Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Fence Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Quincy zoning board delays decision on 6-foot fence at 7 Shoreside Road, requests mirror trial
Summary
After hours of testimony about blocked sight lines and neighborhood privacy, the Quincy Zoning Board continued an appeal to retain a 6-foot fence at 7 Shoreside Road to May 26, 2026, asking the city to install and monitor a convex mirror and for the applicant to consider shifting the fence as needed.
The Quincy Zoning Board of Appeal on Jan. 27 continued a request from Brittany Dunn to retain a recently erected 6-foot privacy fence at 7 Shoreside Road, directing the city to trial a convex mirror at the corner and to revisit the matter on May 26, 2026.
Dunn told the board the fence was erected to match neighboring yards and to provide privacy for her young child and dogs. “If we had ever known that this was not to code, we would have gone through the whole process ahead of time,” she said, adding that the fence reduced trespass and yard trash. The applicant said she had discussed a mirror with the traffic department and would await the board’s decision before installing anything herself.
Neighbors were sharply divided in public comment. Jessica Allen, who lives across the street, said drivers must now pull into the active travel lane to see oncoming traffic: “This is a dangerous maneuver on such a busy road,” she said, adding that evening visibility when she leaves for work is a particular concern. Other residents and a longtime police officer read into the record that there had been no motor-vehicle crashes at the immediate intersection and said they had measured or photographed sight lines and felt the corner remained passable with the fence in place.
A private consultant retained by the applicant, Steven Saragusa of Bowman Consulting, described a November site-distance analysis showing stopping sight distances down C Street in many directions of about 500 feet and intersection sight distances that met AASHTO recommendations at the study points used; at standard measurement points he reported approximately 215 feet of visibility at 14.5 feet back and roughly 360 feet at a 10-foot position. Saragusa said those distances could meet recommended stopping sight distances even if drivers were traveling faster than the posted 25 mph.
Councilor David Jacobs (Ward 1) summarized the technical record for the board: city review and the Bowman study agree that stopping sight distance along C Street exceeds minimums but that the left-turn movement from Post Island Road toward the left may not meet the AASHTO site-triangle standard at the formal measurement point. Jacobs asked the board, if it allowed the fence to remain, to require mitigation such as a convex mirror mounted high on a pole, stepped-back fencing, signage, or bollards.
Board members debated immediate remedies and agreed to ask the city to install a convex mirror at a height less likely to be vandalized, monitor traffic behavior for a trial period (members discussed one to three months), and then return the case for further consideration. The board’s motion to continue ZBA2565 to May 26, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. passed on a voice vote.
What’s next: The board asked the city traffic department to work with council and the applicant on mirror specifications and installation and requested a report on outcomes when the case is returned to the ZBA in May.
