Amazon Asks for Approval Vote

By Joshua Walther

SCHOHARIE - Last Tuesday, the Schoharie Planning Board heard further remarks from the Amazon team managing the former Highbridge warehouse project.

Discussions picked up where they left off last month, where the Board asked Amazon for drainage, traffic, and noise studies following dissatisfaction with some of their incomplete answers.

Now, the team, consisting of two Amazon representatives, Marc de Bourbon from FSI, and several engineers from McFarland Johnson, presented their newly updated site plan and finished studies, which were received with mixed results.

To begin, Amazon gave more details about their noise wall that would surround their west-side truck court, saying that the gray-green wall would be ten feet high, be made from recycled plastic, and would shield the court from Route 30A while cutting the noise from backup alarms.

In addition, the wall would be engineered to be low maintenance and could last up to fifty years, all the while blending in with landscaping in front of and around it.

The team also included a photometric map with their site plan to show the placement of their light fixtures, which would include cut-off guards around the bulb to avoid light pollution by aiming the light downward.

Amazon then provided the Board with a rendered video of a car’s point of view traveling on I-88 and Route 30A, which showcased what the landscaping would look like in one year versus ten years. The warehouse would be largely visible when the trees are freshly planted, but once they’ve been installed for years, the trees would grow to mostly screen the facility.

Jumping into the studies, McFarland Johnson’s drainage engineer presented first. He said that the information was very similar to what Highbridge previously presented, and attested that with the stormwater ponds, the plot would see three times less drainage off-site than there is right now.

Next, the traffic engineer proposed a three-light signal at the intersection of I-88’s westbound off-ramp and another at the warehouse’s southern employee entrance, though the other two driveways can get away with a turning lane that doesn’t impede the thru-traffic of Route 30A.

Finally, the noise engineer took the floor, where he said that after taking into account the trucks’ backup alarms, 30A’s traffic and vehicle circulation on-site, the proposed eleven fifty-ton HVAC units on the roof, and all of Amazon’s effort to attenuate the noise through walls and parapets, the site would only see a one to three decibel increase from what it is right now.

Board member Andrew Rowles grew concerned over the numbers, stating that he thought a three decibel increase meant double the sound, but the engineer assured him that it would be imperceptible to human hearing.

To wrap up their presentation, Amazon provided a SEQRA Compliance analysis, where they compared their overall numbers and impact to what Highbridge would have been.

Many sections were the same, such as impact on land, groundwater aquifers, and energy having no change, though some saw improvements, such as sewer and water using 5,100 less gallons per day and the smaller building having less visual impact.

However, the most shocking numbers were in peak traffic flow, where Amazon proposed that it would see 44 line haul trucks per day compared to Highbridge’s 88. Peak AM traffic decreased from 581 to 89, and peak PM decreased from 500 to 235.

Once the presentation concluded, Board members were free to ask questions and put forth their own suggestions, of which there were numerous.

Board member Dawn Johnson wanted to see another noise wall be built on the plot’s southern side to protect the neighboring resident’s view.

When Amazon told her that they might consider a fabric noise fence, she held her ground, stating “I wouldn’t want to see a tarp there, I want to see a solid wall.”

Continuing on visuals, Chairwoman Kathryn Saddlemire took issue with Amazon’s branding of the warehouse, as an iconic light blue line stretches all the way around its roof, and said that the Board previously told Highbridge that the building must be a neutral color.

“This isn’t what was approved before,” she said. “Do all of your facilities look the same? Are there any options that you could give us? I wouldn’t want something like that in my town.”

Finally, the Board agreed that they would want to see a financial analysis comparison to Highbridge, noting it was important because the potential economic growth of the Town is the only reason why the project is being considered.

Amazon took all of their questions into consideration, and Mr. de Bourbon ended the night by appealing to Chairwoman Saddlemire for a speedy approval vote.

“Is it alright if we ask that at your next meeting, September 16th, you would hold a vote on the future of the project? We’d like some guidance before the winter starts,” he said.

Chairwoman Saddlemire replied by saying that September 16th could be a public hearing, which needs to be held first, and that the Board still has to have time to meet independently for discussion.

However, noting the urgency, the Board moved to schedule a public hearing for September 16th at 7 PM, and they will hold a special workshop that is not open to the public on September 2nd.