142 Conn. App. 300
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Affording housing moratorium under § 8-30g suspends affordable housing appeals during a four-year period after certificate completion.
- Plaintiffs Stefanoni sought declaratory relief under § 4-175 after department denied their § 4-176 petition for a ruling on the moratorium.
- Town of Darien obtained a moratorium certificate in May 2010, effective Nov. 2, 2010, suspending § 8-30g appeals for affordable housing applications in that period.
- Plaintiffs filed a floating zone creation application in Aug. 2011 to establish a town-wide affordable housing floating zone and attached a single-page conceptual site plan showing their property.
- Trial court dismissed for lack of standing, finding plaintiffs neither classically nor statutorily aggrieved; plaintiffs appealed and the Supreme Court affirmed.
- Floating zone proposal was not an affordable housing development and thus not subject to § 8-30g appeals; plaintiffs lacked the required individualized injury or interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs were classically aggrieved | Floating zone affects plaintiffs’ property interest | Floating zone affects town generally, not plaintiffs personally | Not classically aggrieved |
| Whether plaintiffs were statutorily aggrieved | § 8-30g interferes with their rights via moratorium | No direct effect on plaintiffs’ rights since zone not an affordable housing development | Not statutorily aggrieved for § 4-175(a)(1)–(3) purpose; lacked justiciable right |
| Ripe/justiciable declaratory judgment question | Declares moratorium validity as to their floating zone | No justiciable dispute in § 4-176 context | Action not ripe; declaratory relief appropriate only for justiciable rights |
Key Cases Cited
- West Hartford Interfaith Coalition, Inc. v. Town Council, 228 Conn. 498 (1994) (definition of affordable housing application; two interdependent actions; site plan relevance)
- Kaufman v. Zoning Commission, 232 Conn. 122 (1995) (affordable housing development standards; specific project on land not required to submit detailed plans at initial application)
- Schwartz v. Town Plan & Zoning Commission, 168 Conn. 20 (1975) (classical aggrievement two-prong test)
- Burton v. Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., 300 Conn. 542 (2011) (subject matter jurisdiction and need for standing to invoke court review)
- Connecticut Business & Industry Assn., Inc. v. Commission on Hospitals & Health Care, 218 Conn. 335 (1991) (standing requirement for declaratory relief; justiciable interest)
- Pinchbeck v. Dept. of Public Health, 65 Conn. App. 201 (2001) (statutory aggrievement; required individualized interest)
- Douglas v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 127 Conn. App. 87 (2011) (floating zone concept as non-specific parcel application)