Sargent v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Citations

• 236 Conn. App. 269

Syllabus

The plaintiff property owner appealed from the trial court's judgment dis- missing his appeal from the decision of the defendant town zoning board, which upheld the issuance of a certificate of zoning compliance by its zoning enforcement officer to the intervening defendants, abutting property owners. The plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the court incorrectly concluded that a variance that had been granted to the intervening defendants in 2011 properly was considered in calculating the maximum building height of the interven- ing defendants' proposed residence. Held: The trial court properly determined that there were no conditions attached to the variance, as the line designated for conditions on the certificate of variance issued by the board and filed in the land records was left blank, and this court could discern no ambiguities in the certificate of variance because it contained no language that reasonably could be construed as imposing a condition. The zoning board properly considered the 2011 variance in calculating the maximum building height of the intervening defendants' proposed residence, as the variance was not rendered moot by a subsequent amendment to the town's zoning regulations, the plaintiff having cited no authority to support the proposition that a variance may be rendered moot by a subsequent amendment, and, pursuant to the statute (§ 8-6) governing a zoning board's authority to grant a variance, a variance runs with the land and is not personal to the recipient of the variance. Argued April 16—officially released November 11, 2025