The Board of Selectmen met this evening with Selectmen William Hardin presiding. Frederick Clark and Patricia Webster were in attendance. Patricia Hunt and Jeffrey Tufts were not present.

Joseph Meade in attendance.

Selectmen Hardin noted that Hunt and Tufts were not be in attendance this evening.

Hardin read the notice of hearing, summary of application and department comments. Conservation, Treasurer/Collector, Building, and Police indicated no problem with the approval of this license.

Board of Health noted that they still had not seen an Engineer’s report on the clean-up on this site.

Fire Department commented same.

Planning & Zoning Board indicated that there was no site plan on file for this location.

Hardin also noted that a letter from DEP was in the file regarding contaminated soil.

Meade presented himself and submitted to the Board a copy of the certified abutters list and the notice of hearing which was mailed and the certified green cards to the abutters. He also submitted a report from Enstrat regarding the status of the site.

Meade indicated that the property at 612 had been cleared by DEP with no restrictions relative to the selling or developing of this lot. Meade gave a brief history of the lot indicating that there has always been a repair shop or used car license at this site. Meade indicated that he purchased the property in 1978 with the gas tanks already underground. The tanks were installed in 1953. He explained how the laws changed a few years ago relating to the tanks and the tanks were currently not in compliance and would need to be removed. In working with the DEP, the tanks were removed and the contaminated soil was transferred to an asphalt plant. He also explained that he had a Class II license for over 17 years at that location and was arrears in his taxes do to the assessed value of the property being over one-half million dollars. His taxes are now current and he would again like to reinstate the license at that location.

Clark questioned the parking area for the residence and the location of the office. Meade indicated that there is nobody living in the home at this time and he has no intention of renting the home in the future. At this point he was unclear as to whether the building would be taken down or not. Meade also noted that the office is located in the garage. Clark also asked if Meade would plan on expanding the use at all, which would require site plan approval. Meade indicated that he was not planning any changes at this site.

Webster questioned how many lots. Meade indicated 34.

Paicos questioned the positioning of the four lots in front of the residence. Meade said that they are actually located behind the 12’ gate and chain link fence. Paicos also asked for clarification of lot 76 E in comparison to his lot. Lot 76 E is owned by Meade and the area between the two lots is a right of way onto Plymouth Drive.

Paicos asked if there was a final response from DEP regarding the contamination. Meade explained that he had done everything to comply with DEP and the Engineers report recently submitted indicates same. Paicos expressed concern with the Board of Health and the Fire Department comments. He believes that they still were not satisfied. After completion of the removal of the tanks and contaminated soil, Meade indicate that he asked the Health Director to contact DEP to satisfy the Board of Health’s concerns. Saucier explained that he would be too busy to contact them. DEP did call and leave a message for Saucier stating that the DEP’s concerns were satisfied. Paicos asked if repairs would be done on site. Meade indicated that they would. Paicos questioned the visitor parking area. Meade indicated that there was plenty of room for visitor parking, although not indicated on the plan. Paicos also noted that the plan lacked the office area and if proposed for the garage area he should indicate same on the plan. Paicos expressed a real concern that there is no exact plans for the home on the front of the lot. He also expressed concern with lots 1-15 because he felt that there is not enough space for access and egress. Paicos suggested that lots 1-4 were very unsafe as proposed. Paicos does not feel that having used car lots so close together is particululary good for the Town. Paicos also asked the Board why they do not require site plan approval as indicated by the Planning & Zoning Board’s comment and further why the Board continues to ignore the Planning Board’s responses on the applications. Paicos also indicated that he recently met with the Planning Board and they are greatly frustrated that the Board of Selectmen continue to ignore their comments on these applications.

Mr. Bart Foley indicated that he represents Mr. McLaughlin, an abutter to the property. He questioned if the town was limited to how many class II licenses they could approve. Paicos indicated that we can have 25 but we currently only have about 17. Foley indicated that they would like to do something similar to the lot adjacent to this lot. He questioned if this license were granted would this preclude another license being granted on the adjacent lot. Foley asked if site plan approval is really required. Hardin stated that we try to get the applicants to comply but we cannot legally deny them. Paicos reminded the Board that a Class II license was denied for this very reason.

At this point Meade reiterated that he would still have a Class II license at this site if he had not gotten behind on his taxes. Foley stated that he was not speaking against this license but was only present to protect the interest of the other lot.

Hardin suggested that lots 12,13,14,15 be used as visitor parking rather than display parking. Alternatively, other lots should be chosen for visitor parking. Meade indicated that this would not be a problem. Visitor parking would be designated behind the garage.

Clark indicated that a Class II license can be granted in an industrial or business zone although he seemed to remember that the adjacent lot which Foley was interested in was undersized and would need Board of Appeals approval. Foley indicated that the Assessors records were not correct and that he is currently working with the Building Inspector and Town Counsel on this very issue and that currently the land is being surveyed.

Clark motioned to approve the Class II license subject to depicting two visitor parking spaces on the plan adjacent to the garage for visitors and the office area also be shown on the plan at the garage area.

Paicos suggested that the Board consider the following additional conditions:

1. No outside storage of used car parts.

2. Conditional on site plan approval and construction

3. Receipt of letter re: Waste soil contamination

4. Approve more than 2 visitor spots

5. Reduce the number of lots

6. A condition that the home not be used at 612 Washington Street unless approved by the Board

of Selectmen.

Paicos also noted that he is not in favor of so many Class II licenses in one area. Specifically , Lot 76E did not go through site plan approval and it now looks like a disgrace. Paicos also told Meade that this was not a personal attack on him and that he was only trying to protect the best interests of the Town.

Webster seconded Clark’s motion at this time. She stated that she agreed with site plan approval issue but suggested this be brought up as an agenda item instead of in the middle of a hearing.

The Board voted unanimously to approve the Class II license, based on Clark’s conditions.

No Notes

Webster asked the status of the MBTA departmental responses. Paicos stated that we should have the responses back within a week or two. The Board will then review and then we will send the information along to the Legislatures.

Webster also commended the Fire Department on their recent open house held on October 4th.

Clark expressed concern with the DPW Director’s recent information that town buildings do not need to follow the town’s bylaws. Clark noted various violations with reference to town property or buildings. Paicos stated that the Fire Department sign issue had been addressed and they will comply with the bylaws. Clark noted that the canopy at the DPW should have gone through the Board of Appeals if required and site plan approval. Clark asked that this issue be brought up as an agenda item. Paicos suggested that he would get an opinion from Town Counsel on this issue and then ask the Chairman to have this discussed as a regular agenda item.

On Webster’s motion, seconded by Clark, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn at 8:50PM.

APPROVED_______________________________

DATE_______________________________