Costa v. Board of Appeals of Watertown
| Decision Date | 08 February 1960 |
| Parties | D. Jesse COSTA et al. v. BOARD OF APPEALS OF WATERTOWN et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Thomas C. Menton, Waterown, for defendants.
William Goldberg, Cambridge, for plaintiffs.
Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, WILLIAMS, COUNIHAN and WHITTEMORE, JJ.
The board of appeals under the zoning by-law of Watertown has appealed from the final decree in the Superior Court which annulled the issuance of a permit to James P. Duffy to build a motel in a general residence district.
The zoning by-law divides the town into five districts: single residence, 1A and 1B; general residence; apartments; business; industrial. The uses permitted in general residence districts are those permitted in single residence districts, which do not include hotels, motels or lodging houses, and additionally 'Two-family dwellings and lodging houses.' The by-law includes this definition: 'Hotel or lodging house: A building designed or used for paying guests, permanently or transiently, where more than there bedrooms are used for such purposes.' The by-law does not otherwise refer to hotel and makes no mention of motel.
Nothing in the by-law shows an intent to allow a motel in residence districts. Hotels, motels and lodging houses are sufficiently differentiated to be differently classifiable for zoning purposes. See Burnham v. Board of Appeals of Gloucester, 333 Mass. 114, 128 N.E.2d 772; St.1954, c. 134, § 1, amending G.L. c. 140, § 27; Von Der Heide v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Somers, Westchester County, 204 Misc. 746, 748-749, 123 N.Y.S.2d 726; Longo Liquor License Case, 183 Pa.Super. 504, 132 A.2d 899. We need not decide whether the common definition of the by-law is sufficient to establish that hotels are allowed in general residence districts although only lodging houses are specified, or whether a motel may in some circumstances be deemed a hotel. See Maturi v. Balint, 204 Misc. 1011, 130 N.Y.S.2d 122. We discern no implication of authorization of motels in the authorization of lodging houses and the entry must be
Decree affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gallagher v. Board of Appeals of Falmouth
...The ruling below that motels are not included within the authorization of hotels was based on our holding in Costa v. Board of Appeals of Watertown, 340 Mass. 380, 164 N.E.2d 149. We there held that the by-law classification for a residence district of 'lodging houses' in the phrase '(t)wo-......
- Tallman v. Town of Marion
-
Spicer v. City of Claremont
...Inc. v. Motel Syracuse, Inc., 283 App.Div. 182, 127 N.Y.S.2d 485, aff'd 309 N.Y. 831, 130 N.E.2d 620; see Costa v. Board of Appeals of Watertown, 340 Mass. 380, 381, 164 N.E.2d 149. In each case, however, the court seeks to ascertain the meaning and intent of the specific municipal zoning o......