Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 41, § 81T (2026)

Notice of submission of plan; hearing

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 81T. Every person submitting a definitive plan of land to the planning board of a city or town for its approval or for a determination that approval is not required shall give written notice to the clerk of such city or town by delivery or by registered mail, postage prepaid, that he has submitted such a plan. If the notice is given by delivery the clerk shall, if requested, give a written receipt therefor to the person who delivered such notice. Such notice shall describe the land to which the plan relates sufficiently for identification, and shall state the date when such plan was submitted and the name and address of the owner of such land; and the facts stated in such notice shall be taken by the city or town clerk as true, unless the contrary is made to appear. Before approval, modification and approval, or disapproval of the definitive plan is given, a public hearing shall be held by the planning board, notice of the time and place of which and of the subject matter, sufficient for identification, shall be given by the planning board at the expense of the applicant by advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in the city or town once in each of two successive weeks, the first publication being not less than fourteen days before the day of such hearing or if there is no such newspaper in such city or town then by posting such notice in a conspicuous place in the city or town hall for a period of not less than fourteen days before the day of such hearing, and by mailing a copy of such advertisement to the applicant and to all owners of land abutting upon the land included in such plan as appearing on the most recent tax list; provided, however, that when the planning board is also the special permit granting authority for a special permit applicable to the plan, the planning board may hold the definitive plan public hearing together with the public hearing required by section 9 of chapter 40A and allow for the publication of a single advertisement giving notice of the consolidated hearing.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2021 · leading case: Freeman v. Plan. Bd., 646 N.E.2d 139 (Mass. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Freeman v. Plan. Bd., 646 N.E.2d 139 (Mass. 1995). “In accord with the statutory requirement, see G. L. c. 41, § 81T (1992 ed.), a public hearing was held on September 30, 1985.”

Wheatley v. Plan. Bd. of Hingham, 388 N.E.2d 315 (Mass. App. Ct. 1979). · cites it 2× “” The following June 18 the board held the public hearing on the plan required by G. L. c. 41, § 81T. During the course of that hearing the chairman of the board observed, "[T]here were certain procedural steps, only procedural steps, that we waived.”

Stefanick v. Plan. Bd., 657 N.E.2d 475 (Mass. App. Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “First, it requires torturing the statutory language; second, the requirement of G. L. c. 41, § 81T, that a person submitting a plan for § 8IP endorsement send written notice of so doing to the clerk of the municipality, produces, at best, a measure of constructive notice to…”

Fairbairn v. Plan. Bd. of Barnstable, 360 N.E.2d 668 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977). “The planning board conducted a public hearing on the plan (G. L. c. 41, § 81T) on July 23, 1973. By its letter to the planning board of August 13, 1973, the board of health indicated its disapproval of the plaintiffs’ plan for reasons which we shall consider in part at a later…”

Krafchuk v. Plan. Bd. of Ipswich, 453 Mass. 517 (Mass. 2009). “Abutters entitled to notice of planning board hearings, pursuant to G. L. c. 41, § 81T, enjoy a rebuttable presumption that they are persons aggrieved.”

Strand v. Plan. Bd. of Sudbury, 358 N.E.2d 842 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977). “It is only after the statutory hearing of which all interested persons have notice and in which they can participate (G. L. c. 41, § 81T), that a proper evaluation of a proposed plan can be obtained.”

Pieper v. Plan. Bd. of Southborough., 163 N.E.2d 14 (Mass. 1959). “A final decree in each case dismissed the bill and declared that the board had disapproved the subdivision plan “in sufficient compliance with the statute,” that the action of the board was proper, and that there was no necessity for the board to hold a public hearing under G.…”

Patelle v. Plan. Bd. of Woburn, 480 N.E.2d 35 (Mass. App. Ct. 1985). “That satisfied the requirements of G. L. c. 41, § 81T. There was no mystery about the identity of the subdivision plan, and the plaintiffs say as much in their complaint and are bound by that as an admission.”

Bellows Farms, Inc. v. Bldg. Inspector of Action, 303 N.E.2d 728 (Mass. 1973). “1 The plaintiffs then seasonably notified the town clerk in writing, in the manner required by G. L. c. 41, § 81T, inserted by St. 1953, c.”

K. Hovnanian at Taunton, Inc. v. Plan. Bd., 590 N.E.2d 1172 (Mass. App. Ct. 1992). “*483 On December 5, 1988, after the required public hearing on the plaintiff’s definitive plan, see G. L. c. 41, § 81T, the board voted to disapprove the plan on the ground that “[t]his is not a viable subdivision — there is no evidence that sewer is available.”

Hamilton v. Plan. Bd. of Beverly, 620 N.E.2d 44 (Mass. App. Ct. 1993). “Approval of a subdivision plan involves procedures, including a public hearing (G. L. c. 41, § 81T) as well as open sessions of the planning board at which the proposed division of a tract of land into smaller lots is carefully reviewed so as to meet design criteria and certain…”

Zaltman v. Town Clerk of Stoneham, 362 N.E.2d 215 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977). “” On January 16, 1974, the board conducted the public hearing required by G. L. c. 41, § 81T; after the hearing the board voted (as stipulated by the parties) “to tentatively disapprove the plaintiff’s plan until such time as certain corrections were made on said plan as…”

Show all 23 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.