Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19880418Continued Meeting Aspen City Council April 18, 1988 ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 1988 - Land Use Code 1 ASPEN MOUNTAIN LODGE PUD 3 ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 1988 - Land Use Code (Continued) 6 14 Continued Meeting Ashen City Council April 18, 1988 Mayor Stirling called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with Councilmembers Isaac, Tuite, and Gassman present. ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 1988 - Land Use Code Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. Alan Richman, planning director, reminded Council articles 9 and 10 remain to be review. Article 9 is non-conformities, which Council recently addressed in detail through Ordinance #65, 1987. Richman said there are no further changes to be made except removing the limitation of variations of historic structure in just the R-6 and R-15 districts. Richman said this will now be allowed in all zone districts. Richman told Council Article 10 deals with variances and Board of Adjustment standards on variances. Richman told Council staff worked in depth on this section and took the draft to the Board of Adjustment. The Board made significant changes to the article. Richman said these changes synthesizes very complex standards into this code to be used by the Board in granting variances. The Board Chairman requested a change to be made on page 10-1. One of the standards used is practical difficulty, which should read unnecessary hardship and practical difficulty." Richman asked Council to add "unnecessary hardship" to the code. Richman said Article 10 talks about recommendation of the planning staff to the Board of Adjustment. Richman said the planning staff seldom makes recommendations to the Board. They act in a quasi-judicial status. The staff only makes recommenda- tions when there are significant policies issues and the Board wants some advice. Richman suggested striking in (b) and (c) on page 10-2 any reference to recommendation. Council said that was acceptable. Richman told Council the Board of Adjustment has asked for an expiration procedure. Richman told Council that variances are specifically lef t out of the vested rights provisions in the state law. The Board feels their approvals have a specific life to them. The Board requested a 12 month expiration provision with an extension provision. Bil Dunaway said he does not see a need for a variance to expire. Richman said the Board feels when they grant a variance, it is for a specific circumstance associated with a parcel at that time, in the neighborhood. If the variance is not acted on within one year, it ought to expire. Once a property owner acts on a variance, it is permanent. Richman said the next items are those Council has not come to a conclusion on without seeing the specific language. The first of these is land crossed by more than one zone district. Richman 1 Continued Meeting Aspen Citv Council April 18, 1988 said when the proposed use is not allowed in all zone districts, it is clear an applicant is allowed only to develop the use on land in which the use is either a permitted or conditional use and that the external FAR and density would be based on the zone district in which the use is allowed. Richman said when the use is allowed in all the zone districts, like a residential zone district split by R-6 and R-15, planning originally recommended looking at the stricter of the two. Richman pointed out the R-6 zone allows more units per lot area but less floor area than does R-15. Richman said the approach staff came up with was to look at both zone districts and from each particular requirement, chose the more restrictive except in the case where 75 percent or more of the property is in one zone district. Richman said an applicant would also have an opportunity to rezone the parcel. Council said this section seems fair. Richman presented the review process graphic, which has been redrafted since Council first saw it. Richman pointed out, every public hearing has been identified with an asterisk. Council was concerned about the use of abbreviations. Richman pointed out in the 3 step process, at Council and P & Z, consolidated into the designated process is an actual processing of a land use application on designated historic structures. This will cut two steps out of that type of process. Councilman Isaac said he still does not feel the chart works for a lay person. The chart stresses the steps as opposed to the process a person would be interested in. Richman said the handbook will stress individual activity people are interested in, what are the application contents, how many steps, how much time is involved, all aspects of the process will be explained in the handbook. Richman said an alternative is to have a number of charts focusing on each process, which got complicated because people are asking for more than one review at once. Councilman Gassman said the handbook is a good idea but if this chart is part of the code, it is very confusing. Mayor Stirling asked if this could be made more clear for the one- and two-step processes without taking away the summary advantages of the chart. Richman said the chart plus some more explanation would be needed. Councilman Isaac suggested another page listing all the possible applications and how many steps there are. (Coun- cilwoman Fallin came into the Council meeting). Richman agreed the chart does not say everything about all the steps. The options are to do it in a handbook or to add additional graphics. Richman said his intention was to avoid a one-time user having to go through the code but to be able to use the handbook and the chart. Councilman Gassman suggested a list of what types of applications apply to each of the review categories, like listing the~two-step applications. 