De Mars v. Zoning Commission of Town of Bolton

Citation142 Conn. 580,115 A.2d 653
PartiesLaurier F. DE MARS et al. v. ZONING COMMISSION OF TOWN OF BOLTON. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut
Decision Date12 July 1955
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

John D. LaBelle, Manchester, with whom, on the brief, were Jay E. Rubinow, and Eugene T. Kelly, Manchester, for appellants (plaintiffs).

Raymond A. Johnson, Hartford, for defendant (appellee).

Before BALDWIN, O'SULLIVAN, WYNNE, DALY and PHILLIPS, * JJ. concurring.

WYNNE, Associate Justice.

The zoning commission of the town of Bolton adopted certain changes of the zoning regulations which had been in effect in that town for more than two years. Six residents of the town have appealed from a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas. That court dismissed an appeal by them from the action of the commission in adopting the changes. The question before us is whether the court erred in holding that the commission did not act arbitrarily, illegally, or in abuse of its discretion.

Following is a summary of the facts: Zoning regulations were adopted in the town on August 1, 1951. They provided for a residence zone A, a residence zone B and business zones. Residence zone A includes almost the entire town. Residence zone B relates to that portion of the town known as the Lake Area. This is primarily a colony of summer cottages surrounding a lake in the town, although some of the cottages have been made suitable for all-the-year occupancy. The business zones are small in area, not yet affected by the surge of out-of-town pressures. On April 19, 1954, a hearing was held by the zoning commission on certain proposals which the commission itself had initiated. These had to do primarily with enlarging lot areas by increasing the minimum dimensions of lots, in residence zone A, from 150 feet in width and 200 feet in depth to 200 by 200 feet; in residence zone B, from 75 feet in width and 150 feet in depth to 150 by 150 feet; and in business zones, from 150 feet in width and 200 feet in depth to 200 by 200 feet.

The plaintiffs' appeal is predicated upon three claims: (1) The commission is without power to change existing regulations unless there has been a substantial change in circumstances and conditions since the adoption of the regulations. (2) Where the commission makes amendments or changes on its own initiative, it must introduce at the public hearing sufficient facts to substantiate a valid reason or reasons for the change. (3) The records of the commission must set forth the facts warranting the commission's finding that a change is necessary.

Section 837 of the General Statutes confers upon zoning commissions the power to adopt regulations among other purposes, 'to promote health and the general welfare.' These regulations must be made upon reasonable consideration of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular purposes and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the town. They may be amended and changed. Cum.Sup.1953, § 282c. A zoning authority is endowed with a wide and liberal discretion. Bartram v. Zoning Commission, 136 Conn. 89, 96, 68 A.2d 308. This discretion is to be overruled only when the commission has not acted fairly, with proper motives and upon valid reasons. Mallory v. Town of West Hartford, 138 Conn. 497, 505, 86 A.2d 668. It is true that ordinarily a change of zone affecting a small area should be made only when there has been a change in conditions or new considerations have arisen since the previous zoning of the area. Hills v. Zoning Commission, 139 Conn. 603, 609, 96 A.2d 212, and cases cited on p. 610. In the instant case, the change in the regulations affected a substantial part of the town of Bolton. Even if the requirement was applicable, it has been met adequately. Anticipating that the greatest residential use of land in the town was yet to come, the board concluded that larger lot sizes would provide greater area for the disposal of sewage and would increase the distances between sewage disposal areas and the residential water supply. We cannot...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • Murach v. Planning and Zoning Com'n of City of New London
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1985
    ...with proper motives and upon valid reasons. Mallory v. West Hartford, 138 Conn. 497, 505, 86 A.2d 668 [1952]." DeMars v. Zoning Commission, 142 Conn. 580, 583, 115 A.2d 653 (1955). Blake v. Board of Appeals, 117 Conn. 527, 533, 169 A. 195 (1933). The trial court properly ruled, therefore, t......
  • Morningside Ass'n v. Planning and Zoning Bd. of City of Milford
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • January 19, 1972
    ... ... in granting the petition of West Blake, Inc., for an amendment to the town plan of development of the area in question from a medium to a high ... Grover, 148 Conn. 299, 310, 170 A.2d 267; Woodford v. Zoning Commission, 147 Conn. 30, 31, 156 A.2d 470. Only reasons which motivated the board ... ...
  • Builders Service Corp., Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Com'n of Town of East Hampton
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • July 12, 1988
    ...In that context, they refer to DeMars v. Zoning Commission, 19 Conn.Sup. 24, 109 A.2d 876 (1954), aff'd on other grounds, 142 Conn. 580, 115 A.2d 653 (1955). In sustaining the minimum floor area requirement in DeMars, the trial court depended in part upon Lionshead Lake, Inc. DeMars hardly ......
  • Clary v. Borough of Eatontown, A--210
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • July 10, 1956
    ... ... the validity, as against the plaintiff, of a zoning ordinance adopted by ... the defendant borough November ... bend and meets Route 35 at the business center of the town approximately a mile and a quarter from Wyckoff Road and ... Zoning Commission of ... Town of Bolton, 142 Conn. 580, 115 A.2d 653, 654 ... ...
  • 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