Gilbert v. Town Of Hamden

Decision Date26 July 1949
Citation135 Conn. 630,68 A.2d 157
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesGILBERT et al. v. TOWN OF HAMDEN et al.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Action by Alfred C. Gilbert and others against the Town of Hamden and others, for a declaratory judgment determining whether use of Paradise Park by plaintiffs for social and recreation purposes was a violation of zoning regulations of the defendant town. The case was reserved by the Superior Court for the advice of the Supreme Court of Errors.

Questions propounded in the reservation answered.

Frederick H. Wiggin, New Haven, Angus N. Gordon, Jr., New Haven, Albert W. Cretella, New Haven, for plaintiffs.

John R. Thim, New Haven, John J. Johnson, New Haven, for defendants.

Before MALTBIE, C. J., and BROWN, JENNINGS, ELLS and DICKENSON, JJ.

DICKENSON, Judge.

The action was reserved to this court for the interpretation of a zoning ordinance of the defendant town affecting the plaintiffs' property. The part of the ordinance immediately involved provides that no building or premises in residence A zone shall be used and no building shall be erected or altered therein which is arranged, intended or designed to be used for other than one or more of certain stated purposes, including ‘2. Community house or club, except where the principal activity is one customarily carried on as a business.’ The parties agree that the plaintiff The Paradise Park Country Club, Inc., hereinafter referred to as the Paradise Club, is in fact a club. The defendants claim that the only type of club permitted by the ordinance is a community club and that the Paradise Club is not a community club. The plaintiffs contend that the word ‘club’ in the ordinance includes clubs generally and that, if it should be held that the ordinance permits community clubs only, the Paradise Club comes within that definition.

The stipulated facts necessary for the determination of the issues are as follows: Alfred C. Gilbert of North Haven is the owner of Paradise Park, a tract of land of 150 acres with buildings thereon in residence district A in the defendant town. He is president and a large stockholder of the A. C. Gilbert Company, a Maryland corporation having a factory and place of business in New Haven. Gilbert leased the tract to the Gilbert Company for a term of six years from February 1, 1947. The Paradise Club was organized about May 24, 1948, as an unincorporated club and was incorporated about August 9, 1948. It holds a lease of Paradise Park as sublessee of the Gilbert Company for a term of one year from September 1, 1948. Regular membership in the club is limited to employees of the Gilbert Company, with associate memberships for their immediate families. Special membership may be issued by the board of governors in certain instances. The Gilbert Company made Paradise Park suitable for use as a country club at a total cost of $25,475.86-$10,553.16 for buildings and $14,922.70 for grading and landscaping the land. The work commenced on March 27, 1947, and was finished July 25, 1948. On August 2, 1947, the annual outing of the employees of the Gilbert Company was held at Paradise Park. This was the first such recreational use and the only one in 1947. Throughout the summer of 1948, Paradise Park was used by members of the club and their guests for sports, recreation and social activities. On weekends as many as 350 persons at a time, club members and their guests, enjoyed the facilities and privileges of the club.

Club facilities now available for various forms of recreational and social activity include ponds for swimming and boating, a softball field, volley ball, boccie and badminton courts, a dart board, horseshoe pits, a rifle range, ping pong and card tables, trails for hiking, outdoor fireplaces, picnic tables, a dancing platform and other recreational equipment, a clubhouse, a boathouse, a bathhouse and other buildings. Incident to the uses of the club by the members and their guests, and operated for their convenience, are a checkroom adjacent to the bathhouse where members and their guests may, while bathing, check their clothing, a so-called ‘store’ where members, their guests and those licensed to use the club as stated below may purchase cigarettes, soft drinks and sandwiches, and a pavilion having a roof but no walls, where members, their guests and licensees may eat meals and which can be used for dancing.

To augment the income available for the maintenance and improvement of the club facilities at Paradise Park, and as an activity incidental and accessory to the uses described above, the club proposes to license organizations and persons not members to use its privileges and facilities from time to time for a day or a part of a day, but only for the purpose of the kinds of recreation, sport and social activities described above, and to obtain as compensation such sums as may be agreed upon.

On or about December 12, 1930, the town of Hamden adopted zoning regulations, since amended in various respects, the last time on February 18, 1946. The zoning regulations in § 3 divide the town into classes of districts which include residence A-1, residence A, residence AA and residence B. In § 4, it is provided in part that in residence A-1, A, AA and B districts no building or premises shall be used and no building shall be erected or altered which is arranged, intended or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following uses: ‘1. Single family dwellings in accordance with the living space requirements set out in Section 8-A herein. 2. Community house or club, except where the principal activity is one customarily carried on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Town of Los Altos Hills v. Adobe Creek Properties, Inc.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 18, 1973
    ...402, 403--405; McNalley v. Zoning Bd. of Review of City of Cranston (1967) 102 R.I. 417, 419, 230 A.2d 880, 882; Gilbert v. Town of Hamden (1949) 135 Conn. 630, 68 A.2d 157; and Golf, Inc. v. District of Columbia (1933) 62 App.D.C. 309, 67 F.2d 575.) On the other hand in Board of Zoning App......
  • Delbrook Homes, Inc. v. Mayers
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • November 15, 1967
    ...as would those who reside in close proximity to the beach, that is, the residents of the Lakeland area. See Gilbert v. Town of Hamden, 135 Conn. 630, 68 A.2d 157 (1949). Support for the construction adopted may be found in § 35-115(g) of the County zoning ordinance. After setting out the re......
  • Wadell v. Bd. Of Zoning Appeals Of City Of New Haven
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • August 9, 1949
  • Kiska v. Skrensky
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • January 21, 1958
    ... ... Gilbert v. Town of Hamden, 135 Conn. 630, 635, 68 A.2d 157 ...         Who are embraced within the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT