Cherry v. Town of Hampton Falls

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court reviewed the denial of a subdivision application and special use permit by the Hampton Falls Planning Board. The court held that the board reasonably required the applicants to address impacts on the wetlands buffer and demonstrate that no feasible alternative route would have a lesser detrimental impact. The court reversed the trial court’s ruling that the board’s decision was unlawful and unreasonable.

Holdings

1. The Planning Board's interpretation of the Hampton Falls Zoning Ordinance as requiring the plaintiffs to address the proposed road's impact on the wetlands and the 100-foot wetlands buffer was neither unlawful nor unreasonable.
2. The Superior Court erred in finding that the Planning Board's denial was unlawful and unreasonable because the record supported the Board's determination that the plaintiffs had not satisfied the ordinance's wetlands-impact and feasible-alternative requirements.
3. The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Wetlands Board permit did not establish that the plaintiffs satisfied the Hampton Falls Zoning Ordinance because it did not address the proposed construction's impact on the wetlands buffer.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Superior Court erred by ruling that the Planning Board's denial of the plaintiffs' special-use permit and subdivision application was unlawful and unreasonable.
2. Whether the Hampton Falls Zoning Ordinance's references to wetlands in sections 8.5.1.2 and 8.5.1.3 included the 100-foot wetlands buffer.
3. Whether a wetlands permit issued by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Wetlands Board established compliance with the more restrictive requirements of the municipal ordinance.

Disposition

reversed