In a decision that brought cheers from thirsty beachgoers, the Appeals 
Court in Almeida v. Arruda, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 241 (2016) affirmed a lower court finding that the sale of beer and wine at a pre-existing, nonconforming convenience store was neither a substantial change in use nor a detriment to the neighborhood.
Pursuant
On June 17, 2016, the Supreme Judicial Court decided an interesting zoning case concerning whether the holder of a beach access easement has standing to challenge a zoning determination affecting the beach parcel. The case is Picard v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Westminster.
As all followers of Massachusetts zoning know, the standing of
In its decision last week in Showtime Entertainment, LLC v. Town of Mendon, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) struck down a Town of Mendon bylaw banning alcohol at “adult entertainment businesses.” This is the latest case to grapple with the tension that often arises between a municipality’s exercise of its police powers and citizens’
In a recent “unpublished” decision in Cohen v. City of Somerville (pdf), an Appeals Court panel confirmed that M.G.L. c. 240, § 14A – which allows a landowner to obtain a judicial declaration of the extent to which a zoning regulation applies to a proposed use of land – remains available even after the landowner
Last week the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) issued its much-anticipated decision in Palitz v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Tisbury. The fact that the high court took this appeal directly from the Land Court (bypassing the Appeals Court) caused some to wonder whether a dramatic change in the law on the relationship
between zoning
In its recent rescript opinion in Pelullo v. Croft, the Appeals Court affirmed a Land Court decision that overturned a building inspector’s interpretation of an undefined term in the Natick Zoning Bylaw. The Appeals Court found that the building inspector’s interpretation was unreasonable and therefore not entitled to deference.
At issue was the meaning
In a case of first impression, the Appeals Court recently ruled that a dimensionally conforming structure used for a nonconforming use can’t be considered a nonconforming structure under M.G. L. c. 40A, § 6 (Section 6), first paragraph. The case is Welch-Philippino v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Newburyport (pdf).
Under Section 6, the alteration
In a previous post we discussed Gale v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Gloucester (pdf) and the “difficult and infelicitous” language of the first two sentences of M.G.L. c. 40A, § 6 governing nonconforming uses and structures. In Gale, the Appeals Court upheld the grant of a special permit authorizing the reconstruction of a single-family house
On April 25, 2014, the Boston Bar Association will host a lunch program entitled “The (Slow) Rise and (Sudden) Fall of the Chapter 40B Municipal Planning Defense.” This program is jointly sponsored by the BBA’s Land Use and Development Committee (of which MLUM author Johanna Schneider is co-chair) and its Affordable Housing Committee. The guest
Last week the Appeals Court decided Miles-Matthias v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Seekonk (pdf), the latest opinion to address the 30-day window under M.G.L. c. 40A, § 15 for appealing the issuance of a building permit.
In Miles-Matthias, the plaintiffs were aware that the defendants planned to build three single-family homes that would share a common driveway.