Thayre v. Town of Brookline
| Decision Date | 19 February 2021 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 20-cv-10510 |
| Parties | HELENI THAYRE, Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF BROOKLINE and JESSE GELLER, JOHANNA SCHNEIDER, MARK ZUROFF, KATE POVERMAN, LARK PALERMO, and RANDOLPH MEIKLEJOHN, as members of the BROOKLINE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, DANIEL BENNETT as Town Building Commissioner, JOSEPH BRAGA as Town Deputy Building Commissioner, and ROBERT DOUGAN as Town Building Inspector, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
Plaintiff Heleni Thayre ("Thayre") filed suit against the Town of Brookline (the "Town") and the Town's Zoning Board of Appeals members Jesse Geller, Johanna Schneider, Mark Zuroff, Kate Poverman, Lark Palermo and Randolph Meiklejohn, Building Commissioner Daniel Bennett (the "Commissioner" or "Commissioner Bennett"), Deputy Building Commissioner Joseph Braga and Building Inspector Robert Dougan (collectively, "Individual Defendants"). D. 1-1 at 4. The Town and the Individual Defendants have moved to dismiss all of Thayre's federal and state constitutional claims for procedural due process violations (Count III and IV), substantive due process violations (Count V and VI) and "right to intimate association" violations (Count VII and VIII). D. 4; D. 5. For the following reasons, the Court ALLOWS Defendants' motion to dismiss.
On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the Court must determine if the facts alleged "plausibly narrate a claim for relief." Schatz v. Republican State Leadership Comm., 669 F.3d 50, 55 (1st Cir. 2012) (citation omitted). Reading the complaint "as a whole," the Court must conduct a two-step, context-specific inquiry. García-Catalán v. United States, 734 F.3d 100, 103 (1st Cir. 2013). First, the Court must perform a close reading of the claim to distinguish the factual allegations from any conclusory legal allegations. Id. Factual allegations must be accepted as true, while conclusory legal conclusions are not entitled credit. Id. Second, the Court must determine whether the factual allegations present a "reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Haley v. City of Boston, 657 F.3d 39, 46 (1st Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). If the complaint's allegations sufficiently state a cause of action under any viable theory, a motion to dismiss the complaint must be denied. Roth v. United States, 952 F.2d 611, 613 (1st Cir.1991). In considering such a motion, the court must "draw all inferences reasonably extractable from the pleaded facts in the manner most congenial to the plaintiff's theory." Id.
The following summary of facts is from the complaint and are assumed to be true for the purpose of resolving Defendants' motions to dismiss.1 Thayre lives in and owns a condominium in Brookline, Massachusetts (the "Unit"). D. 1-1 at 9, ¶ 14. The 1,996 square foot property consists of three bedrooms. D. 6-4 at 7:16-24. For nearly the entirety of Thayre's ownership of the Unit, Thayre had long-term roommates. D. 1-1 at 9-10, ¶¶ 15-16; D. 6-4 at 5:12-14. Following several incidences with a number of her long-term roommates, which included instances of physical and verbal abuse, D. 21-1 at 2, in 2017, Thayre began offering rooms in the Unit to the public as short-term rentals for an average of three days through the online service Airbnb.com ("Airbnb"). See D. 1-1 at 9-10, ¶¶ 15-16; D. 6-4 at 8:16-18; D. 1-1 at 73, 76, 78.
For the relevant period, a Zoning Bylaw ("ZBL") has been in effect in Brookline, which states that "[e]xcept as provided by law or in this Bylaw, in each district no building, structure, or land shall be used or occupied except for the purposes permitted in the district in the section of this Article applicable thereto." D. 6-3 at 6, § 4.00. It also states that "[a] use listed in § 4.07 is permitted as of right in any district under which it is denoted by the word 'Yes[,'] subject to such requirements as may be specified in § 4.07." Id. at 6, § 4.01(1). The ZBL permits accessory uses as of right within the Residence District, also called the "M-2.0" District, limiting such uses to a portion of the property no more than 25% of the floor area. Id. at 6, § 4.04(1). Under the ZBL's Chapter 4, Accessory Use #51 ("Use #51"), the ZBL permits "[t]he renting of not more than two rooms as a lodging without separate cooking facilities and for not more than two lodgers; in the case of a dwelling unit occupied by unrelated persons, the sum of lodgers and other unrelated persons shall not exceed the limits defined for a family." Id. at 7, § 4.07 (Accessory Uses Table). The ZBL defines "family" as "one or more persons, including domestic employees, occupying a dwelling unit and living as a single, non-profit housekeeping unit; provided, that a group of five or more persons who are not within the second degree of kinship, as defined by civil law, shall not be deemed to constitute a family." Id. at 4, § 2.06(1).
