Until recently, it was unclear whether a Certificate of Approval should be treated similarly to a Certificate of Occupancy for purposes of Connecticut’s nine-year rule under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-265(c), which provides for the deemed closure of certain old open building permits.
Recent guidance from the Connecticut State Building Inspector has answered the question: a Certificate of Approval should be treated within the same statutory and code framework as a Certificate of Occupancy.
Background
Pursuant to Section 29-265(c), nine years from the date a building permit was issued (under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-263) for construction or alteration of a one-family dwelling, two-family dwelling or structure located on the same parcel as such a dwelling, such building permit shall be deemed closed if a certificate of occupancy has not been issued during that time period. Following the nine-year period, no enforcement action based upon work commenced or completed pursuant to the open building permit may be taken.
The nine-year rule does not mean the work was properly performed, inspected or code compliant. Rather, it means that, for qualifying permits, the permit is deemed closed by operation of law after nine years, and municipal enforcement based on the work commenced or completed under the open permit is generally barred. A municipality may still note that no inspections were performed or that no approvals were granted. In addition, the statute does not apply to work performed without a permit, and hazardous conditions may require separate analysis under other provisions of Connecticut law.
Certificates of Approval are generally issued for work that does not require a Certificate of Occupancy, such as certain alterations, renovations or improvements to an existing structure (e.g., projects such as decks, pools, garages, sheds, patios, fences, retaining walls and certain electrical or plumbing work). A Certificate of Approval serves as the building official’s final confirmation that the permitted work has been inspected and approved in accordance with the applicable code requirements.
Certificate of Approval vs. Certificate of Occupancy
The question has therefore been whether a permit requiring only a Certificate of Approval may also be deemed closed under Section 29-265(c), notwithstanding the statute’s express reference to a “certificate of occupancy.” Since Certificates of Approval are not expressly mentioned in the statute, some practitioners and municipal officials had questioned whether permits requiring only a Certificate of Approval could remain open indefinitely.
On May 27, 2026, Omarys Vasquez, the Connecticut State Building Inspector, issued guidance addressing that issue. He advised they both should be treated within the same statutory and code framework and a permit requiring a Certificate of Approval should be analyzed consistently with a permit requiring a Certificate of Occupancy for purposes of the nine-year closure rule.
This interpretation is consistent with the purpose and spirit of Section 29-265(c), which is to provide a statutory closing-out mechanism for older building permits relating to one-family and two-family dwellings, and related structures on the same parcel, that have not received final certification. It is important to note that, similar to a Certificate of Occupancy, Certificates of Approval themselves do not “expire” under the statute; rather, where the statutory conditions are satisfied, the underlying building permit is deemed closed after nine years, and enforcement based on work under the open permit is barred.
Therefore, Certificates of Approval should generally be treated the same as Certificates of Occupancy for purposes of Connecticut’s nine-year building permit closure rule. Although Section 29-265(c) uses the term “certificate of occupancy,” the purpose of the statute, and recent State Building Inspector guidance, support applying the rule to permits finalized through Certificates of Approval as well. For covered residential properties and structures, an open permit that is more than nine years old should therefore generally be deemed closed, subject to confirming that the permit falls within the statute and that the issue does not involve unpermitted work or a separate hazardous condition.
Harris Beach Murtha’s Commercial Real Estate Practice Group and Real Estate Developers Industry Team will continue tracking this and related matters. If you need assistance, please reach out to attorney Ashley Liberta Snyder at (203) 772-7713 and asnyder@harrisbeachmurtha.com; attorney Joshua L. Woods at (860) 240-6195 and jlwoods@harrisbeachmurtha.com; or the Harris Beach Murtha attorney with whom you most frequently work.
This alert does not purport to be a substitute for advice of counsel on specific matters.
Harris Beach Murtha’s lawyers and consultants practice from offices throughout Connecticut in Bantam, Hartford, New Haven and Stamford; New York State in Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, Ithaca, New York City, Niagara Falls, Rochester, Saratoga Springs, Syracuse, Long Island and White Plains; as well as in Boston, Massachusetts, and Newark, New Jersey.