New Britain herald., 1929-07-11
=KILB0URNE WINNER
 IN SUPREME COURT
 OVER GAS STATION
(Continued from First Page)

(Continued from First Page)
 made to stop him from continuing with his plan after zoning had placed the plot in a residence dis trict. he protested that he had full filled the terms of the permit and should be allowed to proceed.
 On an injunction application brought by Corporation Counsel John H. Kirkham, the late Judge Henry P-Roche ruled that this was not construction but that work must have been performed on the building proper to constitute con- struction under the law. Judge L. P. Waldo Marvin in superior court supported the contention of Judge Roche and made the injunction permanent. Judge Hungerford then filed notice of appeal to the court of errors.
 Judges Opinion
 Reversing this finding. the judges of the supreme court say: "To have given permit simply to erect a building on land in its then con- dition would have been giving the defendant right to do an impos- sible thing. xxx We do not think either the permit or the ordinance intended only that part of the sta ton which could be called a house or building, but both must be con- sidered as referring to the station as whole"
 In another portion of the decision, the interpretation which the city sought to have put on the ordinance is referring to as marrow" and the judges write: ITO fail to protect this defendants investment of about s4, 500 in reliance upon the city's per init would be unfair and inequit- able"
 State Permit to Sell Gas
 "The defendant on May Fist, 1925, owned a tract of land in New Brit ain, fronting on Stanley street, which is main highway from New Britain to Hartford upon which he desired to erect gas station. A ravine 12 l the street, extended through this tract for distance of more than 150 feet and a brook crossed the street at this point through a culvert and emptied into this ravine. On the date named the defendant obtained a permit form the building inspec- tor of the city of New Britain to To- ta ct of tbiC location and also obtained a permit from the state commissioner of mo- tor vehicles to sell gas at the pro- pose station. In making the applica- ton for these permits the defendant stated to both the city and the state officials that it would be necessary for him to cover the brook with culvert and hill and grade the land in order to furnish a location for the station and abate .unsightly and un- sanitary conditions. It would have been impracticabls to put build ing and accessories for a gas station on this tract without constructing the culvert and doing the filling re- ferred to in order to bring the land to tiiC icNci Cl lIlo Sti t6tr dll Ol which, together with the intention |, of the defendant to do this was 5 known and understood by the offi- cials prior to their issuance of the permits.
 Began to Build in Two Days
 "The defendant began to build the culvert May 23, two days after the of oF pleted it between July 1S and the 18th, 1925. It was not designed to locate the gas station building di- !, rectly over the culvert The filling a of the ravine was begun at once after the culvert was constructed, and the filling was completed on or about May 25, 1926, and the work of ex- cavating trenches for the foundation walls of the building was thereupon begun and the defendant would have completed the construction of the station before September 16, 1926, had be not been prevented by an in- Junction issued on application of the | officials of the city of New Britain. Application Under Sanction of Law
 1HiS dppilCdllOn was made un0er | the sanction a zoning ordinance adopted by the city September IS, | 1925, by the provisions of which the | premises in question were zoned in | residence A district, so-called, in i which gas stations were forbidden by ordinance. One of the sections Of the zoning ordinance was the fol- | lowing: The provisions of this ordi | nance shall not require any change Tn the plans, construction or desie- | mated use of any building for which | permit shall have heretofore been | lawfully and finally issued; provid- | that construction shall begin within | three months from the date of issu- | ance or such permit and that the | building be completed in it's entirety within one year from the date of enactment of this ordinance.'
 The plaintiff city in it's applica- ton for an injunction alleged that the placing of q gas station on these i premises was forbidden by the zon- Ing ordinance and unlawful and the | defendant in answer plead the above | quoted provision of the ordinance to | which the city demurred alleging that the defendant did not com mence the Construction of the |