Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. Letters of support. Thank you. Lincoln, at some point it comes up.

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the September meeting of the Brockton Zoning Board of Appeals. The members this evening that will be voting on the petitions that are coming before us is Member Stephen Lianas, Member Monique Screenberry, Member Fire Chief Brian Nardelli, member James Sweeney, and member Kenneth Galligan, myself, who is chair. Our zoning enforcement officer and the building commissioner is Mr. William Forte. Our recording secretary is Monica, is Lily Godiva. I almost made a mistake. Before we get started this evening, I would ask if anyone has a cell phone or electronic device, if you would put it on silence or shut it off so that it doesn't interrupt the meeting. If you need to use your cell phone, I would appreciate it if you took your conversation out in the hallway. Prior to the start of this evening's meeting, if there is anyone who would like to withdraw prior to the start of the meeting without prejudice, this would be the time to let the The board, no. So is there anyone here this evening that would like to withdraw? Seeing none, we have five cases before us tonight. Form of the meeting is I will call the petition, call the case. The petitioner or the representative of the petitioner will come up to the podium and present the case to the board. When the presentation has been completed, I will ask the board members if they have any questions relative to the testimony that was given. Concluding that, I will then open it up for public discussion. I will ask if there's anyone here that wants to speak in favor. I will then ask if there's anyone who wants to speak in opposition. Then I will ask if there's any elected official in the room that wants to be heard on the issue. And lastly, is there anyone in the room that has any question relative to the testimony that has been given? At that point, that will conclude the public discussion on the issue. I will close that part of the hearing and open it up for discussion among the board members. Now, this is the portion of the meeting where the only people that are talking and discussing is the board members. They will make their decisions based upon the testimony that has been given. At some point, you will hear a member make a motion to grant. If that is seconded, I will request that the clerk Each member will vote either in the affirmative or in the negative. If there are five votes in the affirmative, the petition will be granted. If the vote is four in the affirmative, one in the negative, it will be granted. Anything less than that, it will be denied. So three positive votes, two negative votes, it's a denial. So that's how that works. And after he tells me what the vote is, I will then announce whether the petition has been granted or denied. All right, the first case to be heard this evening is case number 2627, the petition of Ricky DaSilva. 281 Pleasant Street, Brockton, Mass for a variance seeking relief from Section 27.9, Article 3, Section 27.13 and Section 27.13 for minimum lot area with front and side yard setback requirements to construct two new single family dwellings in an R1C zone located at 52 Dunbar Street. Council.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Attorney John McCluskey representing Ricky DaSilva, DaSilva Enterprises. Ricky is here with me tonight. And you probably know Ricky has quite a bit of experience in the city of Brockton building new construction, taking care of old dilapidated homes, sometimes tearing them down, sometimes rehabbing them. And what we have before you tonight is a situation. And by the way, I apologize.

Ricky, I'm going to ask you to hold this up. I thought we'd have a board here tonight.

He straightens me out from time to time. And so what we have is two lots, lots one and two, shown here.

Council, why don't you just bring that forward so the board can see it. Okay.

So lots one and two, which have been traditionally, back in 1965, these were two lots. And over time, as we've seen happen from time to time, lots get merged, sometimes by deed, sometimes by people going to the assessor's office and saying, create one lot because I don't want to pay any more taxes. But Ricky purchased this property several months ago and And what he did is create two new lots, and he deeded lot two to himself. He first took title in Da Silva Enterprises, and then he deeded lot two, which was a pre-existing lot of record in the registry of deeds. So there were two lots that you'll see in your package that were created in 1965. I think you can back off at this point. Anybody need to see any more? Yeah. So on lot one, there's a dilapidated house which is really in need of repair or being raised. And Ricky has decided to raise that house and build a new single family house on that four bedroom, two and a half bath. I think that's the lot with a farmer's porch. These are... These meet all the setback requirements, front yard and rear. The neighbors are all in favor of this. In fact, I have, and I think, I'm not sure if it got to the record today, but so in the record, there's a letter from City Councilor-at-Large Jeff Charnell, I'm writing to express my full support of the proposed redevelopment 52 Dunbar. The project thoughtfully replaces a deteriorated single family home with two well-designed colonial style single family residences. The proposed lot sizes align well with the surrounding neighborhood. ensuring the new structures fit seamlessly in the community's character by revitalizing and aging and expanding quality home ownership opportunities in Brockton. Project represented clear benefit to the area. There's a letter from Consular-at-Large, Jeff Charnell. Similar letter from Consular-at-Large, David Teixeira. I also have... and three other letters from neighbors, Elida Montero, Gloria Rubilar, and Maria Fontes, all in support of this project. As you know, things have changed over the past summer, and people have different opinions about what the changes have been, and I have different opinions what the changes have been legislatively and how it would impact the city of Brockton. But here the statute now says that the board shall approve a variance and we have to prove practical difficulty. I think here the practical difficulty is that we have a dilapidated home. Neighbors don't want to see it there. They'd love to see something torn down and a new home built. We have two lots of record, so I think that complies with what Brock is looking for. And we have... where with what we have and what we could have is clearly beneficial to the neighborhood. The neighbors want it, the councilors want it, and they all see a benefit to this project. So under the new 40A, I think this fits fairly well within the parameters of what the legislature has been looking for. besides the fact that we're adding two new good housing situations in an area that's in desperate need of housing. So with that, and with the different standards, I would suggest that the board could easily grant a variance and approve this project. And now I'm gonna say one more thing. I was here last night, And as some of you know, I spoke. I don't know what I was speaking to because I couldn't hear anything from what people were asking me. It's hard to hear in this room. And I have hearing aids and I went to my hearing aid people today. I said, I was at City Hall last night and I couldn't hear a thing. They couldn't give me new hearing aids. So that's why I'm creeping up on you a little bit. And if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. if I can hear them. So just, you are gonna knock down that other house that's a mess? Yes, yeah. All right, that's probably the best thing to do. I don't know how you're gonna do it. That's coming down. That encroaches a little bit onto the lot two. So that's coming down in its entirety, and two new four-bedroom, two-and-a-half bath homes will be built. All of the bedrooms are on the second floor, a living space on the first floor. Yeah. Okay, that's all I had, yeah. Thank you.

So these are what we call the Gormley-style houses? Yes.

You probably don't know the history of that. So how many years ago was that? 25, 20 years ago. Chief Galligan and I met and he says, I need a different style house. So I went to my friend, Jake Gormley, and I said, come up with a house. And he came up with a farmer's porch, narrower house, and brought it before the Board of Appeals. And one of the members, I forget who it was, he says, I don't know how I'm going to vote, but I like that house. And that was a long time ago. And somebody stole my rendering of that. I don't know where that is today. But it made some money.

Well, we could rename it the McCluskey House. All right, is there any other questions or any questions from the board members?

Mr. Chair, so the setbacks all meet zoning is what you said? I believe so. Even with the decks on the back?

The decks in the back, let's take another look at that plan. I think they do.

Okay. Yeah. Side yard setbacks are 12 feet when it should be 15. So you're looking for relief from side yard setback?

Yes.

Front and rear setback is fine.

Right. Front and rear is over 30. The front anyway is over 30.

All I got. Everybody good? Okay, I'm going to close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone here that would like to speak in favor? We do have, I'm sorry. Speak in favor? Sure, come on up. Please give your name and address to the clerk.

My name is Gloria Rubilar and I am the owner of the house at 64 Dunbar Street. Ready?

Okay.

So. What's your name again? Gloria Rubilar. R-U-B-I-L-A-R.

