Property owner sought review of determination by town’s water pollution control authority denying owner’s application for sewer extension to service proposed affordable housing development.
The Superior Court sustained owner’s appeal and ordered conditional approval of application. Authority appealed.
The Appellate Court held that trial court impermissibly substituted its own discretion and judgment for that of authority by ordering conditional grant of application.
Although conditional approval of application for sewer extension to service proposed affordable housing development by water pollution control authority was viable and available option for agency, authority was not required to exercise option whenever possible, and thus, trial court impermissibly substituted its own discretion and judgment for that of authority by ordering conditional grant of application; authority exercised cautious approach of requiring developer to file new application once it could demonstrate that sufficient sewer capacity existed for planned development, unknown and unforeseen problems could potentially arise between time for approval and completion of sewer upgrades, and authority had settled policy to not grant conditional approval of applications.