§ 8-26 — Approval of subdivision and resubdivision plans. Waiver of certain regulation requirements. Fees. Hearing. Notice. Applications involving an inland wetland or watercourse.

Connecticut § 8-26

• Jurisdiction: Connecticut
• Title 8: Zoning, Planning, Housing and Economic and Community Development
• Ch. 126: Municipal Planning Commissions

Text

(a) All plans for subdivisions and resubdivisions, including subdivisions and resubdivisions in existence but which were not submitted to the commission for required approval, whether or not shown on an existing map or plan or whether or not conveyances have been made of any of the property included in such subdivisions or resubdivisions, shall be submitted to the commission with an application in the form to be prescribed by it. The commission shall have the authority to determine whether the existing division of any land constitutes a subdivision or resubdivision under the provisions of this chapter, provided nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorize the commission to approve any such subdivision or resubdivision which conflicts with applicable zoning regulations. Such regulations may contain provisions whereby the commission may waive certain requirements under the regulations by a three-quarters vote of all the members of the commission in cases where conditions exist which affect the subject land and are not generally applicable to other land in the area, provided that the regulations shall specify the conditions under which a waiver may be considered and shall provide that no waiver shall be granted that would have a significant adverse effect on adjacent property or on public health and safety. The commission shall state upon its records the reasons for which a waiver is granted in each case. (b) The commission may establish a schedule of fees and charge such fees. The amount of the fees shall be sufficient to cover the costs of processing subdivision applications, including, but not limited to, the cost of registered or certified mailings and the publication of notices, and the costs of inspecting subdivision improvements. Any schedule of fees established under this section shall be superseded by fees established by ordinance under section 8-1c . (c) The commission may hold a public hearing regarding any subdivision proposal if, in its judgment, the specific circumstances require such action. No plan of resubdivision shall be acted upon by the commission without a public hearing. Such public hearing shall be held in accordance with the provisions of section 8-7d . (d) The commission shall approve, modify and approve, or disapprove any subdivision or resubdivision application or maps and plans submitted therewith, including existing subdivisions or resubdivisions made in violation of this section, within the period of time permitted under section 8-26d . Notice of the decision of the commission shall be published in a newspaper having a substantial circulation in the municipality and addressed by certified mail to any person applying to the commission under this section, by its secretary or clerk, under his signature in any written, printed, typewritten or stamped form, within fifteen days after such decision has been rendered. In any case in which such notice is not published within such fifteen-day period, the person who made such application may provide for the publication of such notice within ten days thereafter. Such notice shall be a simple statement that such application was approved, modified and approved or disapproved, together with the date of such action. The failure of the commission to act thereon shall be considered as an approval, and a certificate to that effect shall be issued by the commission on demand. The grounds for its action shall be stated in the records of the commission. No planning commission shall be required to consider an application for approval of a subdivision plan while another application for subdivision of the same or substantially the same parcel is pending before the commission. For the purposes of this subsection, an application is not “pending before the commission” if the commission has rendered a decision with respect to such application and such decision has been appealed to the Superior Court. (e) If an application involves land regulated as an inland wetland or watercourse under the provisions of chapter 440, the applicant shall submit an application to the agency responsible for administration of the inland wetlands regulations no later than the day the application is filed for the subdivision or resubdivision. The commission shall, within the period of time established in section 8-7d , accept the filing of and shall process, pursuant to section 8-7d , any subdivision or resubdivision involving land regulated as an inland wetland or watercourse under chapter 440. The commission shall not render a decision until the inland wetlands agency has submitted a report with its final decision to the commission. In making its decision the commission shall give due consideration to the report of the inland wetlands agency and if the commission establishes terms and conditions for approval that are not consistent with the final decision of the inland wetlands agency, the commission shall state on the record the reason for such terms and conditions. In making a decision on an application, the commission shall consider information submitted by the applicant under subsection (b) of section 8-25 concerning passive solar energy techniques. The provisions of this section shall apply to any municipality which exercises planning power pursuant to any special act. See Sec. 7-159b re preapplication review of use of property.

