Do conditions of a zoning variance need to be explicitly described in the variance certificate? The Connecticut Supreme Court has answered this question with a resounding "no" in Anatra v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Madison, decided in February.
Reversing the state Appellate Court, the Supreme Court held that conditions of a variance should be construed not only by examining the language contained in the recorded variance certificate, but by also considering the entire public record, including the variance application, site plans and exhibits, board minutes, hearing transcripts and the record of decision. An attorney or title examiner who finds a recorded variance certificate stating that a variance was approved "with conditions," will now need to go beyond the land records to investigate the entire administrative file of that variance, in order to determine the full nature and scope of these conditions.
