The Commission may consider the following in
making its decision on an application:
A. The application and its supporting documentation;
B. Public comments, evidence and testimony;
C. Reports from other agencies and commissions including
but not limited to the Town of Orange, such as:
(2) Zoning Enforcement Officer.
(3) Plan and Zoning Commission.
(5) Sanitarian and/or Director of Health.
D. The Commission may also consider comments on any application
from the New Haven County Soil and Water Conservation District, the
South Central Regional Planning Agency, or other regional organizations;
agencies in adjacent municipalities which may be affected by the proposed
activity, or other technical agencies or organizations which may undertake
additional studies or investigations.
E. Non-receipt of comments from agencies and commissions listed in Subsection
C above within the prescribed time shall neither delay nor prejudice the decision of the Commission.
F. The Commission is not precluded from seeking advice
from its own experts on any aspect of an application.
[Amended pursuant to P.A. 04-209, effective 6-3-2004]
In carrying out the purposes and policies of
Sections 22a-36 to 22a-45, inclusive, of the Connecticut General Statutes,
and pursuant to CGS 22a-41(d) a municipal inland wetlands agency shall
not deny or condition an application for a regulated activity in an
area outside wetlands or water courses on the basis of an impact or
effect on aquatic, plant, or animal life unless such activity will
likely impact or affect the physical characteristics of such wetlands
or water courses, including matters relating to regulating, licensing
and enforcing of the provisions thereof, the Commission shall consider
all relevant facts and circumstances in making its decision on any
application for a permit, including but not limited to the following:
A. The environmental impact of the proposed regulated
activity on wetlands or water courses.
B. The applicant's purpose for, and any feasible and
prudent alternatives to, the proposed regulated activity which alternatives
would cause less or no environmental impact to wetlands or water courses.
C. The relationship between the short-termed and long-term
impacts of the proposed regulated activity on wetlands or water courses
and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity of such
wetlands or water courses.
D. Irreversible and irretrievable loss of wetland or
water course resources which would be caused by the proposed regulated
activity, including the extent to which such activity would foreclose
a future ability to protect, enhance or restore such resources, and
any mitigation measures which may be considered as a condition of
issuing a permit for such activity including, but not limited to,
measures to:
(1) Prevent or minimize pollution or other environmental
damage;
(2) Maintain or enhance existing environmental quality;
or
(3) In the following order of priority: restore, enhance
and create productive wetland or water course resources.
E. The character and degree of injury to, or interference
with, safety, health, or the reasonable use of property which is caused
or threatened by the proposed regulated activity.
F. Impacts of the proposed regulated activity on wetlands
or water courses outside the area for which the activity is proposed
and future activities associated with, or reasonably related to, the
proposed regulated activity which are made inevitable by the proposed
regulated activity and which may have an impact on wetlands or water
courses.
In the case of any application which received a public hearing pursuant to a finding by the Commission that the proposed activity may have a significant impact on wetlands or water courses, a permit shall not be issued unless the Commission finds on the basis of the record that a feasible and prudent alternative does not exist. In making this finding the Commission shall consider the facts and circumstances set forth in Article
X of these regulations. The findings and the reasons therefor shall be stated on the record in writing.
In the case of an application which is denied
on the basis of a finding that there may be feasible and prudent alternatives
to the proposed regulated activity which have less adverse impact
on wetlands and water courses, the Commission shall propose on the
record in writing the types of alternatives which the applicant may
investigate, provided this subdivision shall not be construed to shift
the burden from the applicant to prove that he is entitled to the
permit or to present alternatives to the proposed regulated activity.