Legislative History

(1949 Rev., S. 859; 1959, P.A. 679, S. 6; 1963, P.A. 55, S. 2; 273, S. 1; February, 1965, P.A. 622, S. 5; 1967, P.A. 884, S. 2; 1971, P.A. 862, S. 9; P.A. 73-550; P.A. 75-40; P.A. 77-450, S. 5; 77-545, S. 3; P.A. 78-243, S. 1, 2; P.A. 86-236, S. 3, 4; P.A. 87-215, S. 5, 7; 87-533, S. 9, 14; P.A. 89-356, S. 14; P.A. 92-191; 92-218; P.A. 93-124, S. 1; May 25 Sp. Sess. P.A. 94-1, S. 10, 130; P.A. 03-177, S. 7; P.A. 07-102, S. 2; P.A. 08-38, S. 2.) History: 1959 act permitted charging of fees for processing applications and set amounts of charges and provided for action on “subdivision application or maps and plans submitted therewith” rather than “a subdivision plan”; 1963 acts required commission to state grounds for “its action” rather than for “disapproval,” raised the maximum fee the commission may charge from $2 to $3 for each lot and provided for newspaper publication of decision of commission; 1965 act set 10-day time limit for notice by publication in a newspaper and provided notice by mail be given within 3 days instead of on or before day of notice by publication; 1967 act deleted requirement that applicant be notified of decision within 3 days and required instead notification within 10 days; 1971 act changed requirement that hearing notice be published at least 7 days before hearing to “publication ... at least twice at intervals of not less than two days, the first not more than fifteen days, nor less than ten days and the last not less than two days” before hearing, required that commission take action within 65 rather than 60 days of hearing or submission and that notice of decision be published and mailed to applicant within 15 rather than 10 days and limited extensions to 65 days; P.A. 73-550 included resubdivisions and subdivisions and resubdivisions in existence but not submitted to commission for approval under requirement re application to commission; P.A. 75-40 increased minimum fee from $25 to $35 and maximum fee from $3 to $5 per lot; P.A. 77-450 replaced 65-day limit for decision with limit equaling period of time under Sec. 8-26d and deleted provision for 65-day extension; P.A. 77-545 added provisions concerning waivers of requirements and added provisions concerning concurrent consideration of more than one plan for same or substantially same parcel and concerning applications involving wetlands and watercourses; P.A. 78-243 increased fees to $50 or $25 per lot; P.A. 86-236 specified that the provisions of the section shall apply to any municipality which exercises planning power pursuant to any special act; P.A. 87-215 authorized commission to provide by regulation for additional notice by mail to adjacent landowners; P.A. 87-533 substituted provision requiring filing of applications simultaneously with inland wetlands applications, prohibiting a decision until after submission of the report of the inland wetlands agency and requiring consideration of such report for prior provision requiring that applicant file copy of application with agency responsible for administering wetlands regulation; P.A. 89-356 added provision authorizing the person who made a subdivision or resubdivision application to provide for the publication of the notice of the decision of the commission when such notice is not published in a timely manner; P.A. 92-191 added provision that an application is not “pending before the commission” if the commission has rendered a decision and such decision has been appealed to the superior court; P.A. 92-218 added provision re consideration of information on passive solar energy techniques; P.A. 93-124 eliminated the statutory fee schedule and authorized planning commissions to establish a fee schedule sufficient to cover the cost of processing applications; May 25 Sp. Sess. P.A. 94-1 made technical changes, effective July 1, 1994; P.A. 03-177 replaced provisions re publication of notice of public hearing and notice to adjacent landowners with requirement that the public hearing be held in accordance with Sec. 8-7d, effective October 1, 2003, and applicable to applications filed on or after that date; P.A. 07-102 added provision re acceptance and processing of subdivision or resubdivision involving inland wetlands and watercourses and replaced provision re due consideration of report of inland wetlands agency with provision re consideration of report of inland wetlands agency and statement on the record of terms and conditions consistent with final decision of inland wetlands agency; P.A. 08-38 divided existing provisions into Subsecs. (a) to (e), made a technical change in Subsec. (d) and amended Subsec. (e) to substitute “give due consideration to” for “consider” re report of inland wetlands agency and to make a technical change, effective May 7, 2008. Planning commission cannot act until it adopts regulations; on adoption of regulations, a subdivision plan which complies with regulations must be approved. 