Okay, we have a letter here that came in from you. Okay.

Well, yes.

So is there anything you want to tell the board why you're in favor or anything?

Yes, it's important. So of course we are in favor, I think all our neighbors are in favor of improvements in our neighborhood. We are a street of just five homes. We have four in one side, one in the other side. And we do want to do that. It's important. We are really, you know, supporting him. This is an old house, and it had been abandoned for the past two years. The grass is really tall, so it's no good for us or for anybody. However, we have always supported all initiatives through the years, even the warehouse that the city built right in front of our three houses. We had a very thin layer of asphalt in front of our houses before this started. We don't have that anymore. So when they built the warehouse in front of our houses, that was gone. Nobody came to pay that, and we were not asking for payment, but we were asking for just put some asphalt there, and that didn't happen. That has been absolutely a nightmare for us. I had my husband with three spinal cord operations. I had to be super careful driving there. My kids couldn't drive their bikes. My neighbors cannot take the kids in their strollers. We are teachers, nurses. We get up early in the morning. It's dark, and it's dangerous. So the only thing, like I said, is in favor, I'm not opposing, but I would like to really, Ask you to send somebody to really look at that. This is important because now we're going to have more machinery going there. But if you go now, I have videos of that. I have uploaded to this city hall. It's really a nightmare. Our kids cannot run there. You cannot walk. I'm 67 years old. It's tough for me to go for a walk there. So that's the only thing that we want to... bring to the table. It's important that if any job is done, it's also done with responsibility. All the people that live in this street have contributed to the city. I have volunteered for years for the city of Brompton, work with children and work with the homeless and everything like that. But I always thought, I never brought it up, but I thought it was really unfair that after all the work that I have done, still I don't receive the same treatment all of the people. I pay the same taxes. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in favor? We have several letters that have come in in favor. Obviously, this Gloria Rubla, who just spoke. Melinda Montero from 60 Dunbar Street. Maria Fontes, 12 Dunbar Street. Councilor David Teixeira, Councilor at Large, and Councilor Jeffrey Charnel, Councilor at Large. So those are all letters that have been forwarded to the Zoning Board in favor of granting the variance. All right, is there anyone else that wants to speak in favor? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone that wants to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there any elected official in the room that wants to be heard on the issue? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone in the room that has a question relative to the testimony that has been given? Seeing none, I am going to close that portion of the hearing. That concludes the public discussion. I will now open it up for discussion among board members. Board members.

I do think it's a good project. I share the concerns of Ms. Rubilar, which I recognize her from Brockton High School. The road is seriously compromised, which I'm not sure what we, there's nothing we can do as far as this particular project, but I think that needs to be under consideration. when you do bring, when you're demolishing the house, when you're bringing in new supplies, I don't know, I guess you just don't want to destroy it even further. Those are a couple of my top concerns.

The utilities are all in, the water is in, the sewer is in, drain is in. We will not have any control over the construction of the street. We don't know if that is an accepted street or if it's a private way. So what we're voting on tonight is strictly what's on the property itself, which is the two single family dwellings. Did you say that's an accepted street? I don't know if it is. I'm not sure either.

I don't know if it's accepted or private way.

It's very difficult to hear you, ma'am, but I think you are saying your experience is that street is a private way. Okay. All right. Make a motion to grant. Second. There has been a motion made and seconded to grant. Will the clerk please call the roll? Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Thank you very much. Vote is five in the affirmative, none in the negative. The petition is granted. Thank you. Thank you. Good luck. All right, the next petition is 2628, the petition of Fenton Bradley, 125 North Main Street, Suite 305, Attleboro, Mass., for a variance seeking relief from Section 279 for a 20-foot side setback required in order to build an addition on an existing mixed-use dwelling in an R3 zone located at 261 Belmont Street. Good evening.

Good evening, everyone. Fenton Bradley, D21 Architect, Saddleboro, Mass. I'm here on behalf of the owner. I'm seeking relief for variance 261 Belmont Street. Just to kind of recap, this property is an existing mixed-use building, currently commercial on the lower level.

Mr. Bradley, can I interrupt you for one minute? Can you people hear what he's saying? Okay, I would appreciate it if you could adjust those microphones just to bring it closer to your, or speak into the microphone. We're having a little bit of problem here on.

Thank you. So yes, mixed use on the bottom, residential on the top. The building is fully sprinkled and fully has fire alarm. Requesting relief for the side setback. You can see from the site plan here that the owner is proposing a modest addition on the right side of the property. This is approximately 300 square feet. It's going to be a single story. Sprinklers will be in this portion of this as well. And as you can see, kind of deliberately using the outline of the existing footprint on the right side and aligning with the front. So we're not going to encroach any further on any setbacks on the side. And pretty much to the front, it's almost a pretty much zero lot line in the front. So owners proposing like a new facade along Belmont Street to kind of spruce up the kind of retail. The new use is going to be a restaurant space. And in this addition portion, they're just going to have a retail where they sell baked goods. So no kind of cooking or anything in the space. It's kind of a retail component to support the restaurant here. This is kind of a double lot. So you see this is lot A and lot B is just kind of a supporting lot for the parking. So really no other way to go on the addition. We went in on the parking, no room on the rear, and nothing on the front. So again, just a modest addition on the right side.

So if I understand correctly, that proposed addition is really going to line up with the building the way it is now. It's really just going to kind of like kind of square it off, right?

Yeah, basically. Yeah, exactly. It's going to square it off to the front. By there today, you can kind of see how that'll be the case. All right. Thank you.

Yes. So you're going to have residential on the second floor?

It's currently residential on the second and third floor.

And that's occupied now?

Yes.

What kind of operation will be on the first floor?

He's proposing a, it's a restaurant. This is going to be a Haitian restaurant. Provide support for the community. But I said the previous use was retail. I believe that was a TV appliance.

Yes.

Placed there.

Way back.

Yeah, way back. So kind of changing use. But again, fully sprinkled. Everything was all.

Was there a sign hanging off the front of the building, do you know, over the sidewalk, or is that gone? I don't remember seeing it.

I believe it's gone.

Okay, well, if we grant a variance, it's not for that. That has to be separate. However, be aware that we had this property come before us on March 10th of 2020, six years ago. Okay. And we granted a variance for very similar to what you are requesting. Okay. And nothing happened, so that variance lapsed.

Yes, yes.

Okay, so you're aware of that.

I'm aware, again, probably with me coming on board, but it was the same owner. But yes, he believed he got delayed with COVID and some of the other things going on that that project got delayed. But yes, same owner.

Okay, and just for conversation purposes, do you know how often this restaurant is going to be open? Seven days a week?

I believe seven days a week, yes.

We won't be involved in that. I was just curious to see if you're going to be operating seven days a week. The deliveries to this will be off of the parking lot.

Yes, yes, that's kind of a change. This was the previous loading dock on that L, but yes, they're going to come off the... And it's a shorter route right to the kitchen from that entrance.

So there's no packing allowed in front of this building on Belmont Street? That's all posted, no packing?

Yes, yes, no parking there. Right now, the neighbors are actually parked there. They have cars kind of parked on the property because... It's just not in use now. Where's the dumpster going to go for the property in that parking lot? Yes, I believe it's going to be somewhere over in the back there.

Not delineated on this, though. I didn't see it on there.

Yeah, no.

And you're aware of the dumpster regulations, the enclosures and all that?

Yes, I'm aware. Yes, I will review with the owner.

So the side setback right now is about four and a half feet.

Yes, on this side, yes.

