Drumlin Deveopment LLC v. Sudbury Board of Appeals (MA HAC 2001)

"In Drumlin, the Housing Appeals Committee (HAC) upheld the local board of appeals by sustaining a condition that the applicant claimed made the project uneconomic.  The decision upholds the exercise of discretion bythe local board of appeals, even if not objectively reasonable, so long as the condition that was imposed by the board does not result in the project becoming uneconomic."

Dennis Housing Corp. V. Dennis Board of Appeals (MA HAC 2002)

"The HAC upheld a decision by the ZBA denying a comprehensive permit application (40B) because the lot coverage of the plan was excessive."

Casaletto Estates LLC v. Georgetown Board of Appeals (MA HAC 2003)

"The HAC ruled in favor of the ZBA supporting the notion that once a town exceeds the 10% minimum, it may deny all comprehensive permit applications (40B), even ones filed before the 10% minimum was achieved.  Further precedence has been established that once a permit is granted to start the process of developing a 40B, those units "count" towards the town's affordable housing stock."

9 N. Walker St Development LLC v. Rehoboth Board of Appeals (MA HAC 2003)

"The HAC ruled against the developer in Rehoboth after the ZBA granted a comprehensive permit on the condition that only 16 units be allowed instead of the 37 sought by the developer. The HAC ruled that the developer failed to meet its burden of proving that the condition made by the ZBA rendered the project uneconomic."

Archstone Cmtys. Trust v. Woburn Board of Appeals (MA HAC 2003)

"The HAC ruled that the developer, which sought to build 600 units failed to demonstrate how the ZBA's condition that only 300 units be built caused the project to be uneconomic.  At the same time, the HAC ruled that the ZBA failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that the project would be economic at 300.  By doing so, the HAC ruled, after reviewing all financial data, that the project be built at 420 units instead of 600."