Loading...
01-03-05 Town Council Minutes SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 3, 2005 Mayor Douglas Mercatoris called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, January 3, 2005 at 4:03 p.m. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Douglas Mercatoris, Bill Boineau, John Wilkinson, Sally Sparhawk, and Arnold Mordkin. COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Segrest, Town Manager; Susan Hamley, Marketing Director; Art Smythe, Chief of Police; Carey Shanks, Economic Resources Director; Rhonda B. Coxon, Town Clerk; and Hunt Walker, Public Works Director PUBLIC PRESENT: Bob Fridstein, Bob Purvis, Mel Blumenthal, Mark Bassett, Don Crouch, Mike O’Connor, Rick Griffin, Doug Faurer, Chris Nolan, Sean Walsh and other members of the public interested in Agenda items for this Meeting. Item No. 2: INTERVIEW APPLICANTS FOR TOWN BOARDS AND COMMISSION VACANCIES The Town Clerk reported that there were 16 vacancies on the various Town Boards and Commissions, some of which were vacancies that were not filled last year. She stated that the vacancies were posted and published in the Snowmass Village Sun in accordance with requirements of the Home Rule Charter. Council reviewed 2004 Town Boards and Commissions attendance records and interviewed applicants who had submitted applications to fill vacancies on the Arts Advisory Board, Citizens Grant Review Board, Financial Advisory Board, Marketing and Special Events Board, and the Planning Commission. Mordkin requested that Council table action to fill vacancies on the Marketing and Special Events Board until the retail community has had an opportunity to caucus and provide nominations to represent the retail community for this Board. Council stated their appreciation to incumbents and new applicants for their service and interest in serving on the volunteer Boards, and stated that a Resolution appointing members to fill vacancies on the various Boards and Commissions would be considered later on the Agenda for this Meeting. NOTE: Council took a break at this time and reconvened the Meeting at 5:03 p.m. NOTE: Council addressed Agenda Item No. 4 at this time. Item No. 4: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items. Item No. 3: DISCUSSION ITEM: THE SNOWMASS MOUNTAIN MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, INVOLVING REVISIONS TO THE SKI AREA FOR THE REMOVAL, REPLACEMENT AND CAPACITY INCREASE OF SKI LIFTS, EXPANSION OF ON-MOUNTAIN FACILITIES, RECREATION AREAS AND RESTAURANTS, CREATION OF 01-03-05tc Page 2 of 9 ADDITIONAL TRAILS, EXPANSION OF THE SNOWMAKING SYSTEM, AND IDENTIFICATION OF WINTER AND SUMMER PROGRAMS AND USES; TOGETHER WITH A REZONING OF THE SKI/SNOWBOARD MOUNTAIN TO A ‘RECREATION’ . ZONE DISTRICT Jim Wahlstrom explained that this was a review to receive Council direction prior to First Reading of the Ordinance, which is scheduled for the January 18, 2005 Council Meeting. He summarized the contents of the Ordinance and attachments. Bill Kane of the Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) provided a summary of the PUD amendment and stated that approval of this Ordinance would allow the applicant to update the Snowmass Mountain Master Plan and bring the Plan into conformance with the Town’s Land Use Code and PUD process. He outlined the essential elements of the Plan that included an amendment to the Ski Area Master Plan, rezoning the Mountain from SPA to Recreation Zone District, which would provide for permitted uses during the summer season by Special Review and identify the process for each of the proposed activities. He provided an overview of the applicant’s requests included in the application. Council discussed future plans to install a lift from Elk Camp to the Alpine Springs area; final plans for the Burn lift, and the timing for reconstruction of Sam’s Knob Restaurant. Council expressed concerns regarding the lack of a definitive timetable for reconstruction of Sam’s Knob Restaurant and requested that the applicant provide a more specific timeframe for completion of reconstruction. Kane stated a concern regarding a staff recommendation to Council, which would require that the applicant provide easement agreements and/or consents for off-season and extended hours use from property owners whose properties are located adjacent to Fanny Hill. He explained that some of the property owners along Fanny Hill have not responded to the applicant’s requests for the consents, and that the ASC has a ski easement to provide necessary construction for skiing operations on Fanny Hill. The Planning Director requested that the applicant provide a map that identifies the boundary of the ski easement in relation to property lines along Fanny Hill in order to determine which property owners consents need to be obtained. Kane agreed to provide the requested map. Council discussed the review procedure for reconstruction of Sam’s Knob and Elk Camp restaurants and agreed that Special Review