Date: Fri 03-Jan-1997

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

P&Z-Wedgewood-M&E-lawsuit

Full Text:

Developers Sue P&Z Over Wedgewood Rejection

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

M&E Land Group has sued the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) in seeking to

gain approval for its recently rejected 15-lot Wedgewood residential

subdivision.

In the lawsuit filed in Danbury Superior Court, Attorney Robert Hall,

representing M&E, claims that the P&Z acted illegally, arbitrarily and in

abuse of the discretion vested in it in that it misapplied a law concerning

the development of an uphill property causing water runoff onto the property

of a downhill property owner. The plaintiffs add that the P&Z gave no other

reasons for the development application's denial, or at least no other reasons

that were supported by the public record before the P&Z.

Through the lawsuit, M&E seeks to have a judge sustain its appeal of the P&Z's

development denial; order the P&Z to approve the Wedgewood plan as it was

submitted; and grant other relief in law or equity. The site is off Taunton

Hill Road.

Thomas Maguire of Golden Pond Road and Larry Edwards of Easton are general

partners in the M&E firm which acquires raw land, subdivides it, and then

sells the building lots to home builders.

In January 1996, M&E bought 27 acres off Taunton Hill Road. The developers

want 11 building lots in an R-1 Acre zone and four building lots in a R-2 Acre

zone. The land already contains one dwelling. An 1,800-foot-long dead-end road

was proposed for the site to provide access to the lots.

"The southwesterly border of the Wedgewood property consists of a wetland

area, which area extends onto and is part of a much larger wetland area on the

land of the adjacent property owner, shown on the subdivision plan as Ferris.

There is a clearly defined watercourse on the Wedgewood property which flows

into the wetland area, but there does not appear to be a defined channel

through the wetland area. There is a clearly defined watercourse leaving the

wetland area from the property of Ferris onto lands of others," according to

the lawsuit.

A primary issue at a P&Z public hearing on Wedgewood was whether M&E had the

right to discharge water from a proposed detention basin directly into the

wetlands area near the boundary of its property, according to the suit.

"The basis of the commission's rejection of the subdivision application was

the question of water drainage onto the adjacent property owners' land,"

according to the legal papers.

On December 5, P&Z Chairman John DeFilippe and members Thomas Paisley and

Heidi Winslow turned down the Wedgewood project.

Before that vote, P&Z members suggested to the developers that an independent

environmental expert be hired to analyze the potential effects of Wedgewood.

But the developers didn't agree, instead preferring that the P&Z make a

decision on the development application at that time.

Mr Hall had told P&Z members there had been much public discussion about

Wedgewood during recent months, adding that it's unclear if hiring an expert

would prove helpful. Mr Hall then asked that P&Z members to vote on the

proposal.

Both the applicants and opponents of the project had presented expert

scientific witnesses on Wedgewood in public sessions dating back to August.

Ms Winslow said the development as planned would cause drainage, sedimentation

and siltation problems on an adjacent property. She said that a hydrogeologist

hired by opponents of the project made some helpful environmental points at a

past session on Wedgewood.

"There is a misuse of the land as far as the drainage (plans) on this

application," she said when P&Z members turned down the application December

5.

A main concern expressed by nearby residents at past P&Z sessions is that

creating Wedgewood would deplete their domestic well water supplies. The

developers refuted the points which were raised about water supplies.

Taunton Hill Road residents living near the site have told P&Z members they

strongly oppose the development because it also would overcrowd the area,

cause drainage problems, and create added traffic hazards.

The site which was eyed for development is on the east side of Taunton Hill

Road, just west of Cannon Drive. Cannon Drive is a dead end street that

extends westward from Birch Hill Road toward Taunton Hill Road.