Saturday April 27, 2024 
Byline: LARRY RULISON
Schodack
A group of neighbors suing the town of Schodack Planning Board over its approval of a 1-million-square-foot Amazon distribution center on Route 9 say in their most recent court filing that they aren’t trying to kill the $100 million project.
Rather, the group, known as the Birchwood Association, just wants an adequate environmental study of the project done before any building takes place.
The Birchwood Association, a group of about 50 homeowners who live next to the proposed 116-acre Amazon site, sued the Schodack Planning Board and the project’s developer, Scannell Properties, in state Supreme Court in Rensselaer County on July 30, nearly a month after the Planning Board gave the OK to the project.
The neighborhood association filed what’s known as an Article 78 proceeding, which is a way for citizens to challenge decisions by government bodies like planning boards. A state Supreme Court judge rules on such lawsuits.
The lawsuit claims that the Schodack Planning Board violated state environmental protection laws by not requiring that a lengthy Environmental Impact Statement be completed before voting on the project.
A decision is not expected for several months as the judge overseeing the case, state Supreme Court Justice Patrick McGrath, reviews the record and arguments by both sides.
The Schodack Planning Board, represented by the law firm Girvin & Ferlazzo, has argued that it did nothing wrong and took all the required steps to vet the project before granting approval on July 2.
As part of its Sept. 21 response to the Article 78 suit, the Planning Board’s attorneys argued that the Birchwood Association should have also brought the lawsuit against the current landowners of the proposed project site.
The Route 9 site on which Amazon wants to build is actually two different parcels with different owners. The owners have contracts with Scannell to sell the land if the project moves forward.
However, in a response to the Planning Board that was filed on Oct. 19, the Birchwood Association argued that there is no reason to sue the landowners also because they will not be impacted either way by the lawsuit.
“The passive landowners, who have made no applications, received no permits, and whose contracts with Scannell will presumably remain in place regardless of the outcome of this litigation, are not necessary parties,” the Oct. 19 filing states.
The Birchwood Association, which is represented by the Albany law firm of McNamee Lochner, added that the Amazon project may still move forward even if it wins the Article 78 and the Planning Board’s July 2 vote is reversed.
“Petitioners have not pleaded that the project cannot under any circumstances, be built,” lawyers for the Birchwood Association wrote. “Petitioners simply ask this court to order the board to do what it should have done in the first place — follow the appropriate review procedures under (the state environmental quality review act), issue a positive declaration, and prepare an (Environmental Impact Statement) so that the true impacts of the project can be assessed and mitigated.”
lrulison@timesunion.com – 518-454-5504 – @larryrulison
A group of neighbors suing the town of Schodack Planning Board over its approval of a 1-million-square-foot Amazon distribution center on Route 9 say in their most recent court filing that they aren’t trying to kill the $100 million project.
Rather, the group, known as the Birchwood Association, just wants an adequate environmental study of the project done before any building takes place.
The Birchwood Association, a group of about 50 homeowners who live next to the proposed 116-acre Amazon site, sued the Schodack Planning Board and the project’s developer, Scannell Properties, in state Supreme Court in Rensselaer County on July 30, nearly a month after the Planning Board gave the OK to the project.
The neighborhood association filed what’s known as an Article 78 proceeding, which is a way for citizens to challenge decisions by government bodies like planning boards. A state Supreme Court judge rules on such lawsuits.
The lawsuit claims that the Schodack Planning Board violated state environmental protection laws by not requiring that a lengthy Environmental Impact Statement be completed before voting on the project.
A decision is not expected for several months as the judge overseeing the case, state Supreme Court Justice Patrick McGrath, reviews the record and arguments by both sides.
The Schodack Planning Board, represented by the law firm Girvin & Ferlazzo, has argued that it did nothing wrong and took all the required steps to vet the project before granting approval on July 2.
As part of its Sept. 21 response to the Article 78 suit, the Planning Board’s attorneys argued that the Birchwood Association should have also brought the lawsuit against the current landowners of the proposed project site.
The Route 9 site on which Amazon wants to build is actually two different parcels with different owners. The owners have contracts with Scannell to sell the land if the project moves forward.
However, in a response to the Planning Board that was filed on Oct. 19, the Birchwood Association argued that there is no reason to sue the landowners also because they will not be impacted either way by the lawsuit.
“The passive landowners, who have made no applications, received no permits, and whose contracts with Scannell will presumably remain in place regardless of the outcome of this litigation, are not necessary parties,” the Oct. 19 filing states.
The Birchwood Association, which is represented by the Albany law firm of McNamee Lochner, added that the Amazon project may still move forward even if it wins the Article 78 and the Planning Board’s July 2 vote is reversed.
“Petitioners have not pleaded that the project cannot under any circumstances, be built,” lawyers for the Birchwood Association wrote. “Petitioners simply ask this court to order the board to do what it should have done in the first place — follow the appropriate review procedures under (the state environmental quality review act), issue a positive declaration, and prepare an (Environmental Impact Statement) so that the true impacts of the project can be assessed and mitigated.”
lrulison@timesunion.com – 518-454-5504 – @larryrulison