with a Minor PUD Amendment would review the restaurants. Kane stated that the applicant is in agreement with the remainder of Staff’s recommendations. Council also discussed wildlife issues related to the proposed trails, the proposed number of employee housing units, Construction Traffic Management Plan, length of the trial period for on-mountain facilities, uses for night time operations of the lifts, skiing/snowboarding mountain capacity, overnight operations on the mountain, potential links habitat, and open space donations of land to the Town. Council requested that the applicant more thoroughly address the construction traffic management in the Construction Management Plan, obsolete language taken from old Environmental Assessment and that the Burnt Mountain proposal be updated to reflect areas as currently identified. Council further requested that the applicant clarify locations of references to bicycle/pedestrian trails, provide confirmation of completion of the three parcels of open space land transferred from Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) to the Town, confirmation of completion for an easement that would allow the Town to conduct musical and cultural events on Fanny Hill, and correct various grammatical and typographical errors throughout the documents. NOTE: Council took a break at this time and reconvened the Meeting at 6:17 p.m. Item No. 5: COUNCIL UPDATES 01-03-05tc Page 3 of 9 Sister City Committee John Wilkinson reported that the Committee is considering towns in Italy, Austria, and Argentina, along with the Town’s current Sister City, Marsiac, France. He stated that the Committee is proceeding to identify a Sister City for the Town of Snowmass Village. Staff Appreciation Mercatoris expressed his appreciation to the Police, Transportation and Public Works Departments and all Town employees involved for their efforts during the recent holiday season. Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO. 01, SERIES OF 2005 – DESIGNATING PUBLIC NOTICE BOARDS CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE LOCATIONS OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC NOTICE BOARDS FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE. The Town Clerk stated that this Resolution responds to requirements of the Colorado Revised Statutes. Mordkin made a motion to approve Resolution No. 01, Series of 2005, seconded by Boineau. There being no further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 7: RESOLUTION NO. 02, SERIES OF 2005 – APPOINTING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEMBERS CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO -THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD, ARTS ADVISORY BOARD, CITIZENS GRANT REVIEW BOARD, PLANNING COMMISSION AND MARKETING AND SPECIAL EVENTS BOARD. Mordkin made a motion to approve Resolution No. 02, Series of 2005, seconded by Mercatoris. Mordkin made a motion to amend the Resolution by including language that states “to the term prescribed by law”. Sparhawk seconded the motion. The motion to amend was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Mordkin made a motion to adopt as amended the Resolution by appointing Jan Grenda, Judy Clausen and Lois Sando to the Arts Advisory Board, Dan Alpert to the Citizens Grant Review Board, Bob Fridstein, Brad Wyatt and Rick Griffin to the Financial Advisory Board, Bob Purvis and Reed Lewis to the Marketing and Special Events Board, and Jim Gustafson, Don Crouch and Doug Faurer to the Planning Commission, seconded by Mercatoris. The vote was approved by 5 in favor and 0 opposed. Council requested that staff encourage the retail restaurant community to provide nominations for a retail representative to fill the vacancy on the Marketing and Special Events Board, and to include a notice in the local newspaper in October of 2005 reminding the public and representations on the Board of the need for nominations. Council requested that a Charter amendment be included on the ballot at the next Town Election that would request voter approval for a Town Charter amendment requiring annual rotation of the Chairperson position for each Town Board and Commission. Council also requested that staff identify a means to encourage citizens to apply for vacancies. After further discussion, the Resolution was approved as amended, by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 8: RESOLUTION NO. 03, SERIES OF 2005 – APPOINTING MUNICIPAL JUDGE CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPOINTING WILLIAM J. LIPPMAN AS MUNICIPAL JUDGE, SETTING THE TERM OF OFFICE AND COMPENSATION Mordkin made a motion to approve Resolution No. 03, Series of 2005, seconded by Sparhawk. Judge Lippman reported that despite the increase in growth of the community, Court matters are on the decline. Chief of Police Art Smythe stated that he is in support of reappointing Judge Lippman. He 01-03-05tc Page 4 of 9 explained even though there is a small number of cases on Court dockets, the matters that come before the Court are significant for the safety and welfare of the community. Smythe explained that charges for disorderly conduct are the common charge on the dockets that come before the Court and are due to substance abuse or other issues, and Judge Lippman is very successful getting to the root of the problems and providing solutions to problems so that there are less reoccurring instances. Lippman reported that Court dates are scheduled three sessions a month during the busy season, and are scheduled as needed during the slow seasons. Smythe reported that the number of citations issued has increased slightly, although officers are careful to issue tickets unless they are well-founded charges. Council stated their appreciation to the Judge, Police Department and employees for their efforts. There being no further discussion, the Mayor called the question and the Resolution was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 9: RESOLUTION NO. 06, SERIES OF 2005 – 2005 REGULAR MEETING DATES CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING DATES FOR REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FOR THE MONTHS OF JANUARY 2005 THROUGH DECEMBER 2005 Boineau made a motion to approve Resolution No. 06, Series of 2005, seconded by Mordkin. After discussion, Mercatoris made a motion to amend the Resolution by changing the proposed May 16, 2005 Meeting date to May 23, 2005. Boineau seconded the motion to amend. There being no further amendments or discussion, the motion was approved as amended, by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 10: DISCUSSION ON SUZUKI MUSIC INSTITUTE BUS SERVICE – MOTION BY COUNCIL Transportation Director David Peckler explained that the Suzuki Institute is considering moving the Institute to another location due to the cost of Town shuttle bus services, and members of the lodging community have requested that the Town reduce the amount of fees proposed for service in 2005. He stated that in an effort to recover costs for providing shuttle service to various organizations, the Town billed Suzuki $40,000 in 2004 to cover the Transportation Department Marginal costs for 947 hours and 5,906 miles during the two weeks of Suzuki service. Full service cost for 2005 would be approximately $67,000. Peckler explained that although Suzuki is a significant group for the Town during off-season, revenues generated by the Institute do not offset the cost of service. Peckler informed Council that he and the Town Manager have met with members of the lodging community, who requested that the Town allow three years of escalating rate charges at 10-percent per year in order to arrive at a rate that would cover the Town’s marginal costs of $50,000. Under this scenario, Suzuki would be billed approximately $44,000 for service in 2005, which would escalate to $53,000 in the year 2007. After further discussion, Council majority agreed to the proposal. Segrest stated that the Transportation Department budgeted for estimated revenues of $67,000 for this service in 2005, and this action would impact the Town’s General Fund, requiring an amendment to the Budget during the annual Budget Review. He also stated the importance for the Town to work toward future full cost recovery for this service so as not to set a precedent. Item No. 11: CONSIDERATION AND FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 03, SERIES OF 2005 - REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 21, SERIES OF 2004 CONSIDERATION AND FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 21, SERIES OF 2004, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FINAL PUD PLAN AND AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP FOR BASE VILLAGE, SUBMITTED BY INTRAWEST/BRUSH CREEK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 01-03-05tc Page 5 of 9 LLC, AND BRUSH CREEK LAND COMPANY, LLC, FOR FINAL PUD APPROVAL AND TO RE-ZONE THE BASE VILLAGE PROPERTY TO MU-2 ZONE DISTRICT DESIGNATION. Mordkin made a motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 03, Series of 2005, seconded by Wilkinson. The Town Manager explained that per the Town’s Municipal Code, Council must reconsider the adoption of Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2004. Segrest explained that Council whereby a Referendum Petition on Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2004 was determined to be sufficient confirmed the Certificate of Sufficiency. The Town Attorney explained if Ordinance No. 03 fails, Council would then be required to set a date for a Special Election on the issue. Jeff Tippett stated that he felt this Ordinance should be repealed. He explained that when the 2004 Ordinance was presented to Council for approval, the Town Planner presented changes to the Ordinance which included language that changed the vesting period from 10 to 20-years, timeshares were to be approved by the Special Review process, and that the residential