Your area Not set — showing everywhere
Meeting report · Zoning Board of Adjustment
Creating this report cost real money. Help fund coverage →

Zoning Board of Adjustment — May 13, 2026

The meeting consisted of standard administrative procedures, a legal appeal, and a request for feedback on financing, with no evidence of public protest or board disagreement.

Date Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Duration 4.3h Speakers 19 Public comments 1 Decisions 7 Routine

Questions about this meeting? ⁠Just ask.

Ask MeetingWatch answers from this meeting’s report, transcript, and records — with linked sources.

Summary AI-generated to surface controversy & community impact without bias — always verify against the actual meeting before relying on it.

At the May 13 Brookline Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) meeting, two major issues were addressed that impact both local land use and municipal spending.

Regarding property rights, the ZBA ruled in favor of an appeal for 224 Route 13. The board found that the building inspector made a mistake by applying current zoning ordinances to the property instead of the rules in place in 1985. By determining the lot is a 'nonconforming lot of record' under the older rules, the board has directed the building inspector to reconsider the permit for a two-family dwelling.

On the infrastructure front, the board discussed the financial path forward for the Piers Pond Dam, which is currently 'red listed' due to the significant flood risk it poses to southern Brookline. The discussion centered on the trade-offs between a 10-year bond and a 20-year bond. While a 20-year bond would result in lower annual payments for the town, it would also incur higher interest costs (3.43% vs 2.557%). The final decision on this financing rests with the Select Board.

We will continue to monitor how these zoning interpretations and infrastructure decisions affect Brookline residents.

May 13, 2026 4.3h long 19 speakers 1 public comments 7 decisions Routine
Notable statements Drag to browse

“The board requires three votes to prevail.”

— Archer Batcheller · Announcing the quorum and voting requirements for the meeting. ▶ 05:19

“A lot of record gets special privileges and we have to be very careful how we regulate it.”

— Unidentified speaker · Discussing the legal protections afforded to lots that existed prior to current zoning ordinances. ▶ 25:09

“I don't know of any way that our current zoning supports grandfathering.”

— Unidentified speaker · Discussing the mechanism for applying old rules to the current property. ▶ 1:21:21

“If we can look at the law and say, 'You don't need a variance for that,' then we can send the applicant away.”

— Unidentified speaker · Discussing whether to uphold the inspector's decision or proceed to a variance hearing. ▶ 1:23:22
This meeting — choose a section

Public ⁠impact

Issues from this meeting with documented community impact.
What was discussed

Significant flood risk mitigation involving long-term municipal debt.

What happened

The ZBA provided feedback on the options, but the final decision remains with the Select Board.

What was discussed

Determines the legality of a two-family dwelling on a specific lot.

What happened

The board granted the appeal and remanded the decision to the building inspector for correction.

Topics ⁠discussed

Each topic expands to quotes and full context.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

The board discussed the financial implications of choosing between a 10-year and a 20-year bond for the Piers Pond Dam project.

What happened

The decision on which bond path to take rests with the Select Board; the ZBA was asked for feedback.

Speakers: Archer Batcheller, Bob Perrotti, Ben Chandler, Dan Marcek Jr., Peter Webb Scales, Jessica, Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

An appeal by Piper Investments, LLC regarding the building inspector's denial of a permit to construct a two-family dwelling, debating 1985 vs. current ordinance applicability.

What happened

The board found that the building inspector's reasoning for denying the permit was flawed because it applied the current ordinance instead of the 1985 ordinance. They granted the appeal and remanded the decision to the building inspector for correction.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

A request for a variance to allow a two-unit dwelling on a 4.95-acre plot in the residential agricultural zone.

What happened

The board voted to continue the hearing to a later date.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

The board held elections for its officer positions for the upcoming year.

What happened

The board voted to re-elect current officers for another year.

Controversy & ⁠dissent

Where the board, the community, or the agenda diverged.

