Judges: Maltbie, Brown, Jennings, Ells, Dickenson
Filed Date: 12/3/1947
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
The defendant zoning board of appeals of Hartford on September 4, 1945, granted the application of Nellie Salvatore for permission to conduct a restaurant where all kinds of alcoholic liquor could be sold, at variance with the provisions of a zoning ordinance requiring 1000-foot intervals between such restaurants, taverns and grills. The plaintiffs, neighboring property owners, appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, which dismissed the appeal. This is an appeal from that judgment.
The facts sufficient for a consideration of the issues upon which we decide the case may be summarized as follows: The premises are at 1309 Albany Avenue, within a business zone. Previous *Page 188 applications for permits had been made by prior owners of the property in 1942 and 1944 and had been denied. From the transcript of the minutes of the board it appears that the permit was granted because "it will provide a much needed restaurant of this kind in the neighborhood." There is a tavern at 1444 Albany Avenue, 650 feet from the applicant's premises, and a grill at 1164 Albany Avenue with an all-liquor permit, 700 feet from the premises.
When the application was granted, 20-3 of the Municipal Code of 1941 provided that no building in a business zone should be used for certain purposes, including those of a restaurant selling alcoholic liquor or beer, except as permitted in 20-7. Section 20-7 contained special regulations relating to restaurants, taverns and grills and as amended read in part as follows: "In a business zone, no building shall be used . . . for a restaurant selling alcoholic liquor or beer, if any part of such premises is situated: On any part of a lot having a frontage, on either side of a public street, within one thousand feet as measured along the center line of such street, of any lot or plot having a frontage on such street and used for the purpose of a restaurant selling alcoholic liquor or beer, a tavern or a grill." The defendant board contends, however, that it had authority to vary this ordinance by virtue of another provision in the ordinances. Subsection (f) of
The trial court concluded that there was a sufficient change in the neighborhood of the applicants' premises to justify the board in reversing its former decisions and granting the application; that "there was practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship present" in the case; that the variance was within the general intent and purpose of zoning; and that the board did not act arbitrarily, illegally, unreasonably or in abuse of its discretion. The plaintiffs sought a correction of the finding to the effect that the board had made no finding of practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship, and have assigned error in the failure of the court to include this in the finding. The failure of the board expressly to find practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship in the enforcement of the letter of the ordinance does not affect the judgment of the trial court if the facts support such a conclusion. Levine v. Zoning Board of Appeals,
In Kamerman v. LeRoy,
No situation is presented by the finding that meets this test. It suggests little more than that an all-liquor licensed restaurant is desirable in the locality and that the applicant will suffer financially if the permit is not granted.
There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded to be proceeded with according to law.
In this opinion the other judges concurred.
Devaney v. Board of Zoning Appeals ( 1946 )
Thayer v. Board of Appeals ( 1931 )
Skarzynski v. Liquor Control Commission ( 1937 )
Greenwich Gas Co. v. Tuthill ( 1931 )
St. Patrick's Church Corporation v. Daniels ( 1931 )
Jb Constr. Contr. Ser. v. Hartford Zba, No. Cv-95-0549412 (... ( 1996 )
Parsons v. Board of Zoning Appeals ( 1953 )
Stanley v. Zoning Board of Appeals, No. Cv94 30 98 86 S (... ( 1994 )
John Danenhower v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, Old Lyme ( 1948 )
Delaney v. Zoning Board of Appeals ( 1947 )
State Ex Rel. Wise v. Turkington ( 1948 )
City and County of Denver v. Redding-Miller, Inc. ( 1959 )
Rafala v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, Hartford ( 1948 )
Laviana v. Zoning Board of App., Suffield, No. Cv 95 ... ( 1996 )
The Texas Co. v. Zoning Board, City of Hartford ( 1951 )
Mitchell Land Co. v. Planning & Zoning Board of Appeals ( 1953 )
Dolan v. Zoning Board of Appeals ( 1968 )
Dooley v. Town Plan & Zoning Commission ( 1964 )
Nere v. Killingworth Zoning Board of Appeals, No. 70104 (... ( 1994 )
Saporiti v. Zoning Board of Appeals ( 1951 )
O'CONNOR v. Board of Zoning Appeals ( 1953 )
Berkman v. Board of Appeals on Zoning ( 1949 )
Wadell v. Board of Zoning Appeals ( 1949 )