Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Zoning Bulletin <br /> <br />Jurisdiction-Property owner asks court to decide if <br />roadquaJifies as 'public highway' <br /> <br />Court claims it has no jurisdiction to decide due to lack of <br />administrative exhaustion <br /> <br />Citation: Montanaro v. Aspetuck Land Trust, Inc., 103 Conn. App. <br />237,2007 WL 2263903 (2007) <br /> <br />CONNECTICUT (08/14/07)-Montanaro purchased a lot in the <br />town of Wilton that was bordered on one side by a road called <br />Old 2 Rod Highway. Old 2 Rod Hlghway was the only means of <br />access to a highway known as Wampum Hill Road in a neighbor- <br />ing town. <br />The town's zoning regulations required that a buildable lot have <br />frontage on a public highway as defined by the regulations. Mon- <br />tanaro believed that the property in question had frontage on Old 2 <br />Rod Highway and that the road could be considered a public high- <br />way as defined in the regulations. <br />Montanaro sought the advice of public officials as to the likeli- <br />hood of gelLing a permit to build Qn the lot. The town attorney <br />told him that there was uncertainty as to whether Old 2 Rod High- <br />way was a public highway or road under the zoning regulations <br />and that unless it was clear, the to~n would "rather let a judge <br />decide the issue." <br />Without first applying for a building permit or zoning relief of any <br />s6rt, Montanaro brought a COlli-r action, Seekii'1g: 1) a determination <br />on whether Old 2 Rod Highway was a public highway or road, and <br />2) an order that the property .was entitled to a zoning permit and that <br />a permit be issued upon the filing of. an application. Montanaro ar- <br />gued that the court had jurisdiction to hear the complaint because <br />neither the town nor its zoning officials could determine whether Old <br />2 Rod Highway qualified as a public highway, and agents of the town <br />had told him that a permit would be denied over that uncertainty <br />should he apply for one. . <br />The town asked the court to dismiss the complaint, arguing that <br />the court did not have jurisdiction because Montanaro had not ex- <br />hausted his administrative remedies. The lower court agreed with the <br />town, and Montanaro appealed. <br /> <br />Decision: Reversed. <br /> <br />Montanaro argued on appeal that the complaint had contained <br />two distinct causes of action: one for a determination of the legal <br />status of the road and one seeking a declaration that he was entitled <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />38 <br />