The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-05-23
City Building Line On Water
 Street Illegal

That the establishment of a build ing line is equivalent to the taking of private property for public pur- pose, and that no such action is leg al without compensation for such private property, determined by fair handed down by City Attorney Thom- as M Cullinan in declaring that the city's building line on Water street is not legally established.
 The opinion in full is as follows: To the Honorable Common Council of the City of Bridgeport.
 Gentlemen: At the last meeting of your honorable body, the following resolution was adopted:
 Resolved, That the city attorney be body as to whether the said building line (the building line on the westerly side of Water street running from Fairfield avenue south to the southerly line of the property of Frank E. Lal- ley) was legally established on March 20, 1911, when the report of the special committee, appointed :, to lay out said building line, was adopted, and if said line was not legally laid out at said time, that the city attorney be requested to advise this body as to when a building line is legally laid out and completed.
 Meaning of Building Line.
 In reply thereto I would say, that the esta blishment of a building line is clearly taking of private property for public purposes. It seems un necessary to cite authorities on this point, as this proposition would hardly be questioned. That such is the effect of the lay out of building line was necessarily recognized by the general assembly in granting the power to the city to take such action. The city charter provides for a hearing and also for compensation to any owner who may be damaged thereby, the same as in the case of any other inn provement, where land is taken. The establishment of a building line being taking of private property for pub- lie use, it comes within the charter prohibition that there shall be no ap- propriation of private property for public use until the damages for such taking shall have been paid or de- posted in the city treasury"
 On March 20, 1911, when the report of the special committee, appointed to lay out said line, was adopted, the matter necessarily had not been re- ferred to the board of appraisal of benefits and damages and there had been no assessment thereon Conse- quently the damages therefor could not have been paid or deposited in the city treasury. Therefore the building line could not at that time have been legally established, because it would nave been taking of private property without the payment or assessment of damages.
 Under the provisions of our city charter, the board of appraisal of ben effts and damages, after making it's assessment for any public improve ment, is required to make a report to the common council. Upon the accept ance of this report, it is made the duty of the city clerk to record the same. The charter further provides that when said assessments shall have been recorded in the records of the com mon council, they shall mediately become due and payable.
 Case Cited.
 In the case of Shannahan vs. Water bury. 63 Conn. APO, the supreme court, in construing charter provisions simi- lar to those of this city. held that the time when the property condemned for public use shall be deemed to be