Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/07/2007

Home

Zoning Bulletin Taking-Developer claims town punished it by refusing to acknowledge changes to lots Town argues subdivision invalid without commission approval Citation: Lost Trail, LLC, Town of Westo~, 2001' WL 1169167 (D. Conn. 2007) CONNECTICUT (04/19/07)-Lost Trail, LLC, bought two lots of land in the town of Weston in 1997. In 1998, Lost Trail recorded two maps with the tow-n on which the boundaries of the lots were changed; four lots were formed by the changes. Lost Trail claimed that it had presented the maps to the zoning en- forcement officer, the town engineer, and the assistant town attorney, who reviewed and approved the filing of the maps. The maps con- tained a notation with the zoning enforcement officer and tow-nen- gineers signature "attest[ing] to the fact that this plan [was] neither subdivision nor a resubdivision as defined bythe...Town of Weston and [could] be recorded without prior approval of the...Planning and Zoning Commission. The town disputed the meaning of the notation, arguing that it ap- peared because "no subdivision or resubdivision approval had been granted by the Town." The town informed Lost Trail that it had to get a formal determination from the zoning commission as to whether the lot division represented by the maps required subdivision approval. Lost Trail claimed that, by denying the maps were valid, it suffered financial losses. Specifically, it claimed that "[t]own omcials...told...[its lender] that the subject property was being treated as only one lot[,] that it was illegally subdivided[,] and that permits would not be issued by the Town for. ..development of. the property," leading the bank to foreclose on the property. In addition, the town had denied a permit request to build a base- ball field on one of the lots. Lost Trail claimed that appealing to the town zoning commission for relief would be futile based on these ac- tions. Lost Trail sued the tow-n, arguing in part that the town's ac- tions amounted to a regulatory taking because it was unable to de- velop its property. The town asked the court to dismiss the claims against it. Decision: Request granted. The town argued that Lost Trail could not pursue its claim because it was not ripe for judicial review. The U.S. Supreme Court had set the standard of review in cases involving a claiL-n of regulatory taking in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank. Under that standard, there were two factors that had to be considered. 8 196