of communities to the end that transportation systems be carefully planned; that new community centers be developed with adequate highway, utility, health, educational, and recreational facilities; that the need for mineral resources and the needs of agriculture, industry, and business be recognized in future growth; that the concerns of military installations be recognized and taken into account in consideration of future development of areas immediately surrounding installations and that where practical, installation commanders shall be consulted on such matters by local officials; that residential areas be provided with healthy surroundings for family life; that agricultural and forestal land be preserved; and that the growth of the community be consonant with the efficient and economical use of public funds.
Code 1950, §§ 15-891.1, 15-900, 15-916, 15-961; 1950, pp. 487, 889; 1956, c. 497; 1962, c. 407, § 15.1-427; 1975, c. 641; 1981, c. 418; 1996, cc. 585, 600; 1997, c. 587; 2013, cc. 149, 213.
Notes of Decisions
Bd. of Supervisors v. Countryside Inv. Co., 522 S.E.2d 610 (Va. 1999).
· cites it 4× “2-2200 states: “This chapter is intended to encourage localities to improve the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of its citizens and to plan for the fiiture development of communities to the end that transportation systems be carefully planned; that new community…”
Van Tran v. Gwinn, 554 S.E.2d 63 (Va. 2001).
· cites it 2× “§ 15.2-2200 (legislative intent of Chapter 22).”
Covel v. Town of Vienna, 78 Va. Cir. 190 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 3× “” Va. Code § 15.2-2200. Petitioners herein seek judicial review of the decisions rendered by the people’s duly elected members of the Town Council of Vienna.”
Calvary Christian Ctr. v. City of Fredericksburg, 832 F. Supp. 2d 635 (E.D. Va. 2011).
· cites it 3× “It addresses transportation needs. It insures that the growth of the community is consonant with the “efficient and economical use of public funds.”
In re Zoning Ordinance Amendments, 67 Va. Cir. 462 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 2003).
· cites it 2× “The public purposes for these amendments include those purposes of zoning set forth in Sections 15.2-2200 and 15.2-2283 of the Code of Virginia.”
Staples v. Prince George Cnty., 81 Va. Cir. 308 (Prince George Cir. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 7× “Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2200 (2010). Rather, Plaintiffs are contending that the County exceeded the scope of its powers by adopting and enforcing the fourteen-day maximum stay rule because there is no express statutory provision or implied provision that would permit a locality to…”
Heflin v. Caroline Cnty., 83 Va. Cir. 507 (Caroline Cir. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 6× “Count III: Violation of Virginia Law In Count III, plaintiffs seek a declaration by the Court that the special exception was improperly issued and is of no effect because only the applicant, not the County, received benefit from it; the grant was contrary to accepted planning…”
Douglas L. Miller v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “” We hold that the trial judge did not err, and we further hold that the County’s ordinance restricting the number of service connections to each -8- well unless an exemption is obtained was a valid exercise of the County’s zoning authority pursuant to Code §§ 15.2-2200 to…”
Hill v. Hanover Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 56 Va. Cir. 553 (Hanover Cir. Ct. 2000).
· cites it 3× “Conclusions of Law Va. Code § 15.2-2200 expresses a number of principles that guide the development of Hanover County among Virginia’s jurisdictions.”
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.