WINCHESTER — Developers for a proposed combination Dunkin’ Donuts
and gas station rejected by a town board are taking their case to
court.
Project applicant S.S. Baker Realty Co. LLC filed an appeal of the Winchester Planning Board’s decision in Cheshire County Superior Court. The company alleges the board’s decision was based on perceptions, rather than facts, about traffic concerns, and that some planning board members had conflicts of interest and were biased against the proposal.
S.S. Baker Realty proposed building the combination
convenience store, gas station and Dunkin’ Donuts on its property at the
northeast corner of the Routes 10 and 78 intersection.
The planning board denied the company’s application 4-2 at its July 16 meeting, citing a concern the proposal “overwhelms the lot” and three safety issues: the left turn onto Route 10, cars possibly parking on the highway shoulder, and the potential overflow from a drive-through onto Route 78.
Board member Larry Hill abstained, saying he did not understand parts of the motion.
Teofilo Salema — the manager of S.S. Baker Realty and the owner of five other Dunkin’ Donuts, in Keene, Swanzey and Hinsdale — says he has done everything the board has asked of him.
The application’s traffic study was approved by the N.H. Department of Transportation, but was disregarded by the board because of anecdotal concerns, he said.
“They had nobody. They’re assuming they know better than the (Department of Transportation) and the people on the traffic study,” Salema said.
“Why did I spend so much money on traffic studies when they already knew what was going on?”
The appeal also alleges during the public hearings, “it became clear certain members of the Planning Board were acting improperly, had conflicts of interest or were otherwise biased against the Application, and these members should have been disqualified from hearing the Application.”
The petition does not directly accuse any board member or outside influence but asserts the board’s failure to remove biased members or those acting improperly resulted in unlawful hearings, deliberations and votes.
The appeal makes only an oblique reference to specific incidents through a quote from the board’s July 16 meeting minutes:
“(Gus) Ruth reminds the board of certain happenings of this board during the public hearing process such as (Kim) Gordon passing papers to Kulick’s attorney and other members passing ‘personal’ papers from one member to another then another. He does not believe this will look good in court.”
During the May 21 meeting, Gordon handed attorney Kelly E. Dowd a folder of site plan review regulations, according to the meeting minutes.
“She (Gordon) was sharing information with the other attorney in front of everybody,” Salema said in an interview. “That’s unacceptable.”
Kulick’s opposed the project through its attorneys during the public hearings. The store, located on Route 78 less than a half-mile from the intersection, runs gas pumps.
Owner Stanley S. Plifka Jr. told The Sentinel in July that if the proposal were to go through, “you’re going to have three gas stations you could physically throw a baseball to, and that makes no sense to me.”
Salema and his land use agent, James P. Phippard of Brickstone Land Use Consultants, implied a connection between Plifka and Gordon on at least two occasions during the public hearing and deliberations process.
Minutes of the the board’s May 21 meeting show when Gordon asked Phippard if the applicant would consider removing the gas pumps from the proposal, Phippard “replied no he would not do that for Mr. Plifka.”
And when Gordon introduced the motion to deny the application at the board’s July 16 meeting, and a fellow board member advised her to include her reasoning, Salema, who was in the audience, supplied one for her.
“Kulick’s,” he said.
Reached Sunday by telephone, Gordon and Plifka said it was the first they had heard of the appeal.
Plifka declined to comment, and Gordon denied the implied bias.
“There’s no bias for me ... there was no reason to recuse myself,” she said.
No hearings or conferences on the case have been scheduled yet.
Garrett Brnger can be reached at 352-1234, extension 1436, or gbrnger@keenesentinel.com.
Project applicant S.S. Baker Realty Co. LLC filed an appeal of the Winchester Planning Board’s decision in Cheshire County Superior Court. The company alleges the board’s decision was based on perceptions, rather than facts, about traffic concerns, and that some planning board members had conflicts of interest and were biased against the proposal.
The planning board denied the company’s application 4-2 at its July 16 meeting, citing a concern the proposal “overwhelms the lot” and three safety issues: the left turn onto Route 10, cars possibly parking on the highway shoulder, and the potential overflow from a drive-through onto Route 78.
Board member Larry Hill abstained, saying he did not understand parts of the motion.
