Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/04/2003

Home

,-00a Page 2 -- November 10, o ,, Environment -- Commission bases decision on expert testimony and personal observation Property owner wants to build near wetlands CONNECTICUT (08/19/03) --Bain submitted an application to the Inland Wetlands Commission of the Town of Ox_ford for permission to build a two bedroom residential home, a driveway, and a septic system. A portion of the proposed construction would cross 267 square feet of wetlands. The commission denied the application. It based its decision on the property's extremely wet conditions and the fact the fill of the wetlands as proposed would exacerbate flooding on and off the property. This information was gained through expert testimony and the personal observation of commission members. Bain sued, ~guing the commission had acted unlawfully and arbitrarily. The court ruled in favor of the commission. Bain appealed, arguing the commission was basing its decision on pro- posed activities occurring outside the wetlands and inadequate information. DECISION: Affirmed. The commission acted correctly in denying the application. State law provided that municipal inland wetlands agencies could regulate activities within areas around wetlands or watercourses ff those activities were likely to impact the wetlands or watercourses. Consequently, activities in non- wetland areas could be regulated. The commission provided a number of reasons supporting its den_iai. The wetlands were in close proximity to the proposed house and septic system. During hear/.ngs, a soil scientist stated the proposed activities would encroach on the wetlands and result in a decline in their functional value. This decline would create more flooding. The commission documented all of its site visits, concerns, and bases for those concerns. Site visits were an appropriate investigative tool, and commis- sion members could rely on their personal observations. Based on the substantial amount of evidence gained from site visits and expert testimony, it was clear the commission's decision was not unlawful or arbitrary, Citation: Bain v. Inland Wetlands Commission of the Town of O,Vbrd, Appellate Court of Connecticut, No. AC 23240 (2003). see also: Milardo v. Inland Wetlands Commission, 605 A,2d 869 (]992). see also: Grimes v. Conservation Commission, 703 A.2d 88 Historic District -- Proposed district contains irreg~alar properties and boundaries Building owners claim designation arbitrary MINNESOTA (,08/14/03) --:The city of Minneapolis wanted to designate one of its neighborhoods as a historic district because of its character and the part it