Posts tagged "1104417"

Aiello v. Planning Board of Braintree, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-044-17)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us   15-P-1321                                       Appeals Court   ROGER AIELLO, trustee,[1]  vs.  PLANNING BOARD OF BRAINTREE & others.[2]     No. 15-P-1321.   Suffolk.     October 20, 2016. – April 14, 2017.   Present:  Meade, Milkey, & Kinder, JJ.     Practice, Civil, Zoning appeal, Standing.  Zoning, Appeal, Person aggrieved, By-law.     Civil action commenced in the Land Court Department on October 14, 2009.   The case was heard by Karyn F. Scheier, J.     Brian K. Bowen for the plaintiff. Jason W. Morgan for McCourt Construction & another. Carolyn M. Murray (Judy A. Levenson also present) for planning board of Braintree.   MEADE, J.  In this matter we examine the issue of standing to appeal from a zoning decision in the context of an abutter’s appeal of decision of a local planning board (board) to allow modification of a 1994 special permit to remove conditions that benefited the residential abutter in terms of visual and auditory impacts.  We conclude that it was error for the judge to find that the plaintiff lacked standing to appeal from the board’s decision.  We address only the merits argued in the plaintiff’s brief and conclude that the board’s decision granting a modified special permit removing the conditions must be reconsidered by the board. Background.  a.  Aiello’s property.  The plaintiff, Roger Aiello, owns fifteen acres of residentially zoned property in Braintree, located directly north of the commercially zoned locus.  Aiello’s property consists of a number of parcels; in addition to single and multifamily residential units, it contains a prior nonconforming catering business and a “semi-agricultural use,” a goat pasture.  One of Aiello’s single-family residences is located within eleven feet of the locus’s northern boundary.  Aiello’s property is at a higher elevation than the locus.  The judge found that the Aiello property has a clear view of the structure on the locus and portions of the parking area.  The farther away one stands from the boundary line, the more visible the locus becomes. The locus.  The locus, now owned by RMT Braintree, LLC, and occupied by McCourt Construction,[3] contains approximately nine acres and is located in both the commercial and watershed protection districts.[4]  The locus is long (approximately 2,000 feet), running from east to west, and narrow (approximately 200 feet).  It currently is improved with a 675-foot-long commercial structure (sometimes referred to as building).  Development of the rear, or […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - April 14, 2017 at 5:16 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , , , ,