Bd. of Appeals v. Z & K Enter., Inc., 301 N.E.2d 578 (Mass. App. Ct. 1973). · Go Syfert
Bd. of Appeals v. Z & K Enter., Inc., 301 N.E.2d 578 (Mass. App. Ct. 1973). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Board of Appeals of Webster
v.
Z & K Enterprises, Inc.
Massachusetts Appeals Court.
Sep 25, 1973.
301 N.E.2d 578
Roy S. Mier for the defendant., Joseph F. Gorski, Town Counsel, for the plaintiff.
Published

The appeal to this court is from a final decree of the Superior Court which, in effect, sustained the decision of the board of appeals of the town of Webster (G. L. c. 40A, § 21, as amended through St. 1970, c. 80) denying an application to the board for a special permit (G. L. c. 40A, § 4, as most recently amended by St. 1966, c. 199) to use certain land in the “Agricultural-Single Family Residential” zoning district for a “mobile home park” (see Selectmen of Hatfield v. Garvey, 362 Mass. 821, 824-828 [1973], and cases cited; G. L. c. 140, §§ 32F and 32L, as most recently amended by St. 1964, c. 592, §§ 9 and 14, respectively). The provision of the zoning by-law relied on by the applicant authorizes the board, under stated conditions, to grant a special permit for the use of land in such a district for a “Hotel or Tourist Court” (§6, 2[e]). The proposed use disclosed by the evidence is not comprehended within either of the uses stated in the quoted portion of the by-law. It is not enough that a use for which a special permit is sought be “consistent” or “compatible” with a specific use for which the by-law states such a permit may be granted. General laws c. 40A, §4, requires such a use to be “of a character set forth in ... [the] by-law” (emphasis supplied). See Lawrence v. Board of Appeals of Lynn, 336 Mass. 87, 90 (1957); Gallagher v. Board of Appeals of Falmouth, 351 Mass. 410, 412-414,415-419 (1966); Gallagher v. Selectmen of Falmouth, 352 Mass. 307 (1967). See also Clark v. Board of Appeals of Newbury, 348 Mass. 407, 408-409 (1965).

Final decree of the Superior Court affirmed.