Lee v. Board of Appeals of Harwich

414 N.E.2d 619, 11 Mass. App. Ct. 148
CourtMassachusetts Appeals Court
DecidedJanuary 12, 1981
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 414 N.E.2d 619 (Lee v. Board of Appeals of Harwich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Appeals Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lee v. Board of Appeals of Harwich, 414 N.E.2d 619, 11 Mass. App. Ct. 148 (Mass. Ct. App. 1981).

Opinion

Rose, J.

The defendants, Pow, owners of Lot 3 on Davis Lane in Harwichport (hereinafter referred to as “the property” or “lot 3”), the board of appeals of the town of Harwich and the building commissioner of the town of Harwich, appeal from the Superior Court’s judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, owners of land abutting lot 3, reversing a decision of the board of appeals which upheld the issuance by the building commissioner of a building permit for the construction of a single-family residence on the property under the Harwich zoning by-law (hereinafter “the by-law”) and The Zoning Act, G. L. c. 40A, as appearing in St. 1975, c. 808, § 3 (hereinafter “the Act”). In addition, the defendants Pow take exception to the judge’s determination that certain amendments of the by-law which became effective April 6, 1978, after the commencement of the action, do not render the property buildable. We are in agreement with that position, and we reverse the judgment of the Superior Court.

On March 6, 1956, the planning board of Harwich, acting through its chairman, endorsed a plan on which lot 3 appeared “Approval under the subdivision control law is not required.” 3 The planning board purported to act under G. L. c. 41, § 81P, but erred because the plan, on its face, showed a lot (lot 2) with no frontage on any way and, therefore, depicted a subdivision. G. L. c. 41, § 81L. Lot 3, however, met the minimum frontage requirements.

Twenty years later, on July 16, 1976, the Pows acquired lot 3 by deed from David M. Davis, one of the lot owners when the 1956 plan was endorsed and recorded in the Barn-stable registry of deeds. At the time of recording, David M. Davis and Anne Hall Davis held all three lots in common ownership. In 1956, the minimum lot size for single-family *151 residence use was 7,500 square feet. As lot 3 contained 11,978 square feet, it was in conformity with the minimum lot size requirements for a buildable lot at the time of recording in 1956. In 1966, the town of Harwich amended its by-law to increase the minimum lot size to 15,000 square feet (with exceptions not here pertinent) and to 30,000 square feet in 1972. The three lots remained in common ownership until 1968, when the Davises “checkerboarded” them. 4

*150

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

A.T. v. C.R.
39 N.E.3d 744 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2015)
Berger v. Mason
29 Mass. L. Rptr. 118 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2011)
Shaw River, Inc. v. Pearson
28 Mass. L. Rptr. 442 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2011)
Ge Capital Corp. v. Jupiter Leasing Corp.
27 Mass. L. Rptr. 283 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2010)
Murphy v. Planning Board
874 N.E.2d 455 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2007)
Berg v. Town of Lexington
863 N.E.2d 968 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2007)
Siddharth v. Reid
21 Mass. L. Rptr. 715 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2006)
McKenna v. Swartz
21 Mass. L. Rptr. 730 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2006)
Marinelli v. Board of Appeals
840 N.E.2d 61 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2005)
Junior v. Wiley
18 Mass. L. Rptr. 125 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 2004)
Sangiolo v. Board of Aldermen of Newton
783 N.E.2d 830 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2003)
KCI Management, Inc. v. Board of Appeal
764 N.E.2d 377 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2002)
Preston v. Board of Appeals
744 N.E.2d 1126 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2001)
Stefanick v. Planning Board
657 N.E.2d 475 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1995)
Cricones v. Planning Board
654 N.E.2d 1204 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1995)
DiStefano v. Town of Stoughton
634 N.E.2d 584 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1994)
Long v. Board of Appeals of Falmouth
588 N.E.2d 692 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1992)
McLaughlin v. City of Brockton
587 N.E.2d 251 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1992)
Nasca v. Board of Appeals
534 N.E.2d 792 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
414 N.E.2d 619, 11 Mass. App. Ct. 148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-board-of-appeals-of-harwich-massappct-1981.