2 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council April 18, 1988 ASPEN MOUNTAIN LODGE PUD Mayor Stirling said he appreciates the time and effort of all the citizens who have let Council know their f eelings on both sides of this issue. Mayor Stirling asked if Council wants to schedule a meeting in the next 3 days to meet with the Hadid group. Alan Richman, planning director, said staff would be prepared to meet with Council this week. Richman said depending on Council's approach to the issues, there are several methods to the process of reviewing development alternatives to the site with the applicant. Richman said the applicant spent some time with the staff before they got into the extension process. That may have been too insular in that the staff ' s approach was to look at the previous approval and focus on working through the process in as short a time as possible. Richman told Council a short amount of steps does not always equate to a short amount of time. Richman suggested opening with Council a pre-application con- ference. Richman told Council the county land use code authori- zes staff to meet with P & Z in a non-binding but in-depth review of an application. Richman said staff tries to identify up front what the issues will be and tries to get some direction on these issues. Richman said maybe all the concerns were not anticipated during this process. As a result of that, the basic assumptions were unacceptable to the majority of Council. Richman told Council the city attorney's office feels comfortable with that approach. Mayor Stirling asked the status of the planned unit development approvals. City Manager Bob Anderson told Council the excavation permit was pulled but there is not excavation going on at the site. Anderson told Council his interpretation is that the planned unit development has lapsed. The applicant disputes this. Mayor Stirling said during the extension request, it was articulated if this project was extended, the city would still be faced with a moment of truth about density. Mayor Stirling said in light of the applicants' expressing a willingness to reduce the project from the scale it is now, and if the applicant were to begin the process again starting with conceptual, this process would still be into the future without there being reliance on the Council's part or applicant's part. Mayor Stirling said if Council could meet with the applicant and hammer out the density so that a number of rooms, mass, floor area ratio and height and scale could be reached and come to a determination that is acceptable to both sides, this will not be left until the end of the process. Mayor Stirling said if it is possible, then the applicant could be turned back into the process with P & Z to shape the project and the other issues. 3 Continued Meeting Aspen Citv Council AAril 18, 1988 Councilman Tuite asked if the Mayor is including the P & Z in this work as they have been reviewing the project and have some feeling for it. Mayor Stirling said his thought is because the density issues always lie with the Council as a legislative and political issue, the Council should deal with that issue with the applicant. Councilman Tuite said he would hate to see the P & Z left out, Council comes to an agreement and that is not accept- able to P & Z. Mayor Stirling suggested Council could refer their decision to P & Z f or comment. Mayor Stirling reiterated this issue is something the Council has to decide. Councilman Isaac said his concern is to follow the land use code and to stay in the process and out of court. Councilman Isaac said the city should follow the laws they follow f or every other application for the protection of the city and of the citizens. Councilman Isaac said the more the city varies from the code, the more liable they are to lawsuits. Councilman Gassman asked if the city code has a provision for a pre-application con- ference. Richman said the new code does have a provision for a pre-application conference as a staff level function. Richman said the reason for opening this up is the concern that the staff did not reflect in the direction given to the applicant all of the nuances that might come out in the process. Richman said he is looking for a way to give the applicant as much direction as possible so conceptual does not become a 6 or 9 month process but is a way to follow up on what the community would like to see developed. City Attorney Taddune said the way the code is presently drafted, conceptual determinations of the Council are not binding. Taddune said in discussing the pre-application between Council and the developer, staff felt that perhaps the conceptual presentation, given all the information already known about this project, could suffice for the same purposes. Taddune said this is a situation where a lot of information is available and to expedite the process, the conceptual stage could be expanded to solve as many problems as possible at that stage. This would be comparable to a pre-application conference described by Richman. Richman said the conceptual process can be formulated in a number of ways. Mayor Stirling said if the Council and applicant came to an agreement on the issues, could this become binding. Councilman Gassman said the Council and the applicant are going to have to agree on the density at some point in order for something to happen. Councilman Isaac said if the applicant is willing to waive their rights and to agree to some type of amended process, he is willing to go along with this. City Attorney Taddune said this should be a forward moving process. Taddune said Council has taken one position, and it should be 4 Continued Meeting