The Mulligan’s Island golf complex, where developer Churchill & Banks hopes to build a retail complex.

The Providence Journal / Kathy Borchers

CRANSTON — With a key hearing on the controversial Centre at Garden Hills retail proposal looming next week, a concerted push to win support from neighbors and city officials seems to be falling short.

Richard Baccari, CEO of Churchill & Banks, the Providence developer behind the plan, has sent letters to Mayor Michael T. Napolitano and City Council members in recent weeks, urging them to look beyond vocal neighborhood opposition.

“While it is always easy to listen to the group that screams the loudest,” Baccari wrote, “I ask that you consider our project as it is a responsible development for Cranston.”

And a prospective tenant, BJ’s Wholesale Club, has distributed letters to customers urging them to call Cranston city officials and push for official support of the project, which would be built on the 55-acre site of the Mulligan’s Island golf complex, on New London Avenue.

But with the city Planning Commission set to take up the project Tuesday, the effort does not appear to be paying dividends — at least not yet.

Napolitano, who has gone from door to door soliciting input from neighbors concerned about traffic and the loss of open space, voiced strong opposition to the proposal yesterday.

“I will not support the project,” he said, adding later, “I share the neighbors concerns — traffic, noise.”

Jeffrey P. Barone, the City Council member who represents the area, said there are enough votes on the council to block the project.

And he said he was surprised Baccari was still pushing the proposal.

But Greg O’Brien, a spokesman for Churchill & Banks, said pro-development petitions signed by dozens of Cranston residents in recent weeks show the project does have broad support.

And he said he was optimistic that the proposal, which the developer has scaled down in recent months in response to neighborhood criticism, will prevail on the merits.

“This is a very strong project,” he said. “It is in the interest of Cranston.”

Churchill & Banks, in its latest plan, is proposing a so-called “big-box” store, two smaller retail stores and two restaurants on the property.

The developer would also cede about 20 acres of the property to the city and is offering small plots of land to abutters.

But Rachel McNally, president of Save Cranston’s Open Space, a neighborhood group fighting the development, said residents remain firmly opposed to the project.

The land, once a cornfield, has served as open space for years, she noted.

“We’re not against economic development in Cranston,” she said. “However, there’s a place for it.”

The pressure applied by McNally and other neighbors has fueled opposition in the political ranks.

Inspired by the outcry over the project, Councilman Anthony J. Lupino proposed an ordinance in June that would have made it more difficult to pursue big-box developments in the city.

The effort stalled in August amid concerns about its scope and legality.

But city officials say they are looking at ways to tighten up requirements for large-scale retail proposals.

And Churchill & Banks is expected to face tough questions when it presents its plan to the Planning Commission next week.

The panel is unlikely to make any final decisions at the meeting. To move forward, the proposal needs conceptual approval from the board, which also would recommend changes to the city’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning codes to accommodate it.

The City Council has the final say on zone changes and amendments to the Comprensive Plan, a long-range planning document.

dscharfe@projo.com