Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Ass'n v. Planning & Zoning Commission of South Windsor
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
This combined appeal arises from a judgment of the trial court which overturned the defendant planning and zoning commission’s grant of a zone change application. The application was submitted by the defendant developers as a precedent to the construction of the proposed Winchester Mall on the Manchester-South Windsor town line. The defendants claim that the trial court erred (1) in concluding that the commission had violated the uniformity requirement of General Statutes § 8-2 by requiring a buffer strip between commercial and residential zones in this instance and not in other similar…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Burnham v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Sheridan v. Planning BoardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- First Hartford Realty Corp. v. Plan & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Central Bank for Savings v. Planning & Zoning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Veseskis v. Bristol Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Homart Development Co. v. Planning & Zoning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- MacKenzie v. Planning & Zoning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Campion v. New Haven Board of Aldermen, No. Cv 02-0462505 S (Mar. 21, 2003)Connecticut Superior Court · 2003
- Bay City Developers v. Town of Hamden, No. 30 22 98 (Sep. 20, 1991)Connecticut Superior Court · 1991
- Floch v. Planning Zoning Comm., of Westport, No. 311201 (Jun. 27, 1995)Connecticut Superior Court · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.