Celebration of Life Set for Leo Davin in Killington

Vermont Standard

7/28/16

By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

Killington select board member Ken Lee announced that a Celebration of Life honoring resident Leo J. Davin Jr. has been organized for 1:30, Aug. 7 at the Green Mountain National Golf Course grill area. The public is invited to attend, and friends and colleagues are welcome to share their thoughts and stories, Lee said.

Lee said he met Davin through skiing at Killington, an activity Davin enjoyed for 40 years.

“I guess I knew Leo as well as anybody else around here,” Lee said. “We skied and played golf together quite often and were best friends for over 20 years.”

Lee said he, Davin and Red Glaze were called “the silver foxes” because they played golf together so often, were “of an age” and all had white hair.

Asked what kind of golfer Davin was, Lee said, “He was a great guy, and I enjoyed winning money from him on the golf course.” They played together for the last time just two days before Davin had to give up the game because his illness had progressed too far.

Davin, who had lived in Killington for 10 to 12 years, died June 15 at DHMC from “complications resulting from cancer and blood disorder,” according to his obituary. He was born in Hamden, Connecticut in September 1942 and was a versatile athlete, competing at baseball, football, and hockey, as well as recreational basketball as a youth. He was also a ski instructor at Killington for a time. He tried minor league baseball in Boston, but was not successful.

Most of Davin’s working life was spent in the insurance claims business working for large insurers such as Travelers and Aetna Casualty. When he moved to Killington full-time after retirement, he became active in the community and made many friends as well as accomplishing good work for the town.

“He was chairman of the Golf Course Committee,” Lee said, “as well as putting in six years on the planning commission and 5 or 6 years on the recreation commission. He was a community force.”

“At over six feet tall and almost 300 pounds, Leo was a big guy, a funny guy and a good guy,” Lee said. “He will be sorely missed around here.”

In other news, the select board voted to appoint Chad Aston to take Davin’s place on the golf course committee.

Town Manager Deborah Schwartz said the golf course, which operates as a separate entity, borrows money from the town every spring to finance their start-up. Then the town borrows money from the bank in July to cover bills before tax revenue begins arriving.

“I think the golf course should go to the bank and borrow its annual start-up money from them instead of the town,” she said. “Like any other business, even though the loans would be for small amounts.”

Schwartz also brought up the delinquent taxes issue, a subject she has been researching for some time. She said the current policy is to consider a tax sale action after a property owner is delinquent for a year.

“This is too long for any town to have to wait for money it budgeted with the assumption it would be paid,” Schwartz said.

She had also spoken to the town’s attorney, who said setting new tax delinquency rules is within the board’s authority.

Schwartz’s proposal is to consider taxes delinquent if the final installment is still unpaid 30 days after the 10-day grace period, and at that time a tax sale would be considered.

“This doesn’t preclude setting up payment plans with delinquent taxpayers who want to catch up but can’t pay back taxes all at once,” she said. “But if a payment plan is set up, and the property owner stops making the agreed payments, the property is immediately eligible for tax sale.”

She said using the words, “May institute tax sale” would enable the board to accommodate individual circumstances.

Several edits were proposed by selectman Chris Bianchi and board chairman Patty McGrath, and the amended version was passed unanimously.

Comment: Finally a town manager who understands. I and others have stated the golf course needed to recognize the interest expense of money borrowed from the town to accurately state its profitability. Whether its imputed somehow in the town's accounting system or paid directly to a bank on a loan solicited by the GMNGC directly it needs to be recognized as a business expense and not absorbed in the town's operating budget. It's enough that the taxpayers are eating the building and refinancing costs of GMNGC.

State: Route 4 to Get More Rumble Strips

Vermont Standard

July 21, 2016

Staff Report

There will soon be rumble strips in Woodstock, Bridgewater and through Killington.

The state is repaving Route 4 this summer and new rumble strips are to be installed down the middle of the road as part of a plan to put rumble strips on just about every state highway.

The paving project will begin on Route 4 in Killington and extend 14 miles to the Woodstock Recreation Center. The state anticipates closing multiple lanes throughout the duration of the project. Paving will be done in October.

This is the start of what could be many more rumble strips in the future. Vermont Agency of Transportation is considering rumble strips down the

 centerlines of state highways where pavement width is at least 28 feet, where there’s a three-foot shoulder, where the speed limit is at least 45 miles per hour, where there are at least 1,500 vehicles per day or where there have been a number of crashes.

As part of a new policy, rumble strips will not be placed within 100 feet of residences.

“If they don’t like it, now’s the time to come forward. I don’t know what to tell you,” said Municipal Manager Phil Swanson.

The state removed portions of rumble strips in Quechee and Taftsville this summer after some residents complained that the noise of trucks and cars hitting them was loud enough to shake their homes. The rumble strips were installed along that corridor in 2013 following outrage from five deaths in a three-year period.

Rumble strips have been found to reduce crashes 25-35 percent, the Vermont Agency of Transportation said. Fourteen miles of rumble have been installed so far on five major routes, including Routes 2, 4, 7, 9 and 105.

Select board chair Preston Bristow said the board is in favor of rumble strips, “but I realize those that live near them might feel differently,” he said.

Killington Resort Former ski ambassador takes workers’ comp claim to court

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER | July 27,2016

KILLINGTON — A dispute over who should pay a former Killington Resort ski ambassador’s medical bills following a 2008 tumble on the slopes could finally be settled in court.

Thomas Kibbie, of Connecticut, appealed in March a February decision by the Vermont Department of Labor denying in part his workers’ compensation claim with Killington Resort in Rutland Superior Court. Because the resort has not responded to the suit within the prescribed time, Thomas Bixby, Kibbie’s Rutland-based lawyer, has asked the judge for a default judgement in his client’s favor.

“We expected them to respond to the appeal — they’ve fought this tooth and nail for approximately eight years now,” Bixby said in an interview Tuesday.

