Date: Fri 05-Jul-1996

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

Baumer-library-lawsuit

Full Text:

Baumers File Another Lawsuit Over Library Plans

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

A Main Street couple has again sued the Borough Zoning Commission and the

Booth Library Board of Trustees over the commission's decision to allow the

library to expand at its 25 Main Street site.

In the lawsuit filed in Danbury Superior Court, Jean and Edwin Baumer of 23

Main Street, who live next door to the library, ask that a judge rescind the

zoning rule changes made by the commission which allowed the library to seek

and eventually receive approval to expand its facilities.

The Baumers ask that the court: sustain their appeal; direct the Borough

Zoning Commission to rescind its zoning regulation changes; and grant other

relief as it sees fit.

The filing marks the latest of several versions of the suit which have been

filed by Attorney Randall Carreira on behalf of the Baumers. The suits have

sought to halt the library's expansion plans. The library addition is now

under construction.

The Legislative Council recently turned down a request from Mr Baumer that he

be given the exclusive use of his driveway. He uses his driveway, which is

owned by the town, under the provisions of an easement granted to him by the

town. The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) had recommended to the council

that Mr Baumer not be given the exclusive right to use a piece of town-owned

land.

In his amended lawsuit filed in court, Mr Baumer states his complaint involves

the new regulations which the Borough Zoning Commission approved at the

request of the library concerning building heights and the minimum number of

parking spaces required for the library expansion project.

The commission's approval of the new regulations allowed the library to submit

its site plan application for the expansion, which the commission later

approved.

The lawsuit states that Mr Baumer and his wife own land within 100 feet of the

library and are especially aggrieved by the commission's decision, because in

approving the library application, the commission, in effect, approved "spot

zoning" for the library.

The Baumers also charge that the zoning regulation changes violated state law

because: they were not uniform for buildings and land throughout the district;

they allowed the expansion of a building which is non-conforming with borough

zoning rules; and they didn't protect the public health, safety, convenience

and property values of the area.

The Baumers claim the changed regulations violate the zoning rules in that

they: promote street congestion; diminish light and air; overcrowd the land;

and fail to conserve the value of buildings.

Also, the Baumers claim the amended regulations violate the town plan of

development because they promote added congestion in an area that already has

congestion, a high accident rate, and a major street.

The Baumers allege that the amended zoning regulations, in effect, grant a

zoning variance without the library having shown it has a valid hardship to

obtain a variance, thus violating applicable state law. Only zoning boards of

appeal can grant variances, according to the couple.

The Baumers also claim the library should have performed a traffic study to

gauge the impact an expanded library would have on area traffic flow.

In April, the court dismissed a similar lawsuit filed by the Baumers without

the case having been being argued.