DocketNumber: No. 30 28 36
Judges: THOMPSON, JUDGE. CT Page 3507
Filed Date: 4/26/1991
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
The application was submitted on March 1, 1990 and tabled on a number of occasions and finally denied on July 5, 1990. The plaintiff has filed this appeal alleging that the site plan complied with the applicable zoning regulations of the Town of Branford, and that the defendant's action of denying the application was illegal, arbitrary and a gross abuse of discretion.1
Section
The commission gave the following reasons for denying the plaintiff's application:
1. The intensity of the combined uses on the site would result in hazardous and detrimental impacts both on and adjacent to the site per Sect. 31.5.7.
2. Traffic, circulation and parking not properly satisfied under Sections 31.5.3 of the Branford Planning and Zoning Regulations.
3. Failure to present final plan revisions in time for professional review prior to the meeting.
The third reason given for the denial of the application is somewhat ambiguous although it was argued by the defendants that the commission did not have the opportunity to determine if the site plan was in conformance with the regulations. However, the record does not support a claim that the proposed use was not in accordance with the regulations other than the specific sections cited in the first and second reasons for denial.2 A review of CT Page 3508 the record would indicate that the application was denied based upon concerns relating to the intensity of the proposed mixed use on the premises and concerns regarding traffic circulation and parking pursuant to sections 31.5.7 and 31.5.3 of the zoning regulations.
Sec.
However, these very regulations were at issue in TLC Development, Inc. v. Planning Zoning Commission,
While the general objectives of section 31.5 cannot serve as a basis for a denial of the site plan application, it is not the opinion of the court that the commission be ordered to approve the application. The plaintiff's appeal is sustained and the matter remanded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further action consistent with this opinion and the Branford Zoning Regulations."4
Bruce W. Thompson, Judge.
FOOTNOTES