Court rules in favor of environmental protection

INDIANAPOLIS -- The state Supreme Court sided with the Indiana Department of Environmental Management Tuesday in a lawsuit challenging the agency's authority to regulate private ponds and other isolated wetlands.\nIn a separate ruling, the high court upheld a Bloomington ordinance that bans more than three people from sharing a single-family home unless they are related.\nThe wetlands dispute is tied in part to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2001 that left about a third of the state's wetlands without federal protection. Since many ponds and wetlands were no longer subject to federal regulation, IDEM initiated interim steps to regulate construction projects affecting them.\nA Marion County judge ruled last February that IDEM could not require Allen County residential developer Twin Eagle Corp. or any other party to obtain a permit to drain or fill an isolated wetland.\nThe judge also agreed with Twin Eagle's claim that IDEM tried to implement the new rules without giving fair warning to the public and conducting public hearings.\nSupporters of the interim regulations say they are needed to protect Indiana's remaining wetlands from development. Critics say they are too strict and unduly hamper growth.\nThe state Supreme Court ruled IDEM may require permits for dredged and fill materials under its existing rules, and may regulate even private ponds if discharges from them threaten other waters. It also said the interim regulatory process was valid.\nThe justices did not settle all the factual disputes in the case, but said the "proper forum to address this fact-sensitive issue" is through the state's regulatory process.\nThe interim regulations remain in place while a task force established by the late Gov. Frank O'Bannon seeks compromises on permanent rules, IDEM spokeswoman Cheryl Reed said. Numerous environmental groups filed legal briefs in support of the state's position.\nStephen Studer, an attorney for Twin Eagle, said he wanted to reserve comment until he could review the ruling and discuss it with his clients. The Indiana Builders Association and Indiana Farm Bureau filed briefs in support of Twin Eagle's challenge.\nThe Bloomington case began in 1996 when the city sued apartment owner Peter Dvorak for violating the rental occupancy ordinance by allowing five IU students to live in one of his rental properties.\nThe ordinance limits to three the number of unrelated people who can live together in a single-family residence. City officials say it makes neighborhoods more livable by helping to control trash, noise and traffic.\nAttorneys for the tenants argued that the ordinance was biased in favor of families and violated the state constitution's equal privileges and immunities clause, which protects against unequal treatment of different classes of people.\nBut the high court upheld the ordinance on constitutional grounds, and said a law passed by the General Assembly specifically allows local governments to use zoning so that "residential areas provide healthful surroundings for family life."\nMichael Carmin, an attorney for the tenants, said he was disappointed in the ruling but still maintains the ordinance discriminates against college students.\nBloomington Mayor John Fernandez called the ruling "a great day for neighborhoods."\n"The court has affirmed the city's ability to use common sense measures to make our neighborhoods more livable," he said.\nThe city of West Lafayette and the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns filed briefs in support of the Bloomington ordinance.