Case Title: LaFrance v. Environmental Board

Citation: 167 Vt. 597, 706 A.2d 957

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1998-01-08T00:00:00Z

Document:
LaFrance v. Environmental Board  (97-016); 167 Vt. 597; 706 A.2d 957

[Filed 8-Jan-1998]

                          ENTRY ORDER

                 SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 97-016

                        OCTOBER TERM, 1997

Pierre LaFrance                 }     APPEALED FROM:
                                }
                                }
     v.                         }     Washington Superior Court
                                }
State of Vermont Environmental  }
Board                           }     DOCKET NO. S217-4-96Wncv

               In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Plaintiff Pierre LaFrance appeals from a Washington Superior Court
  decision denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granting
  summary judgment to defendant Vermont Environmental Board.  Plaintiff
  claims that the superior court erred in ruling that the Board had
  discretion to set aside its 1993 order to revoke an Act 250 permit.  We do
  not reach the merits of plaintiff's appeal because the appeal is now moot.

       In July 1992, Stokes Communications applied for an Act 250 permit
  which would grant it permission to increase the height of its radio
  transmission tower from 120 feet to 300 feet. In August 1992, the District
  3 Commission approved the construction of the tower.  Plaintiff and several
  of his neighbors appealed the District Commission's decision to the Board. 
  In January 1993, while plaintiff's appeal was pending, Stokes constructed a
  new tower.  The new tower was significantly different from the one approved
  by the District Commission.  It was wider and located in a different area,
  and Stokes added buildings and facilities that had not been approved by the
  District Commission.

       The Board affirmed the District Commissioner's decision to grant a
  permit but imposed as an additional condition that Stokes install certain
  light shields on the tower.  It also determined that Stokes had violated
  the Act 250 permit issued by the District Commission by constructing a
  project with several material changes from the approved permit.  The Board
  ruled that the permit would be revoked unless Stokes filed an amended
  application by January 26, 1994 to obtain approval for the unauthorized
  changes to the radio tower.

       Stokes appealed the Board's decision to this Court, and the January
  26, 1994 deadline was stayed during the pendency of the appeal.  We
  affirmed the Board's order in In re Stokes Communications Corp., 164 Vt.
  30, 32,