Aspen Citv Council April 18, 1988 recognized that they are not reversing themselves by talking with the applicant. Mayor Stirling moved to meet Wednesday, April 20, 1988, at 5:00 p.m. until 6:45 p.m. in order to discuss issues of density, size, number of units, mass, floor area ratio, and height with the applicant and do this in a spirit of cooperation and consistent with all decisions the Council has made to this point; seconded by Councilwoman Fallin. Taddune said Council is not waiving any positions they have taken in the past. The applicant is not waiving any positions they have taken. Councilman Isaac requested the motion add a discus- sion of process . Mayor Stirling amended his motion to include a discussion of process; seconded by Councilwoman Fallin. Councilman Gassman said density is the critical issue and the Council should stick to that. Mayor Stirling agreed starting with that issue. John Sarpa, representing the applicant, said they welcome the opportunity to talk and get to the issues and hear Council's concerns. Sarpa said once the key issues are resolved that the differences of opinions can be easily resolved. Mayor Stirling said he would like to have the comparative chart on units for the meeting; how many were torn down, what is allow able by zoning on site. Councilman Gassman asked if the staff could present a summary of how the 447 units were arrived at. Richman said he is not sure of all the steps from beginning to end. Mayor Stirling said he would like to know the GMP date for 1988, what effect on multi-year allocations this has, what is the status of the 700 South Galena project, the status of the Top of Mill project. Richman told Council Top of Mill only has concep- tual approval pending resolution of geotechnical issues. Councilman Isaac asked the status of the Roberts' GMP approvals. Mayor Stirling said City Manager Anderson has said these have expired. Councilman Isaac said he would like to have some agreement from the applicant on what the process is going to be. Council said this could be discussed on Wednesday. Mayor Stirling said Council should be thinking about what is the density that is the best long term interest for this community and what is Council willing to live with and what makes sense. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Stirling said this meeting will not be a public hearing and Council will not take public comment because they have a lot of work to do on this issue. 5 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council April 18, 1988 ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 1988 - Land Use Code (Continued) Richman said the next amendment accomplishes the consolidation of reviewing several steps along with historic designation. This will reduce the number of steps. Council agreed with this. Richman said the next change was a request to add to the criteria when the Council should or should not waive the six month minimum lease restriction. If there was displacement, this should be criteria against waiving the six month minimum lease restric- tions. Councilwoman Fallin said she feels that "residences" is a key word. Richman reminded Council the reason he brought this criteria in was that Council has been facing the issue repeatedly. Richman said earlier Council agreed it was reason- able in the lodge district to allow short term. Richman said RMF was added to the list because the city keeps getting requests to waive the six month minimum leases. If Council has an overriding concerns about the residential neighborhood, they do not have to offer the RMF zone district as an area in which to waive the six month minimum lease restrictions. Richman said this is a radical departure from the code and is gotten around by going through the subdivision exception process. Councilwoman Fallin said her preference is not to exempt struc- tures at all in the RMF zone. Councilman Tuite said his concern is that the city is seeing residences torn down because of the short term availability which makes it economically more feasible to redevelop an area. Councilman Tuite said he would like to go along with no exceptions. Richman said in the single family zones, there is no waiver of the six month minimum lease restric- tions allowed. Richman said the code gives Council the flexibil- ity to look at the six month lease restrictions in the RMF zone. The concern that is being raised is that the d evelopment com- munity is looking at selling units as short term units. Mayor Stirling said he would rather have flexibility so that the six month minimum lease restrictions could be waived in the RMF zone. However, he would like displacement as part of the criteria and that the developer has to provide housing elsewhere as part of the project. Mayor Stirling said this would be addressing displacement universally without restricting the next applicant. Mayor Stirling said if there is any kind of residen- tial housing on site, the developer would have to deal with the displacement issue. Mayor Stirling said this will have to be dealt with separately, not part of this code. Richman said condominiumization will be subject to the employee housing impact fee. Richman said the reason staff has taken this approach, as opposed to mitigation, is that applicants have created rental histories in order to avoid the city's regulations. Richman said 6 Continued Meeting Aspen Citv Council Aril 18, 1988 everyone who condominiumizes must pay to support the employee housing program because staff has been able to demonstrate that condominium units are much less affordable to the locals. Richman said the criteria for waiving the six month minimum leases is (1) the surrounding neighborhood, (2) where is it located in proximity to downtown, (3) what is the long range Aspen area