Jeweler v. Wilton
Citations
- 199 Conn. App. 842
Syllabus
The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that proposed boundary line adjustments with respect to certain real property in Wilton did not require subdivision approval from the town zoning commission. The plaintiffs proposed to utilize a certain parcel of abutting land to adjust the size of three lots in an existing resubdivision. The defendant municipality maintained that dividing the parcel into four parts constituted a subdivi- sion of the property, as well as a resubdivision, pursuant to the applicable statute (§ 8-18). The trial court concluded that the boundary line adjust- ments did not constitute a subdivision under § 8-18, but did constitute a resubdivision thereunder. The court rendered judgment in favor of the defendant, from which the plaintiffs appealed to this court. Held: 1. Contrary to the defendant's claim, the trial court properly concluded that the plaintiffs' proposed boundary line adjustments did not constitute a subdivision pursuant to § 8-18; because the plaintiffs' proposal merely reconfigured the contours of four existing lots and did not divide the abutting parcel into three or more lots, the court properly concluded that the line adjustments did not constitute a subdivision under § 8-18. 2. The trial court improperly concluded that the plaintiffs' proposal consti- tuted a resubdivision under § 8-18, as no additional building lot would be created under the plaintiffs' proposal: prior to the boundary line adjustments proposed by the plaintiffs, there existed twelve lots in the resubdivision, as well as two separate parcels on abutting land that are unrelated to the resubdivision, and only three of those twelve lots and one of those parcels are relevant to this appeal, those four properties presently exist and will continue to exist under the reconfiguration contemplated by the plaintiffs; moreover, although one of the abutting parcels would be reduced in size, it would nonetheless continue to exist as the remainder parcel, and that reducti
Judges: Keller; Prescott; Elgo
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.