Plaintiffs Orlando and Elizabeth Lopez bring this action pursuant to G.L. c. 240, § 14A, seeking a declaration that the Town of Topsfield Zoning By-law (the Bylaw) Article III, § 3.02, line 2.16 in the Table of Use Regulations (as amended on May 3, 2005) is invalid, unenforceable and unconstitutional. That section permits conference and event facilities by special permit in all zoning districts. Defendants Town of Topsfield and the Town of Topsfield Board of Selectmen have filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the Bylaw is a reasonable land use regulation, which is facially valid and constitutes a lawful exercise of the Towns zoning authority. Defendants Town of Topsfield and Town of Topsfield Board of Selectmens Brief in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment at 1 (filed Nov. 27, 2006).
For the reasons set forth in the courts Memorandum and Order on Defendants Town of Topsfields and Town of Topsfield Board of Selectmens Motions for Summary Judgment of this date, I find and rule that the plaintiffs have failed to show that Bylaw Article III, § 3.02 is clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. Sturges v. Chilmark, 380 Mass. 246 , 256 (1980). Accordingly, Bylaw Article III, § 3.02 is hereby sustained and the motion for summary judgment is ALLOWED.
By the court (Long, J.)