Topic:
BUSINESS (GENERAL); MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES; MUNICIPALITIES; ZONING;
Location:
CORPORATIONS; PLANNING AND ZONING;

OLR Research Report


March 21, 2006

 

2006-R-0232

ZONING

By: Kevin E. McCarthy, Principal Analyst

You asked (1) how many towns do not have zoning ordinances, (2) under what circumstances the state can override local zoning, and (3) what recourse does a business have if most or all towns prohibit that type of business under the zoning regulations.

Only Bethlehem and Eastford currently do not have zoning ordinances, according to Chris Wood, legislative liaison for the Connecticut Chapter of the American Planning Association.

The state could override local zoning, because towns are creatures of the state. But under current law, land use in Connecticut is a matter of local jurisdiction. CGS § 8-2 gives towns broad discretion in adopting and amending zoning ordinances, which dictate how land may be use. But, the statutes do place some restrictions on zoning ordinances. For example, CGS § 8-2 requires zoning ordinances to permit the continuance of legal nonconforming uses and structures that predate a zoning ordinance or an amendment to an ordinance. The law also requires that zoning ordinances permit day care homes in residential areas. Similarly, CGS § 8-3c does not allow a zoning ordinance to discriminate against community residences for people with mental retardation housing six or fewer patients, plus staff, in residential areas.

A business that was “zoned out” of one or more towns has little recourse. The law does not require zoning ordinances to accommodate specific types of business, but courts will overturn them if they prohibit any use. The U. S. Supreme Court has held that laws that preclude all economic use of a piece of property constitute a taking, for which the government would have to provide compensation to the owner. But, as described in OLR report 95-R-0846, the Court set a high standard in this case (Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission, (112 S. Ct. 2886 (1992)). If the law barred certain uses, but permitted other economic uses of the property, it would not be a taking under Lucas.

KM: ts