►
From YouTube: Special City Council Meeting 10/2/2017
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
C
A
Looks
like
we
have
everybody
and
I
know:
alderman
Rainey
is
on
her
way.
So
first,
first
order
of
business
is
you
know,
announcements
from
me.
I'll
just
say
that
today
is
a
tough
day
right.
It's
a
tough
day
for
everybody
here
in
this
room,
it's
a
tough
day
for
everybody,
watching
it's
a
tough
day
for
everybody
across
America
right.
We
all
woke
up
this
morning
to
some
really
tragic
news.
A
We
live
in
I
appreciate
what
a
lot
of
educators
have
done
today
in
the
messages
that
they've
sent
out
to
children
in
this
community
and
other
communities.
We
are
the
adults.
We
must
do
something
tonight,
I'm
asking
that
we
have
a
moment
of
silence
to
reflect
on
those
who
lost
their
lives
last
night
and
all
their
family
and
friends
who
are
enduring
unspeakable
pain.
A
A
Thank
you,
I'm
gonna,
let
that
be
our
only
my
only
public
announcement
today
and
we
have
mr.
Lyon
sitting
for
mr.
Bob
quits.
Do
you
have
any
city
manager,
announcements?
No
mr.
mayor
have
no
announcements,
okay,
city
clerk.
Do
you
have
any
announcements?
I
have
no
announcements:
okay,
okay,
great
okay,
city
clerk
is
gonna,
go
and
grab
the
sign-in
sheet
and
we'll
we'll
quickly.
I,
don't
know
how
many
commenters
we
have,
but
we
have
public
comment
as
we
always
do.
A
I
will
remind
people
that
we
set
aside
45
minutes
per
hour
rules
for
public
comment.
If
we
have
less
than
15
people
that
have
signed
up
for
public
comment,
then
I'll
ask
that
each
person
keep
your
remarks
to
three
minutes
or
left
less
I.
Ask
as
always
that
we
be
respectful
to
the
other
folks
that
are
in
the
audience,
as
well
as
the
people
up
to
the
Dyess.
With
your
time,
I
will
give
you
a
indication
if
you're
at
fifteen,
ten
to
fifteen
seconds
before
you're
at
the
three
minute
mark
okay.
A
So
today
it
looks
like
we
have
one
two.
We
have
nine
people
that
have
signed
up,
so
each
person
will
get
up
to
the
three
minutes.
If
you,
if
you
need
it
just
in
terms
of
the
timeline
for
tonight
as
I
know,
people
are
here
for
different
things.
This
is
a
special
meeting
of
the
city
of
the
City
Council
and
we
are
going
to
be
talking
about
the
downtown
development
plan
or
the
downtown
plan
that
was
put
together
in
2009
and
as
soon
as
we
get
through
public
comment,
we'll
get
into
that.
A
And
then
we
have
an
executive
session.
The
City
Council.
Does
that
shouldn't
be
too
long
that
we
will
that
we
will
go
into
I'm,
going
to
guess
a
half
an
hour
and
then
city,
then
the
human
services
committee
will
convene
okay,
so
that's
sort
of
the
agenda
for
the
night.
So,
let's
begin
with
the
public
comment,
the
first
one
we
have
is
Austin
Shearer
and
again
I
apologize
if
I'm
mispronouncing
names
or
can't
read.
Some
of
this
writing
is.
A
D
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Austin
Shearer
I'm,
an
Evanston
resident,
my
grandfather
and
son,
went
to
Northwestern
Evanston,
in
my
opinion,
is
unique
in
that
it
honors
historic
architecture
and
it
Green
open
space
to
its
residence.
The
library
parking
lot
building
I
think
violates
both
of
these
very
proud
traditions.
D
The
difficulty
with
the
building
it's
just
too
large,
a
building
for
too
tight
of
space,
and
it's
going
to
put
a
wedge
between
the
two
historic
buildings,
the
colonial
Women's
Club
building
and
the
Gothic
Frances
Willard,
building
the
Frances
Willard
bill
and,
in
fact,
will
be
in
the
shadow
of
that
building,
almost
the
entire
winter,
most
of
the
fall
most
of
the
spring
and
every
time,
except
for
really
high
summer
I.
Think
it's
the
wrong
building
at
the
wrong
time
and
I
would
urge
you
to
consider
other
alternatives.
D
D
An
internal
garage
to
get
into
the
library
so
I,
don't
think
the
library
will
get
as
much
use
so
you're
weakening
the
library
you're,
making
the
two
small
buildings
look
kind
of
ridiculous,
because
that
next
to
an
11-story
building,
they'll
just
look
like
little
token
buildings
and
I'm
really
against
that.
The
other
real
problem
I
see
with
this
building
is
liability.
You've
the
Chicago
Avenue
has
been
narrowed
considerably
with
the
bike
lane,
which
I
think
is
a
terrific
thing
for
the
northwestern
students.
D
I
would
say
you
know
if
you
better
put
the
funds
that
you
get
for
the
parking
lot
away
to
pay
for
the
liabilities,
because
the
first
bad
accident
would
that
happens
with
a
student
and
a
car.
The
lawyer
is
going
to
say
this
was
an
inherently
dangerous
situation.