Resort spokesman Michael Joseph said Tuesday the company would not be commenting on the matter “at this time.”

Kibbie had been a volunteer ski ambassador for about 10 years, according to filings in the case, when he fell and hit his head so hard his helmet cracked one January evening while doing a final sweep. He was rushed to the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, N.H., where a CT scan revealed a small brain hemorrhage. Discharged four days later, Kibbie was ultimately diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury and the resort began paying workers’ compensation benefits.

Kibbie would later undergo treatment for TBI, fractured teeth, whiplash, chronic neck pain, headaches, mental health problems and vision problems.

Bixby said the injuries have left Kibbie, a carpenter by trade, unable to work, and anxious around people or in a car.

“He would tell you: He’s not the same person he was before,” Bixby said.

In 2010, Kibbie and the resort signed an agreement providing Kibbie $50,000 in exchange for settling his claims. The resort also agreed to pay ongoing costs “for the treatment of his cognitive or other head injury including neurological, psychological, ophthalmological, TBI care and treatment.”

Kibbie would later testify in hearings before Department of Labor officials that he believed the agreement he had signed covered him “for everything from the shoulders up,” but soon after signing the document, the resort stopped reimbursing certain medical bills, arguing the treatments weren’t covered under the agreement, which only put the resort on the hook for treatment related to Kibbie’s head — and not neck — injuries.

In the February decision, the Labor Department agreed with the resort that it was only liable for medical treatments related to Kibbie’s head injuries.

“I do not dispute that the settlement agreement Claimant executed may not have said what he wanted it to say,” Jane Woodruff, an administrative law judge, wrote on behalf of Labor Commissioner Anne Noonan. “I cannot conclude that this was a consequence of ambiguous or inadequately defined terms however. … I am bound to enforce it according to its terms.”

But it also found the resort had wrongly denied payment for a variety of bills — including dental and mental health treatments, prescription medication costs, and visual deficit treatments — that were medically necessary and directly related to Kibbie’s head injury.

Bixby declined to elaborate on why Kibbie signed the 2010 agreement in the first place, but noted that it was the subject of a separate suit, filed this month in federal court, against Kibbie’s former attorney.

Even with a judge’s order compelling the resort to pay for treatments, his client might have trouble getting Killington to comply, Bixby said.

“This is kind of the tip of the iceberg, but we’re relieved to be moving forward,” he said.

lola.duffort

@rutlandherald.com

Planning commissions seek to amend ski village permit

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER | July 26,2016

KILLINGTON — The long and winding legal wrangle to build a ski village for Killington Mountain Resort is not over.

Regional planning commissions filed an appeal July 1 to amend a decision issued late last month by Environmental Court Judge Thomas Durkin affirming an Act 250 permit for the first phase of the Killington Ski Village project.

The Rutland Regional Planning Commission, Two Rivers-Ottauquechee Regional Commission and Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission wrote to the court saying they never agreed to shoulder the cost of a corridor study regarding the project’s next phases.

Durkin in his decision included a condition that SP Land Company, the project’s developer, contribute $20,000 to such a study, which would be conducted by the regional planning commissions.

The commissions wrote in their motion to appeal that while they had supported such a study, they had always maintained its costs should be shouldered entirely by the permittee.

“The Regional Commissions are not applicants or permittees, and the Court lacks any authority to impose permit obligations on the RPCs absent their consent,” the commissions wrote in their July motion. “Nor does the Court have the authority to order the RPCs to expend funds. Because the RPCs have not proposed, and have not consented to produce and finance the studies, Condition 14 must be altered and amended.”

SP Land responded in mid-July to the motion, agreeing that since the planning commissions weren’t parties to the case, they couldn’t be compelled to take action or spend money in relation to it.

But SP Land attorney Christopher Roy also argued that Durkin ought to consider jettisoning all post-decision traffic studies. Durkin mandated two studies in his decision — one to be conducted by SP Land on the project’s first phase; another to be conducted by the commissions, with partial financing from SP Land, on the project’s next phases.

Roy argued that while it has been common for developers to agree to such studies during the permitting process, recent Vermont Supreme Court and Superior Court decisions called the practice into question.

“The logic of this holding is straightforward,” Roy wrote in reference to a Supreme Court decision in February that nixed periodic post-construction inspection of a stormwater system from a permit tied to an Okemo development.

“An applicant must meet its burdens of production and persuasion with respect to each of the Act 250 criteria,” Roy added. “If it does so to the District Commission’s or the Court’s satisfaction, then a permit should be issued. … Alternatively, if the applicant fails to construct the project in conformance with its application and permit, enforcement is a matter for others, such as the Vermont Natural Resources Board, to handle.”

Roy also noted in an interview Monday the developer had already conducted a traffic study, and expected to conduct additional studies if it decided to go forward with the next phases of the project — which would require a new Act 250 permit.

Phase I of the project, which this Act 250 proceeding concerns, includes the village’s core and a 32-unit subdivision just north of it. The core includes plans for 193 housing units, 31,622 square feet of commercial space, 7,000 square feet of replacement skier service areas within two new base lodge buildings, the relocation of a portion of Killington and East Mountain roads, additional parking areas, and a village green.

The project ultimately envisions creating in several phases 2,300 residential units, a 77,000-square-foot skier services building, 32 new residential lots and about 200,000 square feet of retail space over the next 20 to 30 years.

Once the court responds to the regional planning commissions’ motion, parties will have 30 days to appeal the decision to the Vermont Supreme Court. There is no deadline for the court to respond to the motion, but Roy said he expected a decision relatively soon.

lola.duffort@rutlandherald.com

Crash sends local man to hospital

Rutland Herald

By Dan Colton

STAFF WRITER | July 19,2016

Anthony Edwards / Staff Photo Emergency workers respond to a single-car crash at the intersection of Route 4 and Altrui Place in Rutland Town on Monday afternoon.

Authorities said a medical emergency likely caused a Killington man to crash his vehicle on Route 4 on Monday and lost control while driving.

