 I am Chris Rechia, I am going to be your chair this evening for the Randolph Development Review Board, where Monday, June 17th, 2019, in Chandler Music Hall. Upper gallery, we want to thank you all for coming. If you haven't signed in already, I ask if you do that because we'd like to know who's here. We're gonna go through our agenda and what I do, well, let me introduce everybody first. I'm starting way down on my right hand. I'm going to say, is there somebody in the chair? Matt Doroski. Paul Huggie. John Hart. Dan DeVoe. Josh Osteres. Bill McGrath. So we're all here, and we are the Development Review Board. We apply the zoning regulations for the town of Randolph. We're gonna go through the agenda, which has several items on it, and the first item, though, is the public to be heard about anything that's not on the agenda. So does anyone have anything that they want to comment on that is not an item on the agenda? Okay, seeing none, we'll go on to the first application. So Rudolph and Harold Lambert, correct, who is speaking to that, thank you. So this is a little different setup than we're used to. So we have microphones right here, the tape. This is, the hearing is being recorded for all of these applications, and it does become part of the record. I think where you are is fine. If anyone else wants to speak to this application or other applications, I'm gonna ask that you somehow come up to a front seat or stand up here where we can see you and hear you. But yes, so could you introduce yourself, please, and raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. And would you state your name for the record, please? Harold Lambert. Thank you, Harold. So would you tell us about your application, please? Okay, I'm in the process of trying to subdivide a large piece of acreage. Yes, can I stop you there, I'm sorry. You didn't say anything wrong. Can everybody hear him from there? Okay, so I'm gonna give you the microphone. I'm sure they're all here for the subdivision application anyway. I'm subdividing a 72 acre piece of property that's been in the family for over 55 years. There's a 11 to 12 acre piece that's right along Route 14, right north of, if everybody knows, Giffords Property, and we've divided it into about 11 and a half acres, and there's a house on there, and there's a large barn, and that's the piece that's gonna be divided, subdivided off from the rest. The other 60 to 61 acres will be kept in the family for many, many years to just enjoy the Vermont property. My brother lives in Massachusetts, my brother Rudy, and I live in New Jersey, and the rest of the family is spread out throughout the entire country if you do still come up here to me to enjoy the property. But the main thing is subdividing the piece that you see probably in the maps you see right there, and it's just the process of getting the final approval so that we can sell the property. We actually do have a buyer that's right here in Randolph that is gonna be moving into the house, buying it, moving in, and continuing to use it as a property for their families. Anything else? Yes, probably. Don't go away, because this is gonna be... Do we have any other microphones already in here? Because that would make things easier. Oh, there's one there, but press. There's a lot of room right in front of us. Yeah, that'll be used later, but maybe we could bring this up for people. Thank you. You can hand that to me. Thank you. That'll make it a little easier. So, a question I have is about the back lot. Could you describe the access to the back lot? You said you have a cell that you have a buyer for, is it for the house and the barn? Yeah, the house and the barn, and all the road frontage is going to stay with the piece that's subdivided. The original driveway will stay intact, which is left from the home that's been existing there for hundreds of years. And the right-of-way will go to the right of the property, which is basically the access point that was there again for hundreds of years that went up through. There's a logging road that went through the property that goes straight up through the property and the right-hand side cuts over up into a ton bridge. Okay, so there will be an access to the back lot. Correct. And... It's a 50-foot right-of-way. Yeah, and I see the 50-foot wide utility easement. Is that the same? The access easement is the same? It's basically for the road and if you have to have it be a power or anything. Yeah, those are all there, yes. Okay, thank you. Thanks very much. Do any of the board members have questions? Do any of the audience members have questions? Any of the audience, is this a question or a comment? Well... The reason I ask is I have to swear you in if it's a comment, but if it's a question, I don't need to swear you in. Oh, a question. Go ahead, please. Okay, thank you. But if you could say your name, please, that would be helpful. My name is Larry Ribbett, R-E-V-I-P. Thank you. And I would like to ask what... I mean, maybe it's a print tour and it's going to be answered, but what if anything is going to be done to mitigate light pollution coming from the property? Okay, we're on a subdivision application at the moment. This is not the hotel. Oh. Okay, this is just... Oh, you know? No. But I've moved it already. There you go. There you go. All right. But if Mr. Lemberg wants to answer the question about the lighting, you know. No, I can't do it. Okay. No, wait a little more on that application if you don't mind. Thank you so much. I appreciate that. That's great. Any other comments or questions on this application? Okay, see none. The board, what's your pleasure? I'll move to approve the application. Thank you, Dan. I'll move to approve it. We have a second for Matt. Thank you. Any discussion? Okay, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, congratulations. Thank you. Thank you very much. Yep. I'll take the microphone with you. I have a suggestion we're gonna need this later. Thank you. Okay, we're gonna go on to the next application, which is give your medical center. What I will say is what I just did is what I intend to do throughout the evening, which is I hear from the applicant, have the board ask questions, have the public ask questions for which you do not need to be sworn in, and then go to comments from the public. If there are comments from the public, then I need to swear you in. And if you could be careful about distinguishing those two, that would be really helpful. So the next application is give your medical center, request for a waiver of a local Act 250 review pursuant to Section 805C3 from the removal of two and four main district. Properties are in the Randolph Village high-density district. So who is here to speak to that application? Doug Folt. Would you raise your right hand? You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. Thank you. So Mr. Folt, would you tell us about what Giffords proposing here? Sure, we're just looking for local Act 250 waiver because the projects are actually demolition and no new construction, taking down two and four Maple Street buildings that happen to constitute a hospital to make green space. So strictly demolition, removal of the foundation and planting grass for green space. Okay, any questions from the board? I have a question now. Yeah. What were these buildings used for previously? Two Maple Street was our former HR building and now it's used for storage to keep the water or all disconnected, power is disconnected. Four Maple Street, there's an office for ourcillary. They're in the thrift store and we have some on-call housing as well as some storage. So being in the high-density district, well obviously we have a need for housing and other businesses and things like that. Can I ask what the condition of buildings in that cause you to decide to demolish them as opposed to reuse them? We run a medical facility and the majority of our clinical space needs higher end, more modern technology that we need to kind of work in. So the space is basically that it's a previous residential home and it doesn't seek the needs of what business we do use our stock. So green space does though. Green space is a lot of air for our staff. We will do that. Are there questions from the board? Not a question, but I want to point out for anyone in the audience wondering we don't actually, as a board, have jurisdiction over demolition projects. So they're asking for Act 250 labor. They have to get an Act 250 permit because the hospital is under Act 250 jurisdiction. So we can wait now a review of the local part of the Act 250 review process. If we don't have jurisdiction over the project to begin with, in this case, we don't have jurisdiction over the project to begin with. So that's what's happening. Yeah. And to add to that, the local Act 250 review is really based on its impact on the services of the town. So things like fire or schools or things like that, which you might get from a development that added those things, but it would be difficult to come by by those things that were demolitioned. So thank you, Matt. Any other questions or comments from the board? Board motion? I would like to make a motion to approve the Act 250, the local labor Act 250 review. That's your question. Thank you, Matt. Second. Seconded by Bill. Thank you. Any other discussion? Okay, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? One, three. And the motion passes. Yes, I did. I did. Thank you. Okay, thanks. We're gonna move on now to the agenda back. Thank you very much. On agenda, go. Is that right? No, I'll see what I said. Okay, great. All right, so we're gonna move on to item number four, farm developing LLC. This is a site plan, conditional use, 10 local Act 250 reviews for a hotel, restaurant and conference center facility on Route 66. The property is in the Interchange Southeast District. And again, we're gonna go through the same process of hearing from the applicant, then having the board ask questions and then open up for questions from the public and then comments from the public. I would ask that we have specific rules and regulations that we are intending to implement here. So if you do have a comment, when you get to that point, if you're able to cite a particular part of the regulation that you're concerned with, that would be very helpful. So for now, I'll turn it over to the applicant. Can I ask everyone who is going to be speaking to this application, could you raise your right hand and I'll see how many there are? Oh, good, there are a lot of them. All right, so do you all swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. Great, would you all state your names, please? I'll be here. My name is Brian Lane-Karnes. I'm a dual frontier and I'm a project civil engineer. Thank you. My name is Paul Ray. I'm the owner of the farm. Oh, okay, are we good enough? When I saw several back here. Stephen Roy, we know that if you're an architect, Bob Apple, we leave a vantage for your company. Ed Murfrey, farm applicant. Anyone else that I missed? Okay, thank you. So we'll go right ahead. Thank you. Thank you. So as you said, the project that is proposed is an AB911 hotel in the one building and an associated 152-seat restaurant and 400-seat conference center. I'm Jason Billing, Austin. Can I sit down for a minute? Yeah, that microphone. You might have to pull closer to you, please. Better? Yeah, but you're leaning. I think that's going to fade with time. Can you lift the microphone up toward you? Thank you. Yeah, I think that'll be better for you. No one's sure it's going to be able to testify. Yeah, that's why I have my own down here. So as you can see on the location map that I have on the screen here now, the project parcel is to the east of the Interstate 89 interchange. So it's marked with the tax project location and it's centered in the open field, but you can see on the map there. Just so everyone can get oriented to the north of the project, the sort of large building, you can see there is the former Montpure facility. To the west of that is the parking ride. That development right there is the Morgan Orchard senior living community and that is the McDonald's and gas station on the other side of the highway. This sheet is an overview of the general site plan. This building here is the 80-unit hotel. There's a percussion dropout in the front and a one-story extension on the back here that will have an indoor pool. This building over here is the restaurant conference center. The restaurant is generally in the northern half of the building and the conference center is generally in the south of the building. The access to the site is at the location more or less of an existing farm access up into the site. There'll be a limited amount of tree clearing between here and there along the frontage to provide visibility for the site to grow and then also traffic safety for people entering and exiting the site. Parking areas are distributed around the site. So on all four sides of the hotel, sorry, on three sides of the hotel, there's parking, there's access around all four sides of the hotel which is designed to be searching for fire access all the way around. And then there's this additional bay of parking to the north of the hotel and a bay of parking behind the