Plaintiffs filed their unverified Complaint on August 29, 2006, challenging the validity of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge (the Ordinance) pursuant to G. L. c. 240, § 14A. Defendant City of Cambridge (Defendant or the City) filed its Answer on September 28, 2006. A case management conference was held on November 17, 2006. Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Summary Judgment on October 30, 2008, together with supporting memorandum, Statement of Undisputed Material facts, and Affidavits of Gordon M. Jones, III and James M. Lyman. On January 29, 2009, Defendant filed its Opposition, together with supporting memorandum, Statement of Additional Undisputed Material Facts, and Affidavit of Vali Buland. Plaintiffs filed their Reply on February 27, 2009, together with Second Affidavit of Gordon M. Jones, III. Defendant filed its Reply on April 14, 2009. A hearing was held on the motion on April 22, 2009, at which time the matter was taken under advisement. A decision of todays date has been issued.
In accordance with that decision it is:
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the compromise amendment (the Compromise) that proposed to rezone Industry A-1 to base Residence C-1A with a Mixed Use Residential Overlay District, and rezone property located at 445 Concord Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts (Locus) from Residence C-1A to Residence C-1, was rationally related to a legitimate zoning purpose.
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Compromise was not arbitrary and unreasonable.
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
By the court. (Sands, J.)