Neighborly Concerns Derail BJ's Gas Station Bid In Medford

MEDFORD, MA — The Medford City Council on Tuesday denied a petition from BJ's Wholesale Club to install a gas station for members at its Medford store. The unanimous vote came after a lengthy public hearing, during which the company outlined its plan for the site and fielded accusations of not being a "good neighbor" from councilors and residents.

The store at 278 Middlesex Ave. opened 37 years ago as the wholesale club's first location. Patrick Netreba, director of real estate at BJ's, reiterated its importance to the company, which has since expanded to 219 locations, 149 of which have gas stations.

"Medford is a real special club for us," Netreba said. "Fuel is a big part of what we do and our members clamor for it."

But councilors didn't buy Netreba's refrain. Many of them, including Michael Marks, who lives nearby, raised concerns over regular maintenance – or lack thereof – at the site. He rebuked Netreba's claim that the Medford club receives extra maintenance.

"It's great to say this is their first club, this is their flagship store, it receives extra maintenance," Marks said. "All you have to do is open your eyes and see that none of that is true."

Marks described holes in the fence along Woodruff Avenue, leading to debris from the BJ's lot spilling into the neighborhood, and said he calls the Medford Public Works Department "two to three times" a year to get the area cleaned. Other issues he raised included safety concerns for pedestrians – "you're taking your life into your hands walking through their lot," Marks said – overnight sweeping in the lot and drag racing.

"These aren't made up stories. This is what the neighbors have to put up with," Marks said. "BJ's has not been a good neighbor."

Netreba promised renewed attention to maintenance at the store, acknowledging that the standard may not have been met in the past. The proposed project, which would have installed six pump islands with two pumps on each, also included environmental improvements to the area, less harsh lighting than what is currently in place at the lot and installation of a new fence

Austin Turner, the civil engineer/land development consultant on the project, said the plan called for 14 street trees, ground cover plantings and a lawn area, in addition to a land mound designed to direct the flow of traffic in a single direction to prevent jamming. Accessibility improvements such as sidewalks were included as well.

Project representatives pointed to their record of working with the Community Development Board and the Conservation Commission to enhance the design, and subsequent approval from those bodies, as evidence of their commitment to Medford.

But many of those offerings were contingent on the petition's approval, as they would have been done as part of the lot work. Council President Richard Caraviello said he was "disappointed" some of the work was conditional, in light of years of complaints and the company's stated desire to improve the store's reputation.

"I'm a BJ's customer, probably 30+ years. I don't go to that store," Caraviello said. "Want to know why? It's dirty. You guys don't spend any money there."

Netreba said BJ's is committed to maintenance requests like the new fence, but without construction on the lot, some of the drainage improvements and Artscape projects will not be completed.

Traffic, fire safety, gasoline emissions and additional trucks were among the other concerns raised by the City Council. Councilors Nicole Morell and Adam Knight pointed out that with four other gas stations already in a mile radius, and the station only being open to BJ's members, the proposal did not fill a public need.

"I really do dispute the idea there are public benefits associated with it when it's a members only business for profit for a private business," Jessica Wall, an attorney who spoke on behalf of nearby residents and businesses, echoed.

Netreba moved to withdraw the petition, while councilors went forward with a vote on the motion to reject. There was some discussion over whether it was too late for BJ's to withdraw the paper, an issue on which the Council will get a legal opinion.