restaurant and conference center that's gonna be intended for employee use. These parking spaces on the west side of the site, excuse me, are intended for large vehicles, say someone with a public truck and a snowmobile trailer. There's an adjacent vast trail, so we expect that there'll be some visitors to the hotel that are there for snowmobiling and we've given them a place to park out of the way. In the southeast corner of the site here is going to be an open grass area that will be utilized for occasional events and they put about 10th in that area to accommodate that and there is a designated area of grass over full parking if that. 10th events are not also using the restaurant and conference center facilities. Up here in the northeast corner of the site is the stormwater treatment wetland. All of the drainage for the site will be captured in an underground drainage system, system of catch basins and piping and piped to the stormwater treatment wetland for both water quality and flood control before it being discharged during existing culvert under Oak Ridge Lane here. That's the general overview of the project. I don't know if it's the pleasure of the board to jump into criteria or if you have a few questions first. No, I think unless the board is anxious to ask questions I'd prefer you continue on, go through the criteria. Okay, there you are. So the site is designed to meet the dimensional requirements of the Youth and Achievement Service District. The board members are likely have the cover letter that I prepared. There's a table on the first page listing the dimensional requirements. So most of the requirements are met and more by the site including building coverage and lock coverage so that the lot itself is almost 26 acres. So building coverage is just over 3% of the site and lock coverage so including all the building and then all the impervious areas just parking sidewalks and so forth is just over 13% of the site. Setbacks can be seen on this plan including the 170 foot setback for buildings and parking to the center on every 66 on this curve line here. We are requesting height waiver under section 225.C.3.A which we can talk about more specifically later. So continuing on down through the criteria, I'm going to follow the order of my letter here. So we'll start with conditional use review. The project should have no significant effects on community facilities. We've had all of our requisite local activity reviews so the project's been approved with a few conditions from the fire services advisory committee and we just issued a wastewater allocation by the select board at their June 14th meeting. Water supply will be from an onsite drill well and so the project will be permitted as a non-transit of non-community public water system. We don't expect the project to have any significant impact on schools while there may be some positions where people come in from out of town. We expect the majority of the jobs that have been generated by this project to be filled through a local application pool. The effect of the project on the character of the area, generally in the interchange district, there's a whole set of additional regulations that are intended to establish and maintain the character of the area of the interchange or out of the state in nine. So the project has certainly been designed to meet all of the specific interchange district regulations. There's also several areas of the town plan that the project applies with, protection of geographic and natural features. So the main natural features of the site, there's a stream in a drainage ditch along the 66th right-of-way. So to the east of the project that runs along the south side where the project is, it's conveyed into Colbert to the north side and it comes back on the south side down in this area. So the project has essentially no effect on the stream. The closest disturbance to it is at the right-of-way but that's adjacent to the head wall of the Colbert where the stream is conveyed under the road. So, and the drainage from the roadway at that point is directed away from the stream so to really have no impact there. I would also note that the stream is in a really constructed rip-rap ditch to the north, or sorry, to the east of the project here where we're making our closest impacts. Another natural feature of the site is a class II wetland, which is donated in this area to the east of the site. We'll be maintaining a 50-foot buffer at the minimum to the class II wetland, so our natural buffer or so, not expecting to have any impacts to the wetland. This almost the entire site except for the wetland area is not just primary agricultural soils. As part of the active 50-year process, we are going to be negotiating a mitigation agreement with the Agency of Agriculture for impacts of primary agricultural soils. The project's generally in the cluster as much as possible in the center of the site to minimize the amount of impact and we expect that that agreement will be a combination of on-site and off-site mitigation, but in any case, we'll be following the ratios in the form that the Agency of Agriculture has developed for impacts of primary agricultural soils. I think we've discussed municipal services. And then another policy of the town plan is encouraging a variety of land uses, so this project is going to have a positive impact on a lot of the local economy and local business, so it's going to add to the variety of land uses that are already developed in the interchange area and also provide bad-mining temporary housing to support many of the other local institutions, such as the hospital, the BTC, local businesses that are trying to pull in, how they can support jobs, and even kids visiting new universities like Norwich University. And the project's also designed to meet the purposes of the Interchange Land Use District, which are to encourage a limited mix of land uses primarily of commercial and nature and provide employment for the region. Protecting scene-of-use open-field with lens visible from Route 66, traffic safety over at 66 and access to I-89 and natural features. So I think we've talked about the mix of land uses. We can address the scene-of-use when we get into the interchange specific standards. We have a BUSHET study that I'll present to the board as well, and then we just discussed natural features as well. Traffic impacts are the next criteria under conditional use review. The information that's presented in the cover letter has been supplemented by a traffic impact assessment that was prepared with the request of the Agency of Transportation. We applied for our letter of intent to get access to the state right of way. We're pressing into the traffic impact assessment. So, Neymar and Dickinson prepared traffic impact assessment, which I'll have to summarize for you. One of the reasons they asked us to prepare a traffic assessment was even though the Institute of Traffic Engineers Troop Generation Manual includes restaurant use inside of hotel use, they asked us to estimate that the trips that would be generated by the restaurant separately is only the trips that would be generated by the hotel and the conference center. So I think I referenced using the ITE manual in the letter, 59 trips in the PNP Gower. When you count the restaurant separately, that goes up to 111 trips in the PNP Gower. So that was the basic traffic study that was prepared. So that's a higher estimate of traffic impacts. Even with that higher estimate of traffic impacts, there was no impact or level of service at the Project Drive, at the Interstate 89 Interchange or at the Route 66 intersection up at the top of the Hill by Randolph Center, both in the, you know, so comparing not building the hotel to building the hotel, we compared it in 2020, which is the year we're looking at the hotel opening and then they did a five-year projection. So both the year the hotel opens and five years later, they're expecting no impact on levels of service at any of the study intersections. They also examine traffic safety, including site distances from the driveway. So we had taken a look at that, they took a look at it. They are recommending removing one or two trees to be eased to the project uphill to just improve the uphill site distances. But other than that, I found that the project didn't have an impact on traffic safety. The next criterion under conditional use is no undue effect on bios and ordinances, which will be addressed. Generally, as we go through and address the other criteria, effecting utilization of renewable energy resources. The project, again, is centered in the parcel so it's not particularly near any other properties that may utilize renewable resources. And to the north of the property where you typically have a southern exposure to the sun for solar, there's nothing between us and the wind. So we don't anticipate any reduction in excess renewable energy. And then not generating excessive dust noise, clear or clear, vibration, radiation, or other reasons. We don't expect that this is going to have any particularly undue effects under any of those. The hotel is, generally, everything happens inside. Even the restaurant, most of the things happen inside. And the biggest kitchen is to the north east end of the restaurant is the kitchen area. So it's located as far away from the decent restaurant, residences as possible. So does the board have any questions on the condition and use criteria? Excuse me, can you move my camera now a little bit because it's too high. Too loud? It's too high. We're not hearing. Yeah, as you read, you are. I think it's better to come up from below a little bit. Thank you. Great. Any questions from the board on the site plan, conditional use, sorry. Let's go on to site plan then. Okay. So there's a few things that began inside the plan that I think I already addressed in conditional use, including compliance with regulations and natural features. So we'll move on to access. As I stated before, access to the project will occur from a new curb cut off of street 66. We are proposing a second curb cut on the site for two reasons. One is the site distances of this location are the best of anywhere along the fringe, so for a safety reason. And the other reason we're not proposing to use the existing access off the site is to minimize impact to the neighbors. So this property does have rights to use Oak Ridge Lane, but we didn't want to go that direction. We wanted to reserve Oak Ridge Lane for access to the residential properties. And again, the site distances from down there are significantly worse than they are at the proposed access. So as I stated before, the site distances are generally adequate from the proposed location. It's at the minimum of the intersection of the site distance to the east. So we're hoping to trim a few of the trees back there. We do need to just clear that with the state by one statement, because the buffer for the land goes on towards 66 to the east of the project. So anything we did up there, we just need to make sure, take a long permit if we needed it or at least run it by the state level folks. The curb cuts designed to meet V-Trans commercial access standards, including both the horizontal and vertical dimensional standards. We have received our ladder and tent from V-Trans, so we may have had a chance to review the design of the driveway and find it acceptable. On-site circulation. On-site circulation is provided by a series of drives and parking aisles. So the main circulation is through the driveway, then there's sort of a meaning circulation now between the parking lot and the town. As I stated previously, the drive around the hotel is, this furthest out drive here is actually designed for access by a tractor trailer. So it should be plenty of sufficient access for emergency vehicles and fire trucks. All of the access aisles are 24 feet in width and designed for two-way circulation. There's also access to three sides of the restaurant in the event of emergency services needing to access that area. The parking lot behind the restaurant is also designed for access for a 30-foot box truck, which is what we expect will be the majority of the deliveries to the restaurant so they can pull up to the dumpster location here and then back down to this loading space where deliveries to the restaurant drive out forward. There are no existing pedestrian facilities in 166, as well as no commercial developments or adjacent parcels on the south side of the road so that we are not causing any pedestrian or vehicular interconnection with adjacent properties. Parking loading and service areas. Again, the parking areas are three sides of the hotel and behind the restaurant. All the parking spaces are designed for regulations, nine-foot by 18-foot spaces and 24-foot aisles. The entire parking area is proposed to be paved and it will be graded to drain strong water as I stated before as we're running underground collection system. We are proposing a reduction to the required number of parking spaces based on shared uses between the three facilities on the site. So I said submitted with the application of shared use parking analysis which is based on a reduction in parking based on peak usage over the time of day. So during