square footage would include a 4-percent cushion. Tippett further stated that the changes made at that time were perplexing, and the most perplexing issue was the increase in vesting from 10 to 20-years. He stated that that the developer did not make a presentation for the requests, Council did not deliberate or discuss the changes, and the public had not be made aware of the changes, therefore there was no public comment made. Tippett explained that he felt the change in vesting from 10 to 20-years had tremendous implications and members of the community were astounded, stating that no one had ever heard of a project getting 20 years of vesting. Tippett stated that the implications of construction impacts for that many years without the Town Council having any opportunity to call the developer in for any kind of discussion are huge, but even more important, Council Members accepted the formula that proposed, the square feet of commercial and residential proposed, the number of square feet of commercial that have critical mass, the amount of residential square footage to support that commercial, and how it all had to work and how it all had to be in balance. But the phasing plan in this approval, he explained, would potentially allow a significant portion of the commercial to be built in the first two or three years and then the project would go fallow for as much as 17 years, when the Town would be substantially out of balance with an overabundance of commercial and very little residential constructed. Tippett stated that the implications on the Mall, the Center and on Base Village itself would be horrendous. He expressed the concern that Council did not discuss these issues, staff did not discuss these issues and there was never a request made for Walter Kieser to run any numbers, of which he felt needed to be done before a final decision could be made. Tippett further stated that there was such haste at the December 18, 2004 Meeting, obviously the Council was in a hurry to have the Base Village submission approved while Manchester and Virtue were still in office and therefore missed a very important discussion. Mordkin and Boineau made statements that there was an opportunity for public comment at the Meeting when the 2004 Ordinance was presented to Council for approval, and that the issues were discussed and considered by Council, and to suggest that Council did not understand or consider the Ordinance was a disservice to those members of Council who spent a long period of time working on the Base Village application. Wilkinson stated that he felt it appropriate for the electorate to vote on the issue and make the final determination on the application. Mercatoris stated that he voted in favor of the 2004 Ordinance, would vote in favor of this Ordinance at First and Second Readings and would maintain his vote in favor of both Ordinances when he casts his ballot at the Election. He explained the difference between vesting and construction, informing the public that the Construction Plan for Base Village was 6-7years, approval of the 17-years vesting period would grant the applicant the ability and the right to build the plan that was approved if circumstances such as a market decline, that would make construction of Base Village inappropriate during the 6-7 year period, it does not make the construction period 20-years long as has been eluded to by the media and certain members of the public. Tippett stated that he did not say that Council did not consider the changes; Council may very 01-03-05tc Page 6 of 9 well have considered them. He clarified that he had said there was no public discussion or deliberation, and that Council was misconstruing his words. He further clarified that he said the Council did not deliberate in public and did not discuss their reasons for the changes in public. After further discussion, the Mayor called the question and First Reading of the Ordinance failed by a vote of 0 in favor to 5 opposed. Council unanimously voted against a repeal of Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2004. Item No. 12: FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 04, SERIES OF 2005 - REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 24, SERIES OF 2004 FIRST READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 24, SERIES OF 2004, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE BUILDOUT CHART OF THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCREASE PERMITTED FUTURE BUILDOUT ON THE BASE VILLAGE PROPERTY TO 367 EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS AND 195,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OTHER SPACE. Mordkin made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 04, Series of 2005, seconded by Wilkinson. Segrest explained that at a previous Meeting, the Town Clerk presented Council with a Certificate of Sufficiency for a Referendum Petition on Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2004. At that