State regulators have dealt a blow to a Connecticut developer’s plans for a massive commercial and residential project off Interstate 89 in Randolph.
In a ruling last week, the District 3 Environmental Commission asked Jesse “Sam” Sammis to scale back a project in order to protect several open fields where he proposed to build apartments and other structures.
Sammis wants to transform 178 acres of open land around Exit 4 into a development of 274 homes, a 180-room hotel and conference center, more than 500,000 square feet of office and light industrial space, a 10,000-square-foot fitness center and an interstate rest stop with an attached retail outlet.
“At present, the commission is not persuaded that the project as designed is compact enough to satisfy [land-use regulations],” commission chair Tim Taylor wrote. “We invite the applicant to present a new plan showing a more compact design.”
While the Randolph business community and local government have backed the project, which Sammis calls the Green Mountain Center, a citizens group has called it disproportionate for the community of 4,800 people. Critics have questioned why Sammis would build on open land when he owns several other parcels closer to downtown. A Seven Days tally found that Sammis owned 1,400 acres worth $12.6 million in Randolph.
The commission, which enforces Act 250, Vermont’s land-use law, expressed some interest in that point. It asked Sammis to identify his holdings in Randolph. “This list should include the location of each parcel, its size and a statement regarding its suitability for relocating some or all of the office, residential or light industrial components of the project,” Taylor wrote.
Sammis’ attorney, Pete Van Oot, described the commission’s response to the Valley News as “constructive feedback” and told the paper he’ll file a written response. The next hearing is scheduled for August 17.
David Hurwitz, spokesman for the opposition group Exit 4 Open Space, said members welcome the commission’s early ruling but warned they do not want the see the proposed project go forward even on a smaller piece of land.
“This proposed development … is larger than the entire commercial space in downtown Randolph,” Hurwitz said. “The commission has not asked the developer to reduce the square footage; they have only asked him to cram it into a ‘clustered’ and more compact space to preserve soil. But there is no need to build another town by the highway, three miles away from the downtown, nor is there a need for a Connecticut developer to bring Connecticut-style suburban development to Randolph.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Go to http://www.Exit4OpenSpace.org for more info about the development and to sign the petition to oppose this out of scale development that will hurt Randolph’s downtown and ruin the amazing western views of the mountains from 89.
There are other, better places to put a 180 room hotel if one is actually needed. It does not need to be situated right alongside the highway with a massive parking lot and lights. Randolph does not need 274 housing units next to the highway when there are over 80 houses for sale in town, including large beautiful Victorian homes for as little as $160k.
I’m a resident of Randolph, and don’t understand the “support of the business community” for this project (to the extent that it may actually exist). As is already manifest in the existing downtown, the mere presence of buildings is not what generates “business”. Rather, it is a combination of real relationships and filling true human needs, none of which is offered by this project.
It instead represents a mish-mash of suburban tropes which have long since exhausted themselves, and is based on laughable, pie-in-the-sky numbers. The proposal also ignore the vast changes that have taken place in the natural world, which—in stubborn contradiction to widespread belief—actually supports what we call “the economy”.
Anything of the nature Sammis proposes built on this site is destined to become a stranded asset, as interest in and potential for motoring-for-pleasure wanes, and global supply chains falter. Rather than maintaining a death-grip on growth models and resource sinks with no future, developers, the state, the commission, and Vermont residents should start thinking of way to create and reinforce resilience, marshaling existing capacities in a future that will be ineluctably marked by significant de-growth.
Here is a textbook example of shortsighted, greedy, and unnecessary development being packaged in all of the fashionable cliches by an out of state developer and his high-power lawyer. It is a sad period in Vermont’s history that we are now being colonized by the conquistadors of urbanism. What is sadder is that so many beg for and actually believe in this model of development, when such development is demonstratably bad for small town/downtown economies and community cohesion. If built, all this crap will fail sooner or later. They all do within a generation or two. And then you have a dead artificial landscape. That land has been farmed since those hills were settled 200 years ago and could provide food, jobs, and a sense of communal pride for a thousand more. build in the villages and stop consuming farmland!
Not every business owner in Randolph supports this project. I have spoken to several who are vehemently opposed to it. Also, not every member of town government supports it either. There are two select board members who oppose the project, and are very concerned about the negative impacts it could have on Randolph’s historic and “Designated Downtown” – one of only six in the state.