Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/31/2013 - Special

Home

September 25, 2012 Volume 6 1 Issue 18 Zoning Bulletin had authority to hear appeals of "any order, requirement or decision" made by the ZCO. In response, the Town maintained that the cease and desist order and the September letter issued by the ZCO to Piquet represented decisions from which Piquet properly could have appealed to the Board. DECISION: Affirmed. The Supreme Court of Connecticut held that the ZCO's September letter to Piquet was a decision from which Piquet could have appealed. The court agreed with the Appellate Court that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Piquet had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies prior to filing the declaratory judgment action in court. Rejecting Piquet's assertions, the court concluded that the ZCO's September letter constituted a decision from which Piquet could appeal to the Board. In so concluding, the court addressed, as a matter of first impression (i.e., the first time that court heard the specific issue): "what constitutes an appealable decision of a zoning compliance officer." The court held that: when a landowner receives notice from a zoning compliance officer that the landowner's existing use of his or her property is in violation of ap- plicable zoning ordinances or regulations, that interpretation constitutes a decision from which the landowner can appeal to the local zoning board of appeals pursuant to [CGS] § 8-7 and, when applicable, pursuant to lo- cal zoning regulations. Put differently, when a landowner obtains a clear and definite interpretation of zoning regulations applicable to the landowner's current use of his or her property, the landowner properly may appeal that interpretation to the local zoning board of appeals. Conversely, when a zoning enforcement officer provides an interpreta- tion that is contingent on future events, that interpretation will not be ap- pealable, and the landowner must await a subsequent, final determination following that interpretation—e.g., the issuance of a certificate of zoning compliance in order to appeal to the local zoning board of appeals. The court further clarified that: "when a zoning enforcement officer issues a letter notifying a landowner that he or she is in violation of the applicable zoning regulations, the landowner may appeal that interpre- tation regardless of whether the letter is accompanied by a cease and desist order or other remedial action." See also: Stepney, LLC v. Town of Fairfield, 263 Conn. 558, 563, 821 A.2d 725 (2003). See also: Holt v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Stonington, 114 Conn. App. 13, 968 A.2d 946 (2009). Case Note: Piquet had also argued that an appeal to the Board would have been futile, as ..._ 4 © 2012 Thomson Reuters I