comprehensive plan recommendations. Richman said a fourth criteria could be related to the previous development on the parcel. Mayor Stirling suggested looking at a longer history than 18 months. Councilman Tuite said there would be a downside in having a developer kick some tenants out 10 years before the develop the property. Richman suggested language about directly or indirectly displaced by the condominiumization. This would not put a length on it but would allow for examination of the property. Richman said displacement is a very relevant issue to the long term/short term nature of a neighborhood. Richman said if the city sets a time frame, the developers will use that to their advantage. Councilwoman Fallin said if the city evens allows a waiver of the six month lease restrictions, they are asking f or more residen- tial units to be torn down and short term condominiums to be built. Councilwoman Fallin said pretty soon there won't be any residential in RMF. Mayor Stirling said the city has to deal with a responsibility on each developer's part to provide housing that is lost. Mayor Stirling said this is a separate issue, and asked what the city can do to put pressure on developers to provide the housing that is lost. Margaret Albouy said the city needs to use that same property for long term housing. Mayor Stirling said the Council needs to see legislation very rapidly. Councilman Isaac said his concern is if developers pay into an employee housing pool or create another unit, this is creating more growth. Every replacement unit is making the town grow that much faster. Bil Dunaway suggested expanding the housing impact fee to apply to any conversion or demolition and development. David White said if Council does something like this, they should also look at development paying or building one-half of its required employee units. Currently the money is just sitting with the housing authority with no place to build. White said the city has to make construction of employee housing mandatory to some level. Margaret Albouy said the city should try to devise someway to keep what there is. Ms. Albouy said the locals should be able to live in town. Ms. Albouy said if the city is telling the developer they can pay to have units built somewhere else, this will not happen in town. Augie Reno pointed out some people selling single family residences to a developer may just want to 7 Continued Meeting AsAen Citv Council AAril 18, 1988 leave the community. Mayor Stirling said that point is irrele- vant because the house would still be available to someone at an affordable rate. Mayor Stirling said he feels an impact fee would deal with this situation. Richard Roth suggested Council thinking about a philosophy that any new development, that the developer be responsible for increased impacts on traffic, employee housing, child care, utilities so that in 5 years that responsibility is not thrown back to the city government. Jim Adamski, housing office, said Council needs to have a proactive plan where they can start buying some of these units and start doing a community develop- ment program. This might be a use of the cash-in-lieu program. Wainwright Dawson said creating an independent trust for housing and having it be a public/private fund would be a logical move. Taddune said the concept of growth paying for itself is a notion that has been incorporated in all the city's codes for a long time. Richman agreed the displacement issue needs to addressed. Richman said he does not have an answer. Shifting the impact fee to reconstruction would put the idea of the impact fee in danger. There would have to be an analysis and come up with some rela- tionship. David White said there is provable growth with reconstruction in that the new units are larger. Richman said dealing with redevelopment would be a new concept in the code. Council agreed staff should pursue this. Councilwoman Fallin moved that no waiver be granted in RMF f or six month minimum leases; seconded by Councilman Tuite. Mayor Stirling said he feels this limits Council too much and does not give them a chance to address particular situations. All in f avor, with the exception of Councilman Isaac and Mayor Stirling. Motion carried. Richman said criteria (b) can be eliminated because displacement no longer applies. Richman said the next issue is if Council wants to give people a reconstruction credit when they have taken a structure that is on the historic inventory. This structure can be demolished or it can be moved. If the structure gets demolished, the owner gets a reconstruction credit on the site. The issue is if the structure gets moved and gets designated on the new site, will the applicant be allowed a reconstruction credit. Richman told Council the rationale is when a structure is designated, it is exempt from GMP so the quota has been addressed. This has created an incentive by giving an applicant the reconstruction credit. 