Trooper Aron McNeil of the Vermont State Police said Louis Belfore, 73, was seen traveling east near Rutland High School, slumped over in his seat.

Police said the eyewitness saw Belfore’s eastbound Kia Sorento cross the road’s centerline into the westbound lane. The vehicle went off the road and crashed into the Needham Electrical Supply sign, knocking it down and damaging the sign’s stone platform.

The Altrui Place street sign was damaged and bent, police said, the Kia’s airbag was deployed.

McNeil said the witness was driving in front of Belfore and saw him in the rearview mirror.

Belfore was taken to Rutland Regional Medical Center by Regional Ambulance Service. The Rutland Town Fire Department responded to the scene and assisted medical technicians, McNeil said.

Bernadette Robin, hospital spokeswoman, said Belfore was in fair condition around 5:40 p.m. Monday. Belfore’s vehicle sustained heavy front-end damage and had to be towed from the scene by Carrara’s Services.

Police said Belfore possibly suffered a stroke before the crash. There were no skid marks on the road to indicate he tried to use his brakes, police said.

McNeil said the crash remains under investigation. Speed and alcohol aren’t considered to be factors in the crash, he said.

dan.colton @rutlandherald.com

Killington Village progress hits another delay

Mountain Times

July 14, 2016

By Karen D. Lorentz

The Rutland County Regional Planning Commission, Two Rivers-Ottauquechee Regional Commission and Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commissions have filed a Motion to Alter and Amend the Permit Conditions that were imposed regarding traffic studies in the June 21 Environmental Court decision regarding the Killington Village.

In that decision Judge Thomas S. Durkin largely agreed with the arguments made by SP Land Company in its appeal of certain conditions and findings imposed in its District #1 Act 250 permit. The judgment order also included some new conditions regarding traffic studies.

The Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) specifically objected to the Court “imposing Condition 14” which requires “the Regional Commissions to complete a master plan traffic study” as well as ordering the permittee SP Land to pay $20,000 toward the studies.

Regarding a finding that “the Regional Commissions have pledged to complete a regional corridor study of resort-generated traffic,” the RPCs note that they “have not pledged to fund and undertake the study themselves” and state that the “condition is based on a mistake of fact.”

They also reiterate their prior contention given in testimony before the Court that “the responsibility for conducting the traffic impact study for this development” rests on the permittee(s). The RPCs further contend that the Court cannot impose conditions on them as they are not the party seeking the permit.

In their Motion to Alter and Amend, the Regional Planning Commissions suggest their own wording for conditions 13 and 14.

Their proposed Condition 13 states a “Traffic Study to be completed by SPLC” and adjusts the scope of the data gathering in connection with the current phase with the scope of the studies to be conducted in connection with future phases.

The proposal for Condition 14 is adjusted to delete the payment obligation of the permittee SP Land, contending that “a specific financial condition is not appropriate at this time.” It also provides for “a collaborative planning process to review the scope of and responsibility for traffic studies to be conducted prior to application for any future phase” and includes a dispute resolution provision.

Asked for comment, SP Land President Steven Selbo said he does not agree with the RPCs’ proposed conditions. He is currently working on his response to the Motion to Alter and Amend the traffic conditions.

Noting he has previously agreed to a 50-50 public/private split to pay for corridor traffic impact studies, Selbo said that there are other resorts—at Quechee, Okemo, Suicide Six and Woodstock—which have expansion projects by private developers that can also impact traffic, especially in corridors like Routes 103 to I-91 in the case of Ludlow area developments and along US Route 4 to I-89 where improvements at Quechee Village and in the Woodstock area may impact traffic.

He noted that additional Killington Resort skier visits could also impact traffic and that all private parties should be considered in sharing private sector funding, not just SP Land. (The RPCs also receive some funding from the 1.25 percent Property Transfer Tax, which is assessed on sales of residences like those SP Land is proposing for the Killington Village, specifically to help them fund such studies.)

Proportional funding precedent

The case for proportional funding where traffic impacts exist was made in a July 7 Environmental Court cecision regarding Motions to Reconsider a Hinesburg Hannaford Act 250 permit.

Because the Court heard testimony from the applicant that its project would only contribute about nine percent of the overall traffic at an already congested intersection and thus should only be required to pay 9 percent of the total cost of a new traffic signal (and offered to pay $25,000 toward it as mitigation), the permit had been granted requiring the installation and proportional share payment.

Noting it was “uncontested that the project was not the sole cause of the traffic concerns at the intersection,” the Court stated that the appellants had had the opportunity to present further evidence as to cost sharing at the Act 250 permit hearings and had failed to do so, and therefore upheld its original finding as to the required mitigation and did not amend the permit to require Hannaford to pay for the entire signal light.

Asked about the complexity of traffic issues, Selbo noted that a recent Vermont law was passed by the legislature to address the complicated issues related to traffic and created traffic improvements districts. However, VTrans has not yet created the rules to go with that law. As a result, issues concerning traffic impacts and who pays for them continue to complicate — and delay — the permit process as it relates to Act 250 Criterion 5 (the traffic signal is a condition to the Hannaford project).

Next steps regarding Village permit conditions

Judge Durkin must now decide whether to accept the Motion to Alter and Amend and can then alter his findings or uphold the permit in its entirety. (Should he do the latter, the RPCs have 30 days in which to appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.)

If he decides to alter his findings, Judge Durkin considers both the Motion and SP Land’s Response. Once he makes his ruling in regard to the traffic study issue, either party can appeal it to the Vermont Supreme Court.

If any appeals are made, Court members look at the Environmental Court’s decision and consider the evidence that was submitted on the record in its hearings. Brief testimony can be given by the parties.

The bottom line is that the permit process for a Killington Village entails more delays but fewer issues remain to be addressed.