time, Council determined and confirmed the Certificate to be sufficient. Sparhawk stated that she supported the previous Council’s decision to approve Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2004 and would vote in favor of the Base Village Plan as approved. There being no further discussion, First Reading of Ordinance No. 04, Series of 2005 was defeated by a vote of 0 in favor to 5 opposed. Item No. 13: FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 05, SERIES OF 2005 - REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 26, SERIES OF 2004 FIRST READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 26, SERIES OF 2004, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO RE-DESIGNATE A PORTION OF ASSAY HILL TO “MU”. Mordkin made a motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 05, Series of 2005, seconded by Wilkinson. There being no discussion or comments, First Reading of the Ordinance was defeated by a vote of 0 in favor to 5 opposed. Item No. 14: RESOLUTION NO. 05, SERIES OF 2005 – SETTING THE SPECIAL ELECTION DATE CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION TO REFER TO THE TOWN ELECTORATE THE QUESTION OF WHETHER ORDINANCE NO. 21, ORDINANCE NO. 24 AND ORDINANCE NO. 26, SERIES OF 2004 SHOULD BE RETAINED. Boineau made a motion to approve Resolution No. 05, Series of 2005, seconded by Sparhawk. Segrest explained the Ordinance language and stated that at Council’s direction a Special Town Election would be scheduled for February 3, 2005. Local resident Jim Hooker stated opposition to construction of Base Village as submitted and approved by Council. After further discussion, Mordkin made a motion to amend the Resolution by changing the language on line 48 to state “…ballot questions…” Sparhawk seconded the motion. The motion to amend was approved by 01-03-05tc Page 7 of 9 a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Sparhawk expressed her dismay that the public had been misinformed on several issues regarding the development of Base Village. She stated that this project is not a replica of other Intrawest developments that the theme is consistent with the community, and follows the design of Anderson Ranch, and the applicant did respond to public concerns and comments by making changes to the development. She also stated that public perception that the vesting would increase the construction timeframe is not true and explained that the vesting period refers only to construction delay if it became necessary due to a market decline. She reiterated her concern that ill-founded public statements had caused substantial concern among the citizens. Wilkinson referred to the mass and scale of the buildings that would be located at the base of the ski mountain made possible through amendments to the Land Use Code. He stated that he felt it necessary at this time for Council to determine if this is the desired development for the base area, and the need for the community to make the final determination through an election process. Boineau stated that he felt the election to be the appropriate avenue to determine the final decision and that development of the Base Village Plan as previously approved by Council would be a positive move for the Town as a resort. Mercatoris stressed the need for the public to be thoroughly educated on the election question and understand that the height of the buildings would be 2-6 stories, construction timeframe would be 6-7 years, there would be sufficient water and sanitation facilities within the Village for the construction, the parking in the numbered lots would not change for residents, that Base Village employees, residents and guests would not be allowed to park in Town-owned lots, the building height and scale would revert back to previous Code limitations if the project is denied, that the current landowner has stated that they would not submit another proposal for the base area if the current Base Village proposal is denied by the voters, and that if the current landowner were to sell the property, any proposal made by a new landowner for a smaller development at the base area that would fit within the parameters of the Land Use Code would be similar in size to that of the Woodrun V complex with a very small amount of commercial. He stated that the current amenity package that the applicant has agreed to provide would only be available with the current Base Village plan. Mercatoris also stated that the public needs to be informed that the amenity package includes $800,000 in cash for construction of a park and stream restoration, $1M for a recreation center at the Entryway, $600,000 cash would be paid to Holy Cross Electric that would lower the electric bills of all residents of the community, a community pool on the Base Village site that would be open to the public year round for 110-percent of the same costs for the community pool that is to be constructed at the Entryway, conference space and a conference