It's
the
worst
bottleneck
in
the
city
and
it
is
completely
inconsistent
to
put
a
big
building
there
when
you've
already
narrowed
the
avenue
so
I'm
very
much
opposed
to
this
I've.
D
A
E
E
It
really
means
that
there
is
no
reason
for
them
not
to
and
every
reason
for
them
to
propose
a
development
project
that
is
larger
than
what
they
need
to
be
financially
successful.
I
mean
they.
You
know
they
do
have
an
added
cost,
so
they
have
to
increase
the
building
size.
For
that
reason,
but
you
know
as
soon
as
if
you
can't
build
just
you
know,
look
at
the
zoning
ordinance
and
design
a
project
that
fits
within
the
zoning
parameters
of
the
district
that
you're
in
then
you
have
a
whole
lot
of
more.
E
E
A
F
Good
evening
I've
been
reading,
the
downtown
plan
from
2009
and
I
have
a
few
more
thoughts
about
that.
My
first
thought
is:
I
cannot
believe
that
last
week
sitting
here,
the
city
manager
said:
oh,
it's
not
codified.
We
don't
need
to
pay
attention
to
that
downtown
plan.
This
downtown
plan
has
the
wisdom
of
other
councils
and
planners
people
who
participated.
Lots
of
people
who
participated
in
coming
up
with
the
findings
I
found.
F
F
Residents
of
Evanston
see
Downtown
Development
review
as
an
ad
hoc,
case-by-case
assessment,
where
decisions
are
made
by
City
Council,
without
sufficient
consideration
of
the
principles
of
comprehensive
planning
and
the
tenets
of
good
urban
form,
and
then
there's
another
paragraph
about
public
benefits
that
developers
are
offering.
They
are
very
vague
in
general,
including
such
things
as
payment
of
taxes
that
redevelopment
of
vacant
land
and
the
creation
of
jobs.
These
benefits
are
not
unique
or
specific
to
one
project
and
do
not
relate
to
the
immediate
impacts
on
the
neighborhood
there's
a
lot
of
wisdom
there.
F
G
Thank
you,
I'm
Howard,
Elmen,
listening
to
Sara
talk,
it
felt
like
a
deja
vu
moment.
For
me,
I'm
was
a
president
of
a
condo
association
here
in
Evanston,
and
we
got
very
involved
opposing
a
development
that
was
going
to
next
door
and
I
studied
the
downtown
plan
and
Sierra's
comments
were
our
comments
that
we
made
to
City
Council.
We
made
the
plan
development
we
made,
you
know,
went
through
the
whole
process
and
the
building
got
built
and
we
were
told
again
and
again
look
it's
it's.
It's
a
plan,
its
guidance,
but
it's
not
zoning
law.
G
So
speaking
from
that
experience,
I
guess
my
input
to
the
to
the
council
is
that
unless
the
current
plan
is
actually
going
to
be
codified
and
made
into
zoning
law
speaking
as
a
citizen
who
went
through
this
process,
it's
way
too
detailed.
It's
way
too
specific,
and
it's
way
too
confusing
for
someone
who
doesn't
really
understand
the
law
and
how
the
law
works.
You
read
it
and
you
in
a
reasonable
person,
says
well
wait
a
second.
It
says
it
must
be
any
plan.
Development
has
to
follow
the
downtown
plan.
This
doesn't
file
a
downtown
plan.
G
How
can
this
be
passed
as
a
planned
development?
Some
of
you
may
remember
me.
You
were
on
the
council
and
I
was
up
here
complaining
about
that.
So
I
guess
my
advice
to
you
would
be
to
either
if
you're
gonna
revisit
that
plan
revisit
it
modify
it
and
make
it
into
the
zoning
law.
Make
a
commitment
to
do
that.
So
there
isn't
this
confusion
or
come
up
with
a
less
specific,
more
general
plan
that
then
citizens
won't
point
to
and
said,
wait
a
second.
This
isn't
following
the
specifics
of
that
plan.
H
The
first
of
all
there's
been
some
confusion
as
to
whether
Albion
meets
the
current
zoning.
Even
before
you
talk
about
the
2009
plan,
they're
not
entitled
as
a
right
to
build
anything
close
to
the
building
they're
proposing
they
would
need
to
make
it
shorter
with
a
40
foot
setback
from
the
street
during
the
entire
dimension
of
it,
which
would
make
it
a
completely
non
viable
project.
The
2009
plan
just
makes
it
even
more
non-compliant.
H
The
2009
plan
said
we
want
to
bring
down
the
height
of
that
area
at
a
38
feet,
not
the
hundred
and
five
that
are
even
allowed
in
the
zoning
forget
the
hundred
and
eighty-five
that
they
are
asking
for
I
echo
Sarah's
comments
that
we
we
need
to
follow
that
plan.
It
is
an
elegant
plan.
It
is
a
tremendous
balance
of
trying
to
create
more
growth
and
and
more
density
and
more
height
in
heaven
stand
but
preserve
four
streets.
I
Either
I'm
Chuck
Wasser
burg,
9:08
Greenwood
I,
have
a
statement
to
make
about.
