“Like I told you before, these people will tell you everything that you want to hear that’s good, but they’re not going to tell you anything negative,” said Montgomery resident Tom Weber.

Weber spoke at a public scoping session held by the town’s planning board last week, regarding the warehouses proposed by RDM Group on Neelytown and Beaver Dam Roads. The session was not a public hearing, but an opportunity for residents to bring up anything they felt needed to be addressed by the applicant and their draft Environmental Impact Statement.

The project entails two warehouses on about 88 acres at Neelytown Road and Beaver Dam Road, adjacent to FedEx, UNFI and residential homes. The first warehouse would be 214,000 square feet and the second would be 692,000 square feet. There is also a 300-space truck parking lot proposed.

Weber was concerned about the proposed access road for employee vehicles onto Beaver Dam Road. He said that would negatively impact the road and residences on that street to have hundreds of vehicles pouring through their neighborhood to access the facility each day. He also noted that the proposed exit is located on both a hill and a curve, in an area where traffic pays no attention to the speed limit.

“We hear the noise from the warehouses constantly. We see the traffic from the warehouses constantly. We pick up the garbage out along the road every day from the traffic,” said Weber.

He also questioned how much blasting the applicant planned to do on the property across the street from his home, recalling the ordeal he went through when UNFI did blasting.

“Every time they blasted, our house went up and down and walls started cracking. I had to put a whole new water filtration system in the house because the well was ruined after that,” said Weber.

Town resident Karina Tipton submitted a lengthy and detailed list of concerns about the project, asking that the applicants be required to address issues including blasting impacts, light and noise pollution, stormwater management, the measures to take given the possibility of uncovering a mastodon fossil, construction impacts and mitigation, and a comprehensive traffic study. She asked that the traffic study include the village of Montgomery, Beaver Dam Road, Neelytown Road and all projects (including those approved but not yet constructed) in Montgomery and Hamptonburgh.

Town resident Jayne Fiero also spoke in support of a strong traffic study, saying it was really important, especially if there was a problem and I-84 is closed or congested.

“If I’m having a heart attack, I’d like to know that I can get to a hospital,” said Fiero.

The public can still submit written comments to the board until the end of business on Oct. 20.

The planning board also discussed a lot line change for Gordon Lane, off Browns Road. The applicant is looking to transfer 1.6 acres to her brother on an adjoining lot.

The main issue facing the application was a maintenance agreement between the four lots on the private road.

Planning Board attorney Richard Hoyt said a template was provided by the town to the applicant, but it was not used and the document the applicant provided to the board does not have the necessary language.

In addition to some missing items, he pointed out that the document reads “no work, either maintenance or improvements, shall be undertaken unless and until the consent of all parties is obtained.” The town template says improvements such as paving must have the agreement of all parties, but that maintenance has to be done, such as snow plowing, ice control and filling potholes.

The applicant, Jacqueline Heubach, said she created the agreement using their original agreement from 1999 and the town’s current template as a guide.

“This has worked for us for years. Nobody has had any issues with it, because [we] all grew up there,” said Heubach, explaining that all of the current owners are family. “Why is this such a big obstacle to overcome to transfer 1.6 acres of my property over to my brother?”

Planning Board member Cheri Zahakos pointed out that family relationships may change and the properties may not always remain within the family.

“So, it’s not just today, but it’s the future guidance of what these properties will be bound to in their future, regardless of who owns them,” said Zahakos. “I think that’s the very important part.”

“The way I look at this, maintenance has to be done regardless if everybody agrees or not, but improvements should be agreed by everybody,” said Planning Board Chairman Fred Reichle, which reflects the town’s template. “We don’t care how it’s divvied up paying for everything.”

The applicant agreed to revise the agreement and submit it to the board. The board voted to waive the public hearing and granted conditional approval, dependent on the revised maintenance agreement.