the day you would expect a certain amount of time versus a certain amount of utilization of the parking based on use versus in the evening or on the weekend. So the way the analysis works is you apply these percentages which we took from the city of Montpelier's zoning regulations and then apply the percentages to different time periods and then whenever the peak parking demand time period is the amount of parking that we propose to the site. So based on that analysis, the stream calculation of parking spaces from the zoning regulations is 294 spaces. We're proposing 238 spaces which is a 20% reduction in the spaces based on the shared use parking analysis and also just to minimize site disturbance, minimize the amount of parking spaces that people have to look at when they end up the site and minimize impacts to natural resources. There's a number of reasons why we're requesting the parking reduction. The next site plan criteria is landscaping screening. This is the project landscaping plan. The landscaping is designed for the requirements of the energy district to integrate the site into the mixed agrarian character of the general area. So there's a minimal amount of grass and lawn. This sort of squiggly line here on the edges intended to show the edge of meadow areas. There are some split row fencing along in crowd level trees a little on the entrance to sort of grab people into the site. There are some larger trees proposed around the border of the site to separate the site from the surrounding area. And then the remainder of the trees are there to break up the parking area, provide shade trees so they're considered some significant shade trees in the parking area, especially in this 15 foot wide landscaped area between the two parking areas to the north of the hotel as well as in some of these areas here. And they are also providing landscaping on the east side of the site. One of the comments we did get from the advisory committee was that this wall of restaurant is a large wall with not a lot of door and window openings. They requested some additional screening because there was a view of the back of the restaurant as you're coming down at 66 from the east. So there's these three large maple trees that are intended to sort of break up the back of that facade as well as a couple of spruce trees a little farther away that will work in concert with the existing wooded area to remain to the north and provide additional screening. That those landscaping has been added to the view study so we can take a closer look at what that's gonna look like. Can we get into that section? So just to clarify, that is not in our packet with applications on the landscaping. Right, so the addition of landscaping is just called dead maple here on the back of the restaurant. Gotcha. Yeah, actually, as long as we're on landscaping, can I ask, because by the way, we did a site visit. Some of you may have joined us out there. Nothing that we said or did on the site visit counts. Thank you. Hello. So we had conducted a site visit earlier at 5.30 tonight at the site. Nothing we said or did there counts as part of the record unless and until it's repeated here or addressed here. So I just, for those of you who are there, if you had thoughts and shared them, you need to share them again as part of this. But one of the questions I had while out there, there are two beautiful cherry trees off the back toward the area. And I got mixed review as to whether those were staying or going. Could you explain that? Behind the tent area? Yeah, behind the tent area. So I think these are the trees in question here. So there's five of them that are proposed to be removed along the back here. And they do include some of the large existing trees that are there. Oh, okay. And it was in the area that's going to be graded to create the tent and event site. So it wouldn't survive the grading. So we're proposing to remove them. The next criteria is grading and drainage. So in general, this site is created to follow the existing slope of the site from the southeast. Over here to the northwest over there, there will be some flattening of the site in order to accommodate the building pad over a generally maintaining the existing drainage pattern. As I said, all the parking lot drains just cut in close piping and could be to the stormwater pond where it will be treated to the requirements of the remote stormwater management manual. Outdoor storage and outdoor facilities, we're not proposing any outdoor storage or display of goods, supplies, vehicles, equipment, machinery or other materials other than things that are typically associated with commercial developments like dumpsters, HVAC equipment, parking areas, site lighting, that kind of stuff. The dumpsters are, there's two of them. One of them is located here at the south end of the drive between the hotel and the restaurant. Which is generally going to be for the hotel use. And then when it's located in the northeast corner of the site here, which is generally going to be for the restaurant use. And both of those dumpsters will be provided with screening fences, as well as exterior HVAC equipment and things like that. The next criteria is site lighting. So this is our project photo-measure plan. Generally, the site lighting is designed to provide safety and security for the site without overly lighting things. So the site lighting has been designed to comply with the Vermont outdoor lighting requirements and IDSNA recommendations, including average and minimum light levels and average min-max ratios. In general, the parking lot light areas are related to between one and one and a half foot candles on average. I don't know how easy it is to see, but this gentle line here is a one foot candle isopontore. So you can see, in the areas directly below the lights, it's a little higher, but in general, the parking lot is between one and two foot candles. The area where the pork crocheting is going to be lit more brightly in the neighborhood of five foot candles and they will be lighting at the door at the fences and those kinds of things here. There is a flight pole located right here that we were planning to light the flight on the flight pole, but that's gonna go on the top and chain down onto the flag. Brian, can you talk about how the lighting will look from off-site? What sort of lighting here? Oh, sure. All the lighting fixtures are fully cut off and downcast. Generally, there are LED lights, so there should be no glare impact off-site. There was a little bit of concern at the DRC meeting about these two lights and the impact on the residents that's down the hill from there. So we'll be providing house side shields on the lights on that end there. But otherwise, from off-site, on the areas where you can see the site, you will see that the parking lot is lit, but you shouldn't have any direct views of lighting fixtures. There shouldn't be any glare. The lighting levels and the luminaries that are selected should prevent any significant sky glow from the development. So because the development has limited visibility from off-site, also the lighting will have limited visibility from off-site, so it shouldn't be an adverse impact on the surrounding area. Can you also, as long as we're on questions, I guess, on this, what's the difference between nighttime business hours and nighttime overnight for you guys, for lighting? I don't think you're asking if we're gonna reduce the lighting after like it made in the night. Yeah, thank you for rephrasing that question. Sure, I just wanted to make sure I understand the question. Yeah, it is. We haven't made a specific proposal to reduce the lighting after hours because it's a hotel and we're gonna be accessing it at all hours of the night. And again, because of the limited visibility from off-site, it may or may not be appropriate to have additional dimming after hours. Okay, thank you. So that is the end of the sick plan criteria. Next on my list is the specific, district-specific standards for the image change district. Pardon me. Starting with the dimensional standard specific to the image change district. Generally, the project's designed to meet the dimensional standards of the image change district that's included in the table will actually be finding the latter. As I stated at the beginning, we are requesting a waiver to the height limit in the district. So, the general height limit in the image change district is 35 feet. We are requesting a waiver for building height of 49 feet, six inches, which is below the maximum height allowed will be the waiver for 50 feet. And so there's a few criteria to go along with the requesting of the height waiver. One is the scenic sensitivity requirement. And so, as part of addressing the scenic sensitivity requirement, we had women in for a prepare this view study. The methodology of the view study was similarly to anyone who took a site visit floated, excuse me, balloon above the entrance to the hotel. In this case, we actually had one balloon at 50 feet, which is just above the request height of the hotel. One at 75 feet and one at 100 feet just to illustrate the visibility in unit higher heights than we are proposing. So, this is a general map of where they took photographs of when the balloons were floated. And of all of these locations, the only places where they were visible were off of Route 66 to the east of the project and from the more and more church development. So, generally the project complies very well with the visibility standards. It's not visible at all from Air State 89 and has only limited visibility from Route 66. So, this is the view from the more and more church parking lot. You can see in this floor, this yellow balloon is the 50 foot height. The blue balloon is the 75 foot height. The red balloon is the 100 foot height. So, based on the location used in the picture, this is a rendering of the development as it would appear from the more and more churches. You can see that the, at 50 feet, which is this portion of the roof by the hotel, the hotel is below the existing tree line. So, it won't from this vantage point block any view that isn't of the spot where the hotel is. So, you can see it, but you can also, it doesn't block any view of anything beyond it. And you can get a sense, you know, from this view, all of the light poles are lower than the bridge line of this building. So, even from the places where the site is visible, I'm sure you will see that the parking lot is lit, but you won't really see any of the light fixtures. This is the- I'm sorry, as long as we're on that back again, you do have lighting behind the restaurant, right? On your- Oh, that's true. That's right. There's lighting behind the restaurant. That would be clearly visible. Yeah, so I have more trees. Sorry, hang on, Paul, because I didn't swear you- Oh, I did swear you in. That's right. That was Paul Ray. Sorry, what did you want to say then? We did have trees into the back of that building. Right, okay, so that'll kind of thank you. And again, you know, this view is going to be from above lighting fixtures as well. So, because they're done cast, you know, again, when you can see the development, you can see that there are lights there, but you're not going to see any of the actual LEDs themselves. Right. This is the same view from Route 66 from the north of the project, sorry, east of the project uphill. This is the class two wetland, and here are the same three balloons. So, and these fixtures were taken in April, I think, before, recently before leaf out. So, you know, you can see today, at this site, there's significantly more foliage in the summertime. But this is the view from Route 66 from this fairly limited vantage point that you're driving by the red one. And then you can see right here, these right here are the three spruce trees that are proposed to screen and break up the view that the draft was concerned about. And then also behind them, you can see here, there, and you can almost see it there, the three large maple trees that will be behind there. So, you know, we feel that that provides an adequate amount of breaking up of the view and screening of the view of the back of the hotel. And again, this is giving the time here right to most visible, these pictures were taken in the summertime, you'll see lots of it. And again, even from this vantage point, you can see the hotel, even though you're a lot lower, the hotel is pretty much at the elevation of the existing tree line back here. And you still maintain the views to the amount of the distance. These are the other views from various points where the hotel's not visible. So, this is I-V-9, here the exit, where I'm looking back up towards the hotel. This is the view from the parking ride. And you can see that there's a significant amount of conifers in this area that effectively screen the project from view. This is the southbound lane of Interstate 89. And this is to the south of the interchange looking north towards the project. And then this is a little bit higher up to 66. And this illustrates that, you know, you don't even see the view of the project from 66 until you've passed the drive. So this is from the driveway to the Morgan Orchards to the east of that. So the view