What do you think? Time for some new board members!

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.