Environmental Case Studies

Addition to a Building on the National Register of Historic Places

A property owner applied for a permit to build an addition to a building listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The State Historic Preservation Department did not approve of the addition because it believed the roof design of the addition, while similar to the surrounding historic buildings, was incongruous with the original building. At first glance, this dispute did not appear to be a good candidate for mediation because the issue was black or white, or in this case, hip or gable. If this case proceeded to litigation, each party was prepared to defend its position why it’s preferred roof style was appropriate for the addition.

During the mediation screening the screener recognized that a settlement was possible because both parties were willing to talk about their interests and expressed some flexibility. Although each party preferred their respective roof style, both parties were able to articulate the characteristics they were looking for in the roof of the addition. Through mediation the parties were able to reach a settlement that incorporated design changes to one roof style that adequately mitigated the opposing party’s concerns.

School Ball Fields

A school applied for a permit to expand their ball fields. Neighbors contested the permit application because they asserted that the constant noise during games and practices disturbed their peace and quiet. The neighbors feared that the expansion of the ball fields would only make things worse and as a result they were adamantly opposed to the permit application. When the screening occurred, both sides had consulted with noise experts and were preparing for the hearing on whether the proposed plans met the regulatory criteria.

The screener recommended mediation because during the confidential interview process, the parties were open to exploring a variety of options that could possibly satisfy their interests. Unlike the hearing process, the screening and subsequent mediation focused on generating options that could satisfy their interests such as realigning the ball fields and the stands, building a berm to mitigate the noise, and operational limitations such as the hours each field could be used. During the mediation the parties were able to reach settlement because they were able to engage in a constructive dialogue that evaluated the cost of each option compared to the effectiveness in mitigating the noise.

Big Box Store

A developer applied for a permit to build a facility for a nationally known “big box” store in the outskirts of a small city. The city prided itself on its surrounding natural beauty, vibrant downtown, and sense of community. Opposition to the big box store quickly escalated.

During the mediation screening, the screener was able to get the opponents to articulate their interests. While the opponents preferred that no big box stores be built in their city, they cared mostly about the loss of open space, the impact of the store on their downtown, and affordable housing for low income working people. Since the applicant also appeared flexible and willing to engage in a dialogue with the opponents, the screener recommended mediation.

During mediation the parties were able to reach settlement because the opponents realized that the impacts to downtown would be limited due to the nature of the store and the applicant was willing to donate funds for the preservation of open space and build affordable housing as part of the development.