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/killington-village-progress-hits-another-delay/#sthash.kFlEwlWA.dpuf

Killington municipal property tax rate set

Mountain Times

July 13-19, 2016

By Polly Lynn

KILLINGTON— Killington Select Board Chair Patty McGrath said that new rate for municipal property taxes would be 0.3333, “only slightly higher than we anticipated,” she said. The Select Board unanimously approved the rate at its regular meeting Tuesday, July 5, there was no further discussion.

The 2015-16 rate was $0.4633 for an 18-month budget cycle (approximately 0.3109 if extrapolated to 12-months.) In 2014, the 12-month rate was $0.2959, according to Town Manager Deborah Schwartz.

The state education property tax rate for residents (homestead) and non-residents for the fiscal year, which started July 1, is $1.6227 and $1.4852 respectively. That compares to the 2015-16 rates of $1.7364 for residents and $1.5052 for non-residents, Schwartz stated.

Presenting a financial update to the Select Board, Tuesday, she noted: “The operating note was funded on June 30 to the tune of $900,000, the interest rate is 1.4 percent. To look to see how much of that was from prior year or years vs. going forward, Lucretia did some calculations, which you have in front of you,” she said. Further explaining, she added, “The balance forward from July expenses is just under $66,000. The amount that is needed for June is the lions share of the note.”

Tax delinquencies through June 30 were $395,554, which includes delinquencies, penalties and interest, she continued. Of that number $373,000 was from 2015 alone.

“So if you remove the tax delinquency from the amount needed for June we have a post-tax balance of almost $438,700,” Schwartz said. Additionally, “we have our hands out to FEMA for about $539,000, it is still to be determined what the outcome of that is going to be.

“So the lion’s share of this note was to cover expenses for the last fiscal year which ended last week,” Schwartz concluded.

In order to get away from tax anticipation and/or operating notes in the future, the Board discussed the timing of tax collection.

Board member Ken Lee asked if it would make more sense to go to three payments instead of the current four. Patty McGrath said she thought it would.

“When we do it as four payments there’s a six week gap before we collect our first payment… so that puts us behind,” she said. “If we went to three payments it would still provide benefit, breaking it up and lower tax payments, but it would also get us ahead. So, if our finances are running smoothly, we wouldn’t have to be going for the tax anticipation notes.”

Chris Bianchi said, “The only way we don’t go for a tax anticipation note is if we have a reserved fund balance. Because even if everyone paid their taxes on time come June 30, the end of the fiscal year, and all our bills our paid, the budget’s paid, the state’s paid — we have no money and we don’t collect any until August but we have bills in July and August,” he said. “So unless we build up a reserve fund of a couple months operating, as suggested, we will always need an operating note… we used to have a reserve fund but the balance that we used to carry got used up when Irene happened — we had to deplete that.”

Bianchi suggested that discussing such options, including switching to a different payment schedule and building up the reserve fund balance again, should be brought up at the next town meeting in March.

McGrath agreed but felt discussing the pros and cons of such options and getting that information out to the public early was a benefit.

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/killington-municipal-property-tax-rate-set/#sthash.F0khTQd1.dpuf

Killington Resort, Local Developer Scrap Over New Village

Vermont Standard

7/14/2016 

By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

KILLINGTON — Ticket sales at Northeastern ski resorts have been on a steady decline for at least several years, and recent mild winters haven’t helped. Nevertheless, Killington Resort has some optimistic plans for the future. The resort wants to build 2,300 residential units and commercial space totaling 200,000 square feet on land off Killington Road.

Stephen Durkee, who lives in Mendon on 32 acres near the Killington line and Roaring Brook, filed an appeal of the Phase I approval on his own behalf and for “entities that he owns”— Mountainside Properties, Inc., Mountainside Development, Inc. and Fireside Properties, Inc. The litigation has been going on since at least April of 2010.

Durkee, his wife Karen and the related entities own at least eight properties in Killington including vacant land, a residence, a warehouse, a market, offices and retail space.

In his appeal Durkee cited increased traffic, spoiled aesthetics, threats to safety, water pollution and increased burden on municipal services as affects of the new development that would be hard on him and his group of businesses.

In his March 21, 2016 entry, Judge Thomas S. Durkin of the Vermont Supreme Court, Environmental Division, questioned the standing of the interests Durkee named in his appeal—whether each of Durkee’s entities would actually be harmed by the development project. In the end the judge rejected the standing of one or more of Durkee’s parties on some or all of the points cited in the appeal.

Durkee filed an appeal of Judge Durkin’s declarations regarding the interests of his entities, but that failed.

Regarding traffic, Durkin said that only Durkee himself might be affected adversely by additional vehicles attracted to the area by the development, ergo all of the other entities “lacked standing” regarding that criteria.

In Durkin’s June 21, 2016 decision the resort is required to fund a local traffic study and regional corridor traffic studies to determine if there would be a significant negative impact created by additional traffic that might be attracted to the new development.

“Estimating what additional traffic a proposed development may generate is both science and art,” Durkin wrote. Citing a historic decline in traffic in the area, particularly at the resort, he said, “We found traffic estimates presented by the resort experts to be more credible.”

He pointed out the plan adds no expanded skiing facilities that might draw more skiers, that nothing in the development would tend to increase day-skiers who might add to traffic, that there has been a general decline in skier visits, which has already relieved traffic congestion somewhat, and that the town is installing more pedestrian-friendly walkways, bike paths, crossings and sidewalks as well as increased shuttle service, so he could not envision the huge surge in automobile traffic that Durkee was predicting.

Durkin, after a site visit, described the current resort as aesthetically tuned to the times and to its place, and, since the development plans depict similar design and architecture, and since the changes to the already existing parking lot were improvements and not something to be introduced into a pristine environment, he thought the sight of the development after construction is complete would be at least as pleasant as before construction.

The Agency of Natural Resources had already deemed Roaring Brook an “impaired waterway,” polluted by runoff from the existing parking lot, some years ago. Part of Phase I of the resort plans includes replacing an aging storm water treatment system, adding an additional treatment system and improving landscaping of the lot with environmental sensitivity in mind. The court said rather than deteriorating, water quality in the drainage streams would probably improve as a result of the planned upgrades.

