Petrillo v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of North Haven
| Decision Date | 14 June 1960 |
| Citation | 162 A.2d 508,147 Conn. 469 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | John P. PETRILLO v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF the TOWN OF NORTH HAVEN. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut |
Albert W. Cretella, Jr., New Haven, with whom was Lawrence J. Carboni, New Haven, for the appellant (defendant).
Dannis N. Garvey, New Haven, with whom were John W. Colleran, New Haven, and, on the brief, Lewis E. Caplan, New Haven, for the appellee (plaintiff).
Before BALDWIN, C. J., and KING, MURPHY, MELLITZ and SHEA, JJ.
The board of zoning appeals for the town of North Haven denied the application of the plaintiff for permission to extend the nonconforming use of his automobile junk yard to premises immediately adjoining his present location and for certificates of approval of the adjoining property for that purpose and for a used car lot. Upon an appeal to the Court of Common Pleas by the plaintiff, the action of the board was reversed. The board has appealed.
In 1951, the plaintiff was, and he still is, the owner of an irregularly shaped plot of ground on the north side of Sackett Point Road and bordering the Quinnipiac River. It is in an industrial B zone. Under what is now General Statutes § 14-54, the board in 1951 approved the property for the location of a used car business. The following year, the board approved the same property as a location for a motor vehicle dismantling or junk yard, under the provisions of what is presently § 21-16. At that time, that type of business was a permitted use in an industrial B zone. The plaintiff has conducted a motor vehicle junk yard on the property ever since. Section nine of the North Haven zoning ordinance was amended by the zoning commission in May, 1953, to prohibit junk yards, including automobile dismantling yards, in an industrial B zone.
The plaintiff in 1956 purchased a piece of property adjoining and easterly of his junk yard. This property is the subject matter of this appeal. In July, 1958, the plaintiff filed an application with the board of zoning appeals for permission to extend his non-conforming automobile junk yard to include the second tract and for certificates of approval of that location for both the automobile junk and used car businesses. After a public hearing, the board denied all three requests. Upon appeal to the trial court, the parties filed a stipulation concerning certain statements made by counsel for the plaintiff at the hearing and also correcting a report as to the number of pupils who travel on Sackett Point Road each day in school busses. The court heard no testimony but, with counsel, viewed the premises. On the basis of its observations of the locale, it made a limited finding which was contrary to, and in conflict with, the conclusions of the board. The court sustained the appeal and rendered judgment for the plaintiff.
Motor vehicle junk yards are subject to strict regulation and licensing under the provisions of chapter 406 of the General Statutes. See Leach v. Florkosky, 145 Conn. 490, 494, 144 A.2d 334. Section 21-23 provides that in any municipality having a zoning commission, that commission shall have the authority to create restricted districts within which any motor vehicle junk yard or motor vehicle junk business shall not be permitted to be established. Section 21-16 provides that no motor vehicle junk yard or junk business shall be established or operated unless a certificate of approval of the location therefor has been obtained from the zoning board of appeals certifying that the location is not within an established district restricted against such uses by the zoning commission. The chapter which governs the location, operation and licensing of motor vehicle junk yards is a licensing statute enacted under the police power of the state for their proper regulation. State v. Kievman, 116 Conn. 458, 465, 165 A. 601, 88 A.L.R. 962. Upon the presentation of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Yale Auto Parts, Inc. v. Johnson
...for these particular businesses and not under the local zoning regulations or the zoning statutes. Petrillo v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 147 Conn. 469, 472, 162 A.2d 508 (1960) (citations omitted). In passing on such an application, the board acts as an administrative agency of the state rat......
-
Ryan v. Board of Selectmen of Town of Woodstock
...inquiry under this application. The town counsel, with commendable candor, apprised those present of this. Petrillo v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 147 Conn. 469, 162 A.2d 508. The court can sympathize with the position of the plaintiffs, homeowners living nearby, who purchased their property w......
-
Lage v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Madison
...and basing its finding in part on the results of that visit is clearly distinguishable from the situation in Petrillo v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 147 Conn. 469, 162 A.2d 508, in which the court heard no evidence but tried the case on the record of the proceedings before the board, supplemen......
-
Corona's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of City of Hartford
...application, the board was acting as an administrative agency of the state rather than in a zoning capacity. Petrillo v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 147 Conn. 469, 472, 162 A.2d 508. A hearing was held on the plaintiff's application at which no one appeared in opposition. At the start of the h......