Smith v. Board of Appeals of Needham

Citation339 Mass. 399,159 N.E.2d 324
PartiesBarbara Bailey SMITH and another, Trustees, v. BOARD OF APPEALS OF NEEDHAM.
Decision Date12 June 1959
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

John B. Dolan, Boston, for plaintiffs.

Benjamin Y. Piper, Town Counsel, Needham, for defendant.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and RONAN, SPALDING, COUNIHAN and WHITTEMORE, JJ.

RONAN, Justice.

This is an appeal from a final decree of the Superior Court adjudicating that a decision of the board of appeals sustaining a denial of applications of the plaintiffs for permits to construct two-family dwelling houses on lots of land owned by them in Needham was within the jurisdiction of the board and that no modification of the decision was required. The case was submitted to the Superior Court upon a statement of all the material facts amounting to a case stated.

It appears that the plaintiffs are the owners of a certain parcel of land in Needham which in July, 1957, they had subdivided as shown on a plan submitted to the planning board. The planning board, after notice and hearing and due compliance with the statute, approved said plan in August, 1957. As approved, the plan was recorded in September, 1957, in the registry of deeds. At that time the land was in a general residence zoning district in which two family dwellings were permitted by the zoning by-law.

At a town meeting in March, 1958, it was voted to change the area in which the plaintiffs' land is located from a general residence district to a single residence district, in which two-family dwellings were not permitted. The applications of the plaintiffs on April 2, 1958, to the building inspector for permits to erect two family dwellings were denied because of such change in the zoning of the plaintiffs' land. On appeal to the board of appeals the denial of the applications was sustained, as the board was of the opinion that the action of the planning board did not prevent a change in the zoning of the plaintiffs' land from a general residence to a single-residence district.

The only controversy between the parties is whether G.L. c. 40A, § 7A, prevented the change in zoning from a general residence district to a single residence district from applying to the plaintiffs' land where the plan thereof had previously been approved within three years by the planning board.

Statute 1957, c. 297 (which inserted § 7A), was entitled 'An Act relative to the effect of the adoption or amendment of zoning laws on a recorded subdivision plan,' while the preamble to this statute read as follows: 'Whereas, The deferred operation of this act would tend to defeat its purpose which is to limit forthwith the effect of the adoption or amendment of zoning laws on an approved subdivision plan, therefore it is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience.' The body of the statute provided as follows: 'Chapter 40A of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 7, as appearing in section 2 of chapter 368 of the acts of 1954, the following s...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Rayco Inv. Corp. v. Board of Selectmen of Raynham
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • 22 Luglio 1975
    ...decisions construing § 7A have similarly involved what were unquestionably amendments to zoning by-laws. Smith v. Board of Appeals of Needham, 339 Mass. 399, 159 N.E.2d 324 (1959). McCarthy v. Board of Appeals of Ashland, 354 Mass. 660, 241 N.E.2d 840 (1968). Vazza v. Board of Appeals of Br......
  • East Lands, Inc. v. Floyd County
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • 26 Novembre 1979
    ...333, 273 A.2d 775 (1971); Harris v. Planning Commission of Ridgefield, 151 Conn. 95, 193 A.2d 499 (1963); Smith v. Bd. of Appeals, 339 Mass. 399, 159 N.E.2d 324 (1959).2 The zoning-enabling legislation of a majority of states contains the requirement that zoning regulations be made in accor......
  • Island Properties, Inc. v. Martha's Vineyard Commission
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • 23 Marzo 1977
    ...were unquestionably amendments to zoning by-laws'; examples were the Bellows Farms case, supra note 21, Smith v. Board of Appeals of Needham, 339 Mass. 399, 159 N.E.2d 324 (1959); McCarthy v. Board of Appeals of Ashland, 354 Mass. 660, 241 N.E.2d 840 (1968); Vazza v. Board of Appeals of Bro......
  • Bellows Farms, Inc. v. Building Inspector of Acton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • 7 Novembre 1973
    ...Appeals of Hanover v. Housing Appeals Comm. in the Dept. of Community Affairs, Mass., a 294 N.E.2d 393. In Smith v. Board of Appeals of Needham, 339 Mass. 399, 159 N.E.2d 324 (1959), when this court was first required to interpret G.L. c. 40A, § 7A, which had been inserted by St.1957, c. 29......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT