Supreme Judicial Court - Mass Cases
Supreme Judicial Court - Mass Cases Supreme Judicial Court - Mass Cases
are beyond its staLutory aiithoriiy and the Trial. Court er-red in uphol.dinq the HAC. H. The HA(.: errcd . in stri kiriy and/or - . modifying ,_ .. Condit.ions . . 43A, . 43B, 430, 43K, 43L, . . 43N, . , . 43W, . . . and 5Y. Thc Roa~:d's Decision incl.uded curLdir.1 "conditions prccedent." to SiLe dj.sturbanco, e. g., revi ew and approval by the Board of detaj I.ed construction drawings (43A), and of tirial landscapinq pldris (43K) . KA Vo1.1, 23, 25. The HAC characterized Lhcee and the other above conditions as "impropcr condition [sl subsequent," KA Vol. 1, 46R and modified t-hem pursuar1L Lo At,t.it.ash's suggestions so as to relieve Lhe devel.oper of "t.he burdcri of further review and approvdi." The HAC rclied upon its own prior decj-sions and rccjtilatjnn in so rulinq. Ayain, t.he HAC was without 1 eqal aut.ho.ri ty to re qu j. re such "rnudificat-ions." Nothj.ng in C.L. c. 40H requires, UT provides authority for DHCD reqiilation~ 01 HAC: decisions t.o "trump" a condition imposed by a local board, wherc there is no cviderice that t.he condition renders t.he project "unecmnwnic" or that the cundit.ion j s not "consisLent. wj.tI1 lucal needs. " See G.L. e. 40U, 5. 22. To t.he exLcnL the HAC: has heid otherwise, such hold~nqs arc ultra vires and beyond the
CommiLlee’s authority and the TT-ial Court erred iri upkoldinq the HAC. I. ‘The HAC erred . . in stri.kiriy . - Condition .. . .. . . . -. . . . . 54. Condition 54 of t.he Board‘s Decision requires t.hat affordable uni.ts be ” construct.ed and sold coincident wit.h t.he development. of mal-ket rate units.” RA Vol.]., 31. Even thouyh MassHousiny was silent as t.o condj tion 54”, thc. HAC characterized this conditj on as “a deviaCion from normal Ma~sHousing procedures. ” RA Vml.1, 470. On t.he qrourids that. “such policy matters are riorinally wj t.l?in thc province of MasuHousing, ” the HAC struck the refcrcr~ces t.o “soId.” For the reasons discussed ahove, tiic Board was w ithin its aut.horjty i.n imposinq this condition and Lhe HAC: had no power Lo st.rike it arid the :Crl.al Court erred jn ~~pholdirig thc HAC. J. The HAC err-cd in st.rikinq CoridiLion 79. -.- Finally, Condj.tj.on 7Y uF Lhe Decj ?ion provides t.hat “lt]he fees for t.he enyincering and 1.egal reviews and the town‘s coriaLrucCion oversiyiit u h i i be the obligati.on of thc Applicant. ” RA Vol. 1, 35. Such condition was imposcd pursuant to G.L. c. G.1,. c. 44, s.53G, which provides t.hat. “any ci.ty or town t-hat 21 4 5
- Page 1 and 2: ... COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS S
- Page 3 and 4: C. Ucfendant Attitash Views, W C fa
- Page 5 and 6: 0 0 r) I. * a 0 Simiuns v. Clcrk-Ma
- Page 7 and 8: Statement of Issues Presented for R
- Page 9 and 10: Decision. Ttic Fresidj-nq Of fic.cr
- Page 11 and 12: I'roced~irc Act. See G.L.r: . 4I)D,
- Page 13 and 14: t.o decide this case hy summary dec
- Page 15 and 16: sucii hr>usi.ng uricconomj.r: 2nd w
- Page 17 and 18: cniirli tioris imposed by ?.he boar
- Page 19 and 20: (3 f c h Lhe HAC: in t.hat one at.
- Page 21 and 22: showing that 1) iC reqi.iested a wa
- Page 23 and 24: iiny such condiLion. The HAC is a h
- Page 25 and 26: 0 0 0 a 0 a comprehensive pcrmit. a
- Page 27 and 28: 'The HAC frames t.his care as prese
- Page 29 and 30: 'The board of appeals shall request
- Page 31 and 32: 111. The Trial CourL ... jmproperly
- Page 33 and 34: . . .. specific statute that. the L
- Page 35 and 36: e 0 rn a a rn 0 Conunittee on Urban
- Page 37 and 38: 0 and Reqiil atory Agreement. tc; b
- Page 39 and 40: document.s may be inconsi .?tent wi
- Page 41 and 42: for cost. certification arid sugges
- Page 43 and 44: 0 e e e e e 0 a Inat L c r s ; res
- Page 45 and 46: characterizing them as ":juperflwus
- Page 47 and 48: and the Tr;.al CourL erred in uphol
- Page 49: the Hoard WAS wilhj.n its aiuthoril
- Page 53 and 54: propriety of 53G iunds, tho SJC sta
are beyond its staLutory aiithoriiy and the Trial. <strong>Court</strong><br />
er-red in uphol.dinq the HAC.<br />
H. The HA(.: errcd . in stri kiriy and/or - . modifying<br />
,_ ..<br />
Condit.ions<br />
. . 43A, . 43B, 430, 43K, 43L, . . 43N, . , .<br />
43W, . . . and 5Y.<br />
Thc Roa~:d's Decision incl.uded curLdir.1 "conditions<br />
prccedent." to SiLe dj.sturbanco, e. g., revi ew and<br />
approval by the Board of detaj I.ed construction<br />
drawings (43A), and of tirial landscapinq pldris (43K) .<br />
KA Vo1.1, 23, 25. The HAC characterized Lhcee and the<br />
other above conditions as "impropcr condition [sl<br />
subsequent," KA Vol. 1, 46R and modified t-hem pursuar1L<br />
Lo At,t.it.ash's suggestions so as to relieve Lhe<br />
devel.oper of "t.he burdcri of further review and<br />
approvdi." The HAC rclied upon its own prior decj-sions<br />
and rccjtilatjnn in so rulinq. Ayain, t.he HAC was<br />
without 1 eqal aut.ho.ri ty to re qu j. re such<br />
"rnudificat-ions." Nothj.ng in C.L. c. 40H requires, UT<br />
provides authority for DHCD reqiilation~ 01 HAC:<br />
decisions t.o "trump" a condition imposed by a local<br />
board, wherc there is no cviderice that t.he condition<br />
renders t.he project "unecmnwnic" or that the cundit.ion<br />
j s not "consisLent. wj.tI1 lucal needs. " See G.L. e.<br />
40U, 5. 22. To t.he exLcnL the HAC: has heid otherwise,<br />
such hold~nqs arc ultra vires and beyond the
Change language