Teofilo Salema — the manager of S.S. Baker Realty and the owner of five other Dunkin’ Donuts, in Keene, Swanzey and Hinsdale — says he has done everything the board has asked of him.
The application’s traffic study was approved by the N.H. Department of Transportation, but was disregarded by the board because of anecdotal concerns, he said.
“They had nobody. They’re assuming they know better than the (Department of Transportation) and the people on the traffic study,” Salema said.
“Why did I spend so much money on traffic studies when they already knew what was going on?”
The appeal also alleges during the public hearings, “it became clear certain members of the Planning Board were acting improperly, had conflicts of interest or were otherwise biased against the Application, and these members should have been disqualified from hearing the Application.”
The petition does not directly accuse any board member or outside influence but asserts the board’s failure to remove biased members or those acting improperly resulted in unlawful hearings, deliberations and votes.
The appeal makes only an oblique reference to specific incidents through a quote from the board’s July 16 meeting minutes:
“(Gus) Ruth reminds the board of certain happenings of this board during the public hearing process such as (Kim) Gordon passing papers to Kulick’s attorney and other members passing ‘personal’ papers from one member to another then another. He does not believe this will look good in court.”
During the May 21 meeting, Gordon handed attorney Kelly E. Dowd a folder of site plan review regulations, according to the meeting minutes.
“She (Gordon) was sharing information with the other attorney in front of everybody,” Salema said in an interview. “That’s unacceptable.”
Kulick’s opposed the project through its attorneys during the public hearings. The store, located on Route 78 less than a half-mile from the intersection, runs gas pumps.
Owner Stanley S. Plifka Jr. told The Sentinel in July that if the proposal were to go through, “you’re going to have three gas stations you could physically throw a baseball to, and that makes no sense to me.”
Salema and his land use agent, James P. Phippard of Brickstone Land Use Consultants, implied a connection between Plifka and Gordon on at least two occasions during the public hearing and deliberations process.
Minutes of the the board’s May 21 meeting show when Gordon asked Phippard if the applicant would consider removing the gas pumps from the proposal, Phippard “replied no he would not do that for Mr. Plifka.”
And when Gordon introduced the motion to deny the application at the board’s July 16 meeting, and a fellow board member advised her to include her reasoning, Salema, who was in the audience, supplied one for her.
“Kulick’s,” he said.
Reached Sunday by telephone, Gordon and Plifka said it was the first they had heard of the appeal.
Plifka declined to comment, and Gordon denied the implied bias.
“There’s no bias for me ... there was no reason to recuse myself,” she said.
No hearings or conferences on the case have been scheduled yet.
Garrett Brnger can be reached at 352-1234, extension 1436, or gbrnger@keenesentinel.com.
13 comments:
So now in order to be a member of any board in this town, you can't have any friends, what horsecrap.
Gordon did nothing wrong. She handed a questioning member of the public, who happened to be an attorney, a site review that should have been available anyways. The fact that he was an attorney proves this fact, as he would have been well aware if his asking was a violation of any law.The guy isn't stupid folks.
Why wasn't this material available at the meeting where all relevant documents are suppose to be as required by law?
Why did Ruth open his mouth and make that stupid statement, was it because the fix was in and it all fell apart when Doherty screwed up by voting no?
With all of the really relevant information being left out of written minutes by boards all the time, why did Sharra feel it necessary to put Ruth's statement in these minutes? Was it to give a reason for appeal?
How did this Salema come to find out that Kim Gordon and members of the Plifka family are friends, should we be checking to see if he is friends with anyone on the board?
What about Larry Hill's open admission he was having talks with these people outside of board meetings, why wasn't that brought up in this story? Did the person gave this reporter the information for this story tell him about Hill?
Seems another witch hunt is in the offering here folks, another attempt by the same 3 board members as before to discredit Gordon to get what they want. Anyone see a pattern?
Who supplied this information to this reporter who was not at the meeting? Was it Sharra, Ruth, Beaman or our lovely Joan Morel?
Who's working with Selema to help him with this appeal?
Seems the fix is still in if you read the Selectman's minutes where Beaman asks what the board can do if they know they are going to be sued.
Pay close attention folks, lots of bullcrap going on here.
