Appeals Court hears argument over whether Holliston bylaw’s 'including warehouse facilities' allows standalone warehouses

An Appeals Court panel heard oral arguments in case 25P915, CRG v. Members of the Holliston Planning Board, over how to read a seven-word phrase in Holliston’s zoning use table: “wholesale office or showroom, including warehouse facilities.” The parties disputed whether that phrase permits standalone warehouses or instead authorizes warehouses only as accessory or accompanying facilities, and whether the court should defer to the planning board’s interpretation.

The dispute centers on statutory and doctrinal questions under Chapter 40A of the zoning law and on how to construe the town’s local bylaw. Jason Tallerman, counsel for the Town of Holliston, told the panel that even if the seven words are imprecise, established deference doctrines apply when a reasonable local interpretation exists and that the appeals court should respect the planning board’s reading when two reasonable interpretations compete. “The standard still applies and that standard is different,” Tallerman said, and argued that the punctuation and the words…