On May 10, 2019, Thayre received a Notice of Violation from the Town of Brookline's Building Department. D. 1-1 at 103. The Notice stated that Thayre had violated the ZBL's Chapter 4, Permitted Use #7 ("Use #7") "Lodging House requiring Special Permit." Id. The Notice required Thayre to remove the Unit from the Airbnb listings to remedy the violation. D. 1-1 at 10, ¶ 20. On June 10, 2019, Thayre appealed the citation to the Town of Brookline's Zoning Board of Appeals (the "Board"). D. 1-1 at 105-06. In her appeal, Thayre argued that her Airbnb was governed by Use #51, not Use #7, and that the definition of "lodger" did not include a minimum stay requirement. Id. She also requested that she be allowed to re-list the Unit on the Airbnb website. Id.; D. 1-1 at 12, ¶ 30.
The Board hearing was held on December 19, 2019. D. 1-1 at 13, ¶ 39; D. 1-1 at 74. During the hearing, Thayre testified that she began listing bedrooms in the Unit on Airbnb around 2017, offering the space for two to eight days, with the typical stay being three days. D. 1-1 at 78; D. 6-4 at 29:21-30:7. Thayre's downstairs neighbor testified that Thayre's operation of residence as an Airbnb caused noise disturbances and generated concerns regarding wear and tear on the building, water and insurance. D. 6-4 at 36:1-20. Deputy Building Commissioner Braga provided copies of Building Commissioner Bennett's memorandum to Board Members and Thayre at the hearing. D. 1-1 at 56, ¶ 107; D. 1-1 at 77; D. 1-1 at 108-09. Thayre's counsel, who had not received the memorandum prior to the hearing, was given a five-minute recess to read the memorandum, along with other Board Members who had not read the memorandum beforehand. D. 6-4 at 24:13-16. In the memorandum, dated December 19, 2019, Commissioner Bennett provided his interpretation of whether "lodger" refers to short-term or long-term lodgers. D. 1-1 at 77; D. 1-1 at 108-09. Commissioner Bennett interpreted Use #51 as allowing only non-transient long-term rentals of more than thirty days, despite the Commissioner's admission that "the by law does not specifically reference the non-transient nature of the lodger." D. 1-1 at 108-09. Commissioner Bennett's memorandum noted that this was his interpretation and that of his two predecessors, dating back to 1988, and that short-term rental uses like Airbnbs were "never anticipated when this provision was adopted as part of the by law (sometime prior to 1969)." Id. The memorandum also stated that the ZBL is "one of inclusion" such that if a use is not permitted in the Table of Use Regulations, it is not permitted. Id. The memorandum concluded that because short-term rentals are not listed in the Table, the use is not allowed. Id.; D. 1-1 at 77. The memorandum added that a different interpretation would cause Use #51 to conflict with other provisions of the ZBL "regulating accessory uses, home occupations and office within a residence." D. 1-1 at 108-09. Commissioner Bennett's memorandum concluded by noting that town staff was currently working on a set of short-term rental regulations and if the Board did not uphold the Commissioner's interpretation, "the short term use would be permitted as of right and any future bylaw change would make the use preexisting nonconforming and [the] ability to regulate would be greatly diminished." Id. During the hearing, Deputy Commissioner Braga added that the Commissioner's interpretation of Use #51 as covering stays of more than thirty days was based in part on the State Building Code, which defines "transient" as covering stays of thirty days or less. D. 1-1 at 78.
During deliberations, Board Chair Johanna Schneider said she "hate[d] the idea that the timing of this is such that [the Board is] being forced to weigh in on this when clearly the issue of Airbnbs is not currently contemplated in our bylaw." D. 6-4 at 49:14-18. She added:
Airbnbs are everywhere. There are many on my street. I find them to be absolutely terrible for the neighborhood and I am extremely sympathetic to people who have to live with it in the context of a small condo building. I think it's awful, and I think that it is incredibly inconsiderate for a condo owner to be invading the space of their neighbors and the privacy of their neighbors and the sanctity of their condo building and posing a constant stream of transients on the people in their immediate community. That is a separate issue from whether or not it is currently permitted under our zoning bylaw.
Id. at 49:24-50:14.
The Board Chair Schneider added that she agreed with Commissioner Bennett's memorandum that "[c]learly, Airbnb was not contemplated at the time that the definition of a lodge or a lodging house or whatever else went into [the] code." Id. at 50:17-51:10. Several board members, including the Chair, voiced concerns regarding what would occur if they did not rule Thayre's Airbnb violated the ZBL and whether it would open...
To continue reading
Request your trial