There
were
really
a
question
in
terms
of
what
are
we
truly
building
toward
in
Evanston
I
have
nothing
against
tall
buildings
necessarily
but
I'm
wondering
what
we're
building
toward
here,
I'm
speaking
specifically
about
the
proposed
Albion
development
on
Sherman,
Avenue
I,
don't
need
to
tell
you
or
the
folks
who've
just
spoken
about
the
Evanston
plan,
which
everyone
knows
in
great
detail.
I
But
what
I
want
to
do
is
help
us
keep
in
mind
the
vision
for
Evanston,
which
I
don't
believe
this
building
is
a
part
of
just
a
couple
of
passages
from
the
plan
really
make
this
clear.
The
original
plan
calls
for
and
I'm
quoting
a
human-scale
that
retains
a
strong
pedestrian
orientation
and
physical
amenities.
I
I
B
J
As
part
of
Evan
stone,
Ian's
for
Responsible
planning
advocate
that
the
council
take
the
2009
downtown
plan
into
serious
consideration
when
considering
the
upcoming
album
development
vote,
as
well
as
other
developments
currently
in
the
pipeline.
Today,
we
also
recommend
we
also
advocate
that
the
city
recognize
and
implement
the
public
space
elements
of
the
plan,
not
only
the
development
components,
because,
right
now
we
have
this
wonderful
2009
plan
and
the
only
thing
that
is
happening
is
the
tall
building
part.
J
J
If
the
Albion
is
approved-
and
we
are
very
hopeful-
it
will
not
be
it-
will
obliterate
the
south
traditional
zone
and
undermine
the
key
tenant
in
the
2009
plan,
which
is
an
agreement
to
have
some
traditional
human-scale
zones
that
balance
the
many
core
zones
which
are
very
high
development.
Similarly,
the
37
storey
Sherman
Avenue
development
would
have
blitter
8
the
north
traditional
zone,
Evan
stone
Ian's,
are
only
are
left
only
with
the
core
zones
which
are
zone
even
higher
than
today's
doning.
That's
not
fair,
it's
not
balanced.
J
It
wasn't
agreed
to
by
all
of
the
people
that
participated
in
this
process,
so
we
are
calling
for
three
things:
first,
a
moratorium
on
development
projects
for
any
plan
today,
not
in
the
planned
development
pipeline.
We
are
doing
this
because
most
of
these
are
so
far
has
haven't
been
approved
with
extreme
variances
that
have
often
undermined
our
zoning,
and
each
developer
as
Albion
is
doing
then
uses
past
variances
to
get
more
variances
or,
in
some
other
cases,
to
push
the
boundaries
of
the
zoning
area
areas
as
using
that
as
a
precedent
to
keep
going
today.
J
I
have,
to
be
honest,
it
seems
like
the
Wild
West
of
development
in
Evanston
and
we
must
pause
neither
plans
nor
the
current
zoning
is
being
followed.
Here's
an
example:
why
and
how
is
a
37
story,
development
even
being
proposed
in
an
area
legally
zoned
for
maximum
seven
storeys
developers
must
assume
it,
but
it'll
be
approved.
J
Perhaps
the
original
intent
was
good
to
make
sure
there's
very
high
standards
when
we
and
public
benefits,
if
we're
going
to
have
high
rises,
but
it
seems
to
only
encourage
and
give
developers
a
path
to
go
bigger
and
gives
a
green
light
for
again
extreme
variances
variances
that
are
again
uses
precedent
for
the
next
developer.
Three
before
the
city
makes
any
further
decisions.
City
Council,
the
mayor
and
city
manager
must
consider
the
will
of
the
people,
as
evidenced
from
the
examples
I'm
going
to
mention
that
are
overwhelmingly
against
the
transformation
of
the
city.
J
With
these
kind
of
mega
developments
that
degrade
livability
and
affordability
read
the
comments.
The
city
asked
residents
of
the
community
to
make
of
a
city's
own
website,
the
Co
urbanized
website
for
the
Alvia,
and
please
read
those
of
them.
Four
hundred
and
sixty
five
plus
comments,
most
our
heartfelt
pleas
for
the
city
to
stop
the
transformation
of
the
city.
Consider
two
petitions
with
1600
signers
about
two
different
high-rises
on
Sherman
and
again
read
the
comments
that
reflect
the
same
sentiment
here.
J
To
finally
read
the
public
sentiments
of
hundreds
of
residents
that
are
summarized
in
the
2009
downtown
plan,
some
of
which
were
mentioned
also
just
alderman,
should
consider
taking
a
cue
from
Chicago,
where
some
aldermen
have
down
zoned
areas
like
Milwaukee,
Avenue
and
Logan
Square,
to
protect
from
over
development
and
protect
from
affordability
issues
and
minority
displacement.
Thank.
A
K
Since
most
of
the
current
city
council
was
not
around
when
there
were
discussions
about
the
downtown
plan,
let
me
tell
you
about
an
important
vote
and
for
alder
women,
women
and
rainy.
Let
me
refresh
your
memory.
I
did
a
little
research
and
found
the
following
information
on
Monday
May
29
2007
at
the
official
regular
meeting
of
the
City
Council
consideration
to
impose
a
moratorium
on
new
construction
in
the
downtown
area
was
discussed.