It's going to remain the same amount, right?

Yes, just aligned with the building. So it's noted like 3.8 at the front, so there may be a slight angle to this, but the building is still going to be at a 90.

Okay. Board members, you all set? I'm going to close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone here that wants to speak in favor? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone that wants to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there any elected official in the room that wants to be heard on the issue? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone in the room that has a question relative to the testimony that has been given? Seeing none, I'm going to close that portion of the hearing. That concludes the public discussion. I will now open it up for board discussion. Board members.

I think it's a good project. That building has been in disrepair for quite a while. That's a pretty, 123 is like the new Main Street. There's a lot there. It looks like they have a nice big parking lot. I was not on the board when the other variance was granted, but I would say that this is a good project for, quite a bit of an eyesore right now for that neighborhood and to brighten up that spot. I think, you know, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask to basically square the building off. It'll probably look better in the end and it'll actually help if they were going to do something with that to get any trucks for deliveries off the road and into that parking lot area. So it's not gonna hamper any movement down Belmont Street.

Yeah, I would agree. I mean, it's got plenty of parking, which we like to see the restaurant use is in demand, I can see that working out nicely and not detrimental to the community and actually a benefit, so.

Before any motion is made, the building inspector has a question.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The previous non-conforming use as a restaurant, how long has that been vacant for? Has it been over four years?

Yeah, 20. Yes, I believe so, yes.

So this not only is an addition, but it's a reestablishment of a non-conforming use. I just want to make sure that the applicant is applying for the right permit, because this would be under section 27-39, I believe. It's the reestablishment of a conforming use, so they're adding space, but in addition to that, they're asking to restore a non-conforming use that's in an R3 zone, so...

Great. That's how I read it also. Okay.

I just want to make sure that the board is aware of that.

Very good. A motion to approve. Second. Motion has been made and seconded to grant. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

None in the negative.

The vote is five in the affirmative, none in the negative. The petition is granted. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. The next petition is 2629, the petition of Lucindo Soares, 37 Johnson Street, Brockton, Mass., for a variance seeking relief of section 2765 and 2767 to allow the installation of a pylon sign lacking a 10-foot setback in a C2 zone located at 855 Main Street. Good evening. How you doing? Please identify yourself. I'm John Cruz, one of the GC.

Again. Juan Cruz, one of the GC at the project.

All set?

Okay, go ahead, you're all set. The reason for the... They asked us to do 10 feet back from the sidewalk. We're trying to get it closer to the sidewalk because the building itself sits back about 80 feet back. And we need the LED sign up forward so people driving south or north from Main Street could actually see what's back there. If it sits back 10 feet, you're not going to be able to see the sign because there's a church there. on the left, and there's a garage on the right. So bringing the sign forward, you get to see more of the sign driving north or south.

Okay, so this sign is required to sit no less than 10 feet back from the sidewalk. That's what the zoning requires. You're telling us that your sign is going to be? Right in the property, but on the, Right on the property, right next to the sidewalk. From the back of the sidewalk? Back of the sidewalk, yes. From the back of the sidewalk, it's supposed to be 10 feet back. You're requesting relief so that you can set it back six feet from the back of the sidewalk.

So the street, the curb, sidewalk itself, inside his property.

Right, so the measurement starts at the back of the sidewalk. Yes. Okay, so what we're looking at tonight is the regulation says that sign has to be 10 feet back from the edge of the sidewalk, the backside of the sidewalk. That's what the regulation says. You're here tonight asking for relief so that the sign can be set six feet back from the sidewalk. So we're clear on that.

So when you say I'm six feet from the back of the sidewalk, you mean when his property starts? From the what?

When the property starts. Yes. Your property line at the edge of the sidewalk. Yes. The backside of the sidewalk is a city property. Okay. So the measurement that we're looking at tonight is the backside of that cement sidewalk. So to place that sign, you're going to be at least 10 feet back from that sidewalk. Yes. You are requesting to be six feet back. So no part of the sign can be closer than six feet to the sidewalk.

Can I show you on the print? Just to be clear? Yeah.

To the clerk. I have this plan. This one you're talking about? Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

So they're looking for a four foot variance, yes.

So the pylon is the six foot mark. Then what does the sign do in relation to the sidewalk?

So what I see here, if you look at the plan, it shows straight up.

Mr. Chair, it looks like it goes straight up.

What I see here on the plan is that the outside pylon would be the first one. In other words, that would be, and then there's another one that sits back further, approximately another four feet.

So there's two pylons.

It stands on two metal frames. Yeah.

closest one is six feet correct and then the sign is going to extend what a foot or so beyond that what it looks like okay so just so we understand that pylon it's there's two pylons holding the sign up that's called a pylon two arms two legs This front leg.

Less than a foot sticking out, correct? He was going to keep that flush with the property. Well, that's... So if he's keeping that flush with the property, it's extending out to the street line.

Well, to the... Yeah, so... To the sidewalk.

Right. That's what I'm saying. Is it sticking out four feet? If the pylon sign itself is six feet, this is important because when I go to issue the permit, I got to make sure it's in the right spot. Okay. is that that first pylon, okay, if you will, all right, is six feet. You're not showing a four-foot overhang there that goes to the street.

How many... No, I get that, but if the sign is extended out, it's where the sign ends.

Am I correct? It's not exactly where the structure...

Here's what I'm looking at right here. There's the sign. I'm trying to explain to him that there has to be 10 feet from here to the back of the sidewalk. He's asking for relief for six feet. So I want to make sure you understand that it's no less than six feet from that post right there to the edge of the sidewalk. The rest of the sign extends into your property.

I think where the confusion might be is the rendering that's done officially on the drawing shows it flush. It doesn't look like it overhangs at all. The hand drawing on here does show, I don't know, maybe a six to eight inch overhang further out, further into that six feet. So the official rendering versus the hand rendering. I don't think I have a hand rendering. I have one right here.

You? It's in the dots. So it would be very easy to say that no portion of that sign shall extend more than six feet from the sidewalk.

If we read it that way, the pylon could be another six inches in on the property.

So no matter how big that sign is, the edge of that sign shall not be closer than six feet to the sidewalk. You understand that, right?

I understand that. Right.

Draw an imaginary line down. No, if you go to the sidewalk, it's in violation. I wouldn't be able to issue the permit. No, no, no. I'm saying if it goes, if it goes to the sidewalk, that wouldn't be appropriate for what you're asking for. You're asking for a, A six-foot relief, that six-foot relief goes all the way up to the top of the sign. Correct. So if you want the sign to be at six feet, your piling has to be back so much further to accommodate that six feet. No sign will be sticking out inside that six-foot setback line. Okay. Is that what you're asking for?

So basically what we're asking for is to be flush in our property.

All right, if you want to be out to the sidewalk, that is not what you're asking for, and you run the risk of having a denial here tonight. I know what they're showing, but he's explaining it to me. He wants to be out to the edge. What you're asking for is relief so that that sign is six feet back from the backside of the sidewalk. It's very, very simple to understand here.

So if this is your property line, okay, and this is your sign post, such as, okay, and this is the six feet, okay, what we're saying is that sign cannot be any closer to the street than six feet. That's the entire top of the sign. That's the panel, that's the letters, everything, okay? So that's what you're asking for, correct?

So I'm saying, you're saying six.

Six feet clearance, right up to the sky.

Okay.

Okay?

From the sidewalk.

Yep, from the back of the sidewalk to where the sign begins, any part of the structure. Six feet. Okay. All right, that's fine.

