Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Sign Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Medford council tables appeal over 42 Fulbright Street sign permit, seeks legal review
Summary
The City Council voted 4–3 to table an appeal by AIM Realty/Scrub It Up challenging a building department denial to reface an existing pylon sign at 42 Fulbright Street. Petitioner counsel argued the sign was not abandoned; council requested a legal opinion before ruling.
The Medford City Council on March 20 voted 4–3 to table an appeal of a building department denial to reface a pylon sign at 42 Fulbright Street and requested legal review before deciding the permit appeal.
The petition was presented by attorney Kathleen A. Desmond on behalf of AIM Realty Medford LLC and Scrub It Up Auto Wash Centers. Desmond told the council the site was a longstanding car wash and the new owner, Scrub It Up, purchased the property in September 2022 and planned only to reface the existing double‑sided pylon sign, not alter its structure. She said the sign is about 31.9 feet tall with roughly a 10-by-10 (100 square foot) face and remains visible from Route 93.
Desmond argued the building inspector’s abandonment finding was incorrect. She presented an affidavit from the prior owner, Peter Silk, records of business activity and tax payments, a listing agreement that included the sign, and a history of intermittent operation that included a COVID‑era shutdown. She cited case law and argued that, even if the sign were treated as a preexisting nonconforming structure, replacing sign panels (“refacing”) does not constitute an alteration requiring denial under the cited precedents.
Representatives of Scrub It Up, including owner Matthew Paesner, said the company invested in the property, has spent to resolve utility issues with National Grid, and planned demolition/renovation work that is starting. Paesner said the project’s site plans expressly show “protect existing pylon sign” and that the owner’s intent is only to replace the plastic panels with new branding.
Councilors raising questions said they wanted additional legal analysis and asked for clarification from the building department. Councilor Scarpelli moved to table and request a legal review; Councilor Lemming seconded. The roll call was: Callahan (Yes), Vice President Collins (Yes), Lozaro (Yes), Lemming (Yes), Scarpelli (Yes), Singh (No), President Bares (No). The motion passed 4–3.
Councilors and petitioner agreed tabling would not impose an immediate construction freeze that would harm the project; Scrub It Up said a short delay would not derail its schedule.
The matter remains on the council docket pending a legal opinion and any further documentation from the building department or petitioner. The council’s action was procedural: the appeal was not decided on the merits and the denial by the building department remains in place while the review proceeds.
Ending: The council recorded the tabled motion and legal referral; when the city’s legal office or outside counsel returns an opinion, the appeal will be scheduled for further action and a vote.