The current development plan isn’t the first issue Durkee has had with owners of the Resort.

He purchased a 32-parcel from SKI, Inc. previous owner of the Resort, along with a right-of-first refusal for a second, contiguous property. If SKI received an offer that included rights to “sufficient sewage capacity to accommodate development,” Durkee’s Mountainside Properties would have 30 days to match it or SKI could sell the 60-acre parcel to the offering buyer.

In 2007 SKI, which had already sold the property housing the sewage treatment system to the resort’s current owners, put the 60 acres, which they still owned, on the market. They approached Durkee with an offer from a third party that included the resort’s agreement to provide treatment facility to service up to eight single-family homes, but with the caveat that Durkee had to agree to never contest any attempt by the resort’s new owners to develop the 300-acre parcel where the treatment plant is situated.

Durkee turned down the offer based on his belief that the “no-contest” clause was not part of the original agreement. SKI contracted to sell the property to a third party for a higher price and with the no-contest clause.

Durkee took SKI to court over the issue and lost, but was successful with a subsequent appeal. The court said SKI’s offer with the no-contest clause included did not satisfy the terms of his right-of-first-refusal agreement with Durkee.

Durkee declined to comment on the June 21 rejection of his appeal regarding the Phase I development, and would not discuss the final outcome of his negotiations with SKI and the Resort over the 60-acre parcel.

Asked what they think of the plan, the Killington select board members unanimously said they thought having a village built there would be good for the town.

Judge Thomas S. Durkin of the Vermont Superior Court Environmental Division said in a decision relating to the Killington development proposal, which will include at least eight phases, that completion of the project might take up to 30 years.

In the first phase of development the resort plans 32 detached homes and 193 condominiums, two new base lodges and some commercial units, and a new parking lot configuration and storm water treatment system, as well as a new village green. Application for Act 250 permits was filed for the Master Plan and, after some negotiations with condominium association neighbors, the Agency of Natural Resources and the Killington Planning Commission, approval to begin phase I was granted.

The first phase includes two sections of the Master Plan: Village Core, and Ramshead Brook Subdivision.

Village Core will provide 193 housing units, 31,622 sq. ft. of commercial space, a 77,000 square foot “skier services building,” the two new base lodges, and will require adjusting the paths of Killington Road and East Mountain Road.

Ramshead Brook Subdivision, just below Village Core and comprising 44.69 acres, will provide either 32 single-family home lots or 23 duplex residential lots, and the new storm water treatment system.

Killington Volunteer Fire Department suggested any new structures should be fitted with water or dry chemical sprinkler systems to make up for increased traffic slowing down emergency response time, but Judge Durkin said the court lacked authority to require fire retardant systems and that there was no legal precedence on which he might rely in doing so.

Killington Resort’s optimistic plans are impressive. But not everyone is happy about it.

Mosher Status Conference Canceled

I was alerted by Polly Lynn of the Mountain Times last night that possibly Craig Mosher's Status Conference at 3:00 pm today may have been canceled. I just spoke to Craig and he confirmed that his lawyer called him at 4:30 on Friday to relate that he and the prosecutor had worked out whatever was to take place at the conference over the phone so the court date was to be canceled. So please do not go.

Mosher Hearing Tomorrow Monday July 11, 3:00 pm

Monday,    Jul. 11          State vs. Mosher, Craig
at 3:00 PM  in Room 2       363-4-16 Rdcr/Criminal
                            Status Conference
                            Plaintiff, State  (Rosemary M. Kennedy)
                            Defendant, Craig Mosher  (Paul S. Volk)

Work continues on Route 4

Rutland Herald
July 8, 2016
MENDON — Project managers are warning drivers to expect delays on Route 4 about half a mile east of Sugar & Spice starting next week for culvert, ravine stabilization, and channel work.

As crews shift the ravine operation to the middle and lower parts of the project, traffic may be reduced to one-way alternating traffic while crews unload equipment and materials.

Reduced speed limits will be in effect. Of considerable concern, project managers say, are motorists traveling from Killington west into Mendon. Speeding fines are doubled in a work zone.

Killington to survey site for fire station

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER | July 08,2016

 

KILLINGTON — The Select Board has approved $3,000 to survey a potential site for a new, long-sought fire station.

The site had originally been dismissed by town officials and the town’s Fire Department Facilities Review Committee because of concerns over access, Killington officials said, but reassurances by the Vermont Agency of Transportation that signalization could be arranged have sent the town back to the Route 4 site for a second look.

The $3,000 expenditure would be split between the town’s general operating budget and the fire department, according to minutes from last week’s Select Board meeting. It will pay for an engineering firm’s survey of the parcel, which is somewhere between the Killington access road and Our Lady of the Mountains Church. Officials declined to provide more specific information about the parcel’s location given that it could be the subject of negotiations.

The survey should be concluded by the end of July, Town Manager Deborah Schwartz said.

Vito Rasenas, a member on the fire station committee, said the survey was a positive step forward in what had been a prolonged but productive process.

The committee has been at work since 2014, and Rasenas said it had made some significant progress — from checking out how other towns had designed their new stations, vetting potential sites, to doing public relations work with the community to convince them the expense was necessary. Another site is also under consideration, Rasenas said, although the committee’s attention has turned to the site being surveyed in the wake of the state’s communication with the town.

“Hopefully, we can get it on the ballot next town meeting day,” he said.

Town officials say the fire department’s current station, built in the 1970s, fails to meet a number of fire code and safety regulations, with issues ranging from plumbing and electrical problems, to the size of building and parcel. The committee decided early last year renovations wouldn’t be cost effective and fail to solve the station and site’s basic capacity problems.

lola.duffort

@rutlandherald.com

Twin Road Names Lead To Property Confusion

Vermont Standard

By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

KILLINGTON — Theodore M. Schulze told the select board Tuesday that he has purchased a property on Booth Road, leading to a discussion of which town — Killington or Bridgewater — has the authority to collect taxes and authorize the construction of a gate.

