Neighbors file suit to stop clinic’s move

Women’s Health Services, which has provided gynecological care, including abortions, at 822 Boylston St. for 17 years, won Zoning Board of Appeals approval in May to renovate the property at 111 Harvard St., a former video store, and move into the building.

The lawsuit’s eight plaintiffs - a mix of neighborhood residents, the director of a nearby preschool, and local business owners - are appealing the board’s decision, and asking a judge to prevent Building Commissioner Michael Shepard from issuing an occupancy permit before the lawsuit is resolved. They say the neighborhood is too closely packed with schools and businesses vulnerable to the disruptions by abortion foes that could be expected if the facility is allowed to open.

A decision on the lawsuit’s request to overturn the board’s approval could take up to two years, Brookline’s town counsel said.

The lawsuit cites the graphic signs, Grim Reaper costumes, and potential hindrance of pedestrian and automobile traffic likely to be caused by abortion protesters.

“There are five schools, including preschools and nursery schools,’’ in the area, said Brookline lawyer Thomas May, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the neighbors in Norfolk Superior Court on July 31.

The lawsuit maintains that abortion protesters, both before and during the Zoning Board of Appeals hearings this spring, frightened and disturbed some of the “approximately 900 children’’ in prekindergarten through Grade 8 that use nearby schools, sidewalks, and parks.

In April and May, there were at least three antiabortion protests in connection with the proposed move, both at the Harvard Street site and outside Brookline Town Hall on Washington Street.

During one Town Hall demonstration, the signs carried by antiabortion activists included one depicting the severed head of a fetus.

Additionally, according to the complaint, a state-mandated 35-foot buffer zone for protests at abortion clinics would place any demonstrators at the Harvard Street site directly in front of the entrances to adjacent businesses, and would discourage customers from going into the businesses.

The neighbors say that, in approving the clinic plan, the board violated town zoning bylaws meant to protect “public health, safety, convenience, and welfare.’’

However, Jennifer Dopazo, Brookline’s town counsel, says the Zoning Board of Appeals properly reviewed the clinic’s application in connection with the one question over which it had jurisdiction.

“This permit needed review strictly due to parking issues,’’ Dopazo said in an Aug. 7 interview. “The zoning for medical use of the building was already there, it was an as-of-right use, prior. The board took into consideration issues of parking, and those are the factors it looked at.’’

Zoning board member Mark Zuroff declined last week to comment on the substance of the lawsuit, but said “the appeal was not unexpected.’’

The owner of Women’s Health Services, Dr. Laurent Delli-Bovi, could not be reached for comment on the lawsuit.

Dopazo said the next step for Brookline would be to file a routine form with the court that it would be contesting the lawsuit. A final ruling could take up to two years, she said; however, a hearing on the requested injunction would be expected sooner.

In the meantime, Women’s Health Services would be able to proceed with the renovations, although at the risk of having to undo the work if the neighbors win their lawsuit, Dopazo said. Bill Zucker, a lawyer representing Women’s Health Services, said the work at 111 Harvard St. had not begun, but “there is nothing to prevent the clinic from going forward’’ with its renovations.

He also said the neighbors’ lawsuit is “frivolous and has no merit,’’ and was filed in “bad faith,’’ but declined to elaborate.

“The appeal itself, from our perspective, is about only one thing: publicity,’’ Zucker said.

May, the neighbors’ lawyer, called Zucker’s assertions “flat-out wrong.’’

He said the appeal was filed only in connection with zoning issues, and that rather than attracting publicity to the neighborhood, his clients “would prefer no hysteria.’’

Andrea Miller, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, said her abortion-rights organization had been in touch with clinic officials and “supportive members of the community’’ since the filing of the appeal.

“This lawsuit, we fear, could bolster the views of those who oppose women’s right to choose,’’ Miller said. “We continue to monitor the situation.’’