Alderman
Tisdale
moved
to
suspend
the
rules
to
adopt
an
ordinance
at
the
same
meeting
at
which
it
was
introduced.
K
The
motion
was
seconded
motion
carried
unanimously
alderman
Tisdale
moved
approval
of
Orton
is
51
OH
Oh
7
moratorium
on
the
new
building
construction
in
the
downtown
area.
The
motion
was
seconded
alderman
voted
aye
during
roll
call.
The
motion
carried
9
to
0.
Let's
have
a
moratorium
on
all
development.
Now,
while
you
review
the
downtown
plan,
it
is
within
City
Council's
power
to
tell
the
telev
developers
know,
or
at
least
that
they
adhere
to
the
zoning
that
is
in
place.
The
moratorium
will
have
no
damaging
effect
on
developers.
K
Citizens
have
a
voice
in
the
plan
that
will
affect
all
ordinances
are
not
ends
in
themselves,
but
implement
public
policy
which,
with
respect
to
the
which
have
respect
to
the
downtown
high-rise
mega
developments
currently
proposed
for
the
downtown
threatened
to
use
the
Planned
Unit
development
exception
in
title
6.
The
zoning
code
to
swallow
the
zoning
rules,
which,
together
with
the
2000
comprehensive
plan
in
the
2009
downtown
plan,
protects
citizens,
businesses
and
residences
in
2015,
the
Illinois
Appellate
Court
recognized.
K
The
comprehensive
plan
of
2000
is
formal
Authority
in
the
city
of
Evanston,
and
that
this
plan
treats
the
2009
downtown
plan
as
more
than
just
mere
a
mere
guideline,
in
contradiction
to
what
Johanna
Leonard
remarked,
Johanna
Leonard's
remarks
to
alderman
Fleming
at
the
end
of
the
last
City
Council
meeting.
Please
take
notice
of
this
and
call
for
a
moratorium
on
all
planned
developments
in
Evanston
and
respect
the
plans.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
Carl
all
right
now
now
now
your
turn
Barbara
we're
good
all
right,
Thank,
You,
Thank
You
Barbara,
for
passing
on
that.
Okay,
then,
seeing
no
more
public
comment,
we
will
Jamie
won't.
Give
me
one
second,
we'll
move
to
our
special
order
of
business,
but
before
we
do
that,
alderman
Ravello,
oh
okay,
all
right
so
I'm
going
to
a
turn
to
alderman
Ravel,
just
to
introduce
a
special
order
of
business.
M
Good
evening,
Johanna
Leonard
community
Valmet
director
I
just
have
a
few
slides
to
review
some
of
the
things
that
were
discussed
the
last
council
meeting.
This
is
a
slide
that
kind
of
summarizes
what
a
downtown
plan
and
planner
speak.
These
are
generally
sub
area
plans
that
are
part
of
a
larger
plan
and
you'll
find
a
lot
of
communities
will
have
a
downtown
plan
that
or
we
have
a
central
street
plan,
West
West
Side
plan
that
that
addressed
certain
characteristics
of
a
neighborhood
or
community
area
that
need
additional
attention.
M
This
is
a
summary,
and
this
was
in
the
packet
of
some
of
the
history
from
the
2009
downtown
plan.
If
some
of
you
may
recall
this
started
about
MIT
in
the
mid
2000s,
when
there
was
some
interest
in
concern
over
how
the
downtown
was
being
developed
and
planned.
So
there
was
a
group
of
I
think
there
were
some
aldermen
at
the
time.
Some
plan
commissioners
and
some
stakeholders
that
would
meet
I
believe
once
a
month
to
talk
about
downtown
Evanston
issues
and
the
planning
related
to
it.
M
This
is
a
snapshot
of
the
current
downtown
zoning
and
then
the
next
slide
is
the
downtown
proposed
zoning
changes
that
were
incorporated
to
the
downtown
plan.
So
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
about
the
plan
and
Melissa
clots
are
the
city
zoning
planners
here
as
well.
If
there's
issues
or
concerns
about
the
current
zoning
that
we
can
answer.
C
M
You
know
there
were
there
had
been
and
I
don't
recall
of
you
know.
I
was
not
a
staff
member
or
playing
commissioner
at
that
time.
In
my
time
on
the
Planning
Commission,
there
were
only
two
buildings
that
that
came
through,
and
then
this
the
the
downtown
plan,
and
that
was
seven
or
eight
church
and
the
amli
development,
so
that
was
kind
of
pre
recession.
There
was
also
the
Winthrop
Club,
which
was
Evanston
turned
into
something
else
that.
C
C
C
A
Johanna
just
for
some
of
our
edification
up
here,
so
it
looks
like
the
plan
based
on
that
timeline
that
you
had
up
recommended
approval.
A
draft
in
October
2,
8
2008
didn't
get
adopted
until
February
2009
sounds
like
a
four
month
period.
I
was
just
curious.
Why
and
then
also
curious
about
why
the
plan
wasn't
codified
and-
and
maybe
other
people
up
on
the
stage
can
answer
that
too.
So.
