Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2006

Home

-' Z.B. November 25, 2005 -- Page 7 water resources and ensuring a safe supply of public water for the health and safety of the community -- while also protecting the reliance interests of prop- erty owners. Wawa could not deny that the ordinance ieduced the risk of petroleum leaks by preventing additional USTs from being installed because each addi- tional UST presented an additional risk of harm to the water supply. Therefore, the court determined that the county acted rationally to reduce the danger to the water supply, even if it did not immediately eliminate every danger. see also: FCC v. Beach Communications Inc., 508 U.S. 307 (1993). see also: Haves v. City of Miami, 52 E3d 918 (1995). Equal Protection -- Chiropractor claims denial violates his rights Wants to change zoning designation to expand home office use Citation: Showah v. City of Bridgeport, U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, No. 3:02-CV-329 (RNC) (2005) CONNECTICUT (10/05/05) -- Showah was a chiropractor who used a home office from 1984 to 2000. In 1997, the use of b_is home as an office became a pre- existing nonconforming use when the area was rezoned as residential. In fact, the area was primarily residential. In 1998, Showah asked for a zoning change that would allow his property to be used as an office building housing two or more professionals. After two public hearings, his request was denied. Showah sued, arguing that the city's decision violated his equal protec- tion fights. DECISION: Jud*~rnent in favor of the city. Showah could not prevail on his equal protection claim because he could not show that he was treated differently from other similarly situated indi- viduals. Showah contended that his former property was similarly situated to two other properties that were once home offices but now housed two or more non- residential professionals. However, on.e of those properties had obtained a variance, which differed significantly t¥om a zone change in that the owner could make no further changes to the property or its use without obtaining permission, and the other was on one of the busiest commercial and profes- sional corridors in the city, where it was surrounded by professional offices and business uses. see also: Harlen Associates v. Incorporated Village of Mineola, 273 F. 3d 494 (2001). see also: Natale ~,. Town of Ridgefield, 170 F. 3d 2.58 (1999). © 2005 Quinlan PublisBing Group. Any repro0umion is prof~l~deO. For more information please cal~ (617) 542-00~-8. 121