Paige v. Town Plan & Zoning Commission

The plaintiffs1 appeal, pursuant to General Statutes § 8-8 (o), from the judgment of the trial court sustaining the decision of the defendant plan and zoning commission.2 On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the trial court improperly (1) found that trees and wildlife are not natural resources pursuant to General Statutes § 22a-19, (2) found that the proposed subdivision was not a cul-de-sac as defined in § 2.1.6 of the Fair-field subdivision regulations, (3) determined that the commission had not acted arbitrarily, unreasonably or illegally by finding that the proposed subdivision complied…