The appellant operated a commercial parking lot that was not in compliance with the applicable Zoning By-Law.
The appellant sought to establish that the property constituted a legal non-conforming use by demonstrating continuous operation of a commercial parking lot since the By-Law's passage in 1993.
The application judge found that the lot had been used as an accessory lot rather than a stand-alone commercial parking lot from 1993 through 1996, and therefore fell out of compliance when its use changed.
The application judge granted declaratory relief and an injunction restraining operation of the parking lot.
On appeal, the appellant failed to establish a palpable and overriding error.
The appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent.