High Watch Recovery Center, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission

Citations

• 352 Conn. 1

Syllabus

The plaintiff, which owned two nearby parcels of real property in a rural residential zoning district in the town of Kent, filed an application with the defendant planning and zoning commission, seeking a special permit to construct a greenhouse on one of its parcels. The plaintiff had been operating a residential substance abuse treatment program on one of the parcels since before the enactment of the town's zoning regulations in 1965. In 2017, the plaintiff acquired the other parcel, which was being used as a farm. In 2018, in accordance with the zoning regulations then in effect, the plaintiff applied for and was granted a special permit to conduct certain clinical therapies on the farm parcel, including an agricultural therapy program, in connection with its substance abuse treatment program. The town amended the zoning regulations in 2020 to prohibit the operation of, inter alia, privately operated clinics in rural residential districts, and the plaintiff's use of the farm parcel for the previously approved clinical therapies thus became a preexisting, nonconforming use. After a public hearing on the plaintiff's application for a special permit to construct the greenhouse, which had been filed after the 2020 amendments to the town's zoning regulations, the defendant denied the application on the ground that it would be an impermissible expansion of a nonconforming use. On appeal to the trial court, that court upheld the defendant's decision and dismissed the plaintiff's administrative appeal. The Appellate Court thereafter reversed the trial court's judgment, concluding, inter alia, that the installation of the greenhouse on the farm parcel was a 1 2 MAY, 2025 352 Conn. 1 High Watch Recovery Center, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission permissible intensification of a nonconforming use, and the defendant, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court. Held: The Appellate Court incorrectly concluded that the installation of the green- house was a perm