Potentially controversial issues

01

Appeal of Administrative Decision - 224 Route 13

The issue involved a legal dispute over whether a property owner's rights to build a duplex were 'grandfathered' under a 1985 ordinance or subject to current zoning requirements. This type of decision is significant as it interprets the application of historical vs. modern land-use regulations.
Board position: The board sided with the applicant, finding that the building inspector incorrectly applied current ordinances instead of the 1985 rules.
low concern

Public ⁠comment

What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
1
Speaker
1
Comments
1
Addressed
0
Partial
0
Not addressed
Bob Perrotti
Addressed
Representing Piper Investments, LLC, the speaker argues that the building inspector wrongly denied a permit for a two-family dwelling. He contends the lot is a non-conforming lot of record based on both its pre-zoning status and a 1987 lot line revision approved by the planning board. Key concern
Request to overturn the building inspector's denial of a building permit for a two-family dwelling on Lot D 40.
Board response
The board engaged in an extensive deliberation regarding zoning definitions, lot history, and state statutes. Ultimately, they voted to grant the appeal, finding the inspector's reasoning flawed because it relied on current zoning instead of the 1985 ordinance.
The board deliberated on the legal merits of the applicant's arguments and issued a formal decision to grant the appeal and remand the matter to the building inspector.

Decisions ⁠logged

Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
Finding that rights from the 1985 ordinance are vested in the subject property.
The board found that according to 674.39.2, rights from the 1985 ordinance are vested in the property.
Approved
Finding of fact regarding land area requirements under the 1985 ordinance.
The board found that under the March 12, 1985 ordinance, the minimum land area for a duplex was 160,000 square feet.
Approved
Finding of fact that the subject property exceeds the 1985 requirement.
The board found the property has land area exceeding the minimum required for a duplex under the 1985 ordinance.
Approved
Granting the appeal of the administrative decision to deny the building permit.
The board granted the appeal, finding the building inspector's reasoning flawed because it used the current ordinance rather than the 1985 ordinance.
Approved
Continuance of the Piper Investments Two LLC variance request.
The hearing for the variance request was continued to the July 8th meeting.
Approved
Re-election of current board officers.
The board voted to re-elect current officers for another year.
Approved
Approval of meeting minutes.
The minutes were approved as written.
Approved

Share ⁠this report

Drafts ready to post — click any block to copy.

X / Twitter — by angle

Zoning interpretation and administrative oversight
At the May 13 ZBA meeting, the board ruled that the building inspector incorrectly applied current zoning rules to 224 Route 13. They found the property is entitled to use 1985 regulations, allowing for a duplex. The... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/brookline/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-13/ #MeetingWatch #BrooklineNH
323/280 chars
Fiscal implications of critical infrastructure repairs
The Piers Pond Dam is 'red listed' for flood risk to southern Brookline. During the 5/13 ZBA meeting, officials weighed 10-year vs. 20-year bond options. While a 20-year bond lowers annual payments, it carries higher interest... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/brookline/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-13/ #MeetingWatch #BrooklineNH
332/280 chars
Board administration and procedural updates
Brookline ZBA Update (5/13): The board has re-elected its current officers for the upcoming year. They also continued a variance hearing for Piper Investments Two LLC until the July 8th meeting to allow for pending legal... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/brookline/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-13/ #MeetingWatch #BrooklineNH
327/280 chars

X thread

1
A look at the Brookline ZBA meeting from May 13: Significant decisions were made regarding property rights and the financing of critical flood protection. Here is what residents need to know. 🧵 #MeetingWatch #BrooklineNH
220/280
2
First, a major correction on zoning: The ZBA granted an appeal for 224 Route 13. They determined the building inspector wrongly used current ordinances instead of the 1985 rules. This means the property may qualify for a duplex as a 'nonconforming lot of record.'
263/280
3
Second, the Piers Pond Dam remains a priority. Because it is 'red listed' for flood risk in southern Brookline, the board discussed bond options. A 20-year bond offers lower yearly payments but higher interest compared to a 10-year bond. The Select Board holds the final decision.
280/280
4
Finally, the ZBA re-elected its current officers for the next year. They also pushed a variance request for Piper Investments Two LLC to July 8 to ensure all legal timelines are respected. Stay tuned as these decisions unfold. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/brookline/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-13/
250/280

Facebook — long form

At the May 13 Brookline Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) meeting, two major issues were addressed that impact both local land use and municipal spending.

