903 F. Supp. 2d 385
E.D. Va.2012Background
- T-Mobile sued Loudoun County Board of Supervisors over denial of two wireless facility applications: Bell Tower at Christ Our Savior Lutheran Church and Stephens Silo at Stephens Farm.
- T-Mobile had an option lease with the Church to construct an 80-foot tower; design evolved and ultimately was rejected by the Board in 2011.
- Stephens Silo involved a 100–125-foot stealth silo design; Planning Commission approved, Board denied in October 2011 with later amendment adding environmental concerns.
- Loudoun zoning CR-1 and AR-1 regulate monopoles; the Telecom Plan favors collocation on existing tall structures and mitigates visual impact.
- T-Mobile asserted six claims under 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B); the court granted in part and denied in part cross-motions for summary judgment, including an injunction for Stephens Silo.
- The court’s rulings include standing for Bell Tower claims, denial of several claims for lack of evidence, and an order to grant Stephens Silo permits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge Bell Tower denial | T-Mobile; injunction/redressible injury to lease | Board contends no standing | T-Mobile has standing (injury to lease) |
| Effective prohibition of service for Bell Tower | Denial tantamount to prohibition due to lack of coverage/alternative sites | No general policy; coverage not absent; alternatives exist | Board entitled to summary judgment on Count II |
| Substantial evidence for Bell Tower and Stephens Silo denials | Board lacked substantial evidence | Board had substantial evidence supporting denials | Board entitled to summary judgment on Counts I and IV |
| RF environmental effects basis (Bell Tower) | Denial partly based on RF environmental effects | Denial not premised on RF emissions for Bell Tower | Board granted summary judgment on Count III for Bell Tower; Stephens Silo where RF was a basis, TD for Count V to T-Mobile |
| Remedy for Stephens Silo denial | Injunction ordering permit issuance appropriate | Remand/other remedies unnecessary | Injunction directing issuance of Stephens Silo permits; Stephens Silo denial void as to RF emissions |
Key Cases Cited
- Fairfax Cnty. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 672 F.3d 259 (4th Cir. 2012) (prohibition standard; case-by-case denials not per se denials of service)
- New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC v. Fairfax Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors (New Cingular II), 674 F.3d 270 (4th Cir. 2012) (clarifies burden for proving effective prohibition; alternative sites must be futile)
- AT&T Wireless PCS v. City of Virginia Beach, 155 F.3d 423 (4th Cir. 1998) (substantial evidence standard; local decisions may be based on community input)