In all matters wherein a formal application, request or appeal is submitted to a planning commission under this chapter all public hearings shall be held and all decisions made in accordance with the provisions of section
8-7d.
(1971, P.A. 862, S. 13; P.A. 77-450, S. 6; P.A. 78-104, S. 2; P.A. 82-81, S. 2; P.A. 87-533, S. 11, 14; P.A. 99-21, S. 2; P.A. 03-177, S. 9.)
History: P.A. 77-450 inserted new Subsecs. (a) and (b) and reworded former provisions which were designated as Subsec. (c); P.A. 78-104 amended Subsec. (a) to allow more than one extension and to change the duration of extension time from double the original period to time period equaling the original period, amended Subsec. (b) to allow more than one extension, and amended Subsec. (c) to replace references to “official receipt” with references to “submission” and to allow submission to agent of board or commission; P.A. 82-81 provided that town clerk would act as agent for receipt of documents for any board or commission not having regular office hours; P.A. 87-533 added Subsec. (d) regarding applications involving activities regulated pursuant to Secs. 22a-36 to 22a-45, inclusive; P.A. 99-21 amended Subsec. (a) to extend the time for completion of a hearing from 30 to 35 days after commencement; P.A. 03-177 replaced former provisions with requirement that all public hearings and decisions be made in accordance with Sec. 8-7d, effective October 1, 2003, and applicable to applications filed on or after that date.
Cited. 181 C. 243. Where plaintiff company claimed it was entitled to a certificate of approval for a subdivision plan by operation of law on commission's failure to act within time allowed by section, request for writ of mandamus was denied when court determined that plaintiff had withdrawn its original application. 187 C. 232. Cited. 193 C. 387; 196 C. 676; 219 C. 303; 222 C. 269; Id., 380; Id., 912; 225 C. 432.
Cited. 1 CA 621; 6 CA 34; Id., 284; 7 CA 684; 8 CA 556; 27 CA 443; 35 CA 599; 37 CA 348.
Cited. 39 CS 306.
Former Subsec. (c):
Statute creates two alternative trigger dates for commencement of the applicable time period. 256 C. 674.
Notes of Decisions
Quarry Knoll II Corp. v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 780 A.2d 1 (Conn. 2001).
· cites it 14× “In an attempt to avoid that result, the commission appears to claim that, because the term “submission” is not defined under the Greenwich charter, we should apply the definition provided under General Statutes § 8-26d, 18 to § 100 (a) of the Greenwich charter.”
Koskoff v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 607 A.2d 1146 (Conn. App. Ct. 1992).
· cites it 28× “He claims that the trial court failed to find that the commission’s failure to act within the sixty-five day period allowed by General Statutes § 8-26d (b) 1 results in automatic approval of his subdivision application.”
Winchester Woods Assocs. v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 592 A.2d 953 (Conn. 1991).
· cites it 8× “n its appeal; (2) no application was pending before the commission within the meaning of § 8-26; (3) the sixty-five day deadline for action by the commission on the plaintiff’s application had run from the submission of the application and not from the time of a public hearing;…”
Miles v. Foley, 752 A.2d 503 (Conn. 2000).
· cites it 6× “He argues that the commission’s rejection of the subdivision application does not constitute action within the meaning of § 8-26 and, therefore, the commission failed to act within the statutorily prescribed sixty-five day time limit of General Statutes § 8-26d (b). 4 The…”
M & L HOMES, INC. v. Zoning & Plan. Comm'n, 445 A.2d 591 (Conn. 1982).
· cites it 13× “” Under General Statutes § 8-26d (b): “A decision on an application for subdivision approval, on which no hearing is held, shall be rendered within sixty-five days after receipt of such application.”
Par Developers, Ltd. v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 655 A.2d 1164 (Conn. App. Ct. 1995).
· cites it 13× “See General Statutes § 8-26d (c). 2 When no public hearing is held, as in this case, a planning and zoning commission must make its decision within sixty-five days of the receipt of the application.”
Timber Trails Corp. v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 610 A.2d 620 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 4× “2 The remaining issues are: (1) in *384 the first case, whether the modifications and conditions imposed by the commission on its approval of the subdivision plan were equivalent to a failure of the commission to act on the corporation’s application within the time allowed by…”
Merlo v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 495 A.2d 268 (Conn. 1985).
· cites it 4× “” General Statutes § 8-26d (a) provides as follows: “In all matters wherein a formal application, request or appeal is submitted to a planning commission under this chapter and a hearing is held on such application, request or appeal, such hearing shall commence within…”
Carr v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 872 A.2d 385 (Conn. 2005).
· cites it 3× “to 1999) § 8-26d. In 2003, § 8-26d was amended to provide that all public hearings and decisions be made in accordance with the timing provisions of § 8-7d.”
Miles v. Foley, 736 A.2d 180 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999).
· cites it 6× “I The plaintiff first claims that the vote by the commission to reject the plaintiffs subdivision application without processing it was not a valid action under the provisions of § 8-26 5 and, because the commission did *650 not act within sixty-five days after the receipt of…”
Caron v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Comm'n, 610 A.2d 584 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 2× “They claim that, since the legislature placed the same sixty-five day time limitation on site plan review; General Statutes § 8-7d (b); coastal site plan review; General Statutes § 22a-109 (g); subdivision applications; General Statutes § 8-26d (b); and inland wetlands and…”
Jolly, Inc. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 676 A.2d 831 (Conn. 1996).
“The appeal shall be taken within twenty days after the expiration of the period prescribed in section 8-26d for action by the commission.”
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.