Keywords: Courthouse. Zoning, Nonconforming use or structure, Governmental use. Governmental Immunity. County, Municipal zoning by-laws. Municipal Corporations, Governmental immunity, By-laws and ordinances.
The Appeals Court today issued its decision in Graham-Gund-v.-Planning-Board-of-Cambridge. The court ruled that even though the structure would not have conformed to the zoning if it had not been a government building (and therefore, not subject to the zoning), the fact that it “conformed” because it was not in violation, being a government building, means that it was conforming prior to the change in zoning. which provided. “The sole issue on appeal is whether the court house, when it loses its governmental immunity by transfer to the developer, will constitute a preexisting nonconforming structure under G. L. c. 40A, § 6, and § 8.22.2(a) of the relevant zoning ordinance such that redevelopment may be approved by special permit. A judge of the Land Court concluded on summary judgment in a well-reasoned decision that c. 40A, § 6, and § 8.22.2(a) of the zoning ordinance govern the developer’s efforts to redevelop the property, and we affirm”
For the full text of the case click on: Graham-Gund-v.-Planning-Board-of-Cambridge