8 Continued Meetinq_ Aspen Citv Council Aril 18, 1988 Richman said this is allowed only within the city and only f or structures on the inventory which are neither landmarks or in the historic district. Councilwoman Fallin said putting it within the city limits put a crimp on this and suggested defining the areas as the metro area. The land situation within the city is too restrictive. Richman said the reason for moving within the city limits is that is the only way the structure can be desig- nated. The county does not have any preservation mechanism. Mayor Stirling said he feels the structure should be required to be a landmark where it sits and anyone who wants to develop the property has to deal with the structure where it sits. Richman said this is not allowed to occur within the district. Richman said there is no protection of houses rated 1, 2, and 3 outside of the districts. Augie Reno said part of the reason for the lower scores of some structures was their location and the fabric of th e neighborhood. Reno said most of the HPC felt that structures should stay where they are located. Richman said this is enabling language. An individual still have the right to demolish a structure on site. This would allow someone if they do not want to demolish it but also want recogni- tion they would get a credit. Council agreed to leave the language in the code and try it. Richman said the next issue is cash-in-lieu of open space in the CC district. Bil Dunaway said with this provision, everyone will want to build rather than have open space and open space is more important that cash. Mayor Stirling said there is a philosophi- cal argument made for the character of the downtown, the old buildings are right to the sidewalk. If that tradition is to be continued, this should be given as an option at the discretion of the P & Z. Councilman Gassman disagreed that open space is more important. A lot of the open space in new buildings is worth- less. If the city got the money, they could buy something useful to the community. Mayor Stirling moved to leave in the language giving discretion and flexibility regarding open space; seconded by Councilwoman Fallin. All in favor, with the exception of Councilmembers Tuite and Isaac. Motion carried. Richman said in looking at area and bulk in the R-6 district, Council never looked at the issue of separation of principle and accessory buildings. Richman said Graeme Means argues in the R-6 zone with the new site coverage requirements, it has become difficult to make the 10 foot separation. Richman recommended addressing this only for the R-6 district. Richman suggested reducing the 10 foot requirement to 5 feet that if the building official needs to deal with the fire code question, he will have the authority to deal with that. Richman said the space between 9 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council Aril 18, 1988 two dwellings will not be effected. This is just the distance between principle and accessory buildings. There are still significant setbacks required in the R-6. Mayor Stirling moved to reduce this from 10 to 5 feet in the R-6 zone only; seconded by Councilman Isaac. Graeme Means asked if Council will deal with this in the R-15 zone also. Richman pointed out the setbacks or site coverage requirements have not been imposed in R-15. Richman said the situation on R-15 lots is much more expansive and to meet the 10 foot separation requirement is not a hardship. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Fallin. Motion carried. The next issue is the park impact fee on commercial development. Richman said staff researched this and found that the city used to apply a park dedication fee to commercial development in the 1970's as well as to condominiumization. Richman told Council the city was sued for the park dedication fee on condominiumiza- tion. Richman said commercial development was eliminated from park dedication fee at that time. Richman said the city has established a firm relationship between commercial development and impact on parks. Richman said staff has been able to come up with a formula to establish this fee. Mayor Stirling moved that all commercial development pay a park dedication fee; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor, motion carried. Councilwoman Fallin entered into the record a letter from Ed Zasacky f or the PCPA on why commercial development should pay a park impact fee. Richman brought up affordable housing impact fee and pointed out when Council reviewed the housing guidelines, they increased the rate of low and moderate income housing cash-in-lieu. Richman said he recalculated the numbers for this code. Richman told Council on page 7-63 and 7-64 he would like to clear up something. Richman said this language only talks about a non-conforming use. Richman suggested the language state "subdivided or acquired to create or extend a non-conformity". Council has no objection to the language. Richman said when the growth management was revised in 1981, commercial and lodge development was moved off an open-ended approach to employee housing to housing a certain percentage of their employees. Richman said at that time, Council agreed 10 Continued Meeting__ Aspen Citv Council April 18, 1988 commercial and lodge development should house 25 percent of their employees. Richman said this number should have been addressed every couple of years to see if it was still applicable. Richman told Council in 1984 or 1985 and the percentage was revised to 35 percent. Richman said as part of the growth management update, Council should have been asked to raise this percentage. Richman recommended commercial and lodge development should be required to house 50 percent of their employees. Councilman Gassman asked why not house 100 percent. Richman said the approach that has been taken is to go gradually. Richman told Council the county is 100 percent. In the city the jump from 35 to 100 percent is enormous. Richman said he feels strongly the percentage needs to be increased. Margaret Albouy said the city should not assume every employee is a new one and would like Council to see hiring local people encouraged. Councilman Tuite said this applies to new development, and if they take an old employee, that old business will have to hire someone else. Ms. Albouy said there is a mistake in bringing in outside people for new jobs. Richard Roth encouraged Council to go with the full 100 percent. This is a chance to address the issue and the need that is here. Roth said the developers have to be responsible for the impacts they create. Richard Compton