141 C. 79. Master plan adopted by planning commission is controlling only as to municipal improvements and regulation of subdivisions of land. 144 C. 117. Burden of proving one is aggrieved is on plaintiff; must show special injury affecting property or other legal right. 145 C. 674. Prior to 1963 amendment, beginning date of appeal period was day of announcement of decision to interested parties. 151 C. 269. Statute not applicable to commission created by special act where said act made no provision for appeal. Id., 635. Cited. 154 C. 600, 603. Under special act where town council denied application for approval of subdivision, appellant from such decision must allege and prove his aggrievement. 155 C. 1. Parties cannot by stipulating that plaintiffs are aggrieved confer jurisdiction for appeal; proof of aggrievement is essential prerequisite to court's jurisdiction. 156 C. 505. Appeal sustained where planning board had adopted regulations contrary to provisions of Secs. 8-25 and 8-26; subdivision regulation is creature of statute and must conform to statutory provisions. Id., 540. Cited. Id., 588. Failure to publish decision within specified time, grounds for reversal. 163 C. 379. Cited. 171 C. 480; Id., 512; 172 C. 572; 176 C. 475; Id., 581; 179 C. 650; 181 C. 243. Superior Court not limited to record before planning commission on issue of aggrievement; person does not become aggrieved until board has acted. Id., 442. Cited. 184 C. 450. Where plaintiff company claimed it was entitled to a certificate of approval for a subdivision plan by operation of law on commission's failure to act within the time allowed by Sec. 8-26d, request for writ of mandamus was denied when court determined that plaintiff had withdrawn its original application. 187 C. 232. Cited. 192 C. 353; 193 C. 387. Motion to approve failed to carry, therefore application was denied; action substantially complied with requirements of section. 196 C. 676. Cited. 213 C. 604. “Pending before commission” includes commission decisions on appeal to Superior Court. 219 C. 303. Cited. Id., 511; 222 C. 380; Id., 911; Id., 912; 223 C. 171; 225 C. 432; 227 C. 71; Id., 910; 229 C. 325; 232 C. 44. Commission's vote to reject subdivision application was action within meaning of section; application could not be deemed approved for failure to act. 253 C. 381. A motion to approve an application which fails to carry does not constitute action required by statute and is construed as failure of the commission to act. 1 CA 621. Cited. 3 CA 556; 5 CA 509; 6 CA 34; Id., 284; 7 CA 684; 8 CA 556; 12 CA 153; 16 CA 303; 18 CA 488; 21 CA 667; 22 CA 255; 23 CA 75; 25 CA 61; Id., 572; 26 CA 17; 27 CA 412; Id., 443; Id., 508; 28 CA 674; Id., 780; 29 CA 1; Id., 28; Id., 469; 30 CA 85; Id., 395; 31 CA 643; 35 CA 191; Id., 599; 37 CA 303; Id., 348; 40 CA 840; 45 CA 89. Commission's vote to reject plaintiff's application for approval of a subdivision plan is equivalent to disapproval of the application and did not constitute an action that would trigger automatic approval provision of statute. 54 CA 645. Clause “which conflicts with applicable zoning regulations” has as its antecedent not “the property” but “any such subdivision or resubdivision”; city cannot reject subdivision application on the basis of existing zoning violations, where the violations are not inherent in the application. 66 CA 317. Section prohibits commission from approving subdivision that conflicts with applicable zoning regulations. 79 CA 614. Motion was an invalid action under section when it expressly reserved final approval of plaintiff's application and provided for subsequent review following submission of revised map, thus application is deemed approved for failure to act within time limits. 111 CA 219. Action for mandamus against planning and zoning board for refusal to approve residential subdivision in light industrial zone denied; discretionary with board; legal remedy through appeal. 17 CS 271. Cited. 26 CS 169. Intended to provide appeal for persons aggrieved by inferred approval, not successful applicants for certificates. 31 CS 85. Cited. 39 CS 306; 41 CS 196; 43 CS 508.