I would strongly suggest that whoever the sign company is, have a conversation with that gentleman right there. Because once you pour the footings and everything for the sign, if it's in the wrong location, you got to start all over again.

You can always have a footer discussion before we...

Well, it's not just that. We want to make sure that it's in the right spot before you, you know what I mean? We want to see the final sign design before I do the permit. And in addition to that, Mr. Chair, I just want to point out to you, there's the hand drawing says LED sign on that. They're asking for two separate things. So they are asking for a... Well, the hand drawing does, yeah. Electronic sign? Yes. Okay, all right.

So that's the second half of this request is the electronic sign. The LED. There are rules and regulations relative to the operation of that sign. That's his, or is that mine? You take it.

Oh, is that yours? I got mine right here.

So let's understand the LED sign. The LED sign cannot be lit or illuminated when the business is closed. Normally, the sign has to go off at 11 p.m. If you're open till one, the sign can stay on till one. On an LED sign, there is standards on the intensity of the LEDs. During the day, the intensity of the LEDs is quite bright because it's daylight. When it gets dark, the LEDs have to be turned way down, so you're aware of that. Also, there can be no animation no scrolling on the sign, and the sign cannot change any more frequently than once every 10 seconds. So you can't have animation bouncing on that sign, and whatever goes up there can't change the font any sooner or any earlier than 10 seconds. So there's a whole section on that sign. I just want to make sure you understand that. Okay, so those are the two things you're looking for is the LED sign and We've had a conversation on how that sign should be operated, when it could be on, and you are very clear as to where that sign is gonna be located. Okay, very good. All right, board members, do we have any questions? Everybody's good? Okay, I'm gonna close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone here that wants to speak in favor? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone that wants to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there any elected official in the room that wants to be heard on the issue? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone in the room that has any question relative to the testimony that has been given? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. That concludes the public discussion. I will now open it up for discussion among the board members. Board members.

So I do have a question for the building inspector. Is the LED performance, is that reviewed with an inspection?

The controlling order for the sign comes from this board. When we issue the permit, it's conditional on the board order itself.

Right, but the functionality of it. So once they have it up there, do you guys inspect it for the timing, for other, you know?

We really haven't. Well, if we've received a complaint, then obviously we would. It's complaint-driven, so I would say if somebody's driving by a sign at night and it's illuminated, you know, brightly and it's flashing and it's causing a nuisance, then yes, we would. We don't regularly drive around and enforce.

Okay. Other than that, I have no problem with the LED. As long as everything is six feet back, I think it's appropriate for a Main Street business. And I don't think it's blocking the view of traffic either.

No, it's funny enough so that it won't cause... any problems cars going in and out. And if you are on the south end of Main Street heading north, the Vassa Hall, which is right out on the sidewalk, if the sign was further back, that building would block that sign. So I think it's a legitimate request to move the sign a little closer to the sidewalk. So personally, I don't have a problem with it, but I think it's very important that we had this discussion so everybody understands where that sign is going to end up. I think that's important. I think that's important.

I think that's important that you make sure that you speak very carefully. The petitioner speaks very carefully if this is to get granted to that sign person because that's going to be, when you come back to re-inspect, that's going to be difficult. And I think the beauty of a sign like this, it has two pylons so you can see through it. This isn't a solid sign to the ground where you can't see out if you're trying to get out of that parking lot.

I just hope that we don't have any misunderstandings about what we talked about tonight. And that's why I made the suggestion that whoever's going to put this sign up may want to have a conversation with the building inspector so that there's no mistakes made.

Make a motion to grant second.

All right. So we've granted relief from a sign setback and we are granting an led sign with the controls on the sign. The clerk, please call the roll.

Ms. Delanus?

Yes.

Chief Nardelli? Yes. Mr. Sweeney? Yes. Ms. Greenberry?

Yes.

Chair Galligan? Yes. Mr. Chairman, that is five to zero in the affirmative.

The vote is five in the affirmative, none in the negative. The petition is granted. Good luck. Thank you. The next petition, 2630, the petition of Amarok LLC, 550 Assembly Street, 5th Floor, Columbia, South Carolina, for a special permit and variance seeking relief from Section 2720, Subsection 5, to be allowed to install a 10-foot low-voltage security system inside and behind the existing fence in a C2 zone located at 1675 Main Street.

Evening to the chair, evening to the board. My name is Jeff Fugino, attorney at Gellerman and Cabral in Norwood. I'm here this evening with Michelle Affronti. She's a representative from Amarok LLC. We're here before the board for essentially two items. These properties concern 1675 Main Street, and across the street it's 1724 Main Street. Both are the sites of HERC rentals, equipment rentals. At the 1675 location, for a little more than three years now, there's been what we consider to be a security system inside the six foot fence there. Michelle can talk more about how that system works and to answer any of the board's questions in that respect. HERC recently expanded across the street earlier this year to the 1724 Main Street location at which they installed the same security perimeter inside of their six foot fence there. So tonight, with regards to those two properties, we're appealing a June 22nd, 2026 cease and desist order issued by the building department. essentially directing us to the board to obtain a special permit and or variance to authorize these systems. So I'm gonna ask the board to first consider the appeal of the cease and desist separately of the special permit and variance request. In that respect, I'd like the board to consider whether this will be determined to be a security perimeter is actually a structure or not under the zoning ordinance here. And that definition for a structure, right from the ordinance, it says anything assembled at a fixed location to give support or shelter, such as a building, tower, framework, goes on to name a few more things, including fence. but we'd ask you to consider that when you hear how the system works, and Michelle can talk more about how the system does operate, that it's not actually a fence. There is a fence, a standard six-foot fence, outside of this security perimeter that is already there. So I'd ask the board to consider the argument that because this system is not a structure, it's not regulated under the zoning ordinance, and therefore we do not need zoning relief. There's a number of other communities in the state which operate similar type systems in Boston, Worcester, Springfield, in which THE ONLY ITEM THERE TO BE LEGALLY PERMITTED IS AN ELECTRICAL PERMIT, FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL IS AS NECESSARY. AND I WOULD SAY HERE, AS TO BOTH OF THESE SYSTEMS, AMROCK WENT THROUGH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, GOT THEIR ELECTRICAL PERMITS, WORKED WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. as to all their requirements. So in terms of what they thought they were complying with, they thought they were fully in compliance with the building and fire department in that respect. So I just asked the board to consider that. And again, Michelle could answer questions as to how the system works as to whether you may wish to make a determination that it is or is not a structure. And therefore, if not a structure, not regulated under the zoning ordinance. but if you do determine that it's a structure and that requires relief from this board we've also applied for a special permit in variance as necessary specifically under under section 27-20 part 5 for accessory structures if you determine that it is a structure and it needs a special permit, we ask you to consider under the standards of the zoning ordinance for that section and for the special permit section generally, 27-49, that the security system meets the criteria for a special permit under the ordinance and also applied for a variance as the board determines is necessary. And again, there's been much talk about the new variance standard. You know, we view it, you know, the key word there is practical difficulty. The issue here with Herc rentals, it's heavy equipment rentals. They face a large, you know, theft risk at all their sites across the country. This being no different in that this type of a system is safe, effective, benefits the community insofar as these businesses are able to operate without incident there. So in that sense, I'd ask you to consider that the that the system would also meet the new variance standard as well. I'm gonna turn it over to Michelle LaFronte who can explain some more how the system operates, which I think obviously be of interest to the board.

Before we get into the actual operation of the fence, what I'm looking at here is a six foot chain link fence. you want to extend that to 10 feet in height. So in its totality, looking at a fenced area, we're looking at an enclosure that will be 10 feet high. That's what I'm looking at here tonight.