A
M
So
what
happened
at
the
time
was
the
plan
was
released
in
October.
It
was
a
I.
Remember
this
very,
very
vividly.
It
was
a.
It
was
in
the
parasol
room.
It
was
a
joint
meeting
of
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
Economic
Development
Committee
and
it
was
presented
and
alderman
Wynn
was
there
and
the
old
Romania
was
there
as
well,
and
it
was
there's
a
lot.
M
The
room
was
filled,
it
was
standing
room
only
and
it
was
released
and
then
it
came
to
plan
commission
for
discussions
and
it
could
have
been
November
December,
but
that
those
were
may
have
been
times
that
we
were
still
applying.
Commission
was
still
deliberating
on
708
church
I
can't
recall
exactly
and
then,
when
the
Planning
Commission
started
their
review.
M
I
recall
some
of
the
feedback
from
from
the
people
who
came
to
provide
public
comment
were
very
concerned
that
the
consultants
the
city
had
hired
had
not
provided
a
plan
that
reflected
the
comments
that
had
been
received
during
the
public
review
period
and-
and
there
was
one
resident
who
pointed
out
that
a
google
search
had
revealed
some
of
the
passages
from
the
plan
matched
passages
from
other
plans
for
their
communities.
So
they
felt
like
it
would.
M
M
A
O
I
N
And
you
know
there
was
there
was
an
election
in
2009
I
think
we
had
a
number
of
new
council
members
that
joined
the
council,
but
those
are
who
were
here
and
those
new
members
recognized
I
think
some
of
the
extreme
and
very
obvious
incorrect
assumptions.
In
this
plan,
the
plan
predicted
a
very,
very
strong,
ongoing
residential
development,
more
condos
projected
35,000
square
feet
of
additional.
N
Commercial
space,
that's
in
addition
to
the
708,
our
building,
in
addition
to
the
1890
project,
which
was
supposed
to
have
a
grocery
store.
So
those
two
projects
didn't
happen.
It
was
apparent
that
they
weren't
going
to
happen
and
I
think
just
operating
on
a
basic
recognition
of
what
was
reality
in
front
of
us.
The
market
was
not
what
the
plan
projected.
N
It
doesn't
escape
my
attention
that
a
lot
of
people
talked
about.
You
know
we
should
be
following
the
plan,
but
I'm
a
little
baffled
by
that,
because,
for
example,
if
we
were
to
go
back
and
say
okay,
you
know
what
we
need
to
have
followed
this
plan.
So
what
we
need
to
do
is
we
need
to
catch
up
on
the
projected
200
units
of
housing
a
year
that
didn't
happen
so
we're
maybe
a
thousand
units
down.
So
we
should
really.
N
So
you
know
so:
I
don't
have
a
particularly
strong
interest
to
tear
down
Davis
Street
and
fill
that
in
with
eight
to
ten
story
buildings,
and
since
this
plan
was
adopted,
we
also
adopted
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
which
the
maximum
with
bonuses-
the
bonuses-
would
be
even
higher
at
this
point,
so
Kay
has
88
feet,
so
that
would
probably
be
someone
they
would
have
nine
to
ten
stories,
so
Davis
Street
those
nice
to
three-story
restaurants.
Businesses
could
theoretically
all
be
eight
story
buildings
and
you
can't
go
to
it.
N
Go
down
the
list
J
the
central
core,
35
plus
stories
you
know
which
blocks
which
entire
blocks
of
existing
businesses
and
buildings
are.
We
going
to
choose
to
tear
down
to
follow
this
plan
for
the
most
part
and
I
realized
that
the
north
light
is
an
exception
to
that.
But
the
other
proposals
that
are
kind
of
on
deck
are
taking
either
underutilized
or
empty
space,
so
the
Nevins
property,
the
owner
of
that
property,
is
selling
the
property.
So
it's
not
like
anybody's
taken
away
the
Nevins
building.
N
In
the
Chase
Bank
property,
again
it's
it's
a
drive-through
and
an
empty
lot.
So
it's
it's
taking
something
that's
not
being
utilized
the
library
parking
lot
is
a
is
a
parking
lot
presently.
So
to
me,
it
makes
sense
to
look
at
the
empty
space
instead
of
tearing
down
we're
putting
out
other
businesses
and
other
residences.
We
talked
about
affordable
housing
and
this
increases.
The
dimittis
increases
the
supply.
It's
that
econ
101
class
we
took
in
high
school
if
we're
gonna
go
to
find
other
places
and
tear
down,
maybe
some
two
three-story
buildings
that
have
apartments.
N
Those
tend
to
be
the
market
rate,
affordable
units,
so
I'm,
not
particularly
interested
in
going
around
town
and
finding
the
older
housing
stock
and
tearing
that
down.
So
we
can
put
in
more
expensive
units
for
a
trade-off
of
ten
percent
affordable
units.
So
the
plan
I,
don't
in
my
opinion
it
wasn't
codify
Dan
I
was
on
the
council,
then
because
it
stopped
reflecting
the
reality
of
what
we
were
looking
at
and
it
wasn't
a
close
call.
N
Properties
were
in
foreclosure,
buildings,
weren't
getting
built,
and
we
were
in
a
completely
different
environment,
not
to
mention
our
budgetary
issues,
so
this
plan
stopped
making
sense
I.
It
was
well
intended.
I
will
realize
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
went
into
it,
but
it
started
in
2006
and
by
the
time
it
actually
got
adopted.
The
reality
had
changed
so
I
had
no
interest
in
codifying
this.
N
I
don't
want
to
see
Davis
Street
filled
with
ten
storey
buildings,
and
you
know
the
way
we've
been
doing
it
with
a
thoughtful
public
process
to
evaluate
the
projects
that
have
been
for
us,
I
think
has
been,
has
been
fairly
effective.
These
projects
have
been
very
well
vetted,
they've
evolved
over
time
and
I.
Think
the
ones
that
have
been
built
ended
up
being
a
good
positive
contribution
to
the
community
Thank.
P
Thank
You
mr.
mayor,
this
is
it's
like
almost
everything
that
comes
before
us.
This
gets
really
complicated
and
I
I
understand
the
frustration
of
the
public
I.
You
know
we,
we
have
a
plan
that
a
lot
of
them
worked
on
what's
happening.
Right
now
doesn't
seem
to
reflect
that
plan,
but
I
think
alderman
Wilson
explained
it
pretty
well
I
mean
looking
looking
at
it
and
I.
Remember
this.
P
I
mean
I
can't
support
the
the
destruction
of
what
I
is
the
1700
block
of
Sherman
Avenue,
but
I
I
feel
really
strongly
that,
for
example,
the
area
in
the
fifth
Ward
that
is
now
small-scale,
affordable,
single-family
houses,
many
of
which
are
being
rented
out.
The
north
downtown
plan
envisioned
perhaps
replacing
those
houses
with
larger
buildings
to
accommodate
students
and
other
people
who
wanted
to
live
close
to
transit,
oriented
development.
P
That
goes
contrary
to
what
I
think
we
should
be
doing
and
that
is
creating
affordable
housing
for
families
and
other
folks
who
want
to
live
in
a
house
and
not
necessarily
in
a
large
building.
All
of
that
and
I'm
only
one
of
nine
people
on
the
council
I
mean
I,
get
to
have
an
opinion,
but
my
opinion
has
to
mesh
with
my
eight
colleagues
here
and
we
need
to
discuss
these
things
and
bring
them
forward
with
with
the
help
of
the
public
and
work
on
this
together.
P
That's
the
other
point
that
mr.
Lenoir
brought
up
I
thought
was
was
really
good
and
I.
Think
people
may
not
understand
that
planned
developments
really
do
offer
the
seller
of
the
property
a
way
to
capitalize
on
their
investment
in
the
property.
Obviously,
if
a
larger
building
can
be
built
under
the
plan
development
process,
the
seller
of
the
property
is
going
to
benefit
more
if
a
larger
sales
price
for
the
real-estate,
rather
than
a
smaller
building.
P
That
would
not
realize
as
much
for
the
for
the
seller
and
that's
something
that
we
we
have
control
over
through
zoning
and
how
we,
how
we
send
that
message.
It's
something
that
we're
going
to
have
to
deal
with
we're
gonna
have
to
deal
with
it
with
affordable
housing.
We're
gonna
have
to
deal
with
it
with
you
know
again
with
the
buildings
that
come
in
and
are
not
necessarily
what
we
think
represents
the
best
design
for
our
our
city.
P
I
fought
really
hard
for
the
library
parking
lots,
building
to
be
as
beautiful
and
as
low
and
as
compatible
as
possible
and
I
see
what
we
ended
up
there
as
a
victory.
Is
that
victory
the
same
victory,
we're
going
to
have
in
other
parts
of
the
downtown
I?
Don't
think
so,
but
how
we
deal
with
that?
Do
we
scrap
the
planned
development
process?
I'm
not
ready
to
do
that.
Well,
no
I
mean
do
you
want
this
I?
P
P
P
O
Thank
You
mr.
mayor
well,
I
have
a
lot
of
things
to
say
and
I
think
having
been
on
the
council
when
we
did
adopt
this
plan
and
I
completely
acknowledge
that
the
world
turned
upside
down
with
the
Great
Recession
and,
and
it
is
even
continuing
that
we
all
know
that
retail
is
turning
upside
down
again.
So
I
understand
10
years
later
that
if
we
hadn't
had
the
Great
Recession,
this
plan
might
still
make
some
sense
to
some
people.
O
There
are
aspects
of
it
that
I
still
think
that
we
all
would
share
share
our
view
of
so
I
mean
there
there.
It
also
was
written
at
a
time
when
we
had
the
pressure
of
the
tower
and
I.
For
those
of
you
don't
remember,
I
voted
over
and
over
and
over
against
the
tower,
so
the
only
silver
lining,
the
only
silver
lining
to
the
recession
was
it
stopped
the
tower
so.
O
But
the
point
of
this
downtown
plan
is
exactly
what
I
think
Sarah
red,
which
is
piecemeal.
Development
is
terrible.
It
is
absolutely
terrible.
We
should
not
be
in
a
position
where
we
are
doing
individual
negotiations
over
every
property.
That's
actually
what
caused
us
to
try
and
come
up
with
zoning
that
the
community
could
count
on
and
frankly
that
the
development
community
could
count
on
so
that
people
weren't
coming
in
and
girding
for
a
long
battle.
O
We
have
done
that
a
number
of
times
in
Evanston
much
to
the
exhaustion
of
the
community
and
the
discouragement
of
positive
development,
and
so
the
point
was
to
draft
a
downtown
plan
that
gave
the
community
some
sense
of
certainty
about
what
would
happen
in
their
neighborhood.
So
they
didn't
have
to
be
on
high
alert
and
know
the
zoning
code
forwards
and
backwards
in
order
to
get
in
here
and
and
fight
over
it,
and
that
the
development
community
could
know
that
they
should
not
even
come
forward
with
a
25
story.
O
Building
in
a
place
that
we
have
decided
a
25
story
building
will
never
be
built.
So
what
developers
that
we
adhere?
This
all
the
time
developers
want
certainty
and
the
community
wants
certainty.
That's
why
we've
had
battles
when
there
had
been
surprises
or
when
the
zoning
is
up
for
grabs.
I,
completely
appreciate
Jeanne
Lynn
Wells
point
about
Planned
Unit
development.
The
reason
why
we
put
Planned
Unit
development
sin
place
was
because
that's
what
our
lawyers
told
us
was
the
only
way
in
which
we
could.
O
We
could
have
some
say
over
the
quality
of
the
building
that
was
built.
We
had
too
many
really
cheap
buildings
built
and
we
all
can
think
of
them
right
away
in
the
late
90s
and
in
Evanston,
and
the
solution
for
that
was
by
making
everything
a
Planned,
Unit
development
that
we
could
say
to
the
developer.
You
know
the
marvelous
brick
and
the
terrific
glass
that
you
showed
us.
You
have
to
build
that.
You
know
that's
a
requirement
now
in
the
Planned
Unit
development.
O
O
You
know
they're
like
stacked
up
like
planes
coming
into
O'hare,
and
none
of
us
I
will
say:
I'm
not
happy
about
it,
because
zoning
and
Evanston
prides
itself
on
being
the
first
city
in
Illinois
to
have
a
zoning
ordinance
and
part
of
it
is
because
it's
a
jigsaw
puzzle,
and
we
all
agree
that
this
will
go
here
and
that
will
go
next
to
it
and
you
have
some
sense
of
of
what
your
community
will
look
like.
But
if
you
change
one
of
those
pieces
it
wrecks
the
jigsaw
puzzle.
O
So
that's
why
we
had
a
whole
downtown
planning
process,
because
we
recognized
that
there
was
pressure
on
our
downtown
to
do
to
do
things
that
we
as
a
community
didn't
didn't
necessarily
want
to
do
so.
There
was
a
long
process
now.
Is
this
exactly
what
we
should
be
doing
now?
I'm,
not
entirely
sure
I
don't
entirely
agree,
but
I
do
know.
I
really
really
think
it's
terrible
for
us
to
have
a
negotiation
one
by
one
by
one,
because
we
will
lose
I
mean
they
will
come
in
and
site
site.
O
You
know
gradually
we'll
get
pushed
off.
What
our
vision
is-
and
you
know
if
developers
think
that
having
a
Planned
Unit
development
means
they
can,
they
can
go
big,
then
we
need
to
say
no,
you
can't
you
know
the
purpose
of
a
Planned
Unit
development
was
to
have
quality
control
over
the
building
and
give
us
more
ability
to
say
no
to
certain
things
on.
In
my
mind
and
I
was
on
the
council
when
we
adopted
that
it
didn't
mean
it
was
a
free-for-all.
O
That
was
never
the
understanding
of
what
we
were
doing
when
we
adopted
the
Planned
Unit
development.
So
you
know
I'm,
I'm,
puzzled,
I,
think
moratoriums
and
I
did
vote
for
the
one
in
2007
moratoriums
are
difficult.
They
put
the
city
at
risk
of
liability,
I
see
why
communities
do
it
because
they
recognize
that
things
are
coming
at
them
pell-mell
and,
and
they
really
need
an
opportunity
to
take
a
deep
breath.
O
O
Alderman
Bernstein
worked
hard
to
make
sure
that
K
section
was
dropped
down
to
four
to
eight
stories,
alderman
rein.
You
might
remember
that
so
I'm
not
sure
where
this
leaves
us
I
think
we
I
I
thank
alderman
Ravel
for
making
for
getting
us
going
talking
about
this,
because
we
all
needed
to
read
this
again
and
have
the
discussion
about.
O
Where
do
we
go
from
here,
but
what
fundamentally,
what
I
think
is
unfair
to
us
as
a
community
and
unfair
to
frankly,
the
good
developers
who
might
want
to
invest
in
our
community
is
to
have
it
go
piecemeal.
One
I
mean
we
won't
end
up
with
a
community
that
we
all
want
to
live
in.
If
we
do
that,
Thank.
L
Well,
I
thank
the
council
for
advancing
this
discussion
of
the
downtown
plan
it
had
been
scheduled
for
the
end
of
October
and
I
did
want
us
to
have
an
opportunity
to
reread
or
read
for
the
first
time
perhaps
the
downtown
plan
before
we
start
dealing
with
these
planned
developments
that
are,
as
alderman
Wynn
said,
circling
the
they
are
port
and
ready
to
land.
