Landowner appealed from a decision of the city planning and zoning commission, which amended city’s zoning regulations and zoning districts in accordance with city’s amended plan of conservation and development, but which did not recommend any change to the zoning of landowner’s property. The Superior Court dismissed landowner’s appeal. Landowner’s petition for certification to appeal was granted.
The Appellate Court, as matters of first impression, held that:
- Landowner was not statutorily aggrieved by city planning and zoning commission’s sua sponte revision of city’s zoning regulations and zoning districts, which did not alter the zoning of landowner’s property in any manner;
- When a zoning commission, as part of its sua sponte application to amend its zoning regulations, refrains from taking action to alter in any manner the zoning classification of a particular property that is not specified in the application as the subject thereof, that property is not “land involved in the decision” of the commission, and thus, the property owner is not entitled to appeal the commission’s decision amending its zoning regulations; and
- Landowner was not classically aggrieved by commission’s sua sponte revision of city’s zoning regulations and zoning districts, since commission’s decision did not adversely affect landowner’s interests.