The Connecticut Supreme Court has upheld a lower court's decision requiring the removal of a seawall built by David and Betsy Sams on their property along the Connecticut River. The court ruled that the seawall was constructed without necessary approvals, violating state environmental regulations. This ruling emphasizes the importance of adhering to environmental laws designed to protect coastal resources.
The case, Sams v. Department of Environmental Protection (SC18438), stems from a dispute over the construction of a gabion seawall that the Samses erected in 2004. The court's decision, released on April 30, 2013, affects not only the Samses but also sets a precedent for property owners along Connecticut's coastline regarding compliance with environmental regulations.
Background
David and Betsy Sams own property located on the Connecticut River, approximately four miles from Long Island Sound. Concerned about erosion affecting their property, they decided to build a 261-foot gabion seawall to stabilize the shoreline. However, they did not obtain the necessary permits from either the town of Old Saybrook or the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) before construction.
The Samses relied on advice from a licensed engineer, Gary Sharpe, who indicated that no authorization was needed if the seawall was built landward of the high tide line. However, after a complaint was filed, the DEP inspected the site and determined that the seawall was, in fact, constructed waterward of the high tide line, which triggered the need for a permit under state law.
The Ruling
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in favor of the DEP, affirming the lower court's decision that the seawall must be removed. The court found that the DEP had proper jurisdiction over the seawall under General Statutes § 22a-361, which requires permits for structures built in tidal waters. The court stated, "The department properly asserted jurisdiction over the seawall under § 22a-361 because the department proved that the seawall was located waterward of the high tide line."
Additionally, the court addressed the plaintiffs' arguments regarding the high tide line's location and the use of the Army Corps of Engineers' data to determine it. The court concluded that the DEP's use of this data was appropriate and consistent with state law. The ruling emphasized that the department's findings were supported by substantial evidence, including visual observations of tidal waters in contact with the seawall.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for property owners along Connecticut's coastline. It reinforces the necessity of obtaining proper permits before constructing any structures that may impact coastal resources. The court's decision clarifies that the DEP has the authority to enforce environmental regulations and to order the removal of structures that violate these laws.
Furthermore, the ruling establishes a precedent that the jurisdiction of the DEP extends to structures built without the necessary approvals, even if property owners believe they are acting within legal boundaries. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of compliance with environmental regulations to protect natural resources and prevent public nuisances.
What's Next
Following the court's decision, the Samses must comply with the order to remove the seawall and restore the shoreline to its previous condition. While the ruling is final, it is unclear if the Samses will seek further legal recourse or appeal the decision. There are no related cases pending at this time.