Only, the only thing I would add is it's actually inside. It's not a system on top of the six foot. Right, so it's inside.

Work in conjunction with each other so that the totality of the fencing that is surrounding it, it will be 10 feet high rather than six feet high.

that if you determine that the system is a fence, we'd ask the board to consider that this particular system is not in fact a fence, and that the only fencing is six feet, and this indeed is a 10 foot tall system, yes it is, but it is not a fence within the traditional meaning of fence, and within the meaning of a structure.

Okay, so let's see how it plays out.

Sure.

I just have one other question, Mr. Chair. We are not taking both, because these, These last two, we're not taking them collectively, right? We have to do both of them, right?

I can't hear you.

We're not taking these last two petitions collectively, right?

No, I think the smart thing to do is to take them separately. Absolutely. But when we get to the second one, basically it would be easy for you to say all the testimony that was given in the first case is now in the second case and I'm done. Understood. Okay. I think we can do that. Right into the microphone. Bring it right up close. You can pick it right off the table if you want to.

I don't want to be too loud. It might be for you, but it sounds so loud for me, and I apologize. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for your time. My name is Michelle LaFronte. I am from Amarok. We are a Columbia, South Carolina-based company. We did install the security system at both Herk locations on Main Street. We install these systems across the United States. We have more than 9,000 installations of our security system. In 31 states, there are state laws regulating these as alarm systems. They operate as an alarm system that you're probably familiar with. So we install them to a height of 10 feet tall. They are installed separate from the perimeter fence approximately four to eight inches behind the perimeter fence. They do not change the perimeter fence. They do not do anything to the perimeter fence. We just have a perimeter fence in front of them when we install them. The reason it's 10 feet tall, it needs to be taller than the perimeter fence to keep folks out. So if you have our system behind a perimeter fence and the perimeter fence are both the same height, somebody could climb it and jump over. With our system being taller, it's very hard to climb on top of a six-foot or eight-foot perimeter fence, whatever the perimeter height is, and get up over that additional height. We have warning signs on our system every 30 feet. It warns everyone that you will get a shock. It is a pulse. It is three ten-thousands of a second if you touch it. It does not harm you. It is medically safe. There are studies done, which we did submit to the board. They are medical safe. And we operate our systems under a standard under the IEC 60335-2-76. And it regulates how these systems work. They work with a 12-volt DC battery. Same as your car. That DC battery... takes that power, I'm sorry, I apologize, an energizer takes the energy from the battery, it energizes it, it increases it, and when it's to a certain amount, it releases it down the system, takes it up to approximately 7,000 volts. It can circle that perimeter in approximately one second. So what the system is looking for is five clean returns. If it does not get five clean returns, which is in approximately five seconds, so if you touch it, and you walk away, it'll get a clean return the next time, so it won't do anything. But within that five seconds, if you keep touching it or you cut those wires or you drive through the perimeter fence and drive through the security system, it will set the alarm off. Audibly on the site, if they have sirens turned on on the site, and silently back to the call center the call center then goes through a call list same as any other security company if it's jeff at three in the morning he gets a call and they say hey the alarm's going off on your site is there a storm there or you know look on your camera see if someone's cut the system or trying to get in If he says tree fell on the system, turn the alarm off, do not call the police, we do not call the police. If he says, hey, somebody's driven through the perimeter fence, they're now in the system, they're trying to get trucks out, we then call the local police department and let them know. It's a verified alarm. So that's how it works. Like I said, it is safe. If you touch it, I could liken it the best I could explain it to you because I've touched it, is a static shock when you touch a doorknob. It stings, but after you throw your hand away, as soon as you touch it, your hand comes back off of it. Most people don't touch it again. We have had people cut them, drive through them. We've had people... touch them repeatedly. Most people don't though. And most of the time the signs are the deterrent. So they are safe. Again, it's behind the perimeter fence. You have to be trying to get to it. You're not going to get to it if you're walking down the street. And if you walk down the street and touch the perimeter fence, it's just a perimeter fence. There's nothing on that. When we installed this system at both HERC locations, We did go through the normal channels that we always go through, and that's reach out to the local building department, ask what type of permits are required to install our system. We were advised we would need an electrical permit. This was approximately three, four years ago, and I believe there were some different folks in place at the time in the building department. We did get an electrical permit. We passed all the inspections on the electrical permit that we obtained on both sites. Additionally, we did work with the local fire department, and we did install a NOX 3502, which de-energizes the system if there would be a fire and the fire department would want to come in. They would use that special key that only the fire department has, and it would then cut the power off, de-energize it, so you wouldn't bother them if they touched it. Even if they did touch it, again, it would be unpleasant, but it wouldn't harm them. But we do try to work with everyone as best we can. We always reach out. We try to stay in full compliance with everyone working with local fire departments, building officials. And additionally, we do get an alarm permit for these if the jurisdiction has an alarm permit. So respectfully, we are asking that you approve our appeal And if not, you approve our variance and special use permit so that we can continue to protect Herc Rendles. We protect a lot of their sites throughout the United States. Not just Herc, we protect a lot of large, well-known companies, but Herc is one of our national accounts. And they do have a theft problem. It's not unique to any town. It's not localized, crime is everywhere. Catalytic converters, theft of vehicles, folks moving into property that's unsecured, it happens everywhere. And that's what we're trying to do, just secure their site with a safe system. If you have any questions on the system, I'd be happy to answer them. And there are two representatives from the local HERC sites. they're here as well and they can speak a little bit better to criminal activity or unwanted activity at the sites. But again, respectfully, we request that we be, you know, we acted in good faith, we respectfully request that if you don't approve our appeal, which we hope you do, you would allow us to obtain a variance or special permit so that we can continue to protect their sites. And if you have any questions, I'll answer them.

Any questions from the board members? Yeah, Mr. Chair, I have a question. So you cited some other examples in Boston, Worcester, Springfield. Are there any other examples that about a high school or a school?

We often install near schools, next to residences.

But is there a specific example in these three close in-state that about a working functional high school?

I would actually have to go back and go through them. Honestly, I could not tell you right now, but we only install on non-residential property. We don't install on any residential properties. We don't secure any hospitality sites or anything like that. So if it was a residence, we would not install. But as long as it's a business on non-residential property, on a non-residential use property, we do install them. And we do, like I said, I can't speak to those certain specific cities in Massachusetts, but there are many places that we abut schools or hotels, churches, restaurants, residences.

I think that's the uniqueness here. So that was the reasoning behind my question.

And I will say at the site where the school is, so the school has a chain link fence, and then there is a separation of three feet, and then HERC has their chain link fence. So there's not only the school's perimeter fence, HERC's perimeter fence, and then our system is inside of there. And once again, you cannot touch it by just touching the perimeter fence. You'd have to be making a conscious attempt. And once you make that conscious attempt to breach that perimeter fence, you are criminally trespassing. I mean, no one should be in there.

So you'd be using the first fence in conjunction to get up if you were climbing it as one unit to get up and over?

So if you want to get to our system, you would have to climb up that six foot tall chain link fence, stand on top of it, and reach in the four to eight inches to touch it.

So essentially all the same structure?

It's behind, our system is separate from the chain link fence. It's four to eight inches inside of it.

Okay, so very close.

It's close, but again, it's very hard to climb and stand on top of a six foot fence. And if you're doing that, you're already criminally trespassing when you're making that attempt.

