Central Falls Oil Tank Zoning Case Headed To Court

CENTRAL FALLS, RI — Lawyers for Western Oil and for the City of Central Falls are scheduled to appear in court next week and argue for the resolution of a zoning controversy.

The Zoning Board of Review on Oct. 7 denied an application from Western Oil for a height variance and special use permit to construct nine new 30,000-gallon above-ground storage tanks at its 1 Duchess Way facility. Western Oil then sued the city seeking a reversal of that decision.

The Providence Journal reports that Western has hired Atty. Michael A. Kelly, "a veteran litigator who has extensive experience in zoning law and at one point was general counsel for Cumberland Farms/Gulf Oil Inc." Kelly, in an interview with reporter Jim Hummel, called the 5-0 Zoning Board vote a "hack decision." Kelly also said the board took 111 days to issue a formal decision, delaying any appeal.

Nick Hemond, a former assistant solicitor in Central Falls who specializes in zoning issues, is handling the appeal for the city. The two sides are scheduled to appear in Superior Court on July 13 before Judge Richard Raspallo.

Last fall, many people went on record to oppose the project, including then-mayor James Diossa, some city councilors, state lawmakers, and local residents. The board's vote against the project was unanimous. The oil recycling company is near the Lincoln border, is close to Scott Pond, and abuts a residential area.

Live in Central Falls? Click here to subscribe to our breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox and mobile devices. You can also download our Patch mobile app on Android or iPhone.

The city in 2006 gave Western permission to install four 15,000-gallon tanks, and in 2012, Western won approval for four 35-foot tanks. The current proposal would more than double the company's capacity.

In April, Atty. General Peter Neronha ruled that the Zoning Board in Central Falls violated the state's Open Meeting Act when it didn't post minutes from its meetings in a timely manner. Western Oil, Inc. had filed the complaint alleging that minutes from Sept. 2, 16, 23, 30, and Oct. 7 — where their project was discussed — were not made available to them as required by state law.