Needham design board tells Acar Auto Center to remove redundant signs, continues pricing-sign request to April 6

The Needham Design Review Board on March 23 reviewed an application for freestanding and multiple wall/window signs at Acar Auto Center, 1032 Highland Ave, and voted to continue the matter to April 6 so the applicant can submit a revised package showing two primary signs and a special-permit request for the pricing/brand panel.

Chair Mark Losing said the town’s sign bylaw is intended to identify a business at its location rather than serve as a promotional display, and urged the applicant to consolidate the many logos and service panels into a single, compliant identification panel. "We allow identification, not promotional signage," Mark Losing said. He recommended retaining the pylon sign and the primary wall sign but removing the other window and service signs unless they are redesigned to comply.

Contractor Jamal Deac and the business owner (who joined by phone) said some elements had been on the building for years and argued the panels help customers find a small business. The owner said he would remove the extra panels if forced but refused to cover the pricing sign’s trade name: "I refuse to do that … Acar Energy is my brand," the owner said. The board responded that the trade name could be considered separately and asked the applicant to apply for a special permit for the price/brand sign.

Members pressed the applicant for factual evidence about how long certain signs had been in place. Millie Pradhan said she reviewed Google Street View and did not see the same set of signs in 2019, suggesting some of the signage likely post-dates that image. Felix Semmel proposed a condition that any inspection-station sign be removed unless the station becomes licensed within an agreed period.

The board outlined a path forward: (1) allow two "by-right" primary signs (the pylon sign and the principal wall panel as presented), (2) permit a limited, consolidated set of vehicle-brand logos on a single panel beneath the primary identification, and (3) require removal of specified additional window and wall panels now shown in the package. The board asked the applicant to resubmit images that accurately reflect what is being requested (for example, editing out signs the applicant intends to remove).

A motion to continue the public hearing to April 6 passed unanimously by roll call. The board asked the applicant to come back with a cleaned application that clearly requests the two primary signs and a separate special-permit application for the price/brand sign; the board said it would review the pricing/brand request on its merits at that time.

The board’s direction was procedural (to continue and require a revised submission) rather than final approval of the special-permit elements. The applicant agreed to remove several of the additional panels before the next meeting and to provide revised drawings for the board’s review on April 6.