is that you do have from 66 doesn't start until after you've passed the Morgan Orchards drive away. And just for clarification, in all these renderings, you have put the hotel and conference at our restaurants in the drawing. So these ones are ones where the picture was taken to illustrate the fact that you couldn't see the balloons. Okay, fine. So without the balloons, we can't put the drawing in the rendering, but so. But where the balloons were showing, you have shown that's the rendering there. From the two areas where the balloons were visible, that's where we've put the renderings, the building in. So that is one portion of the waiver criteria. Another portion of waiver criteria is that. Can I ask a question? Oh yeah, we have to go back to the slide that's on the right area, right? Yep. So those trees right there will be maintained. Are those owned by? So some of them are on the applicant's property and the ones that aren't on the applicant's property are in the Interstate B9 right of way. So there's minimal chance that AOT will feel impacted now. Sure. We own about five acres on the west side of that little log pattern that we saw and that's those trees that might be illustrative. So this is the, here's the park and ride. This is the applicant's property. So you can see that the bulk of those time flows are on the applicant's property and then there is some amount of them that are in the Interstate B9 right of way. But I mean, unless these are impinging on the function on the highway, I can't imagine AOT can move through and kind of move down. But even if they did, there's still be a significant buffer on the property. So the other section of, or one of the other sections of the height waiver is that the building height is necessary to accommodate a specific process that can't otherwise be accommodated in a building designed to meet the 35 foot height standard. So I dressed up a bit in the ladder but I'd like to kind of go through that point by point. This project, the project that is proposed is a hand in hand. So it's a national brand hotel. It's not an independent hotel. And with being a national brand hotel, there are requirements in order to get the franchise that has to be met. If you don't meet the brand requirements in your building and hotel, then you don't get a franchise agreement and therefore you can't build a project that you're proposed on. One of the requirements in order to get the franchise agreement is that the applicant conduct a market study to determine the number of rooms that should be in the hotel. And the results of the market study that was done for this hotel showed that an 80-unit hotel was what was done for the feasible. We're proposing seven to nine units just for some building. It was awkward to add the 80-unit into the layout of the building so we cut down to 79. So because as part of the franchise agreement, the applicants have agreed to build a 79-unit hotel. If they don't build a 79-unit hotel, then the project doesn't go forward. So the number of units in the hotel is a specific requirement of this specific project and the project would not go forward if that number of units wasn't met. So that's the majority of the reason why we're discussing the height waiver is to accommodate a 79-unit hotel. We looked at a three-story hotel because we could fit it within the 50-foot additional height with the waiver. And a two-story hotel, if it had the proposed roof line, and I'll just switch to that. So this is an elevation of the hotel building. There's a variation in the roof line. So this is the point in the roof line at which it's 49-and-a-half feet. It's around 10 feet lower down at the ends. So this variation in the roof line was designed into the project to meet the building design standards of the district. So even if you were to build a two-story hotel with a very roof line that meets the design standards of the district, it would still require a height waiver and it would take up quite a lot more space because about two-thirds of the first floor isn't hotel units. So in order to change from three-story to two-year, adding more, you're adding a lot more room on the end than just a third more of the building because of the large area in the first floor that's dedicated to lobby and exterior and things like that. So you said that the two-story version, do you know the numbers that that would change for the percent coverage and building coverage? I don't, because we haven't done a full design in two-storys. We're asking for a two-story. No, I understand. I know, we are in charge with one of the issues is clearly a height waiver, right? So then the question is, what are the alternatives if they're, and we're trying to, we need the information on the record, right? So even a two-story building with a complying roof line would be over 35 feet. Okay. So the option for creating a hotel with 79 units with a complying roof line is a one-story building and that's just too large to be feasible inside. It takes up too much area and it's really infeasible. And I don't think that the grain would approve a one-story hotel anyway. It's still for the two-story hotel. So the specific requirement of this project is that to build this project that you're proposing, it has to be a 79 or 80 unit hotel. And it's not feasible to build a 79 or 80 unit hotel that has a roof line that complies with the architectural standards of the district and has the required number of rooms. So that's what you're saying for the requirement in the regulations, the specific process? That's right. Okay. But there's nothing else, no elevator, HVAC system that would be a specific process that would require the 50-foot height. Well, I mean, as you make the building small, you reduce your requirements for an elevator. You know, in a three-story building, you need an elevator. And in a three-story building, you may not need an elevator, but no, there's not. You know, and this is the reason why it has to be a three-story building. So everyone knows, the requirement is that one, three, eight, two of the section is that the additional building height is necessary to accommodate a specific process that cannot otherwise be accommodated in a building designed in accordance with the maximum height standards. Process is not defined. It's one of the things we have to consider what is meant by a specific process. And we will address that. And that's what Dan was getting at. Is it okay to call, yeah? I do want to mention to everybody that we did do a preliminary meeting with the DRB. Yes. And we showed different roof lines. We showed a four-story building with a flat roof. Right. We also showed a building with a peaked roof. Yeah. And that's what we're providing. So we took our call from what the consensus was of the board, so we wanted to put a peak on it. Yeah. So that it would fit within the character of Landoff Center and a flat roof. I think all of that is relevant information. It's important for people to know. And that's what I was trying to get at. I think we have pictures that show. I think we should, if you have them, you should show them so that people understand that's part of the decision-making that's going on here. The ratings that were from the community room? Paul is raising those as relevant. If you have them and you want to raise them, you can, yeah. And then what our building looks like now. Right. I think you'll find it's a little more attractive because this will just take a second. Any questions from the board? This concludes, Brian, your description or did you have them? I have more criteria to address. Okay, why don't you quickly go through those? I do want to get to public soon. So, but go ahead and why don't you do those and pull up those maps at the same time so I can see how you can do the left hand and right hand. I'm teasing. If you would, I mean you could show those profiles at any point. Sure, I can do two things at once. Okay, yeah. I'm teasing. You can do one at a time. I didn't know which one you wanted to do first. I've got this, so let's do that. Okay, we'll do that first, yep. Excuse me. So this is the grand standard design for Hampton Inn in 2019 and this is the original proposal that we presented to the DRB at the preliminary hearing. So the standard design for Hampton Inn is a four story hotel. As you can see, it's far more modern and has a flat roof and has a very specific color scheme. So just all of this that you see in this picture here would be part of what the standard Hampton Inn design would be. So it's nail panels on the outside and grand white. It's got the recessed windows. It's got the vertical blue element as well as the blue elements on the underside of Hampton Inn. So we presented this preliminary DRB hearing, the feedback both from the DRB and from the members of the public that were attending was that the strong preference was to have a building design that fit much more into the actual architecture of Vermont as well as matching much better with the other existing development in the area. So this was the starting point for the discussion. And I will also put up quickly the renderings of what we're proposing. Anyone here from Texas that can check the entrance? I think so. It's all on the hard disk, believe it or not. Yeah, okay. So that's the current proposal. And all of the things that you were looking at in the current proposal were things that we had to go to the National Grant and get specifically approved for this project because it is a variation from their standard design. So the roof lining, the materials. So we'll get into this when we do the design scenarios but the material on the bottom here is gonna be a stone over there. And then there's gonna be two levels of a composite wood product, which will look like vertical siding to sort of break up the height of the building, the variation of roof lines, and then we have these stones in the center section. So all of that were design changes coming out of the original medium which will simply request them in order to help the project fit into the water better really and fit into rain golf better. So that's sort of the journey we were on for the movie theater. We really tried to listen to the concerns that we heard at the time there. And that's how we got to this product. Very good, thank you. You wanna finish the criteria and then we'll move on to questions from the board? Yes, thank you. There are some supplements that use standards but the hotel conference facilities is allowed for use in the interchange of these districts and restaurant is allowed as an accessory used without knowing drive-through or exterior of the walk-out. And then there's a list of supplemental site plan standards for the district. Hazard materials, no hazardous materials other than your standard cleaning fluids and such that you might use in a hotel or restaurant. The open-space criteria, while the project is proposed to be built in an open field in the center of the site, open-space criteria specifically protects open fields that are visible through the 66. And so you can see because of the existing tree line along here and for those of you that are at the site visit, the site does not appear to be an open field in 66. The fields don't open up until you get up in this area to the east of the site where the fields are spoken up into the northern orchards area. And again the proposed development is located towards the center of the property so we're trying to preserve connections to the open-space goes to the last trees there and block the display of the hotel and to the open-space to the east. That's a wow. Seeing sensitivity, we covered visibility of the site from the various protection requirements on route 66 and R-State 89. I think we've covered topography and grading, clustering is the next. Oh, topography and grading. Yeah. You can go to the elevation, what's the level to base the hotel or either? 