Batchelder v. Planning & Zoning Commission
133 Conn. App. 173
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2012Background
- Plaintiffs Batchelder and Montigny sought to block a settlement of Diamond 67, LLC v. Planning & Zoning Commission, in Vernon, involving Diamond and the defendant planning and zoning commission.
- The case history spans two prior appeals where Montigny and Batchelder intervened or sought intervention under environmental statutes; Montigny was granted intervenor status on remand, Batchelder did not participate.
- The remand hearing under § 8-8 (n) allowed Montigny to argue environmental issues, but he failed to introduce evidence, and the settlement was approved by Judge Klaczak.
- This court previously held Montigny forfeited the right to contest the settlement by not presenting environmental evidence at the remand hearing in Diamond 67, LLC v. P&Z Commission.
- The trial court’s grant of summary judgment on Montigny’s claim and dismissal of Batchelder’s appeal as moot were challenged in the present administrative appeal, which the court ultimately found moot.
- The court concluded the plaintiffs could not obtain practical relief since the environmental issues could have been raised at the remand hearing but were not, ending with dismissal of the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal is moot due to lack of practical relief | Montigny; Batchelder | Sferrazza | Appeal moot; no practical relief available |
| Whether Montigny was improperly barred from challenging the settlement via § 8-8 (n) remand | Montigny | Diamond / P&Z | Remand hearing proper; Montigny forfeited by not presenting environmental evidence |
| Whether the intervenors had standing to challenge the settlement in light of previous rulings | Batchelder, Montigny | P&Z | Intervenors may raise environmental concerns, but relief barred by mootness |
Key Cases Cited
- Pathways, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 259 Conn. 619 (Conn. 2002) (environmental standing to intervene in settlements)
- Dietzel v. Planning Commission, 60 Conn. App. 153 (Conn. App. 2000) (standing to oppose settlement on environmental grounds)
- Brookridge District Assn. v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 259 Conn. 607 (Conn. 2002) (§ 8-8 (n) hearing as statutorily prescribed forum for environmental concerns)
- Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone v. Connecticut Siting Council, 286 Conn. 57 (Conn. 2008) (mootness and lack of practical relief in environmental challenges)
- Diamond 67, LLC v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 127 Conn. App. 634 (Conn. App. 2011) (remand hearing timing and environmental issues; abuse of intervention rights)
- AvalonBay Communities, Inc. v. Zoning Commission, 87 Conn. App. 537 (Conn. App. 2005) (settlement approvals require party consent and proper hearing)
- Iacurci v. Wells, 108 Conn. App. 274 (Conn. App. 2008) (plenary review of mootness decisions)