Please folks.....Let them build a Dunkin Donuts. Seems like everyone complains that this town has no business etc and ANY time someone wants to do something GOOD, it's defeated or ends up in a lawsuit. Let's move this town forward and stop the complaining and nit picking. We all have to do our part. Start today by voting!
I agree with the comment made at 3:53pm. Let them build the gas station and DD's. Why is everyone so loyal to Kulicks when they have been instrumental in shutting down several local businesses just by being competition. I live in the middle of town and I actually get my gas at Gomarlo's because it is convenient. Let's see what happens if there is another gas station in town.
Are you blind? There are business coming in to town all over!
If your an attorney with a client who has tried to get his way with common folk that take time out of their life to sit on boards like budget committee, planning board or library or what ever for no pay and failed their attempts have their way with niceties, his only choice is, you must attack the weakest link personally. It seems to me there is something sinister in all this project. Applicant S. S. Baker and Teofilo Salema were well prepared, well informed, had knowledge forehand about the facts a certain person is setting on the planning board that is vulnerable to personal attacks because of her past history so the others will cut and run. This person Kim Gordon proved in court it was just a Margaret Sharra’s attempt to remover Kim! Teo Salema didn’t attend planning board meeting to acquire this information, someone who knows, who attends meetings, who has the motive with hatred to make a deal, are the two persons who wants Kim Gordon gone…..Margaret Sharra and Gus Ruth. If their attorney is any good at all he will made a deal, where you get your Dunkin Donut if you get Kim Gordon for us!
Now if you voters put up with kind of crap from our town elected people and town employees we are all in trouble.
Where? The random used clothing stores and a ridiculous fireworks store?? And a candy store.... when half the kids and adults teeth are rotting out??
He doesn't want to just build a Dunkin Donuts, he wants to build a large convenience store with a drive through donuts shoppe and 6 gas pumps on all that very small corner lot, that's why they said no. We don't need another gas station across the street from one that is already there or just up the road from two others.
That there are no businesses coming to this crooked little town is no wonder when you have people like Sharra, Ruth, the Beamans and Hill, among others dictating who and what comes in. Get real people, look what they have done to this town and at the real reasons this town is such a dump. If the voters in this town don't care enough to take notice and vote these people the hell out of the positions they hold then nothing here will ever change. If you want businesses to come here and if you want change then get off your duffs and do something instead of just whining.
Good point ANNOY 7:26 and 6:41. Ever wonder why gas and fuel prices are all the same price all along RTE 10....a moment to think...... for those that do not get it “no competition”! Get it! Competition keeps prices down. Economics 101! Unless you have more money then brains, for those who are just getting by. I want to save money on the cost of gas and spend it on things like food. Who care if you take a left turn out Dunkin Donuts. I want more business in town to help our tax base low. That intersection is a pig sty and Butch Plifka could have bought the lot 50 times before Teo Salema came along . We know Butch tried to get a permit before and he has no one but Sharra and Gus Ruth to blame. Gus invited his friends the Bosivert to buy the racetrack without thought of traffic then, now it is a problem.
You forgot about Big Daddy's Campers, a used car lot, an asphalt plant, a brewery, a motorcross repair and sale shop...to name a few more
Brewery? Where? We need businesses to help the tax rate. Those above mentioned businesses are great for the individuals who owns them...
The brewery is going in on Old Chesterfield Road, and I believe the board is being sued for approving it. The real problem is that people have blindly voted for a horrific zoning ordinance and all the annual changes that have been manipulated to favor certain people who wanted to avoid specific restrictions. An example of this is expanding the downtown business district so that the Learning Center's planned new facility would not fall within the aquifer protection district. It would have taken up too much of the lot with building and pavement if it fell within the APD. Don't forget that a Beaman owned that real estate whrn the change was made.
Who do you think has rigged the zoning over all these years? Hint: MS
Just wondering if my comment went through regarding the past owners of the Winchester Learning Center's new location. I mentioned that prior to the WLC purchasing it, it was owned by Butch Plifka and before that Penny and Jeff Vaine. I was wondering when a Beaman owned it as the Anonymous poster on Sept 14 at 5:26AM mentioned. Thanks.
Post a Comment