1,591 feet at the hotel. So again, the project is designed to be, to cluster it as much as possible while still providing the adequate space for the building or a part of the parking at the center of the property. It's designed, the buildings are designed to relate to each other within the architectural design and in the layout of the site. So that's why we're proposing it's kind of L-shaped here. We expect this pedestrian traffic between the two sites to be centered on this portion of the site. So you see there's several crosswalks pedestrian walkways. There's also a new sort of formal landscape area here to the south of the restaurant. That's sort of part of the pedestrian connections between the two buildings. We review the landscape as well as access and circulation, the parking. So one of the parking criteria of the particular district is to try and avoid large spaces of parking. So we're trying to meet that and we're both separating the parking area around the sites, which is possible. So that 57% of total parking is to the north of the hotel in the center area. And then 43% is in these sort of auxiliary lots to the west and behind the hotel and behind the restaurant area. We've also provided this large landscape highland in the main parking area to divide the two large sections of parking and to try and separate the sort of pedestrian oriented area of the site down here from the more parking area oriented area of the site. So as we discussed, this will be a minimum of 15 feet wide and have large shaped trees and quite a bit of formal landscape in it to break up that parking area. As we're letting me discuss, all of those prospectilities will be underground, which brings us to the building design standards, which I'm going to hand over to Steve from Media Lanford Architects. Thank you, my name is Steve Roy, we're the Media Lanford Architects. We are the architects working on the project. As Paul mentioned and Brian, we started with a prototype hotel. We've customized it to fit the standards and fit the desires of preliminary hearing. Looking at the building, its primary design is to use materials that are of the area. So there's stone and kind of residential grade siding products, asphalt shingle roofing, things that are compatible with the area that look and feel familiar to folks in the area. The massing is to be compatible between the two uses. So with the hotel as the main view here, what we've done is to break up the roof mass on several locations. So as the building gets a little bit wider towards the entrance, we've raised the roof profile slightly, adds visual interest. The peak of the hotel at the front kind of signifies that it's a main point of entrance and it has some special, the stone in here has some special attention to it. The colors that we've chosen are meant to be earth cone colors, ones that help to blend the project into the natural scenery that will help both to reduce the visibility from any access points but just to also feel like it's of the area. We have several views that I'll flip through just to take different vantage points throughout. This one is looking from the north side of the hotel towards the entrance. We do have some landscaping that'll happen in the parking island, which is that, that's what that is showing. Looking around to the core co-share from the west side of the hotel is if you had driven through the parking lot. This would be a visitor's perspective as they drive up to the Port Co-Share. As you can see, it is not dominant in height, it is really kind of a residential scale building. You can see in the background the conference center which is this area here. There's an entrance portion to that building and then the restaurant is the gabled section. So we've tried to put a gable on the restaurant as well as the hotel. Those are kind of the signifying and unifying elements between the two buildings. One of the criteria for the area. This would be a view from a porch seating area for the restaurant. So if you're having a meal, you could be outdoors on a night like tonight. In the distance, you may have a little bit of a mountain view from that level. I think the last of those views, I think really the effort has been to make it feel residential, reasonably scaled with adjacent buildings and other buildings in the area. Questions about the exterior? Not that I have, anyone have questions about the exterior? Thank you, good. Thanks, Steve. Thank you. Brian, you back up? I think, I'm not sure that we've shown a good view of the restaurant design, but just so everyone can see if there's a bird's eye view of the restaurant design. It's got a similar stone veneer on the inboard, you will enter into the site and then a similar composite wood siding project on the area in the food cell. So as Steve was saying, some gables in this area and so between materials, the massing and the gables that's how we're drawing the two buildings on the site together. So just to clarify, the restaurants on the left side, as we look at it, the conference center is on the right side. That's right, yep. So this mass is the restaurant. This is the sort of entry in law here and that mass is the conference center. Okay, thank you. Paul, did you want to say something? Yeah. We had one more view from Route 66, looking at. Yeah, we did. But I think we'll give people a good perspective. This is the 65th site. There, yep. Interesting. That's what we'll look like from the entrance on Route 66. Okay, thank you. Anything else, France? I think that concludes our presentation. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you all for your patience out there. Questions from the board? Yeah, I want to ask about the lighting again, because it comes up a lot. We have an example further up the hill of lighting. It's really visible to people passing by because you're looking up at the lighting. And you've rightly pointed out, Ryan, that almost every vantage point you're looking down. So you'll note the parking lot somewhat a little bit in it, but you're not going to see the glare of the light and it just makes good sense to me. I'm wondering from this particular vantage point, what might you see and what have you done to alleviate it, if anything, easily alleviate it? So there are a couple of lights along the parking lane, but then once you get up into the main, I'm sorry, the entrance drive, but once you get up into the main portion of the parking lot, all the fixer, fixation, the cleaning site, and you're going all the way from the track. So you may look up and you may see these two lights on the entrance drive, but that's no different than driving on the street and going under a streetlight or some such like that. Nothing's going to be pointed out at Route 66. It's already, you know, just optics of the things around the outside that are going to be throwing light into the site and then everything's going to be downcast. So I don't expect it to be a significant clear issue. And as you're going down Route 66, you'd have to be looking this way out your window to really see them. Which I would argue isn't the best way to look when you're driving that section up Route 66. Probably should be looking forward, yeah. Kind of as long as we're on lighting, I'm sorry, and we talked about whether there was a difference between business hours or late night in terms of change of the lighting, but can you describe, and this gets into traffic, but I wanted to address it in terms of lighting, the back of the hotel, and is that the loading area for the back, in the back of the area of the hotel, and when deliveries and things like that occur relative to the kind of standard business operating hours? So the loading area for the hotel, the breakfast area and kitchen are in this horseman hotel, so the loading is going to occur along this drive-out right here. So, and I'm not sure what time the deliveries have been. I don't know if that's something that's been worked out yet, but certainly the main traffic. I was looking at the traffic, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I'm hearing you. Yeah, we're all interrupting. Go ahead, Ed, why don't we let... I just said deliveries for the breakfast area, we have to have the breakfast times. Okay. So, kind of a block. Yeah. So, is it fair to say that that's coincident with the other kind of general day traffic that might be coming and going from the business? I'm trying to get a sense of like, whether, and I saw the traffic study, you know, the analysis of the number of vehicles and things like that, so I understand that. What I don't understand necessarily is the coincidental timing and how traffic circulates through the site and whether there's any interference between deliveries of the, you know, 55-foot tractor-trailer trucks or the box trucks and people going to the conference center or people using the restaurant. So, generally those deliveries happening in the late morning to middle of the day are at the very slow time for the hotel, for sure. People tend to leave the hotel in the morning and show up at the hotel in the evening. And so, the middle of the day, the hotel demands are very low. So, we wouldn't expect there to be very much traffic at all, accessing the drive around the back of the hotel at those hours. The deliveries to the restaurant are all going to be behind it in the employee parking area. And they're not going to be receiving deliveries in the middle of the dinner time rush. They might be delivering during the day during a conference, but the conference attendees are going to be parking the house and then they're going to be parking lot and accessing the buildings and the front. So, in deliveries that come into the restaurant will come in turn and then back up behind the restaurant and the only conflicts between any employees that might be at the restaurant who aren't likely to be leaving when they receive the delivery and the delivery trucks. Yeah. And kind of continuing on the lighting concept here. We do have some residences in the area. This is not a residential district, but you're adjacent to a residential district. So, the criteria for lighting is whenever practical or if lighting is in a sensitive or residential neighborhood to have lighting that includes timers, dimmers, sensors, et cetera, to eliminate unneeded lighting. And so, with respect to the residences that you know are adjacent, both on the west side and the south side particularly, can you describe how the lighting would affect those residences? Sure. So, to the residents to the south, there's a significant different distance from the back of the parking lot to their house and also a significant increase in elevation between the hotel level and the house. So, from the back of the parking area to the residents to the south is 356 feet and that includes 150 feet of wooded area in between the two houses, as well as the ground level at the house to the south is approximately 40 feet higher than the ground level of the hotel. So, I wouldn't expect any significant impacts from lighting to some of these above and that far away. So, for the residents on the west, they are below the lighting and so we are going to be installing house side shields on those sides. And I think, you know, out in that area there's certainly candidates to dim or, you know, put on motion sensors at night. I would imagine that that would probably be one of the two quick, most of the sort of outer lighting, at least dimmers at night, if not the really off the floor sensors. The ones closer to the hotel are probably going to need to stay on for a security reasons. Very good, thank you. John, I think he'd ask him questions until somebody takes this other microphone and then try to see if he said okay. So now, I'm going to switch to the traffic circulation a little bit. Can I just finish up on the lighting? Oh yeah, sure. We did go in front of the track committee and they were comfortable with our lighting. Yeah, we saw that. So, we have been in front of a town board, they gave you a recommendation. Okay, relax a little bit. We are, lighting is under our conditional use standards, it's under our site plan review criteria and the track is advisory to us. So, thank you though, I understand. So, circulation from the, looking at the areas that you have for trailers and buses. So, are those a standard size and location for being able to back out? I'm saying this as someone who needs about 16 tries to back up a trailer on my truck. So, don't go by me, but coming into these, obviously they have to back out into this to get out again. Right, so they're designed for a pickup truck with a trailer, so they're designed for, because the people we expect to be using them are people who want to bring their snowmobiles, stay at the hotel, snowmobile around the vast trails. So, we did run a turning movement analysis and they're adequate for someone with like a tundra and full-size pickup truck and I think it was like a 20 foot trailer can get back out of those spaces. Great. So, that's why you can see that the aisle width is increased from this to there. Yeah. It should be adequate for those. Not planning to have a semi parked there overnight. You don't expect actually that people that are driving semi's are gonna throw in a little parking right and sleep in a truck. So, what would a bus be typically supported by the same lane shape? I haven't done a specific analysis for a bus. Strikes me that they probably would. You know, at worst, they may need some management from the hotel staff to shuffle people around. And just to be clear, if it were me, I would have to go forward and drive over the grass and back out to a different room because I could do that. I mean, honestly, we consider that as a circulation. Yeah. We've been in it because of the additional impacts on the previous and all that. Yeah, I'm glad you did. Got questions? Other questions from folks? No? Okay. I think we'll go to questions from the public. When you stand, would you please state your name and we have a microphone here. I would really ask you to use it both so that we can record you, but also so that everybody else can hear. So, Mr. Deer. Gary Deer, I'm newly appointed to the board of the Regional Planning Commission. What is the nature of your interaction with the Planning Commission? And would you refer to this district standards? Are you tired about the T-Rorg standards? Yeah. Okay, so I think you're welcome to answer this if you wish. I'm gonna be pretty lean on the questions unless we really are up against time, but we're really trying to focus on the standards that are applicable through our zoning regulations. So