said developers are buying older buildings and converting them to employee housing. This reduces the low price lodging. This may accelerate this problem. David White said in the past employee housing has been built at 40 percent, and most of this housing has been built by government. White agree development has to pay for itself. The closer the city gets to 100 percent, the closer it will move to the solu- tion. The city is far behind now and will get farther behind unless this percentage in increased. Wainwright Dawson agreed with increasing the percentage and said the development in recent years has not pulled their oars as far as impacts. Employees are getting priced out and pushed out. Dawson said this may help to stabilize and re-balance the equity here. Bruce Baldridge said 100 percent is unnecessary as some people prefer to live down valley. Roth said the way the code is written now is deceptive. When it is said that a developer is providing 100 percent of employee housing, they are providing 100 percent of 35 percent. Councilman Tuite asked what the impact of this would be on the developer in terms of overall costs, what percent does the housing play in a development. Richman said he would have to run the numbers, but it is a large portion of the development. Richman pointed out the impacts on commercial are increasing by establishing parking requirements. 11 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council April 18, 1988 Councilman Tuite moved to go to 100 percent employee housing requirement; seconded by Councilman Gassman. Mayor Stirling asked why there is 100 percent requirement in the county and not in the city. Richman said there was a determina- tion that the city was the proper location for development t o occur and taking this to 100 percent could have the effect of stopping growth. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Isaac. Motion carried. Dan Arrow asked about the food stand issue and the political signs. Richman said these will be in the draft presented at the April 25 meeting. Arrow asked Council to reconsider the cash-in- lieu of open space and to better define what Council wants open space to be. Mayor Stirling said there is still discretion; this does not eliminate open space entirely. Margaret Albouy said she has a concern about a development code. Ms. Albouy questioned whether this code revision will control the excess commercial development that has already occurred. Ms. Albouy said the goal of the planning office is to maintain the capacity between commercial space, bed space and ski capacity. Richman said the process is a two-fold one. This initial effort has been to simplify and streamline the code. The staf f has focused on policy issues, like condominiumization and employee housing. Richman told Council staff has not tried to deal with comprehensive and broad planning issues. Richman said staff will come back to Council right after this process with a list of issues that did not get addressed, like displacement, floor area ratios in other zones. Richman said he will let Council and the community prioritize these issues. Ms. Albouy asked if the community is going to lose the essential services, like gas stations. Ms. Albouy said the city needs to develop a code to protect the permanent community. This process should have tremendous community input. Richman said one possible effect of the increase in employee housing requirements is to increase the value of the commercial space that exists. One reason there is so much displacement is that existing space is more valuable because it is exempt from growth management. Richman said an indirect effect of making employee housing requirements so high may be to force local serving uses out of town. Councilman Isaac said he feels there will be other long range and secondary impacts from the 100 percent employee housing f ee. The city could lose a lot of the older lodges. This drastic increase may be over reacting to the current problem. 12 Continued Meeting Aspen Citv Council April__18, 1988 Richard Roth said this seems like a development approval process. There is no vision of what the city would like the community to be in the year 2000. This seems like no planning, only develop- ment approval. Mayor Stirling said the staff is working on the comprehensive plan, which is in the constant process of being updated. Richman said the staff has completed transportation, parks and open space, but the land use plan is not done. Richman said the staff is required to respond to service demands placed on the office. Bruce Kerr , owner of a 22 room lodge, said he feels this code gives no flexibility with what he can do his property. There are provisions for PUD which allow large projects to be built, but he cannot do anything. Kerr told Council he is housing not only his employees but employees that work 2 or 3 other places. Kerr said he would like to see the long term planning process address the way the town can keep some of the smaller lodges and let them do some expanding to make them more economically viable. Council requested Richman to add this to the list for follow up. Councilwoman Fallin said her plan in initiating this code process was to bring it up to date and compile it so that it was read- able. This issues have to be addressed in another forum. David White said he feels the code is a lot clearer. White said what to be done for the permanent community has to be addressed. This goes along with preserving the character of town and the older lodges. Wainwright Dawson said a public/private partner- ship should be encouraged to solve these problems. The employer should get the bonus for helping over 100 percent employee solution. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Kathryn Koch, City Clerk 13