Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 08 — · Chapter 130 — Redevelopment and Urban Renewal. State and Federal Aid. Community Development. Urban Homesteading. Abandoned and Blighted Property
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-136 (2026)

Modification of redevelopment plan

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A redevelopment plan may be modified at any time by the redevelopment agency, provided, if modified after the lease or sale of real property in the redevelopment project area, the modification must be consented to by the redeveloper or redevelopers of such real property or his successor or their successors in interest affected by the proposed modification. Where the proposed modification will substantially change the redevelopment plan as previously approved by the legislative body, the modification must similarly be approved by the legislative body.

(1949 Rev., S. 985; 1953, S. 494d.)

Cited. 158 C. 522. Submission of proposed modification of redevelopment plan to include plaintiff's property to Stamford legislative body is sufficient compliance with law. 159 C. 116. Cited. 174 C. 160; 201 C. 305.

Cited. 26 CS 249.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1965–2006 · leading case: Mar. Ventures, LLC v. City of Norwalk, 894 A.2d 946 (Conn. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mar. Ventures, LLC v. City of Norwalk, 894 A.2d 946 (Conn. 2006). · cites it 18× “General Statutes § 8-136 12 governs modification of a redevelopment plan.”
West Haven Sound Dev. Corp. v. City of West Haven, 514 A.2d 734 (Conn. 1986). · cites it 4× “Unsure of how next to proceed, the city of West Haven sought a declaratory judgment to determine whether the referendum in fact constituted a modification of the plan within the meaning of General Statutes § 8-136.”
Aposporos v. Urban Redevelopment Comm'n, 790 A.2d 1167 (Conn. 2002). · cites it 2× “Under those circumstances, this court concluded *579 that compliance with the requirements of General Statutes § 8-136 pertaining to modifications of redevelopment plans was all that was required.”
Broadriver, Inc. v. City of Stamford, 265 A.2d 75 (Conn. 1969). · cites it 2× “In February, 1963, an extended development plan, which included the plaintiff’s property, was adopted by the commission, as permitted by General Statutes § 8-136, and was approved by the Stamford board of representatives, the federal government, and the Stamford planning board.”
Fishman v. City of Stamford, 267 A.2d 443 (Conn. 1970). · cites it 2× “to 1966) § 8-136, which provides for modification of a redevelopment plan.”
Mar. Ventures, LLC v. City of Norwalk, 855 A.2d 1011 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “General Statutes § 8-136 provides that a redevelopment plan can be modified at any time by the redevelopment agency.”
City of West Haven v. Impact, 384 A.2d 353 (Conn. 1978). · cites it 2× “The sole issue before the court was whether the ordinance passed by the referendum constituted a modification of the original redevelopment plan within the meaning of § 8-136 3 of the General Statutes. The trial court concluded that the referendum ordinance was not a…”
Bridgeport Taxpayers Ass'n v. City of Bridgeport, 217 A.2d 718 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1965). · cites it 2× “General Statutes § 8-136. The finding of the court is that there has been no substantial modification in the plan.”
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.