I
I
agree
that
we're
in
a
quandary
as
to
I,
don't
think
any
of
us
are
totally
happy
totally
is
even
too
strong
a
word
with
the
this
zone.
L
The
the
way
the
zones
are
designated
in
this
downtown
plan.
I
think
a
lot
of
us
would
want
to
I
think
the
the
world
Evanston
has
changed.
A
lot
in
the
world
has
changed
a
lot
in
the
last
almost
10
years,
since
the
process
of
planning
had
started.
So
what
what's
envisioned
there
is
is
not
what
we
really
want
in
many
respects
for
the
downtown,
but
nonetheless
the
plan
I
think
has
a
lot
of
really
good
planning
concepts
in
it.
That
will
serve
us.
L
Well,
as
we
begin
to
evaluate
the
various
plan
development
proposals
coming
to
us
and
I
guess,
there
were
four
concepts
that
struck
me
as
I
was
reading
the
plan,
and
one
is
I
mean
I'm
I,
do
think
tall
or
denser
mixed-use
development
in
the
downtown
core
that
takes
advantage
of
our
public
transit
is,
is
good
policy,
good
planning
policy,
it's
good
environmental
policy.
It
helps
reduce
climate
pollution.
It's
good
economic
policy
because
it
provides
good
support
for
our
downtown
business
and
retail
community,
so
height
bonus.
L
A
bonus
is
okay
in
the
core
area,
but
it
really
needs
to
be
in
exchange
for
significant
public
benefits.
We
have
the
phrase
public
benefits
in
a
lot
of
our
documents,
but
we
really
need
to
I
guess
have
another
discussion
at
another
time
about
what
those
public
benefits
really
should
be
in
order
to
award
the
height
bonuses,
and
then
we
need
to
really
decide
how
much
of
a
height
bonus
we're
willing
to
that.
We
want
to
see
in
our
downtown
in
the
various
areas.
So
that's
a
challenge.
L
Secondly,
we've
heard
a
lot
tonight
about
trying
to
maintain
Evanston's,
unique
local
flavor,
it's
character,
etc.
Balancing
the
old
and
the
new
and
I-
and
that
is
really
important
and
I-
think
the
plan
does
try
to
do
that
by
identifying
those
transition,
those
traditional
zones,
and
so
we
need
to
work
hard,
I
think
to
try
to
keep
those
I
think
when
people
we
want
our
downtown
to
be
something
other
than
going
out
to
Old
Orchard.
We
want
to
have
some
of
those
special
shops
that
give
Evanston
real
character.
L
L
And
so
it
says
in
the
downtown
plan
that
all
floors
above
the
fourth
floor
must
be
setback,
a
mini
minimum
of
ten
feet
from
the
building
lines,
so
that
so
you
create
so
as
you're
walking
along
as
a
pedestrian.
You
don't
feel
like
there's
a
looming
tower
above
you,
it
also
suggested
that
we
count
above
great
parking
floors
when
we're
looking
at
the
height
of
a
building.
L
That
would
be
that
would
be
in
a
have
an
important
impact
on
some
of
the
development
proposals,
we're
going
to
look
at
and
basically
try
to
promote
a
more
slender
building
profile
in
those
buildings
that
are
going
to
be
taller.
So
those
are
some
ideas
that
struck
me
as
I
was
reading
this
and
that
I
will
be
personally
using
as
I
evaluate
the
planned
developments
coming
to
us.
Thank.
P
You
mr.
mayor
I,
just
wanted
really
briefly
to
say:
I
see,
Annie
Coakley
sitting
back
there
and
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if
Annie
and
our
economic
development
staff
got
together
and
gave
us
a
list
of
who
the
retail
tenants
are
in
the
downtown.
My
sense
of
what's
happening
in
the
downtown
is
that
well,
the
larger
tenants
and
the
new
new
spaces
that
are
at
market
rates
are
difficult
to
fill.
P
We
don't
have
quite
so
much
problem,
filling
the
older,
less
expensive
retail
spaces
and
the
Class
B
office
space,
Class,
B
office
space
includes
our
therapists.
Our
architects
are
all
those
folks
who
don't
want
to
pay
the
cost
of
going
into
a
larger
class
a
space
but
want
to
be
in
the
downtown
and
I
think,
as
I
said
in
my
previous
remarks,
I
think
those
are
the
folks
who
stick
with
us
over
the
long
term
and
while
retail
certainly
is
changing,
and
it
will
be
interesting
to
see
what
happens
with
the
Target
store.
P
A
H
N
You,
pursuant
to
v
Illinois
compiled
statutes.
Ilcs
1
20/2
am
of
the
City
Council
convene
into
executive
session
to
discuss
agenda
items
regarding
litigation.
These
agenda
items
are
permitted
subjects
to
be
considered
an
executive
session
and
are
enumerated
exceptions
under
the
Open
Meetings
Act.
These
exceptions
are
5,
ILCs,
120,
/,
2a
and
c11.
Is
there.