After Wednesday night’s Zoom meeting filled to capacity, blocking others from joining, the Board of Appeals moved a hearing about the 290 West Main Street gas station variance application to Oct. 2.

Abutters of the property — which sits at the intersection of School Street and West Main Street — packed the virtual meeting room. Other residents hoping to hear more about the plan and raise their concerns were in attendance as well.

About an hour after the meeting started, it was brought to the attention of the board that some residents were unable to enter the Zoom meeting, which had been set to cap at 100 attendees and had reached the max. Denying people access would constitute a violation of the state’s open meeting laws.

The board determined the public hearing needed to be rescheduled and settled on Oct. 2 as the best available date. Members agreed on a hybrid model for the meeting, opting to use space in the Select Board room at Town Hall.

Prior to the meeting adjournment, representatives of Rte 85 Realty Corp. had begun presenting their case to the board.

The company is looking for approval of a use variance on the parcel, as the land is zoned as an agricultural district. The variance would maintain the current zoning while allowing specific use for a country store and gas station.

Neal Bingham, Rte 85 Realty’s lawyer, argued that the allowed uses under the applicable zoning bylaws created a burden for his client.

“Literal enforcement of the bylaws would create a hardship [for the developer],” Bingham explained.

He and Shawn Reardon, the project’s civil engineer, described conditions on the site that make the land “undevelopable” under the existing zoning rules.

Reardon cited a large wetland on the western edge of the property and steep slopes as factors that push any developable projects too far east, “to what is otherwise sort of an uninhabitable area” in his estimation.

The developer suggests that the proposal is the most appropriate use of the land, beyond what currently is allowed in the agricultural zoning district.

According to a memorandum Bingham’s law firm filed with the board, its insistence on the variance versus a complete rezoning is to keep the project “in a style consistent with the existing semi-rural residential neighborhood.”

The realty company’s proposal would see the construction of a 4,000-square-foot country store with four pump islands on the north side of the development. Four electric vehicle (EV) charging stations would be installed as well as a new stormwater management system for the property.

Also featured in the design are pollinator gardens as well as blueberry bush plantings that would serve as a transition to the wetlands west of the parcel.

Before the hearing was postponed, members of the board asked clarifying questions.

Member Shawn Masterson inquired about current ownership of the property.

Bingham responded that Allan O’Connor still holds the deed. O’Connor previously operated the Evergreen Haven Garden Center on the property.

Bingham went on to explain that O’Connor had entered into an agreement with Rte 85 Realty to sell the property should the project move forward.

Other members expressed concerns over the necessity of showing hardship and what standing the developer had to make a variance request in the first place.

Businessman Kevin Meehan — the owner of Rte 85 Realty Corp. — requested the proposal be withdrawn without prejudice. His team explained that it would prefer to make its case from the start, rather than picking up from this stopping point. The board accepted the request and provided instructions to Meehan’s team on how to refile the application for the Oct. 2 hearing.

A rendering provided to the Board of Appeals by Rte 85 Realty Corp. shows the proposed layout for a country store and gas station at 290 West Main Street.

Residents want voices heard

Because of the issues with Wednesday night’s meeting, residents continue to wait for their concerns to be addressed.

Prior to the meeting, a coalition of residents organized to submit objections to the town and get people to attend the public hearing.

“We collected close to 100 signatures of our neighborhood and taxpayers who are opposed to this,” Alison Fitzpatrick said in an earlier interview with the Independent. She and her husband, Jim, live on Dicarlo Road and directly abut the 290 West Main Street property.

They, along with other abutters, have submitted their objections to multiple town committees.

“Not one person we’ve talked to has said this is a good idea,” Alison Fitzpatrick noted.

The Fitzpatricks and their neighbors share a long list of concerns they want addressed by both the developer and the town. They have questions about the process the developer is taking to get approval, environmental and traffic concerns and the project’s necessity.

While the memorandum Rte 85 Realty sent to the Board of Appeals reports the developer has spoken with abutters and “received generally favorable feedback from those who responded,” the Fitzpatricks and others claim no such outreach attempts were made.

“We only heard about [the public hearing] secondhand,” Alison Fitzpatrick stated.

Because their property also sits against the wetlands impacting the 290 West Main Street parcel, the Fitzpatricks — who have lived in town for almost 20 years — see the variance application as a double standard in process.

They explained that they have consistently worked with the Conservation Commission to ensure any home improvement projects they’ve undertaken have not encroached upon the wetlands. The couple would like to see the developers go through the same rigorous process.

“We worry about 40,000 gallons of gasoline in the ground,” said Jim Fitzpatrick. 

He claimed that the area has high water tables, and that neighbors fear a leak from the storage tanks could spill down into Lake Maspenock.

Steve Conti, another resident of Dicarlo Road, echoed these sentiments. “Beyond the obvious environmental impacts, these things also need vetting by the Fire Department,” he said.

According to Conti, the neighborhood is at the furthest end of the town relative to the Fire Department’s location on Main Street.

Said Conti: “They need to be able to get up here and have a safety plan.”

The developer has asserted that its plan will be put through the proper channels. It is intended to go through a site plan approval from the Planning Board, notice of intent to the Conservation Commission and a formal design review process. 

However, residents have continued to express wariness over the variance request. They indicated that they would prefer the developer pursues its project through standard vetting channels versus exceptions under a variance.

“We’re just asking that [the plan] follows the normal process,” said Alison Fitzpatrick.