Killington Road Foreman Chet Hagenbarth said he was fairly certain Booth Road is entirely within Killington, not Bridgewater, and that his department has been maintaining the road for years.

“If that road is in Bridgewater,” Hagenbarth said, “we’ve been spending about $10,000 a year maintaining a road we don’t own.”

Based on Hagenbarth’s remarks, the select board began to discuss who was collecting the tax revenue for the parcel. Schulze and the foreman agreed to figure out together exactly where the property is.

Hagenbarth said he and Schulze went to the highway garage after the select board meeting and pored over the road maps.

“Turns out there are two Booth Roads,” Hagenbarth said. “The one that Schulze’s property is on is, in fact, in Bridgewater.”

According to Schulze, who spoke with Bridgewater highway department’s Randy Kennedy, Booth Road is a class 4 road, and since Schulze owns the land on both sides of the road and his is the only residence on it, the town of Bridgewater would probably have no objection to a gate Schulze wants to build.

“But Mr. Kennedy thinks there might be a continuation of the road that extends into Killington, so I should make sure you don’t have any problem with the gating idea,” Schulze said.

Schulze said he can see no evidence of there ever having been a trail or road beyond the Killington line.

The property Schulze bought is approximately 425 acres of an 862acre tract near the Chateauguay Wilderness, the site of a farm at one time very long ago and now consisting of valuable hardwood timber, large meadows and a small home. The larger package was on the market for over six months at a price of $1,350,000.

“We’ve got a newborn child and I have a business in Rhode Island,” Schulze said after the meeting. He and his child’s mother are planning a wedding in Providence in September. “I can’t say what our exact plans are for the property at this point.”

If he can find a way to establish an automotive business in Vermont like the one he has in Rhode Island, he would love to live here full time. He said the gate, which “is only an idea at this point” would be to provide privacy and security.

“My first improvement would be a barn to store equipment,” he said. Then, if living here works out, we would probably build a new house on the property.

The existing home, built in 1953, has one bedroom, one bath and 834 square feet of living space. Schulze has been furnishing it for now, and is installing solar panels, but has no current plans to do any remodeling.

In other business, Town Manager Deborah Schwartz announced the new tax rate for the upcoming year. The town property tax rate is $0.3333 for a 12-month fiscal year. The 2015-2016 rate was $0.4633, but it covered 18 months as the town converted from calendar year accounting to fiscal year accounting so the state education taxes and town taxes covered the same periods of time. For comparison purposes, an estimated 2015-2016 rate for just 12 months would be $0.3088.

The state school tax rate in 20152016 was $1.7364 for residents, $1.5052 for non-residents. The new rate will be $1.6227 for residents and $1.4852 for non-residents. The state education tax has always been on a fiscal year from July 1 to June 30.

Schwartz announced the town had exercised its tax-anticipation loan for $900,000 at an interest rate of 1.4 percent.

“I want to point out that we have $395,554 in delinquent tax bills,” Schwartz said. “If we had this money, we wouldn’t have to borrow so much to cover our own bills.”

Selectman Ken Lee suggested that the four-installment tax collection scheme that was put in place to ease the pain of transitioning through the one-time 18-month budget, might be contributing to a summer revenue shortage as well. Tax bills are due August 15, and there is little or no cash left on July 1 to carry the town until revenue starts to come in.

Selectman Chris Bianchi and McGrath agreed that they should go back to the three-installment system, but that it couldn’t be done until Town Meeting 2017. Bianchi also suggested building up a reserve fund to provide cash during revenue-poor periods, another idea that has to wait until Town Meeting.

The results of the town slogan survey are in, according to Schwartz.

“Seventy-three percent of the responders want to keep the old logo, ‘The Heart of The Green Mountains’,” Schwartz said. “We had 106 respondents.”

“That’s more than we get out to vote at some Town Meetings,” Bianchi said.

Killington Select Board approves $900,000 Operating Note and $3,000 for fire station site investigation

Mountain Times

July 7, 2016

KILLINGTON — Last Wednesday, June 29, at 9 a.m. the Killington Select Board gathered for a special meeting at the Town Offices. Board Members Chris Bianchi and Ken Lee were present as well as Town Manger Debby Schwartz and Chet Hagenbarth, highway and facilities director. Additional members of the community present, included Steve Finer, Jim Haff, Vito Rasenas, Roger Rivera and Andy Salamon.

The meeting primarily consisted of two agenda items: Review and approval of operating note in the amount of $900,000 and the approval of expenditure of funds for fire station site investigation. Both were approved.

Based on conversations with the bank, it is the town’s intention to repay the note immediately after receipt of the first quarter taxes in August, Town Manger Debby Schwartz explained. Chris Bianchi offered additional clarification saying that because the town is taking out this note within the Fiscal Year, which ends on June 30, it is an Operating Note versus a Tax Anticipation Note.  However, the reason for the note is no different as in past years, when a similar loan has been requested, he said.

A vote on the motion to approve the Operating Note in the amount of $900,000 was unanimously approved.

With regards to the funds for further investigation into a fire station, Schwartz provided a brief background on this project noting that various sites have been identified and then prioritized for further investigation.

Chet Hagenbarth, highway and facilities director, explained that a few months ago, there was a request made for $1,800 to do a building layout on one of the sites. Because one of the top site involves potentially two lots, Hagenbarth would like to do a survey to see how much of the land is useable, identify the expansion capabilities, and to determine the orientation for the fire trucks. In order to do a wetlands survey, topo and conceptual layout, Hagenbarth requested that the board approve a not-to-exceed expenditure in the amount of $3,000 instead of the $1,800 originally requested and approved. He added that the Fire Department would be contributing $1,500 of the expenditure with the remainder coming from the town.

