Updated 4:47 p.m.
ESSEX JUNCTION — The Development Review Board in Essex, after another hourslong meeting Thursday night, nixed Scannell Properties’ proposal to build an Amazon distribution facility in Saxon Hill.
After months of debate, the decision came at 9:08 p.m. when the seven-member volunteer board reconvened in the Essex High School auditorium after an hourlong private session.
Ian Carroll, chair of the board, said a vote to approve the application failed 4-2, with one board member yet to weigh in.
The result came after careful deliberation, he said, and was based solely on the merits of the application and current zoning regulations.
The announcement drew cheers from the remaining members of the public at the late hour. Some of them grouped outside to discuss the matter after the meeting ended.
“It’s an inflection point for Essex in terms of people speaking (out) in wanting to uphold the town plan,” said resident Lorraine Zaloom, who saw the vote as “a victory for Essex and the surrounding communities.”
Named Project Moose, the site plan outlines a 107,000-square-foot facility and 482 parking spaces at 637 Kimo Drive on 22.94 acres of mostly vacant and wooded land in the Saxon Hill Industrial Park off Thompson Drive. If built, it would be the first Amazon facility in Vermont.
Scannell, the commercial real estate development company headquartered in Indianapolis, is seeking a waiver for the required 50-foot buffer between the property and Kimo Drive.
The applicant could appeal the decision to the state’s environmental court, according to Town Manager Greg Duggan.
The vote was an important victory and “resoundingly rejected the merits of the application,” said Jared Carter, one of two lawyers representing about 23 Essex residents and a newly formed nonprofit called ACRES — an acronym for Alliance of Concerned Residents Envisioning Solutions — who oppose the project.
Jeffrey Polubinski, an attorney representing Scannell Properties, declined to comment Friday. Amazon emailed a response.
“We’re disappointed with this decision as our proposal was developed through collaboration with town officials and staff and designed to comply with all applicable regulations, while also supporting local economic development goals and the needs of our customers in the Burlington-area,” said Steve Kelly, Amazon spokesperson, in an emailed statement.
The company will share next steps after it reviews the board’s reason for declining to approve the plan, he added.
In an email Friday, Duggan wrote a letter will be released within 45 days outlining the reasons for the denial.
Meanwhile, a similar project is slated closer to the Canadian border in Champlain, New York, north of Plattsburgh, where Amazon recently bought a 17.76-acre parcel, Channel 5 reported.
The hotly debated project has continued to gain public opposition since it was proposed earlier this year. In hours of testimony over the last few months residents opposed to the project cited health and environmental concerns and highlighted Amazon’s record of hazardous and low-paying working conditions.
Thursday night, protesters gathered at the entrance of the high school building at 6 p.m. with posters and a song before the start of the fifth public hearing.
Earlier this week, Phoenix Books announced an open letter to town officials calling for “whatever measures are necessary to prevent a decision from being made that will have negative and lasting impacts on our regional roads, traffic safety, flood resilience, economy, and job market for the entire state.”
The letter has garnered more than 400 signatures, including area small business owners, according to Joanna Grossman, a Burlington resident and community relations manager at Phoenix Books, which has a store in the Essex Experience mall in Essex.
Grossman was among more than 80 people who attended the public hearing Thursday, held this time in the high school auditorium. About 70 people attended remotely online. A majority of those who spoke made comments opposing the proposal at the meeting, which began at 6:30 p.m.
Speakers reiterated concerns of traffic congestion, increased noise and road safety — particularly during school dismissal times — and emphasized the need for multiple access points to the site for fire safety.
At its previous meeting on July 26, the town board had asked Amazon to present a more realistic traffic study.
At Thursday’s meeting, members of the board and the public criticized a lack of answers, particularly trip generation estimates from comparable facilities and better peak hour traffic estimates.
Daniel Clarey, senior traffic engineer at Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, said the proposed “super rural facility is very unique to Amazon,” which makes it difficult to provide actual on-the-ground data.
The proposal further included post occupancy monitoring and would have to pass the state’s Act 250 process, which also considers traffic, he added.
“I don’t think the answers that have been given are satisfactory,” said board member Trefor Williams.
Anthony Stout, a senior planner and local expert for the attorneys representing town residents, said he analyzed the traffic studies submitted. He took issue with the traffic counts submitted as unrealistic given the existing traffic on Rte. 117, among other things.
He said it was suspect the applicant could present operation data — how many trips going in and out and when — but not a comparable traffic analysis.
“If they’re relying upon this operation schedule and they want you to base your decision on that, then (they should) produce it, provide you the data,” he said at the meeting.
Representatives at the meeting said they did not have comparable data to present.
Ultimately, residents opposing the plan said that is what tipped the balance in their favor.
“I think it was quite telling that Amazon refused to provide comparable traffic estimates from comparable sites around the country. I think that was a critical component of the testimony last night,” Carter said Friday.
Ken Signorello, the chair of the town’s conservation and trails committee — and the person who composed a protest song and led residents in singing outside the meeting space — said the committee 10 days ago filed significant concerns about removing the buffer zone and advised the board to reject the waiver and the proposal.
A handful of residents, including developer Al Senecal of Allen Brook Development who owns that parcel and several others in the Saxon Hill industrial park, spoke in favor of the Amazon project.
“I don’t see the traffic impact being any different” than what folks already face trying to get onto Route 117, said Dana Sweeney, a Sand Hill Road resident who said she never hears trucks going into the industrial park, which is home to a few manufacturers.
Zoned reservation District-Industrial (RPD-I), the area is slated for development that will be good for the town, she said, “because we need to increase our tax base, we need to increase jobs in our community.”
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the location of the Essex Experience mall.