Regarding property rights, the ZBA ruled in favor of an appeal for 224 Route 13. The board found that the building inspector made a mistake by applying current zoning ordinances to the property instead of the rules in place in 1985. By determining the lot is a 'nonconforming lot of record' under the older rules, the board has directed the building inspector to reconsider the permit for a two-family dwelling.

On the infrastructure front, the board discussed the financial path forward for the Piers Pond Dam, which is currently 'red listed' due to the significant flood risk it poses to southern Brookline. The discussion centered on the trade-offs between a 10-year bond and a 20-year bond. While a 20-year bond would result in lower annual payments for the town, it would also incur higher interest costs (3.43% vs 2.557%). The final decision on this financing rests with the Select Board.

We will continue to monitor how these zoning interpretations and infrastructure decisions affect Brookline residents. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/brookline/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-13/ #MeetingWatch #BrooklineNH

Action ⁠items

Who owes what, by when.
Reconsider the building permit application in light of the board's findings regarding the 1985 ordinance.
Assigned: Building Inspector

Member ⁠positions

5 issues · 0 explicit · 20 inferred
Present
Appeal of Administrative Decision - 224 Route 13 YES ~
Supported granting the appeal based on the 1985 ordinance.
Variance Request for Piper Investments Two LLC YES ~
Voted to continue the hearing to July 8th.
Election of Board Officers YES ~
Voted to re-elect current officers.
Approval of meeting minutes YES ~
Voted to approve minutes as written.
Dan Marcek Jr.
Vice Chair
Present
Appeal of Administrative Decision - 224 Route 13 YES ~
Supported granting the appeal based on the 1985 ordinance.
Variance Request for Piper Investments Two LLC YES ~
Voted to continue the hearing to July 8th.
Election of Board Officers YES ~
Voted to re-elect current officers.
Approval of meeting minutes YES ~
Voted to approve minutes as written.
Webb Scales
Clerk
Present
Appeal of Administrative Decision - 224 Route 13 YES ~
Supported granting the appeal based on the 1985 ordinance.
Variance Request for Piper Investments Two LLC YES ~
Voted to continue the hearing to July 8th.
Election of Board Officers YES ~
Voted to re-elect current officers.
Approval of meeting minutes YES ~
Voted to approve minutes as written.
Present
Appeal of Administrative Decision - 224 Route 13 YES ~
Supported granting the appeal based on the 1985 ordinance.
Variance Request for Piper Investments Two LLC YES ~
Voted to continue the hearing to July 8th.
Election of Board Officers YES ~
Voted to re-elect current officers.
Approval of meeting minutes YES ~
Voted to approve minutes as written.
Appeal of Administrative Decision - 224 Route 13 YES ~
Supported granting the appeal based on the 1985 ordinance.
Variance Request for Piper Investments Two LLC YES ~
Voted to continue the hearing to July 8th.
Election of Board Officers YES ~
Voted to re-elect current officers.
Approval of meeting minutes YES ~
Voted to approve minutes as written.
David Partridge
Alternate
Absent
Marcia Farwell
Alternate
Absent

Positions marked ~ are inferred from context and may not reflect the member's explicitly stated position. UNCLEAR means the vote was split but the record did not name how this member voted — it is not a “yes.”

Support coverage

Creating this report cost ⁠real money.

MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Brookline.

Report composed by grok-4.3, gemma-4-26b, grok-4.20-0309-reasoning, grok-4-fast · analyzed 2026-07-08.