Andy Salamon advised that the Committee looked at two different footprints for the new Fire House and suggested that a conceptual layout be done for both noting that the Williamstown model was the one preferred by the Committee. Salamon also raised questions regarding signalization at the proposed site entrance and at the Killington Road/Route 4 intersection. Hagenbarth responded that if there is any type of traffic signalization, it will be determined by VTrans and they will design it and will provide partial funding.

The expenditure of $3,000 for the Fire Station Site Investigation was unanimously approved.

Fire Station Funds

Community survey nixes Killington slogan change

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER | July 07,2016

KILLINGTON — “The Heart of the Green Mountains” won’t be going anywhere.

With a community survey showing overwhelming opposition to changing the town’s slogan, Select Board members opted not to take any action in favor of change at their Tuesday night meeting, Town Manager Deborah Schwartz said Wednesday.

Nearly 73 percent of the survey’s 106 respondents said they would rather keep the town’s current slogan. And though the survey, which was available online and in a paper format at the town office and welcome center, gave respondents the option to choose at least three options, many only endorsed the town’s current motto.

“Only one I want. The others have no community meaning. We are a community first — tourist destination after,” one respondent wrote in the survey’s comment section.

The survey gave respondents seven options: the town’s current slogan, five alternatives and the chance to suggest their own. Alternative slogans included “Discover More,” “Something for Everyone,” “Discover the Heart of the Green Mountains,” “Elevate Your Experience” and “Your Adventure Starts Here.”

A distant second to the town’s current slogan, with 26.4 percent of the vote, was “Your Adventure Starts Here.” One respondent even suggesting melding the two: “Heart of the Green Mountains — Your Adventure Starts Here.”

But in general, commenters argued that proposed changes substituted the Killington Ski Resort’s identity for the town’s.

“There is nothing wrong with the current slogan,” one respondent wrote. “The others are either too long, require an explanation or sound too touristy and trite. The town of Killington is more than the resort. We are in fact and in spirit ‘the Heart of the Green Mountains.’”

Schwartz and the town’s marketing department had pitched the new slogans in view of planned resurfacing work to the town’s three welcome signs.

Killington sets tax rate

Rutland Herald

July 07,2016

KILLINGTON — The town has set its municipal property tax rate at 0.3333, according to Town Manager Deborah Schwartz. The estimated rate at the time of budgeting was 0.3298.

This year’s tax rate, which covered an 18-month budget, was 0.4633.

Slip Lane closed for the next two months

Chet Hagenbarth, Killington Town Road and Facilities Manager, just informed me the West Hill Road slip lane will be closed for the next two months effective immediately. The milling resulted in the lane being set below the grade of the rest of the road thus creating bumps at the beginning and end. This could be dangerous especially to motorcyclists.
The lane was milled because the town had hired a milling machine for a nearby project on Bigelow/Priscilla lane which was finished in less than the half day minimum it was hired for. The initiative was taken to efficiently utilize the town's resources.
So at least we have some cost savings to offset the inconvenience of having the slip lane closed for a couple of months.

Coffee walks slated for Killington links

Rutland Herald

July 06,2016

 

KILLINGTON — Town Manager Deborah Schwartz is inviting the community on a coffee date.

Schwartz will be at the Green Mountain National Golf Course on select Wednesday mornings in July and August to meet residents for a walk around the course and coffee at the club house.

The walks will begin at 8:30 a.m. at the club house, according to a town press release announcing the “Killington Connects” initiative. Following the walk, complimentary coffee will be served in the clubhouse, courtesy of Green Mountain National. Individuals may skip the walk and meet for coffee starting at 9:15 a.m.

In case of inclement weather, the coffee portion of the morning will start at 8:30 a.m.

The first walk is scheduled for July 13. Additional Killington Connects walks are scheduled for July 27, August 17 and August 31.

Schwartz was hired by the town in March and has been on the job since April.

“I’m eager to meet with the residents of Killington and hear, one-on-one, about what concerns them, and excites them about the future of their town,” Schwartz said in a statement. “I’m really looking forward to spending some quality time with them, and what better setting than the golf course with its spectacular scenery.”

Killington Village closer than ever

Submitted

An architectural rendering of Killington Village Ski Plaza at dusk shows the contemporary style for the planned village. It will be located in the area where Snowshed and Ramshead base lodges currently are.

Good news for Killington Village as SP Land prevails at Act 250 appeal

By Karen D. Lorentz

It’s been a long haul since Feb. 2012 when SP Land Company first presented its Killington Village Master Plan Act 250 application to the District #1 Environmental Commission, but SP Land Company President Steven Selbo received some good news last week in a decision that favorably addresses several key issues that had caused SP Land to appeal its Act 250 permit issued in Oct. 2013.

In the decision rendered on June 21, Judge Thomas S. Durkin of the Superior Court’s Environmental Division (a.k.a. the Environmental Court) largely agreed with the arguments made by SP Land in its appeal of certain conditions and findings in its District #1 Act 250 permit.

The four page Judgement Order, which states new conditions and affirms the need for a village core, was accompanied by an 86-page Decisions on the Merits document which clearly explains the law and thoroughly addresses the issues of the appeal and cross appeal to the Environmental Court.

Selbo commented that he is “very pleased” with the Decision and Judgment Order and the many positive findings.

Asked about the new conditions imposed, he said most are very favorable to SP Land. There are a few that he is still studying, including a short extension of a 25 mph zone proposed for the village area. But he said so far they are minor things that he can live with, and he thinks the investors in the project will be able to accept them. “I’m very positive at this point,” he added.

“It is the first time for a complete village permit to be issued,” commented 20-year Killington resident, former selectman, and Butternut Lodge owner Jim Haff.

“If you recall, SP Land is the only company to get a full Act 250 permit as ASC had partial village approvals. I congratulate SP Land on this step which is further than anyone has ever gotten. Now the Environmental Court has taken them a step further to an actual village. We know there could be another step if this decision is appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court, but if they come to the same findings, then the village is a go.

