Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Training topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA hears training on variance hardship standard after E & F precedent
Summary
Town attorneys and legal experts briefed the Zoning Board of Appeals on Connecticut case law (E & F, Verillo) that tightens the standard for proving hardship for variances and discussed regulatory and policy options for New Canaan.
The New Canaan Zoning Board of Appeals received an hour-long training on Jan. 5 focused on the legal standard for granting variances, recent Connecticut case law, and how the town might respond through regulation or practice.
Presenters including town attorneys and Ira Bloom reviewed the E & F decision from the Connecticut Supreme Court, which attendees said has raised the bar for proving a hardship. Attorney Ira Bloom said the E & F ruling "really made it very difficult to get a variance based upon hardship," and presenters described a split in local practice: some ZBAs continue to grant variances relying on local judgment and accepting appeal risk, while others have tightened approvals.
Attorney Pete Delderin discussed examples where the court’s reasoning can justify a variance: he described a renovation case in which fire-code requirements would have made part of a building unusable without a variance, arguing that losing use of an entire floor could meet the standard. He contrasted that with routine homeowner requests — such as adding a small garage or expanding living area — that training materials suggested are less likely to qualify as hardship if the buyer knew the property’s condition beforehand.
Board members asked whether the town’s regulations are consistent with case law; planning staff said they are reviewing ten years of variance grants and considering regulatory changes, including calibrating setbacks to lot size to reduce recurring variance requests on nonconforming lots. The training emphasized that towns can pursue rule changes in planning and zoning to reduce the number of contested variance requests, but that some towns accept litigation risk and remain more permissive in practice.
The training closed with board members debating whether New Canaan should favor stricter conformity with case law or retain collaborative, flexible practices to preserve the character of older homes. Presenters advised the board that while they cannot ignore Supreme Court precedent, the board can pursue regulatory text changes or other policy tools to manage recurring issues.
What happens next: planning staff will continue work on zoning regulation updates to address common variance patterns; board members may consider those proposals in future meetings.
