Planners clash with applicant over gas station plan

By Jay Turner

Tensions ran high at last week’s Planning Board meeting as members George Jenkins and Jeremy Comeau, for the second meeting in a row, clashed with Canton attorney Paul Schneiders and his client, Ronen Drory, over a proposed gas station/convenience store project on Route 138.

Source: CCTV

Having previously engaged in a lengthy discussion over traffic impacts and believing they had addressed all of the board’s concerns, both Schneiders and Drory returned last Wednesday expecting a quick resolution and a vote. Instead it was much of the same, with board members questioning whether the gas station was simply too much on a property with two other major uses.

The site in question, located at 955 Turnpike Street across from the Turnpike Café, already has a car wash and a vacuum station and has been approved for an indoor/outdoor soccer complex that would run parallel to Route 138 along the rear half of the property.

The original proposal for the gas station had also called for a drive-through window to sell coffee, but Schneiders said his client agreed to remove it from the plans — at a “huge financial loss” — based on input from the zoning and planning boards.

To further appease the board, Schneiders said on Wednesday that his client would add a right-hand turn lane at the exit to the property, which would increase exiting time by at least 50 percent.

“I think we’ve made some really substantial concessions,” Schneiders said, “and we hope that we’ve satisfied all of your concerns at this point.”

However, both Jenkins and Comeau, along with fellow board member Gary Vinciguerra, continued to express concerns over the flow of traffic internally, citing too many instances where motorists could get confused and potentially cross paths.

Comeau, who filled in as chairman for an absent Kristin Mirliani, went so far as to call the traffic pattern a “nightmare,” while Jenkins likened it to the “old bumper cars down at Nantasket Beach.”

“This plan is too busy,” said Comeau, repeating a claim he had made at the board’s previous meeting. “There are too many things going on in this site.”

Surprised by the board’s continued resistance, a frustrated Schneiders fired back at the project’s two most vocal opponents while admitting he was at a loss as to how to proceed.

“The idea has been to take what we thought was an excellent plan, the one that our client wanted to do, and try to keep amending it until we got what the Planning Board was happy with,” said Schneiders, “and I don’t really know how to proceed with this board anymore.”

Schneiders said it seemed like certain board members — Jenkins in particular — had no intention of approving the project regardless of any changes they might propose.

“Can’t you help us out a little and make it a better project instead of simply throwing stones?” he asked.

Jenkins, in response, said he would gladly endorse a “better plan,” as long as it was one that kept the “internal traffic safe for people who use it.”

“I’m trying to make a better plan,” he said, “not for you, not for a long shot for you, but for the public. That’s who I serve.”

With the two sides still clearly far apart, Schneiders went on to suggest that the board appoint two members to meet with his client in an attempt to work out any remaining differences. He also asked that the board provide them with a written list of concerns as well as a list of possible solutions.

Board member Chris Connolly, who indicated his support for the project during the meeting, agreed to serve on the two-member committee along with Comeau.

Connolly also defended some of Schneiders’ remarks while urging all board members to be more cooperative with the applicants. “They can’t read our minds,” Connolly said.

The hearing will continue at the Planning Board’s next meeting on Wednesday, November 2.

In other news:

The Planning Board continued a hearing that began two weeks prior on a proposed liquor store at 2740R Washington Street (Rte. 138), where the former Interstate Towing building currently stands.

Schneiders was also the attorney for the second applicant, Dr. Assaad Saya, and like the first hearing of the evening, traffic on the site had been the major concern of the board.

Saya, who also owns the gas station at 2740 Washington Street, wants to raze the Interstate Towing building and replace it with a 4,800-square-foot liquor store. However, he had also indicated a willingness to use the existing building in the absence of site plan approval.

But on Wednesday, October 19, Saya returned to the board with two new ideas — one that would make the entrance and exit to the liquor store a one-way road, and a far more expensive alternative plan that would involve razing the four-year-old gas station building and combining it with the liquor store in the rear of the site.

Schneiders said he had advised Saya not to combine the two businesses for legal reasons, although that was the option that the majority of board members preferred. Both sides agreed to continue the discussion at the board’s next meeting on November 2.

* The Planning Board heard from Attorney Michael Curran on a proposed 17-lot subdivision off Stonewood Drive in East Canton, near York Street. The applicant, John Crugnale, was seeking a special permit under the town’s flexible development bylaw, which allows for smaller lot sizes if the developer agrees to set aside land for open space.

Curran said his client is seeking to develop less than half of the 44 acres he owns while preserving a large area of open space to be used as hiking trails.

There was some question, however, as to whether the application met all of the requirements for a flexible development permit. The board eventually agreed to continue the hearing on November 16 at 7:05 p.m.

* A hearing on a proposed seven-unit condo project at 41 Plymouth Street was postponed and will be rescheduled at a later date.

Share This Post

Short URL: https://www.thecantoncitizen.com/?p=9150