“I applaud SP Land’s not giving up and making good points,” Haff added, putting perspective on a village core that has been on the drawing boards for 49 years, including under previous resort owners Killington Ltd. and ASC.

Court findings, changes 

Selbo was “very pleased” with the changes reducing party status of some participants. SP Land prevailed in seeking to limit the scope of party status as to criteria Steve Durkee could participate in and the Court also agreed to objections of party status given to Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission, denying it but making SWCRPC a “friend of the court,’ which allowed participation but no right to appeal.

SP Land also prevailed on its objection to the Act 250 permit condition which required fire suppression sprinkler systems in all residences, not just commercial buildings with retail and/or condo units. SP Land had objected to the fire sprinklers being required in private homes, on the basis that there is no precedent in Vermont for such a condition being imposed on its Ramshead Lot Subdivision single-family homes or duplexes. Selbo had in effect objected to “spot zoning” and the Court agreed, specifying that there was “No evidence presented suggesting any applicable federal, state, or local regulations … imposed on any other development, either in Killington or elsewhere in Vermont.”

Selbo was appreciative of the fairness applied to the project, noting his former objections to not having an equal playing field.

Judge Durkin also supported the design guidelines that had been presented for the Ramshead subdivision “so that was very positive,” Selbo commented.

Mendon resident Steve Durkee, who owns several properties in Killington, cross appealed the 25-lot subdivision approvals SP Land received in its permit. However, SP Land prevailed once again with the Court concluding that the various elements of the proposed 25-Lot Subdivision would “not cause or result in a detriment to the public health, safety or general welfare” and therefore affirmed the District Commission’s approval of the 25-Lot Subdivision.

Selbo commented, “There was strong precedence for this subdivision, and we followed prior precedence and the judge agreed.”

Aesthetic impacts

Mr. Durkee’s objection to the village core on aesthetic grounds regarding the scale, massing, height, and form of the structures for Phase I also failed with the Court concluding, “Phase I development will provide positive and not adverse aesthetic impacts.”

In addressing objections to village aesthetics, Judge Durkin noted SP Land “provided a credible contextual presentation, via PowerPoint, for the Phase I development and the overall master plan, including summaries of the existing developments surrounding the Killington Resort and other Vermont ski resort developments.”

He stated, “This design and construction will present a pleasing appearance for the Village Core structures that will allow visitors to recognize the area as an established resort village.”

Most interestingly, Judge Durkin, who had made a site visit, expressed an understanding of both the importance of and need for village centers, noting:

“The proposed Phase I developments will replace aged and somewhat worn Resort facilities at the main base areas with a coordinated redevelopment that will bring more complementary structures and walkways to the existing development. Instead of approaching the main base area via undefined gravel parking lots, a visitor will approach a completed Village Core area that welcomes the visitor with varied architectural styles and building materials, all inspired by historic local and resort styles that will provide a sense of place and encourage visitors to remain in the Village Core area to ski, shop, and relax during vacation visits.”

Traffic findings

SP Land appealed what three regional planning commissions had proposed as its share towards a Corridor Study, which would measure village impacts on traffic on Routes 4, 100, and 103. Selbo objected to SP Land having had 100 percent of the private portion of the study cost, which study was estimated at $100,000. He was pleased that Judge Durkin capped SP Land’s contribution at $20,000, noting “the original condition lacked a sense of fairness.” Selbo was also okay with Judge Durkin changing the timing of the contribution to Phase I whereas it was originally to be assessed prior to a Phase II application.

Regarding Judge Durkin’s condition that SP Land undertake traffic studies on Killington Road traffic impacts, Selbo noted he had been “good with that the first time around and it was never an issue,” adding such studies would tie in with future phases anyway.

He did say that the location of the 25 mph limit as imposed by Judge Durkin went beyond where his traffic engineers had recommended the speed reduction occur. The Killington Road’s speed limit from Route 4 remains at 35 mph; but instead of dropping to 25 mph at Road H (vicinity of Mountain Inn/ East Mountain Road and the realiged Killington Road) to slow traffic down for the upcoming new Village Rotary, it will decrease about 400 feet sooner in the vicinity of Lot G.  Selbo said SP Land’s traffic consultant had not seen a need for that as clearings would provide the necessary line of sight, but he noted the change is “not a big deal.”

Many of the traffic findings were predicated on an understanding of a Village Core as a generator of longer visits. Judge Durkin stressed that Phase I development will result in stays for several or more nights, and, while generating visits to nearby establishments on the Killington Road (on-mountain trips), he stated those stays are not likely to result in “guests arriving and leaving on the same day” (off-mountain trips), which would increase traffic on the region’s highways.

He also pointed to traffic counts being down to about what they were in 1991 and cited decreases in annual skier visits. Furthermore, he pointed out that Killington is not expanding its resort and therefore day skier visits are not likely to increase.

Additionally, Judge Durkin said that Phase I improvements will “help alleviate the traffic congestion” at the main base area because day skiers will park at the new day-skier lots and either walk to or utilize shuttles to get to the slopes.

What’s next

Parties have ten court days to file a Motion to Alter with The Environmental Court. The judge has to decide whether to accept such a Motion and can then alter his findings or he can uphold the permit as he conditioned it.

Should he do the latter, a party has 30 days from the June 21 ruling in which to appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.

Selbo said if no appeal is made, the next step for SP Land is to locate a joint venture partner  to develop the project. But before construction could begin, there would have to be presales of units and that requires a significant marketing effort,  he noted. The Killington Road reconstruction and other infrastructure would also have to be built, he added.

As for a timeline, this could take several years, Selbo said, noting he had to confirm whether the project starting date has to occur within the seven-year period stated in the original permit or if it would change to a construction start within seven years from the June permit.

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/killington-village-closer-than-ever/#sthash.WcVCXA0C.dpuf