what happens at the Regional Planning Commission? Not so relevant with the exception of our town plan, which have been approved by them. But you're welcome to go forward though. So it's our standards that they're... Yes, it's our standards only that we're considering here. Thank you, Gary. Next question. And again, we're on questions at the moment. If you do wanna make a comment, I'm happy to swear you in, but I'd like to get all the questions out first so everybody can hear the answers. Hi, my name's Cynthia Cui-Li-Chi and this is sort of a waterfall question, in the sense that they're asking for a height waiver based on demands, market demands, based on a market survey that they had done saying that 80 rooms would be, was the amount that would be absorbed easily. Was that before or after the other proposed tamped in of Montpelier, which has not opened yet? That's another 84 rooms. That's 20 minutes away. That should be 30 class, 40 minutes, yeah. I don't know how fast you... It's 20, 25 minutes. I don't know the answer to that, and you kind of were looking at me, but I can't answer that question. Well, just as you're chairing the meeting, so. Yes, I am chairing the meeting, so can the applicant answer, or does the applicant wish to answer that? Sure, so they're both tamped in, so I'm sure that the National Brain is aware of both developments. However, I'm not privy to the details of the market study. What I do know is that the market study that was conducted for this project had a recommendation of 80 rooms and that is the basis for granting franchise agreement to the applicants. I guess my thing is that this board is going to have to grant that waiver, not grant it based on how credible that argument may or may not be. And that was a bit of a comment, so that's an example where that's okay, we'll let you get away with it, but seriously, let's keep it to questions and then we can come back again to comments on that. So let me go to this gentleman there, because I saw your hand. Well, whoever's got the mic, go for it, there you go. Hi, I'm Joan Sacks from Randolph Center. There have been three, maybe this is a comment, I don't know, but there are three projects in Randolph Center, built in the last five years, that are heavy users of water, and I'm worried about having another heavy user of water in the same area, whether or not they are tied to the Randolph Center water thing. Yeah, you're definitely in the comment range. Could you phrase that in a question of like, could you explain the water usage and how it relates to the site plan criteria or the natural resources? So should I make a comment later then? Yeah, but I'm going to pick up on what you were saying to Sacks and say, could you discuss a little bit about the water, the amount that you need, how it relates to the discharges of the site, because that's within the purview of the board, as well as how it might affect the natural resources on the site, which are on the board, and maybe in the context of that, you can address some of the concerns that you're likely to hear about here. Sure, absolutely. So we are proposing that the development as a whole will be served by an on-site water system, which means we're planning to drill well and install all the needed infrastructure to treat and pressurize and distribute the water to the two buildings in the project. So as part of that process, there's a permit process with the state, where they are reviewing both the source of the water and the treatment of the distribution of the water. So we're currently working through the source permit process with the state. We've had a site visit with them and they're the state hydrogeologists. They've reviewed our general plans for the development of the site and they've given us approval to drill well. Once the well is drilled, we then need to submit to the state a plan to test the well for both quantity and interference with other water sources within a 2,000-foot radius, which is a criteria developed by the state for the particular amount of demand that we are proposing for the hotel. And also the water quality, which really only goes to protecting the users of the water system. So the applicant is a professional hydrogeologist. We will oversee the well drilling as well as the discharging and reference testing. And that will include monitoring all of the wells within a 2,000-foot radius that we get permission to monitor from the lane owners to ensure that there's not unacceptable interference or too much withdrawal from the aquifer. So in order to get our plan to develop the water system, we're going to have to ensure that we are not excessively using the water from the aquifer. There are several wells in the immediate vicinity of the project that are drilled to 200 feet or so and produce over 50 gallons a minute, which is an incredible amount of water for a particular residential well. Our projected maximum day demand for both the hotel and the carpet center is around 26 gallons a minute. So we give in the quantity of water that is typical for shallow, frankly, shallow bedrock wells in the area we don't expect to get interference. But again, we will be conducting a very thorough test of the aquifer's capacity to ensure that we won't be creating interference with other people's water supplies. And does that include if you're not interfering with other people's water supplies? Is it fair to say you're also not interfering with the natural resources of the site, the streams and- Oh, I'm sure it is, absolutely. All right, thank you. Are there questions? Yes, go here. My vocolor Randall's Center. So my vocolor Randall's Center. So I'm gonna quantify this a little bit because- Wait, comment or question? It is a question. Okay. Just to preface it, you made the comment that you didn't see semi-trick traffic because you thought the trucker would stop at the parking area on 89, is that correct? So hotel guests, not deliveries? Right, and that's, just from my experience traveling the country, I think if you have a hotel at an exit of an interstate, you're going to get truckers. They need to take showers, they need to eat. You know what? My question is, if you get that semi-truck traffic coming into this hotel as guests, where are they parking? Are you looking at that with the traffic study in terms of entering and exiting? So in terms of on-site circulation, again, we're not really playing the site to accommodate the tractor trailer drivers coming and parking at the site. So I think if that were one of the hotel, it would be the kind of thing that they would have to call ahead and exchange given that there is low demand for the restaurant to come to the center useful for night. I think you could accommodate the tractor trailer parking more than more remote parking lots across the numerous spaces, but you just have to plan that they would leave early in the morning before the restaurant traffic showed up. I think that's the only way it's going to happen. In terms of the access, the access to the site is completely designed for tractor trailer traffic because we expect tractor trailer deliveries. So just because some of the cars, some of the vehicles accessing the site are tractor trailers, they're not going to create any more significant traffic impact than was already contemplated in the traffic study because both the state road and all the access were designed, access and circulation are designed to accommodate tractor trailers. So I'm going to change my method. See, I can learn. I'm going to swear people in so that you can do comments and or questions for both and then I won't have to worry about it and it will be on the record, okay? So do you, if you wish to continue, can I swear you in my heart? Great. You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? Yes. Thank you. Please go ahead. Okay. Thank you. Another question is, I'm sorry. Again, with a restaurant conference center and I'm going to guess that you're planning that you'll probably get some lightings there and in terms of, you know, studies of noise pollution traffic when you've got late night events that your weddings don't really go, you know, midnight or after and mitigating any of that because you do have residential areas including, you know, Gimford, senior living. So have you looked into that? We haven't conducted a specific noise study but the majority of the time any events that are gonna happen on the property are gonna be indoors. There will be the occasional outdoor event but that is located in the portion of the site that's most remote from any other kind of development. So those events are going to be restricted by both local noise ordinances and as we look at the Act 250 process they have their own noise standards. So in terms of the operation of the site certainly we'll be able to plan to abide by all those standards in terms of noise. You know, the traffic impacts, you know, for events, if there's an event that legalizes the entire site it may be possible that we need to provide some traffic control at the site but the traffic study is looking at a specific set of agreed upon conditions in which you analyze traffic so that you can compare it from project to project fairly. So, you know, we hired a professional traffic engineer to conduct that study and the conclusion is that there's little to no impact on traffic congestion in the site. Oh, do we know what this restaurant is? Is this strictly, is this like a family restaurant? Is this a restaurant we are? The tenant for the restaurant hasn't been selected yet. Maybe I could jump in with a question that I had related to that. So a restaurant without a hotel is not allowed in this district. It's allowed as an accessory used to the hotel. Is there any chance that the hotel would be constructed without the restaurant or is this a project that is whole? It's whole. Okay, thank you. It's whole. Thank you. Gilton wants to see a restaurant there. Very good. Thank you. Milo, back to you. Are you done for now? I have a question. Who's responsible for policing that area? Would that be state police or does county share? State police and Sheriff Department. Thank you. So next question and or comment. Would you, may I swear you in? Okay. Thank you. You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. Would you state your name please? My name is Janice Shabat. Thank you, Janice. And I had a question pertaining back to the lighting. Yep, please. We had a review meeting last month about the aesthetics of the building. What was that board called? Hold the microphone. The design review advisory committee? Yes. And they had mentioned in that meeting about the possibilities of putting motion sensor lights at least in the back part of the building to keep down some of the lighting. I did hear that mentioned at the meeting this afternoon but again it was a maybe and an if. My question is, is this something you are going to do and if not what would stop you from being able to do that? I think it's the pleasure of the board and the applicant as to whether the board would require that as a conditional of the permit or whether the applicant is willing to commit to providing it as a representative of the applicant. I can't commit them to it so that's where we are on that. Okay, but it was recommended from the other board? I believe it was recommended from the other board? It's not in the written decision. That was not in the written decision but we hear the comment. Gotcha, thank you. Can I just make a quick comment here? Sure, go on. We really want to ensure the safety of our customers that we want people to feel comfortable on the site that it's a secure site and one of the ways of doing that is by lighting. Understood, thank you. By the way, I will come back to the people that I didn't swear in who I was demanding just do questions. Obviously we learned from that technique so I will come back to you with the comments. Other questions and or comments? Yep. Can we state if someone's a resident of Randolph or Brentview? Well, it's a public meeting. They don't need to do that but if you people wish to, it would be nice in addition to knowing your name, where you're from. That would be great. I'm clarification. Yes. State statute actually says that parties involved in this discussion have to be Randolph residents. Well. For owners of property in Randolph so. Thank you. It would be important to state that they are Randolph residents. That's my personal lawyer and town manager. Thank you. I did not realize that. So you can learn. See I've learned two things tonight. Okay, so please state where you're from and if you're not a resident of Randolph, I think you've got to ask for permission to do that. So go ahead. Thank you. Larry Rivet, the Grand Tree Hill Party Grand Tree. And three questions about life. And I do thank you for covering most of my concerns. I feel good about what you said. Winter. I saw a picture from the East. We're gonna mention was April. So from my vantage point, so it is possible that I'm gonna get other people from that side might get actually anywhere. I might get better views in the winter than they do when there's foliage. Has this been addressed? Because I didn't really, I mean, yeah, I mean, especially like the trees in the back of the restaurant, they're