hotel, a children’s center, a gondola, snowmaking, open space dedications, affordable housing, an activity center and road improvements that would include a roundabout to make it easier for vehicle movement from one side of Town to the other, a cabriolet, a six- pack high-speed ski lift, snowmelt road construction in parts of the community that are outside of the Base Village area, as well as other amenities that would return the community to a vibrant resort. He urged the citizens to contact Planning Commissioners, Council members, the applicant and Town staff in order to obtain the correct information before casting a vote at the Special Election. President of the Enclave Homeowners Association Mel Blumenthal stated that he attended approximately 90-percent of Planning Commission and Council Meetings during review of the Base Village application. He also stated that the Homeowners felt the applicant had made every effort to address and accommodate all the Homeowners’ concerns regarding the development He stated that the Base Village review was the most open process he has ever seen for a development review process, that the public had been invited to participate and requests made to discuss issues with the applicant, Council, Planning Commission or Town staff was never denied. He explained that he was convinced that after four years of Planning Commission and Council review, the plan as approved by Council was the only viable solution for the Town’s future, and 01-03-05tc Page 8 of 9 that he felt there any “smaller” proposal for the base area would not be economically viable for the community. Blumenthal explained that the community is dependent upon its resort attraction, and a competitive resort requires the current Base Village plan. He expressed a concern that the base area would be filled with houses and townhouses that would generate very little revenue for the community would not provide amenities and other things currently enjoyed as a lifestyle in Snowmass Village if the Referendum is approved. There being no further comments or discussion, Mayor Mercatoris called the question and the Resolution was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. The Snowmass Village Special Election was set for February 3, 2005. Item No. 15: MANAGER’S REPORT Additional Town Holidays In response to a discussion held at a previous Town Council Meeting whereby, staff proposed Martin Luther King Day and President’s Day holidays be included as a part of the Employee Benefit Program. He explained that employees who work on the holiday would be give a different day off in lieu of the holiday. Council agreed to the proposal and requested an informational statement be recorded on the Town’s telephone answering system informing callers that the Town is closed for the holiday and providing a telephone number to call in case of an emergency. Sanitation Fee Billing Segrest reported that staff has scrutinized the Solid Waste formula for billing efficiency as previously requested by Council. The Public Works Director reported that in the future, post cards would be used to bill residents for Town Sanitation fees as a cost savings measure. Council Recommendation - Ballot Question Mercatoris requested that staff prepare a Resolution for Council consideration that would allow Council to make a recommendation to the Town’s electorate regarding the election question that would appear on the February 3, 2005 Special Town Election. Item No. 16: APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR: 04-05-04, 04-12-04 AND 12-20-04 Sparhawk made a motion to approve the Meeting Minutes as listed. Boineau seconded the motion. The Town Clerk stated that due to audio problems, submission of the Minutes to Council had been delayed. Wilkinson requested a statement be included in the Minutes of 12-20-05 that reflects a request he made for the Planning Commission to investigate potential trail access and easements at the Cougar Canyon development, and that the applicant agreed to provide the information to Council. In the same set of Minutes, Wilkinson also requested the inclusion of his objection to the request for late-night bus service. There being no further corrections or additions, the Minutes were approved as amended, by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 17: COMMITTEE REPORTS/CALENDARS Restrictions for Delivery Trucks Mordkin requested that staff investigate the possibility of restricting delivery trucks to specific hours of delivery within the Town. He explained that he felt this restriction would be a safety measure for both Town guests and residents. 01-03-05tc Page 9 of 9 Item No. 18: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mercatoris made a motion to adjourn the Meeting, seconded by Mordkin. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. The Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. This set of minutes was approved by Town Council at the Regular Meeting on February 22, 2005.