(a) If the commission determines that the proposed erection, alteration or parking will be appropriate, it shall issue a certificate of appropriateness. In passing on appropriateness as to exterior architectural features, buildings or structures, the commission shall consider, in addition to other pertinent factors, the type and style of exterior windows, doors, light fixtures, signs, above-ground utility structures, mechanical appurtenances and the type and texture of building materials. In passing upon appropriateness as to exterior architectural features the commission shall also consider, in addition to any other pertinent factors, the historical and architectural value and significance, architectural style, scale, general design, arrangement, texture and material of the architectural features involved and the relationship thereof to the exterior architectural style and pertinent features of other buildings and structures in the immediate neighborhood. No application for a certificate of appropriateness for an exterior architectural feature, such as a solar energy system, designed for the utilization of renewable resources shall be denied unless the commission finds that the feature cannot be installed without substantially impairing the historic character and appearance of the district. A certificate of appropriateness for such a feature may include stipulations requiring design modifications and limitations on the location of the feature which do not significantly impair its effectiveness. In passing upon appropriateness as to parking, the commission shall take into consideration the size of such parking area, the visibility of cars parked therein, the closeness of such area to adjacent buildings and other similar factors.
(b) In its deliberations, the historic district commission shall act only for the purpose of controlling the erection or alteration of buildings, structures or parking which are incongruous with the historic or architectural aspects of the district. The commission shall not consider interior arrangement or use. However, the commission may recommend adaptive reuse of any buildings or structures within the district compatible with the historic architectural aspects of the district.
(1961, P.A. 430, S. 8; P.A. 73-473, S. 3; P.A. 80-314, S. 6; P.A. 81-326.)
History: P.A. 73-473 added specific provisions concerning certificates of appropriateness for parking; P.A. 80-314 added Subsec. (b) re exclusion of consideration of interior space except to recommend adaptive reuse and expanded considerations for certificate concerning exterior features with specific references to doors, windows, signs, etc.; P.A. 81-326 added provisions concerning issuance of certificate of appropriateness for exterior architectural feature designed for utilization of renewable resources.
Cited. 153 C. 160; 171 C. 199; 189 C. 727; 196 C. 596; 227 C. 71.
Subsec. (a):
Commission may consider historic value and significance of buildings in their existing locations, including outbuildings, as a “pertinent factor” in denying an application for alterations. 285 C. 755.
Notes of Decisions
Felician Sisters of St. Francis of Connecticut, Inc. v. Historic Dist. Comm'n, 937 A.2d 39 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 12× “Following a public hearing held pursuant to General Statutes § 7-147e 9 on July 28,2004, the defendant’s five members *844 voted unanimously to deny the plaintiffs’ application on the ground that it did not qualify for a certificate of appropriateness under General Statutes §…”
Gibbons v. Historic Dist. Comm'n, 941 A.2d 917 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 10× “The commission argues that the historic district enabling statutes clearly express the “legislative purpose to preserve historic places, as well as historic buildings . . . .” (Internal quotation marks omitted.”
Smith v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Greenwich, 629 A.2d 1089 (Conn. 1993).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 7-147f. “Absent a statutory provision designating which commission is to have overriding responsibility, [however,] the fact that the legislature has given responsibility to more than one agency suggests that each must exercise its own authority, using its…”
Figarsky v. Historic Dist. Comm'n, 368 A.2d 163 (Conn. 1976).
· cites it 3× “2d 387 ; see General Statutes § 7-147f. The plaintiffs had the burden of proving that the historic district commission acted illegally, arbitrarily, in a confiscatory manner or in abuse of discretion.”
Morena v. Historic Dist. Comm'n, 934 A.2d 335 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 7× “The statute provides in relevant part: “In passing on appropriateness as to exterior architectural features, buildings or structures, the commission shall consider, in addition to other pertinent factors, the type and style of exterior windows, doors, light fixtures, signs,…”
Barry v. Historic Dist. Comm'n, 894 A.2d 1080 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 3× “General Statutes § 7-147f (b) provides in relevant part that “the historic district commission shall act only for the purpose of controlling the erection or alteration of buildings, structures or parking which are incongruous with the historic or architectural aspects of the…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-147f(b) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.