practically not to be there in the winter. And that's just one example. So I'm gonna ask about what plans to help save for the life of foliage. So all of the views of the restaurant and all of these, an entire view study were taken with no foliage. So what you see in the pictures is what you're gonna see when there's no foliage. Additionally, these three things here are spruce trees. So they're very provide year-round screening. And then once you get to the north of the spruce tree area, there's some significantly thick, they are the citrus trees, but there's a significantly thick area of chivalry that will provide some amount of screening in winter as well. So the idea of probably baffling the fixtures and that there's nothing over the property boundaries and that'll cover a lot of that for lighting. Yeah, absolutely. Okay, next issue is color of the lights. Has that been mentioned? That has not been mentioned. The lumens have been mentioned, but not the coloration of them. They were gonna be LEDs, I understand. So they're not orange. Okay. Oh, they're definitely not orange. One of the information is that the chair mentioned that if no one right now, the president would speak. And then we got one, yeah. Yeah. I press the chair, you know, for time considerations. Yes, yes, I'm trying to get a sense of how many more people we're getting. I feel like we're doing pretty well, but how many more people would like to either do comments or questions? I see a few more hands. It's not too bad. All right, let's do, I think that if we can limit people to a couple of minutes at most and we'll let you do another question, however, since you're not from Randolph, does anyone on the board have an objection to hearing from people who are not from Randolph at the moment? Why are we initially interested in tying people from, well, this gentleman, let's let him finish. Yep. Then let's turn to Randolph residents and see how we are on time and more questions. Yeah. The branch of your residence or elsewhere. Right, I think, okay, I think that makes sense. So go ahead and ask your next question, which will be your last question at the moment. Just to finish, the current one is going to be on the intro, like a whiteish type. Yes. It's certainly something that is considered by the lighting engineer. Not going to be, so to say. No, no, no, they're all out of these. They're all out of these. Okay, that's, and then one more. I think you brought it up. You brought it up so you could now see what I've heard. And that there will be a couple of lights that will be visible in front of them. What's wrong with having lower lights along the entrance that are less visible? Really, all you need to see is the road to get in, even if you don't have your headlights on. So the maximum, you sure, the maximum mounting height for any of the lights inside is 20 feet? That's, whoa, the parking lot lighting. It's not going to be like on a telephone pole. They're pretty, you know, when you see a 20 foot high light, you think, oh, those are wrong. Although, along the roadway, it's possible they have just very little light. Yeah, well, the problem is that you need a lot more of them. So the higher the light is, the more humanly it distributes light over the area you're trying to light. Can I make a further comment on lighting? Yeah. I just wanted to illustrate on this lighting plan. Yeah, you can all see those numbers from back there right now. Yeah, it's super easy, right? If you can, it's gonna do it. Yeah, right. Oh, well, here, I know how to fix it. Oh, now we can see them, guys. So, you can see that around the edges of the property, the light is, there's really no spillover. I mean, this is even the edge of the property. This is kind of the edge of the woodline, maybe, between the site and the 66. So the optics of the light and the placement of the light are really designed so that there is no spillover of the light outside of the area that we're intending to light. So you can see then, you know, so if that's a nine-foot parking space, this distance is probably at most 25 feet out to the parking lot. We're at virtually zero light around the edge of the parking lot. And those are lumens, Brian? Those are hook candles. Hook candles, okay, thanks. Yes, yep. So, and you can see, even in this area, the light throw is all forward into the site and there's very little spillover to the back. The optics of these lights are quite good that way nowadays, so I just wanted to emphasize that though there's a lot of lights, they're all focused on lighting the site and the very little of it is going off of the site, even within our property. Yeah, thank you. Okay, I saw some hands over here before. Yep, let's go back here. Are you from Randolph? Yes. Okay, by the way, if you're, I understand Green Tree, Brookfield, things like that, but if you're from Morrisville, you got to get a life if you're here. So thank you. Got it. Do you need this? Oh yes, do you swear to some of the truth, the whole truth and nothing about the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. Would you state your name, please, for the record? Tom Harris from Brookstreet in Randolph and my question relates to the market study. Is there anything, any data in the market study that demonstrates or sheds light on the ancillary economic benefits to the surrounding community of this project, including the addition to the grand list? I apologize, you have to take that one out. There was an answer. This is, I think, the effect on the grand list. Nothing specific. Thank you. You're welcome. And by the way, if you want a bit of viability of the project and that intent and felt like we're getting behind it, you know, what the impact would be. And, you know, so just to be clear that those are not among the criteria that we consider, obviously an important factor and Act 250 will consider that, some of that for the region, but not here. Yep, thank you. I didn't even need to swear you in, however, because you didn't make a comment and you just asked a question. Good job. I'll raise my comment as a question. Very good. Let's go back to that. Thank you. My name is Paul Haynes. I'm the director of Green Mountain Economic Development Corporation. I'm not a resident of Randolph, I'm a resident of Norwich. We own some property, our organization. Can I still swear you in though? Because even though you're from Norwich, yeah. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? Okay, thank you. So I would like to offer our strong support for this project on behalf of the economic vitality of the town of Randolph and some of the institutions including Vermont Technical College and the business community that we spend a lot of time working with. So I've been familiar with the site for some time. We have considered it for some other uses that we did not deem appropriate there. I think the solution that they came up with is quite successful and appealing. I think it's financeable. I think the fact that they have a market flag and that will fly there supports those statements and I commend them for a very sensitive design that I think addresses the concerns that you have which are very appropriate. Thank you. Thank you Bob. Are there questions or comments? Yes. I do, yes. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. And you notice that in the expedience and interest of time I'm not asking people to raise their other right hand. Do you could be sure that's how it's going to go? Again, the question about, I have a couple of comments. One is about the water use. The state of Vermont has been doing assessments and mapping of aquifers and I don't know if it's been done for Randall or not but it would seem to me that that would be appropriate and ask to have that done because of these other uses that have come on at some point particularly with climate change we are going to have less water and we do not want to have a situation where either the hotel or any other project here such as the other ones that are in Randall Center or the private homes lose their water so that's something I want to make a comment about. The second thing is, I'm wondering why an 80 room or 79 room hotel in Randall? We do not, the nearest ski resort is 45 minutes in several different directions. Marpelier has hotels and things like that and it's much more of an estimation as does Snow at Stowe and as does around Killington or Rutland and so forth. And I can see a use for this hotel for the VTC graduation, for the New World Festival and for weddings and so forth but I don't see that many weddings happening around here. I know that our daughter's wedding was 21 years ago and we would have had it indoors in this conference from not outside in a tent if it had been available so I'm worried about the effect on Randall businesses, successful Randall businesses such as some of our restaurants and tent companies so that's the second question. Thank you. I don't know if you, is there anything there you want to respond to or if we just go on? I think we've addressed the water issue and I don't think the economics of the hotel are all meant to be. I think we're getting a little bit of a shock in us. I'm gonna run this meeting the way I wish so I am going to be very tolerant of people asking questions or making comments and the zoning board will address the zoning regulations in our decision but this is an opportunity for people to express whatever it is and I don't expect them to have read the 200 pages of regulations to make a comment or question. Anyone else? Yes, we'll go to the back. Could you grab a microphone? I can talk really loud. That does work. Okay, great. Can you raise your right hand? Yes, sir, my name is Chandler Palakka. I live in Randall, I'm a resident, I'm not a property owner. It's okay. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? Yes, I do. Great. I wanted to address a comment that I heard that we're gonna be receiving less water with climate change, more understandings and what he said is not true. We're supposed to be getting more water. Not towards coming from a problem with the Southeast, but my understanding is the Northeast is we're receiving more water than less. So I just wanted to speak up on that point. Thank you. Thank you. Beautiful. I'm gonna go to the back over there. Yes, sir. My name is Chandler Palakka. I live in Randall, I'm a resident. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application? I do. Thank you, Ken. I wanted to comment in reference to some of these other comments as far as the need for a hotel. I was a member of a committee, unofficial official committee about eight to 10 years ago by a group of the businesses here in Randall to see what we could do about making Randall better. We did a survey and I was personally part of that survey. We went as far as the law school in Wellington and of course VTC, Chandler itself, the hospital, the GW Plastics and all the businesses on Beanville Road. And we definitely, everybody unanimously said we needed a hotel here for their business of acquaintances and things like that. And even the local businesses in downtown all agreed that we needed. This was the time when Dell Thompson was trying to build a motel which is now Gippard's out building area. He finally gave that up for a year and owned and built a restaurant instead, but just my comment. Thank you very much. Yes, sir. I think I can speak loud enough. James Larson, I'm in the East Valley and that's part of Randall. Yes, at the moment, yes. So I'll let this gentleman come. Wait, wait. You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application. Can you see how well I do that? I got that memorized. Yes, sir. So I'll let this gentleman's comment. I think most of the business owners in the town will agree that we sorely need some kind of lodging. Do you agree? We sorely need some kind of lodging. You know, I give the woman here some credit. You know, she's a woman after my own heart, but it does take longer than 20 minutes to get to Macbeth, Macbeth, Macbeth, Macbeth, Macbeth. The closest hotel is Berlin, not Macbeth. To the north, the closest hotel is Weber. There's bound to be something in between. Slow machine traffic at one time, it's a great idea, but I don't know. That is gonna really inject some business to the past trails. It's gonna help the businesses around us, the small businesses. You've been living in a hotel for three or four years. Ever since 3000 and close, we've got not one question. It is, as far as the restaurant goes, is there a chance that a local business? It would be a preference. Yes. So take a look at the restaurant or it's gross fraud by Hampton that it has to be not prescribed by Hampton, that it has to be a chain or something like that. We have to, someone has to replace the opportunity who's a restaurant operator, so that's what we're trying to find. We need it. Okay, thank you. So just for the record, since this is all on the record, it may interest you to know that the Development Review Board and the zoning regulations do not address a need for a particular project or not. We rely very much on private business and entrepreneurial spirit to determine what's needed and when. So to the extent that this issue is related to items in the town plan, we will be looking at it. But