Residents told the Lloyd Town Board that appeals challenging a proposed concrete batch plant have stalled before the town’s Zoning Board of Appeals. The town board itself voted last month to join the challenge.

The appeals dispute a determination by Building Department Director David Barton that the plant, proposed for 3260 Route 9W, falls under the Light Industry zoning classifica-tion. Developer Luke Clemente’s project is under site plan review by the Planning Board.

Three formal appeals have now been filed against Barton’s determination. None has been scheduled for a hearing, according to residents who spoke.

Resident Bruce Epperson told the board during public comment that Barton has issued three zoning determinations classifying the plant as Light Industry. Epperson said Bar-ton’s Sept. 28 determination “exceeded his authority” by finding that a third-party ap-peal does not halt the site plan review.

Epperson called that conclusion “dubious” and said it “is not straightforwardly spelled out in state statutes.” He said town code requires an appeal to be heard within 90 days. He filed his on July 28, and no hearing has been set.

Epperson also said a Zoning Board of Appeals member yelled at him and “almost spat on” him when he appeared before the board on procedural matters. He said he com-plained to the town board and the supervisor and no action was taken.

“So far the process has become totally gridlocked for anyone who is in opposition to this proposal and it has been accelerated for those who are in favor,” Epperson said. “It has been an undemocratic, unfair and biased procedure.”

An attorney representing residents of Cross Creek Run has also filed an appeal, which has not been scheduled.

Cross Creek resident Michael Matt questioned why several board members “seem to be bending over backwards” to help Clemente. Matt said his review of project submissions found the plant would create two jobs, not counting truck drivers, and generate an unofficial annual tax bill of $30,000. He asked whether a small reduction in homeowners’ taxes justifies the noise, groundwater, dust, traffic and environmental effects.

“Whether you call this concrete batch plant something else, it still involves all of the components to make concrete, mixing them on-site, loading large concrete trucks every day, many times a day,” Matt said. He said enclosures, lower building heights or sound barriers would not change that.

Matt said he and his neighbors believe Barton “has overstepped his authority” in interpreting the new zoning code, and that they plan to appeal.

Resident Joannes Sieverding reminded the board that it classified concrete batch plants as Heavy Industry, which he said should not be allowed in the Light Industry zone. He warned of accident risks on Route 9W, saying concrete trucks travel much more slowly than other traffic on the corridor.

Clemente said his application has been before the Planning Board for seven months. “It is an unfair characterization that anything is being rushed here,” he said. “This has been moving at a snail’s pace from day one back in March.”

Clemente said the planning board process leads to a public hearing where residents can voice concerns and he and the town’s experts can respond. “Clearly this is not the forum before the town board,” he said.

Planning Board Chairman Sal Cuciti said the site plan review is moving at a fair pace and a project this complex requires a lot of information. “The planning board is going to make sure that every bit of information is there before they hold a hearing,” he said.

On Oct. 21, the Town Board voted 3-2 to appeal Barton’s determination to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The resolution states the board “believes this determination is inconsistent with Local Law A of 2026,” which defines concrete batch plants as Heavy Indus-try. Supervisor Stu Weiss and Councilmen Mike Petty and Mike Guerriero voted yes. Councilwomen Lacy Maffei and Tiffany Rizzo voted no.

Weiss said in a later interview that his filing covers all three of Barton’s determinations and incorporates a challenge filed by attorney Michele L. Babcock, of Mackey Catania & Whalen, on behalf of Cross Creek Road residents. In the filing, Weiss wrote that the determinations are “an abuse of his authority and an attempt to usurp the authority of the Town Board.”