The Appeals Court of Massachusetts affirmed judgment dismissing plaintiff rental owner’s claims that an apartment building used to house homeless families without a special permit caused him to lose tenants and rental income due to lack of standing. Plaintiff, who owned abutting rental properties, attempted to challenge the Worcester zoning board of appeals decision denying his request to investigate and issue a cease and desist order against the locus. Plaintiff also alleged instances of trespass by children living at the locus. However, plaintiff’s unsubstantiated personal opinions, vague sentiments, statements of lost income with no record, and lack of evidence that children from the locus were more likely to trespass than children from a typical multi-family dwelling did not establish particularized injuries to confer standing. The court noted that even if the plaintiff had standing, the summary judgment would still be granted on the ground that the locus was not a “temporary shelter” within the meaning of the Worcester zoning ordinance because there was no evidence the locus provided overnight accommodations for the homeless.
Foster v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Worcester, 2010 WL 568681 (Mass.App.Ct. 2/18/11).
