By Richard Roberts
 
One of the most persistent and confusing issues in local land use law has been the appropriate process and standards for a zoning board of appeals to use when reviewing an application for a certificate of location for a used car dealer and repairer license. The General Assembly had tinkered with the governing statutes repeatedly over the years, casting doubt on which board or commission had jurisdiction based on a town’s population, but the passage of three conflicting and inconsistent public acts in the 2003 session muddied the waters further, making it virtually impossible for municipalities to be confident that they were processing the applications properly.
 
By way of background: Prior to 2003, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-55 set forth a series of criteria that a local agency was to consider in evaluating the proposed location for a used car dealer and repairer operation. When the dust finally settled on the 2003 session, it appeared that the legislature had repealed Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-55, leaving municipalities with no standards or procedures to employ in reviewing these applications. The official sets of statutes produced by the State continue to show this statute as having been repealed up through the 2019 revision. In the interim, our advice to clients was to continue to use the standards that had been contained in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-55 so that there was some framework for review. This advice was bolstered by a 2011 Superior Court case (East Coast Towing), wherein Judge Tobin concluded, through the process of statutory interpretation, that the General Assembly had not in fact repealed Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-55.
 
A recent Connecticut Appellate Court decision, One Elmcroft Stamford, LLC v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Stamford, (AC 41208, September 3, 2019), has clarified the law and should help municipalities review this type of application in the future. Significantly, the Appellate Court agreed with Judge Tobin’s analysis in East Coast Towing and concluded that Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-55, as amended by Section 9 of Public Act 03-265, remains in effect. This version of Conn. Gen. Stat. §14-55 provides as follows:
 

The second important part of the One Elmcroft Stamford opinion is that, when reviewing an application for a certificate of location for a used-car dealer and repairers license, the zoning board of appeals should not apply variance standards of review; e.g., undue hardship or deprivation of reasonable use of the property. The appropriate standard of review is that set forth in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-55, which requires consideration of the potential impact of the dealer or repairer’s location in reference to schools, churches, theaters, traffic conditions, width of highway and effect on public travel.
 
In sum, the One Elmcroft Stamford opinion clears up a longstanding area of confusion and complication and gives municipalities a straightforward road map for review of applications for dealer and repairer certificates of location – at least until the General Assembly decides to revise the statutes again.

Read more