if you tell me, if four people came to propose hotels in various parts of the town, they would all be reviewed by the same zoning rules within the district that they apply and the need for all those would not be addressed. The same is true for any other business, gas stations, dollar stores, anything else that you might think of. So I just wanna, I mean, I appreciate hearing the comments about the economic impact and the things that from a town plan standpoint you think might be relevant, but the reality is that's not within our purview to decide whether it's needed or not. So let me go to the back over here. Yep, go ahead. Yep. I'm just gonna make this point. Thank you, Nicola, Randolph. I mean, swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application. I do, and I'll make it quick because I know the need isn't an issue here, but it goes back to those comments about older surveys that were done on the need issue. Our Randolph region re-energized International Development Committee recently re-did a study of businesses or 24 representative businesses in the area a hotel came up as one of the number one concerns of what those businesses and the rest of the schools needed for their future success. And so if I wanted anybody who would like to copy that survey, I can provide them a copy but folks are interested in me and they're in contact with me. I'm glad to do that. Thank you. Yes, sir. Go ahead. I don't need no money. It's right. I don't need money. I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application. I do. Thank you. Okay. But I'm trying to find out, I understand the business end of it. I'm in the South property, right beside there that nobody likes to see. But I'm exactly right there looking after the project. My question is, I keep caring and I don't know which board I can bring this up to is, we are concerned about everything around you. You know, businesses, economy, the traffic and everything. Is there any rights for the people or any concerns of people who are actually affected by it right there? Is there anything? So there is a character, the neighborhood criteria, things like that. And I read a part about lighting and its effect on nearby residential but the reality is, most of these criteria are based on how the town is affected from public spaces, not private. And traffic certainly is an issue, both internal and external. But- I don't want to get almost clicked all the time going out there. Well, if this goes forward, you'll have company. But I think- Yeah. But- I just want to make clear that that's a distinction. Most of our rules are related from a public community standpoint as opposed to a private person's- Yeah, I've been to each one of these boards and I bring up the question about you guys coming to us property owners and working with us. And I hear your rebuttal to one of them that it's not really your concern because you're concerned about other areas. You're not concerned about the individual property around where are you concerned with us? Are you willing to work with us? Or is it just a thing to say, yeah, we're going to get with the neighbors and we're going to try to work with them? Or you don't have to? Which one is it? Are you- Do you want to answer for the applicant, Paul? Paul, I did receive your wife, Jeanette, and I let her know that the boom is going up to address the issues of the town. Yeah, that was the second time, this time here, not the time before it was up, or the time- I didn't know who it was. I don't want to get into it, but that boom came that Friday morning and I didn't know about it and it went up and it came down that weekend. I had no problem with the boom. What I'm having problems with is, as a property owner, I feel that it would be an obligation of a big place to deal with the property owners there. The other thing is, we have a property line right there and the backside there. What stops the residents that want to walk around in these beautiful fields and see the beautiful trio then come and up my property line and visit it up in my place? Is it, do I have to put posted signs? Do I have to load a shotgun or- Of course, the shotgun. So yeah, look, good question. And as I mentioned, kind of our overall thing is related to, most of our rules and regulations are related to views and impact from public standpoint, but we always encourage a developer to get with the neighbors and see if they can work out differences and it is important still for us to hear about your concerns regarding lighting or landscape planning or things that could make, to minimize the impact of this project on your property. And I agree with the owners that we need a hotel here. I work at Noenche University. I retired from the Marine Corps. They're training officers. So I believe, and I've been part of this community for 23 years and I've given a lot to this community. So I think, you know, just a common courtesy to help us along the way so we know what to do, whether to sell a house, move out, or move out. Well, as I say, from a board standpoint, we encourage applicants to work with neighbors and to discuss their issues with them and try and accommodate them as best they can in the site. Do you have anything you wanna add to that? I just have to call the Shabbat. I have spoken to him. Okay, good. Sounds like you can do it again. Did I not call you last year? You can call without me. Okay, I'm gonna. I haven't heard anything from you since last time. Okay, obviously a communication issue that is an opportunity there or whatever, it would be great, but not relevant necessarily to the board stuff. Any other comments or questions for people? Yes, sir. I'll try and turn it back to the higher note. Excellent. But I do respect all the landowners. Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application. I do. Would you state your name, please, for the record? I'm a Freeman. I'm in Braintree. And I do respect the important landowners. I did hear a little bit of dealing with light infringement and setbacks for the property line. So it seems to me that they're addressing some of the concerns of the area residents. I just wanted to echo what Bob Hain said about the design. I'm in support of this. I'm on the board. I was on the board of directors of PROSTA, a non-paid director of a nonprofit outdoor recreation group here in Randolph in the San Juan area. And I believe the design of this building fits in. It was a landscape very well. It's very hidden. And I give them props for that. So I just wanted general support. I echo quite a bit of the prior statements I've said about the need for it. I think one thing to think about too with this is this hotel will net more people in general to this area that will end up trickling downtown. And so I think there's a lot of excitement about it. They will. So, no, would you provide light down the hill? Yeah, we have stagecoach to bring you back up the hill. Yes. Anyone who hasn't spoken yet and then I can just quickly come back. Yes, now go ahead. Yep. Please get a microphone. Yep. Thank you. Yeah, use square to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so far as it pertains to this application. Yes. Thank you. Please say your name. One Bill of Friends. I put those to the work that's being done here today. I think a lot of people have had impressions of today. My concern is the height. You know, when you look at the wood at 50 feet and take away a third of that to the amount of 35 feet, I have some concerns about how high that is that it starts to put the roof line into the foreground and the visual coming down to 66.10. That's certainly from my property, which is a little bit of a tip, at least. I have questions about the needs. I drove through Rotlin to get here today and it's worded up in Palestine and between Palestine. And I tried to. Thank you. Anyone else? Yes. I said thank you, Lucci. Second try around. Then I got a second try. I said to Randall, I start to tell the truth. You've already been sworn in, I believe. Oh, no, I haven't. That's not true. Oh, sorry, I'm sorry. I'm going to get serious. Continue to raise your left hand then. Did you swear to tell the truth to the right? I swear to a little truth and nothing of the truth as regards to these proceedings and this application. Perfect. I asked the question before. I'm not sure whether I need to re-ask it to get on record about the market survey, whether that did or did not include the other 80 forums that are going to be coming up on the market soon. As a second comment, in terms of need, it seems to go between the stuff this gentleman was working on 10 or 20 years ago and Samus had a building permit out for hotels in the area for 20 or 30 years or more. So if there was this great need, I think it may have been fulfilled in some sense if the need were really there. I'm not really sure how that's... Other people spoke into it, it wasn't really my main concern, but that's okay. Thank you. Can I address the question of the studies? Yep. So the market study did include the proposal to tell a molecular. Honestly, with the amount of appeals happening there, it's questionable whether the project will even go forward or not, but regardless, the market study and the reason why we presented the market study to this board is that the market study that has already been done and already been completed is obsessed the requirement for this specific project of the number of rooms that are required to build a Hampton Inn. That is the purpose for talking about the market study. It's specific to this project. It's already been done and it requires this project to have 79. The mark seems 80, but 79 is acceptable, 79 rooms. Okay, thank you. Yes, Mila, one more time. Did I swear you in already? Yeah. Yes. Thank you, go ahead. That's right, you were my first. So in the discussion of whether we need a hotel here, I don't know, I think there's definitely a need for a place for people to stay. One of the biggest concerns is it being at the interstate exit versus downtown. We like to go camping down in Bennington when we happened in to talk to a guy to find out about the renovation of their downtown. Bennington looks a lot like Randolph. Right now there's a lot of empty storefronts. Interestingly enough, he got there because there was a hotel built three or four miles outside of the downtown and he came in to manage it. That hotel is now boarded up and gone. And he said that, yes, people stopped going downtown. And so I think that's something that this town really ought to consider. I have this contact information at home. It seems that a lot of, this isn't unique to Randolph, but it seems like a lot of towns just don't talk to each other about what they're doing to revitalize their downtowns. This is happening all over Vermont. Yeah, everywhere. We just hate to see the downtown, you know, close down more. Okay, thank you. Anyone else who hasn't spoken yet, it's looking good. Could I make a comment to that? Yes, do make. I'm a 1987 graduate of Randolph Indian High School. I went to apology in Wyoming, back I owned 22 North Main Street. I've owned it for 22 years. I've owned the building where the hub is gonna be, that it were fixed up downtown. The last thing I want is for the death of Randolph. I do have the back to prove Randolph. That's why we're doing this. We're all local people. We're not outside of the building. We're both of people who are trying to fit the need for spending a lot of money doing it. Okay, thank you. Okay, yeah, I'll close. So I want to, first of all, thank you all very much. Are there any other comments or questions from the board that we haven't addressed? Okay, does anyone from the board consider that we need any more information that isn't already on the record here, that we, any reason that we should continue the public hearing? Otherwise, I would take a motion to close the public hearing and move this application to deliberative session. So, I do want to make just a comment for people that are here tonight and thinking, is this the first time we're seeing this stuff? And the answer is no. I just want to make sure it's clear that there was a preliminary meeting a month, maybe two months ago, where we saw some preliminary drawings of the earlier versions of these, preliminary views of what the building looked like. So the applicants heard from us then and we've been thinking about this and asking questions for a couple months. So we're not blazing through a review of a really significant project. Anyone who wants to move to the arts? No. So, we have a motion to close the public hearing and move to deliberative session. Do I have a second for that? No second. No second. Move seconded. No, you can't second your own motion, but I think I got one and two here. So, I got two here. You're telling me already. Yeah, very good. Any further discussion for that? I just, before we do this, I do want to thank you all. I think this is a great meeting, good hearing. I appreciate people's comments and the ability to constructively discuss this stuff. It makes me feel good about everything about Randolph and Braintring and Northfield. And if there was anyone from Morrisville, I'm sorry. It was just good. But you're all terrific and thank you very much for the participation. We appreciate it.