|
<br />
<br />p~~- .
<br />
<br />C"
<br />
<br />- ~
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />,
<br />
<br />"I
<br />i
<br />!
<br />
<br />t'l"',"',''''''',''\,
<br />". .1
<br />.-~" /
<br />
<br />1
<br />- !
<br />i
<br />,
<br />'I
<br />I,
<br />, .!
<br />
<br />C'"
<br />'\. -'..
<br />
<br />. .,.
<br />
<br />May 25,20081 Volume 21 No. 10
<br />
<br />See also: City of New Bedford v. New Bedford, Woods Hole, Martha's
<br />Vineyard & Nantucket S. S. Authority, 329 Mass. 243, 107 N.E.2d
<br />513 (1952).
<br />
<br />Case Note: In reaching its conclusion that the MBTA was exempt
<br />from the local zoning regulations, the court noted that the META was
<br />required by statute to maximize its revenues from, commercial adver-
<br />tising, and such revenues affected the operations of the META and the
<br />fares charged by the MBTA. The court also noted that the parties had
<br />agreed that' imposing cease and desist orders against the MBTA with
<br />regard to the advertisements in question would frustrate the MBTA's
<br />ability to generate revenue from the signs. The revenue expected from
<br />the signs at issue was more than $100,000 in each city. '
<br />
<br />Bond Liability-After subdivision expiration,
<br />parties with 'acquired mortgage interests in lots,
<br />demand town call performance bond
<br />
<br />Town argues granting of mortgage interests are not
<br />conveyances that trigger its duty to call the bond
<br />
<br />Citation: Town of Groton v. Mardie Lane Homes, LLC, 286 Conn. 280,
<br />943 A.2d 449 (2008) ,
<br />
<br />CONNECTICUT (04/0 1/0 8)-Mardie Lane Homes, LLC (MLH)
<br />owned property in the town. MLH sought approval fr()m the town to
<br />construct, a subdivision on the property. MLH's subdivision plans pro~
<br />posed the constru~on of public improvements, including the construc-
<br />tion of roads and recreation areas. On October 27, 1998, the town
<br />gave MLH a conditional approval for construction of a subdivision
<br />onMLH's property., As a condition of its approval, the town required
<br />MLH to post a performance bond with surety to ensure that the pro-
<br />posed public improvements would be completed.
<br />MLH, 'as principal, and RLI, as surety, issued the bond to the town
<br />as obligee. In relevant part, the subdivision bond provided that if MLH
<br />completed the improvements before October 27,2003, and the town ac-
<br />cepted the improvements, the bond obligation would be null and void.
<br />However, if MLH failed to so complete, the bond would remain in effect
<br />and MLH and RLI would be liable to the town for the amount the town
<br />expended to complete the improvements.
<br />After the approval of the subdivision plan, a number of parties, includ-
<br />ing East Haven Builders Supply, Inc. (EHBS) obtained various types of in-
<br />terests in subdivision lots on the property, including mortgage interests.
<br />
<br />,':-':"\'.:,": -
<br />
<br />~ ~ - ....:.
<br />
<br />. / .
<br />
<br />~ :(:.-..'
<br />
<br />~"
<br />
<br />. ~f:\
<br />:,; . ~:
<br />;'';'
<br />
<br />5
<br />
<br />.-:;S.'"
<br />
<br />..,.......
<br />
<br />97
<br />
|