That was my question. You're criminally trespassing. Performing a criminal act. Yes. If you're doing that.

Yes, exactly. And no one should be performing a criminal act. And as for children, I understand it's scary. I'm a parent. but it is behind that perimeter fence and there shouldn't be any children in Herk's property when they're open or closed. When they're open, the system is turned off. Children are going to be going to school during the day and coming through there and their gates are going, you know, that's when the children come through there. When they close their gate at night and go home, the system gets turned on. So if there's a child, a teenager, whoever, they're making a conscious attempt to break in and do something they shouldn't be doing and enter Herk's property, which is a crime. And there are warning signs every 30 feet. If they continue to do, I mean, you know, it's a criminal thing. But they shouldn't be in there. And again, it's turned off during the day. So even if the children are walking home, one, they would have to go through Herck's gate. You know, they'd have to come through their gate to come in and come around. And the system's turned off. So it doesn't matter anyway because they wouldn't feel a pulse when it's turned off during the day. And if they touch the perimeter fence, it doesn't matter because there's no pulse on their perimeter fence.

That's all I have. But just to maybe help clarify, I was down there today. And when I pulled in, I was immediately challenged. What are you doing here? Which is good for you people. And I introduced myself and the gentleman came out and we had a very informative discussion and I walked away with what I thought was very good information. So to just hit on the question that you had relative to the school, there was a six foot chain link fence that goes down the school property. We measured it with a tape, I think it was four feet from the school's chain link fence to the chain link fence for the business. They're both six feet high. So really it's like a no man's land in between. Then on the backside of the fence that's part of the business is where this electrical fence is located. So if somebody from that school tried to reach in to get anywhere near this electrical, they would have to have an arm that's five feet long and it would have to fit in between the chain link. It's virtually impossible for anybody to reach in to touch this unless they were doing it on purpose. So as far as the school is concerned, it's not on during the day, there are two fences four feet apart, and if somebody does get in there, they're in there for not a good reason, and they're gonna suffer the consequences. I think that's probably the best answer I can give you.

Yes, that was a very good answer, thank you, sir. And just lost my train of thought, sorry.

While you're thinking of it, I think what time does HERC close?

I can, I'll ask Kirk. I believe they close at six or seven o'clock, but I don't want to speak for them.

Billy Sheehan, I'm a district manager for Kirk Rentals. So our operating hours are seven to five. I would say we have truck drivers that start as early as, sometimes even earlier, they're de-energizing the system. And then we close. We're open until 5. Usually have folks work until 5.30, 6. And so that's when the system would get turned on.

So school probably gets out at two. Kids should be clear of there if they're not playing sports by long before that, even if they are playing sports and be away from that building when it's still not even energized yet.

Yeah, I think we start to see the kids walking out around 2.30 or so and we see groups kind of walking off. But to answer your question, seven to five, but really we have folks working, you know, 5 a.m. to at least 5 p.m.

And that means it would be de-energized majority of the time. Any child would be around that school if that's the concern. Correct. And then if they came back after that or whatever the face, and they tried to get into your property where they shouldn't be anyways. Right. Right. Thank you.

It looks like it could not be an accidental act. Somebody would have to intentionally want to get onto that property.

Correct. Correct. Thank you, sir. And yes, and what I was going to say is, you're exactly right. HERC is very good when someone pulls in the property because I got on the property and I came in and I was immediately met at the door. Hey, how are you? What can we do for you? Because they were actually closed, but they still had their gate open. And I was immediately met with somebody coming there. They do have cameras. They do have lights. All those things are great, but they don't stop... crime like our system does. And again, it's more of a deterrent than anything. I mean, you know, most times once people see the signs, they just, they go, you know what, we probably shouldn't do this. And they leave. So, but again, if you have any other questions, I'm happy to answer them.

I'll make sure I call next time I come to rent a bucket truck.

I guess I have some follow-up questions to the Chief. You know, the school, high school ends at what? Quarter past two or whatever. Do we know what time the after-school programs end? I mean, we're talking five o'clock close, that's when it gets re-energized. Is there any after-school programs that go past five?

I think it's middle school through high school. So there's even younger children than high schoolers in that building.

Oh, so it's middle school through high school. And high school. Yes. Okay. which middle school would be later in the afternoon?

Well, it's a continuous charter, so it's different grades going up from middle school to high school.

I'm just trying to get to the point of how much crossover there is. Are there any special education classes? I've seen students do some bizarre things. Is climbing a fence and not knowing what they're doing going to result in a shock? things like that. I mean, you are abutting a school.

We are, and I understand that, and it's a total, you know, I totally understand your concern. Again, it is medically safe, even for a child, even with someone with a pacemaker. It is not going to hurt them if they touch it. It's going to sting. I mean, I'm sure you've all got a static shock on that doorknob sometimes in the wintertime when you walk across your carpet with your socks on. It stings. I've touched it. Is it pleasant? No, but it Your hand comes right off of it, and you're like, okay, not doing that again. But again, when the system is off and the gate is open, they would have to walk in and come through to even encounter it. And again, it's off at that time when the gate is closed and it's armed. They can't touch it on the perimeter fence if they touch the perimeter fence. They can't get their hand through the chain link, and that's where the IEC standard comes in. because the opening is too small and that's why we're set back to four to eight inches. If they had wrought iron there, we would put a one by one inch mesh on the inside of the wrought iron so that nobody, again, could get their hand through. So again, there's standards built into the way we install it. We install to those standards. That's why we need to have the perimeter fence minimum of five feet tall in front of our system and we set it back four to eight inches behind. So we do have standards in place.

Is there a mesh on this chain link fence that's flooding the school? There is not mesh. Walking to school?

There is not mesh on the chain link because the chain link is a small enough opening. You can't get your hand through it.

I'm just thinking a child, a 10-year-old could get their hand through it.

They can't get their hand through it and reach in. It's not possible. Dr. Mark Kroll, I think I added the safety thing. He did studies on it. And again, the IEC standards, the IEC 60335-2-76 specifically talks about the size of the opening that you need to have so that no one can touch it. And that's why they have the standards of four to eight inches behind so that if you do get your hand through, you can't get all the way in there.

Now, I think Crescent Ridge has something similar like that that keeps the cows in there. Can you bring the microphone closer? I can't hear you. I was saying Crescent Ridge up in Sharon has something similar to that that keeps the cows in. And that's actually a lot more accessible than this is. You could just reach in there and actually grab the wire in there. And I haven't heard of any incidents up there with anybody getting seriously hurt or anything like that.

So an agricultural fence like to keep cows Yeah, it's similar to that, but that is much more powerful because that's to keep a 200-pound animal, 300-pound animal or bigger in. Ours is just to keep people out. And those do not have anything in front of them at all to stop somebody from touching it. So if you go up there, you'd be able to probably just walk up. And I'm not saying that one specifically, but normally agricultural fences, there's no fence in front of it or a barrier to keep anyone from touching it.

Are there any alternatives to the system? Just to say you're denied, what's the alternative?

Well, that would be a question for HERC. They have lights. That doesn't work. Cameras don't work. Well, the cameras work. but they capture the act after the fact. They'll come in in the morning and see someone on there. They have had problems with criminal trespass on the property. They could have a truck stolen that could go out and crash into someone's home or do some damage. There's all kinds of things that could happen. We can all do the what ifs. However, a lot of businesses do close if they can't secure their property because they're not going to take a loss. I'm not saying that this would happen in your town, I don't know, but it's happened in other towns. Businesses can't secure their property, they close their business and they move to another town.

I can speak to it a little bit. So one of the reasons that we're specific on this site is Our business model is we like to run certain types of equipment out of certain locations. Brockton, we run a lot of trucks, close to 500 trucks, probably getting closer to 700 over the next couple of years. The difference with trucks is a lot of the other equipment that we rent is not easily stealable, right? Like if somebody, it's hard to get into an excavator and drive it down the street and get away. Trucks, on the other hand, you can jump in, throw them and drive and be doing 80 miles an hour pretty soon. So that's why we're specifically trying to secure these two sites is it's a truck location for us and hundreds and hundreds of trucks. And that's kind of why we're specific to this one. Board members, are we all set?

I do have a question. Do you have a good relationship with the school since you're neighbors?

Tommy runs our location, the 1724 in Brockton. I don't think we have much of a relationship with them. We're super open to it, though. So I'm Thomas Westerfeld.

I'm the manager at 1724. We have met the janitor from the school. He's come over. He actually wanted to rent a forklift from us, which unfortunately we didn't have what he needed at the time. To answer your question about earlier about the kids, so they get dismissed around 2, 2.15. I'm there until...

Please come closer to the microphone.

I'm sorry. They get dismissed around 2, 2.15. They're usually no activity after 4 o'clock. I'm there until 5 o'clock every night. I usually lock up. If there is a mechanic, they're there until, like he said, 5.30, 6 o'clock. But there is no activity at that school after 4, 4.30. They're gone.

Okay, we all set?

To answer your question, though, we're also very open to a relationship with the school as far as we do a lot throughout the area in the company, donating equipment for students to learn and get used to how to operate it and what it does, and open to that for sure.

All right, if you're all set, I'm going to move on. We good?

Yeah.

I'm gonna close that portion of the hearing. I will now ask, is there anyone here that wants to speak in favor? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone that wants to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there any elected official in the room that wants to be heard on the issue? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone in the room that has a question relative to the testimony that has been given tonight? Seeing none, I'm gonna close that portion of the hearing. That concludes the public discussion. I am now going to open it up for Deliberation among board members.

If you don't mind, I'll go first. A couple of things. So when this came before us, went before Deputy Chief Williams, anyone who knows Deputy Chief Williams, he is a stickler. And he spoke to these folks, talked about this, really had no concerns with this at the time. I remember having the conversation with him. I don't know if the school or anyone else was involved at that time, but this was something that like she was just saying, it was, he looked into it throughout the country. They didn't have any incidents of any problems through other parts of the country. The other part of this, too, is I think, you know, HERC has made a large investment in the city in an area that was very, very beat up for a long time after the Collier dealerships moved out. And I wouldn't want to run a business either if I couldn't secure it in a certain area. So I think to the safety component of it, I would, our Fire Prevention Bureau really did a deep dive into this to look into this before obviously allowing any of this to go on. And they found no problems with anything after doing their research as well with other properties that this has been installed in throughout the country. So that's just my two cents on that as the fire chief from a safety perspective. Again, we can talk, and belabor the point of people sticking their hands through fences all we want, but, you know, they shouldn't be doing that. I mean, you know, my mother told me when I was a kid, don't touch a hot pot, and I didn't do it because it was going to hurt. I took her word for it, and I got this far, and I think I'm doing all right. So I think those are the things. I just wouldn't want to hurt something that's going in the right direction. We had the case earlier and not to get off topic, but the case on Belmont Street, I think that was an extremely important petitioner that wants to rebuild and redo something in an area that's very beat up right now. taxpayer in Brockton, not just the fire chief. These are the things I want to see. These are the things how I want to see my city built back in revenue to come in. I'm sure they're paying plenty of taxes, which supports the fire department. So these are the things I look at when I hear from true professionals that have been in that business in fire prevention for quite a while, and they don't have any problems. And if there was a problem, Deputy Chief Williams sure as heck would have found it. I'm very comfortable with that. So that's all I have.

I guess, you know, you make very good valid points, and it's good to clarify the history of it through the fire.

Can you speak into the microphone?

You make very valid points. It's good to learn the history of that. It looks like there's some setback on that property. I guess my question would be, are there any further measures with that setback that could additionally provide, I don't know, a little bit of a pushback, whether it be greenery or something to keep people off. I don't know how dismissal looks or whatever, or if there's anything after school or even on a, you can't rule out there'll never be anything after five o'clock. You just can't do that in a school. But if there was, you know, it looks like you got five or six feet from the sidewalk. If there's any greenery to push people that might congregate on the sidewalk, even that much farther over might be a better look. I understand the importance of securing expensive property for a business. I just think there might be some room for some extra buffer. That's all I got.

I would like to just comment. I spent some time down there today because this is all new to me. This whole business about an electric fence is new to this board. So I went down there today and basically what we have here is a six foot perimeter fence, which is allowed. They want to extend it to 10 feet. They could be here tonight asking for a 10 foot chain link fence with barbed wire on the top. And aesthetically, that certainly wouldn't be a good look for a business on Main Street. So with a six-foot chain link fence with four feet of this wire that is a deterrent to deter people from trying to get in, certainly aesthetically, it's a very decent look for a commercial operation. the wire that is on the back of the fence sits back away from the chain link fence. So to get any kind of a reaction from this electrical charge, you would have to get your hand through the fence, which is probably going to be impossible on the school side. As I said before, there is a six foot chain link fence. It looks like it belongs to the school. There's a four foot gap between their fence, this fence, And then on the inside of this fence is the additional four feet of wire that probably would be similar to putting a barbed wire up, but this is not barbed wire. It handles the same problem in a different fashion, shall we say. If anybody wanted to break into that location down there, they're going to get in a situation where they are intentionally trying to break in. I don't see anybody accidentally getting involved with this. And accidentally, if somebody hits it, they're going to pull away from it. They're not going to hang on to this thing by any means. That business down there was an eyesore to Campello for a number of years. This company moved in, totally refurbished that entire property down there, It is a good look for Campello. When I looked in there today, you could eat off the floor of the repair facility. Obviously, it's a very well-run operation. They mentioned tonight the number of vehicles that they have parked in that parking lot. At night, there is nobody in that part of the city. You drive by and that's it. I was told today that they had approximately $6 million worth of equipment on that lot. One of the big problems with the vehicles that they rent, which is dump trucks and similar ones, is the theft of catalytic converters. So people will try to break in to get catalytic converters. So this is a method that has been proven that will deter that. So even though we have a lot of questions tonight, I am comfortable that they've got many of these installations all across the country and there's been no horror stories with this. So this fence is approximately eight inches inside the chain link fence. And on the school side, you've got a chain link fence, four feet of no man's land, chain link fence, and then eight inches before somebody can get onto this thing. You know, I look at this almost like we look at LED signs. When they came on the scene, it was a whole new scenario for us. We may see more of these as they go along. I doubt that this company would invest in what they have done down there on something that has not been tried and proven. If there was problems with this across the country, I don't think these people would be involved in this thing. So I'll tell you, I went there personally today, and I'll just express my thoughts that what I saw today, I feel very comfortable that it is a safe operation and it's certainly going to be a deterrent and they have strong concerns that in late night hours, there is nobody in that area unless somebody wants to cause trouble. So this is one method of securing their property. That's my thought. And as part of this discussion to the building inspector, If we approve this, will the cease and desist order go away? Or do we have to vote?

So, Mr. Chair, I would ask that you uphold the notice of violation only for the fact that we identified it more as a structure. Upholding the notice of violation will mean that basically we cited it correctly and that we referred it to this board for further approval, which would be a special permit, a couple of things. Whether that structure, that barrier, consists of poles and fishing wire doesn't exactly, it's a system of barrier, it's a barrier, whether it be strung by wire and separate poles, it may not meet the definition of a fence, but it definitely meets the definition of a structure. The only reason that we cited it, firstly, was for the height, but in addition, there is no definition or allowed use of a electric perimeter fence in our zoning ordinance. And our zoning ordinance is restrictive. If it's not specifically listed, it's prohibited. So that's the other reason why we refer this to the zoning board, so that a judgment could be made. But I would ask you, the department and myself would ask you to uphold the notice of violation that we cited it correctly. If that violation has been then sanctioned with a order that allows them to keep the perimeter fence as it is, then the violation goes away because essentially you're not telling us that we're wrong, you're saying that we see what you have cited, you've cited it correctly, but we're going to allow it, so.

Well, I just want to make sure that when we vote on this, obviously we're voting them, allowing them to extend the height of that fence to 10 feet. Yes. The last four feet of it is this new system. If they were asking for a 10 foot chain link fence, probably most of this discussion wouldn't even happen.

Correct.

So what I don't want to have happen is if we agree tonight that we're going to grant them a variance to allow them to have 10 feet of height on a perimeter fence. I don't want a situation developing where we grant this and then another city agency says, no, you can't have it. I don't want to get into that scenario. I mean, if we as a board sit here tonight and look at this and say, we're very comfortable with it, I am comfortable with granting them the right to have the six foot fence and the four feet above it.

There'll be no further enforcement action from the building department.

All right, so what you're telling us then is that if we vote in the affirmative to grant this, then a cease and desist order goes away.

It was either you can vote to overturn the notice of violation and find that we didn't cite it correctly, I think there's two issues before the board tonight. Does the notice of violation get overturned? And if it doesn't, are you going to grant the allowance of the fence? So you can put that in the same order, and I think that if you find that we cited the fence correctly, but you're going to allow for it, then the violation no longer exists.

Okay, so it's all in how I word it? Yes. Okay, so we can take one vote to allow the six foot fence with the extension of four feet and allow for the cease and desist order to be vacated.

I believe you can, yeah.

All right, so I don't want to get way out in the weeds on this thing. I'm trying to make it as simple as possible. So when we take a vote, we know what we're voting for. And honestly, if they asked for a 10 foot chain link fence, like we got at the Brockton fairgrounds and other places around the city, it would probably be not a very difficult vote. It's only because of this electrical type fence that we've got into the weeds that we get into. I do not want to sit here tonight and make an affirmative vote and tell these people, you can do what you have done. with all the permits that were given to them by the building department, the electrical department, the fire department, everybody's on board that this thing works. And then all of a sudden there's a glitch that says, no, you can't do it. I don't want to get into that. Okay.

Fair enough.

Okay. As long as we understand that.

Make a motion to grant. Just on the motion, if it does pass, I would like to see a stipulation where there is more landscaping to prevent people from even walking in that, at least on the main street part. I don't know how you folks feel about that, but an extra barrier to keep people just on the sidewalk through landscape would be something simple.

I would just want to say that We need to be very careful about what we talk about with landscaping because we don't want to create an area where you can't see through the fence.

Well, it can be low-lying. You just wouldn't step on it because it wouldn't be very convenient to step on it.

Could you think of maybe cement planters or something like that that actually may prevent a car from driving into the fence? Some kind of a planter that can be put on top of... the blacktop that's out there now. I'm going to allow an answer for that question.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Herk Reynolds can speak to that. There are already bollards out there in front of the chain link fence. Bollards approximately three, maybe four feet tall. about this big around to stop anyone from driving into the fence.

I'm not necessarily worried about the driving. I'm more concerned about the students and people congregating after hours or if somebody electrified the fence and someone dared somebody to climb the fence on some whim to keep crowds from forming in that area.

So again, on the one side of Main Street, they do have landscaping, quite a very nice area of landscaping. It's, I don't know, maybe... 24 to 30 inches, and it has some low plants in it. On the other side, there isn't a sidewalk. It's kind of like a pull off for the road, and there isn't a way, there is no sidewalk there. It's just kind of a walking path that they go down.

It's all road. I guess what I'm suggesting is I do see a few bushes. If that was filled in where you couldn't really step on the property, and it kind of works as a buffer to keep people on the sidewalk,

All right. I'm going to close that discussion. We're not going to go back and forth here. The sidewalk as it exists now goes right up to those yellow ballards and it goes right up to the chain link fence. I personally do not know where the state layout is for main street and how wide that area is between the fence and the actual roadway of main street. I think what we need to do tonight is keep our thoughts to the fence and the I'm sure that what they're hearing from you, if it is something that would enhance their property, I'm sure they would do it. But I just don't want to get in a situation where we mandate that to be done. And then we find out that we're intruding on state property. And now we got another problem. So I would ask that you kind of make your point, but I don't want that to be part of the decision. All right. So we finished discussing this. Yeah, we have a motion. I'll second. So we have a motion and a second, correct? Yes.

Yep.

All right. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Mr. Landis?

Yes.

Chief Nardelli? Yes. Mr. Sweeney? No. Ms. Greenberry?

Yes.

Chair Galligan? Yes. Mr. Chair, that is four in the affirmative, one in the negative.

The vote is four in the affirmative, one in the negative. The petition is granted. All right.

Thank you to the chair and the board. Appreciate your time tonight very much. You got one more to go.

I'm going to read the next one. And I would appreciate if your testimony is everything you said on the last one pertains to this one.

Indeed, Mr. Chair, Jeff Eugenio, on behalf of government and Cabral.

Not yet, I got to read it. Oh, I'm sorry. All right, petition 2631, the petition of Amarok LLC 550 Assembly Street. Fifth floor, Columbia, South Carolina for a special permit and variance seeking relief from section 2720 subsection five to be allowed to install a 10 foot low voltage security system inside and behind the existing fence in a C2 zone located at 1724 Main Street and 1744 Main Street. Now this one, This is the old car dealership. Actually, the one that we were discussing earlier is the one that's across the street. This one is the one that's actually up against the, but the same testimony. Yeah, okay. Everybody okay with that?

Yeah.

All right, good. All right, councilor, it's all yours. Okay.

Evening to the chair and to the board. I'm Jeff Eugino on behalf of MROC LLC. I'm a gallerman in Cabral in Norwood. I'd ask the board to consider all the testimony that has been made in the first case. I'll be transferred to the second case and be considered by the board for the same relief.

Very good. Board members, any questions? No questions. This is virtually the exact same thing that we just talked about. It has received approvals from the fire department, from the building departments, from the electrical people. We good? Good. Okay, I'm going to close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone here that wants to speak in favor? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone who wants to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the hearing. Is there any elected official in the room that wants to be heard on the issue? Seeing none, I'm going to close that portion of the hearing. Is there anyone in the room that has a question relative to the testimony that has been given? Seeing none, I am going to close that portion of the hearing that concludes the public discussion. I will now open it up for discussion among board members. Board members. Motion to grant? Second. Motion has been made and seconded to grant. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Mr. Landis?

Yes.

Chief Nadella?

Yes. Mr. Sweeney? No.

Mr. Greenberg?

Yes.

Chair Gallagher? Yes.

The vote is four in the affirmative, one in the negative. The petition is granted. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you everyone for your time. Appreciate it.

That concludes all the business that's been for us tonight. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. The motion has been made and seconded to adjourn. We are adjourned.

Oh, yeah. The kid could jump over.