i think the intent is that if you decide tonight to move forward with this guy then i can send out the warnings  this perhaps maybe starting with what started the conversation which was a discussion about whether or not we want to allow promote i should say or even if it's not adopted and sewer is run down into the gate that really evil subdivision of some of the properties there and  expanse of residential homes as opposed to any type of commercial homes what's left left of our commercially developed all property of the town so sort of allowance for current residential  and everyone having a voice i agree with brian i don't see any strong argument for removing turn as far as a development is concerned and if we bring the septic down into the gateway is there own properties there can subdivide more easily than we do a lot of what thirty acres already right now pretty much everybody is on at least one to occur and that's partly because of well and septic concerns all but with water and sewer then those properties can easily be developed into either subdivided three logs or multi multi unit buildings on the same lot and that would then forego any future commercial development which is what we're trying  use if those properties stay commercial considerations for traffic considerations at the same time not because we have allowed the story really conditional use of twelve lanes i'm not of the mind to change that in that when the compromises that went into that we were really getting too far astray from the town plan and that's why i would oppose this i think to introduce emotion at this time without having a broader improvements in order to maximize their property so it's not necessarily that that that a public vote is going to make a determination it could be privately funded just a follow up question that i've gotten on the street is that with the more intensive development we are also necessarily talking about road infrastructure improvement that we already have a problem at certain i would like to say yes to this but if it really shows that it could not pass i want to see this stuff happen because i do want to see business done in the gate way but if we have to do it in a print and by getting the water and sewer down there in a slow pace and people agree with it then i would i could see everything apennines you know in time  and these parcels being included in time so in a way i guess at this point you know the let's see what happens from there  one of the uses that we have it's a conditional use is a retirement community and this is there's not really a lot of property out there that could be developed into a retirement community  community i could have that wrong say no new well units and then the gateways saying we're no longer going to allow single family units and to think about the big picture the potential cumulative impacts  there and perhaps for your benefit and the cameras of might very quickly can recap what we're looking at doing basically what we're doing is we're expanding the square footage of a couple  allowed right now professional services and office services are limited to five thousand square feet so if you want to have a business that going to bring in ten fifteen twenty office workers you'll be limited to five thousand square feet but we actually allow the square footage of a building to be ten thousand square feet so square footage of a building right now could be ten thousand square feet if we do that then we have to make sure that there's at least two different businesses in there we can get one decent sized employer to come in here with thirty employees take up ten thousand square feet and set up shop so they're very limited in their expansion capability if they are interested in going into a ten thousand square foot building so we allowed after a lot of professional services we did not allow expansion of retail which i think is important because of concerns about competition with the downtown five thousand square feet there really isn't a lot of retail organization we didn't really expand restaurants or that type of competition at all although we did allow a tablet in which is strictly beverage  pull more mind with compatibility with allowing fruit to food processing which is something we didn't have before in the sense of a brewery or maybe harrington's would want to move out there or another food processor all we propose that the other big change that we have made i think is expanding from ten thousand square feet to seventeen thousand square feet oh and that's a pretty good sized building brand it isn't to stories high so the ten thousand square foot building two stories r s twenty thousand square foot building we we thought that it would be good because there were some interested parties in the reproachfully that fell through because they didn't have the square footage of bailable at the time that they were interested so they took their it was the state of vermont d c laboratory which would have been a great complement to the gateway we've been shooting water and sewer use to say the least but a lot of other benefits to to having a large company out there like that so they were looking for something that s square footage and so we we went to that extent but in order to protect the the world scenic nature of the gateway as we have it now we required that the building of that size would have to be at so we actually have to define uses and this is come all before to define uses that are addressed the same thing one is allowed one is not allowed currently so we categories i don't quite know what they were looking to differentiate between but they basically both address the repair for one final question on that i don't see anything in the purpose statement that either says that's what he wants or that's what it doesn't this is a as a matter of fact it pretty much says designed to allow for commercial uses jurek i mean if it were you could almost argue that our this proposal word to go forward is more in keeping with the town plan and gateway commercial district purpose statement than the the regulations we currently have allowed in single family years so i mean that that's true but would anybody like he would then maintain for building for properties that have a residential and commercial use now those buildings would not even would not be w in lines so the only thing the only property that would be non conforming were properties that are one hundred percent properties residential hundred percent residential so i'm just curious  of the concerns that i do have is that it's a concept that you're talking about but that it takes somebody to put it into a written form that makes sense that you have not approved and had your warning and it would just it would really come natural it would read at least fifty percent get ok very little time for debate discussion i'm still on the retirement community that right now is conditional use and this motion will not no no no yes yes yes we have a core three