Planning Board of Northborough v. Board of Appeals of Northborough

254 N.E.2d 262, 356 Mass. 732, 1969 Mass. LEXIS 916
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided December 23, 1969·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The Northborough planning board under G. L. c. 40A, § 21, appealed to the Superior Court from the granting of a variance by the Northborough zoning board of appeals which authorized a certain area to be used as a “drive-in theatre” in a district zoned for residential purposes. A judge of the Superior Court entered a decree annulling the variance. The case is here on the owner’s appeal from the [733]*733decree. The judge made a report of material facts and the evidence is reported. The record clearly shows that the board of appeals did not find or include in its decision that the granting of the variance would be “without substantial detriment to the public good.” G. L. c. 40A, § 15, cl. 3, as amended through St. 1958, c. 381. The burden is on the applicant for the variance and upon the board of appeals to go forward with evidence that the statutory prerequisites for the granting of a variance have been met. Sullivan v. Board of Appeals of Canton, 345 Mass. 117, 119-120. In view of the foregoing we see no need to discuss other aspects of the case.

Henry P. Grady (John A. Romano with him) for Catherine A. Sheehan. Richard W. Mirick for the plaintiff.

Decree affirmed.

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

Planning Board of Northborough v. Board of Appeals of Northborough, 254 N.E.2d 262, 356 Mass. 732, 1969 Mass. LEXIS 916 (Mass. 1969).

254 N.E.2d 262 (Planning Board of Northborough v. Board of Appeals of Northborough) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tebo v. Board of Appeals of Shrewsbury
495 N.E.2d 892 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1986)