Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Tarullo v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Comm'n of the Town of Wolcott

Citation: 33 ELR 20197
No. No. SC 16797, (Conn., 05/20/2003)

The court affirms the dismissal of a property owner's appeal of a town wetlands commission's grant of a wetlands and watercourse permit for the construction of a subdivision on land adjacent to that of the property owner. The property owner misconstrued Connecticut General Statutes §22a-41(a)(2) as requiring the wetlands commission to consider alternatives to development that would cause less or no environmental impact. The statute requires the commission to determine that a feasible and prudent alternative to the proposed activity does not exist. Moreover, the record revealed that the commission considered two prior, more intrusive applications for the site, and review of multiple wetlands applications for a site constitutes consideration of feasible and prudent alternatives. In addition, substantial evidence supports the commission’s finding that there were no feasible and prudent alternatives to the proposed application for the subdivision.


J. Brendan Sharkey
Law Offices of J. Brendan Sharkey
590 Mt. Carmel Ave., Hamden CT 06518
(203) 248-8545

Counsel for Defendant
Michael G. Tansley
Cicchetti & Tansley
500 Chase Parkway, Waterbury CT 06708
(203) 574-4700

Tags: