►
From YouTube: Land Use Commission Meeting 4-30-2022
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).
A
All
right
good
evening
and
welcome
this
is
the
march
30th
2022
public
hearing
of
the
land
use
commission.
The
city
code
directs
this
body
to
hear
applications
for
map
and
text
amendments
special
uses,
including
plan
developments,
zoning
relief
and
appeals
from
decisions
of
the
zoning
administrator,
as
well
as
to
make
recommendations
regarding
the
city's
long-term
planning
goals
and
objectives
depending
on
the
type
of
matter.
This
commission
will
either
be
a
make
a
final
determination
or
send
its
recommendation
on
to
city
council.
Ms
jones,
would
you
please
call
the
roll.
C
D
E
A
Present
so
with
seven
members
present,
we
do
have
a
quorum
also
present
tonight
from
city
staff,
our
neighborhood
land
use,
planner,
megan
jones
assistant
city
attorney,
I'm
assuming
that's
mr
george,
brian
george.
A
Okay,
just
now
with
the
sevenson
city
attorney,
I'm
never
sure
exactly
who's
here
with
us
and
zoning
administrator
melissa
klotz.
This
is
a
formal
hearing
and
there
are
rules
that
govern
our
proceedings.
Most
importantly,
only
one
person
speaks
at
a
time,
so
all
testimony
may
be
accurately
recorded.
A
Anyone
who
wishes
to
address
the
commission
regarding
any
matter
on
tonight's
agenda
will
have
the
opportunity
to
do
so
at
the
appropriate
time.
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
at
any
time.
Our
procedure
is
to
hear
from
staff
on
the
documents
on
file
and
then
receive
testimony
and
other
evidence
from
the
applicant
or
appellate
after
that.
Persons
wishing
to
make
a
statement
regarding
the
matter
will
have
a
chance
to
do
so.
Any
person
with
a
legal
interest
in
property
located
within
the
defined
notification
requirements
of
the
subject.
A
Property
may
present
evidence
reasonably
question
witnesses
or
seek
a
continuance
of
the
hearing.
When
all
supporting
and
opposing
testimony
and
statements
have
been
heard,
the
applicant
or
appellant
will
be
given
an
opportunity
for
rebuttal
or
to
make
a
closing
statement.
Then
the
commission
will
close
the
record
and
begin
deliberations
to
consider
the
standards.
A
A
When
testifying,
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
since
we're
online
still,
if
you
would,
if
you
want
to
be
recognized
when
we
get
to
the
citizen
comments
section,
if
you
would
please
just
raise
your
hand-
and
I
will
call
on
you
as
I
see
hands
go
up,
our
meetings
are
audio
and
video
recorded.
Please
make
sure
that
your
microphone
and
video
is
turned
on
when
you
are
asking
questions
or
making
statements
so
that
it
can
be
properly
recorded.
A
I
would
ask
also
that,
if
you
are
not
as
if
you
are
not
actively
engaged
by
making
a
statement
or
asking
questions
to
please
mute
yourself,
so
we
don't
have
background
noise.
All
proceedings
are
subject
to
broadcast
at
a
later
date.
Any
matter
not
concluded
at
tonight's
hearing
will
be
continued
until
our
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting
our
agenda.
This
evening
we
have
three
issues:
the
first
issue,
which
is
under
new
business,
a
for
a
public
hearing
for
a
map,
amendment
22
plnd0017
that
has
been
withdrawn
from
this
agenda.
A
The
staff
will
be
re-noticing
that
for
a
future
date.
So
if
you
showed
up
to
speak
to
us
tonight
on
the
map,
amendment
regarding
central
street
crawford
rose
point
road.
We
will
not
be
hearing
that
this
evening,
but
it
will
be
re-noticed
to
a
later
date
mid-may.
Is
that
what
I
understood
to
be
the
approximate
time
for
that.
G
Correct
it
will
likely
be
be
put
back
on
the
agenda
in
may.
We
are
aiming
to
put
it
on
an
agenda
where
there
will
be
another
case
in
that
same
neighborhood,
so
that
hopefully
neighbors
have
fewer
meetings
that
they
need
to
attend.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
the
other
item
that
we
have
on
the
agenda
that
is
2356
colfax
terrace.
I
see
the
applicant
is
here
and
then
the
last
item
is
just
a
another
business
item
for
us
to
discuss
our
rules.
So
with
that,
I
will
ask
at
this
point
anybody
who
may
be
speaking
to
us
on
any
of
the
matters
presented
to
us
tonight
to
please
take
an
oath.
A
A
H
A
I
do
thank
you
and
you
can
go
ahead
and
mute
yourself
and
turn
off
your
your
your
cameras
again.
If
you'd,
like
the
first
item
we
have
on
our
agenda
this
evening,
is
the
approval
of
our
meeting
minutes
for
march
9
2022..
A
A
He
was
marked
as
absent,
so
I
don't
know.
Maybe
if
you
could
look
at
the
recording,
I
don't
recall
who
made
that
second,
if
the
person's
here
and
remembers
that
they
did.
A
It
may
have
been
we'll
just
check,
we'll
check
the
video
to
make
sure
we
get
the
accurate
recording
of
who
who
actually
seconded
the
motion
any
other
any
other
issues
with
the
minutes
hearing
none
is
there
a
motion
to
accept
our
minutes.
A
H
A
Yes,
with
that,
I
think
everybody
voted,
so
that
would
be
a
7-0
vote.
The
motion
are,
the
minutes
are
approved
with
that
one
change
on
on
who
made
the
second
again.
We
are
not
hearing
the
map
amendment
if
someone
joined
us
late
this
evening
that
will
be
re-noticed
to
a
later
time,
and
so
we
will
move
on
to
our
next
item
of
new
business,
which
is
2357
2356,
colfax,
terrace,
22
zmjv0018
is
miss
klotz
reading
this
one
into
the
record.
If
you
would
do
so,
please
thank
you.
G
Thank
you,
chair
rogers,
sarah
and
patrick
hillman.
Property
owners
submit
for
major
zoning
relief
in
the
evanston
zoning
ordinance
for
additions
to
a
single
family
residence
in
the
r1
single
family,
residential
district.
The
applicant
requests
zoning
relief
for
46.1
percent
impervious
surface
coverage
where
a
maximum
45
percent
is
allowed
section.
G
A
six
foot
and
seven
point:
three
foot
solid
fence
in
the
front
yard,
where
fencing
is
not
permitted
within
the
front
yard
yard
or
within
three
feet
of
the
front
facade
of
the
house
and
not
over
four
feet
in
height
or
seventy
percent
opacity
section
six,
four
6467
the
land
use
commission
is
the
final
determining
body
for
this
case
per
section.
6389
of
the
evanston
zoning
ordinance
and
ordinance.
92021.
G
A
A
A
Right
so
this
is
this:
is
we're
talking
about
the
fence
that
runs
basically
from
the
bike
room
roughly
that
portion
of
it
from
the
bike
room
to
the
middle
of
the
cul-de-sac,
property
line,
correct,
okay,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
have
the
right
ones
here
mark
for
people
following
along.
This
is
on
page
66,
since
we
skipped
ahead
here
in
our
packet,
so
mr
hillman
welcome
back,
and
if
you
would
please
tell
us
about
the
changes
in
your
proposal.
J
Yeah,
well,
I
think
you
know
I'm
gonna
keep
it
short,
because
I
think
we
heard
you
folks
pretty
loud
and
clear.
Last
time
there
was
just
you
know,
there
was
too
many
variations
that
we
requested,
and
so
you
know
we
worked
really
closely
with
melissa
and
the
entire
staff
to
get
it
down
to
just
the
three
which
were
critical
for
us
to
move
forward
the
project
so
that
we
can
really
well
really
three
things
number
one.
We
want
to
be
able
to
build
a
house
that
will
house
a
growing
family
of
four.
J
We
want
to
be
able
to
maintain
the
look
and
feel
of
the
neighborhood,
the
light
airiness
and
not
encroach
on
our
neighbors
any
more
than
we
would
like
to,
or
they
would
like
us
to.
We
want
to
protect
the
trees.
You
know
we
brought
in
an
expert
to
help
us
and
help
joe
decide
how
to
help
build
a
house,
so
we
can
keep
all
the
trees
that
are
on
the
property
and,
most
importantly,
we
want,
to
you
know,
add
to
the
to
the
neighborhood
in
a
way.
J
That's
both,
you
know
beneficial
to
a
property
that
has
been
vacant
for
almost
20
years
again,
allow
for
that
green
space
block
out
some
of
that
alley
light
and
have
a
say,
a
safe
space
for
children
to
be
able
to
go
and
play
and
not
be
have
access
directly
to
an
alley.
I
want
to
thank
melissa
and
her
team,
like
they
worked
really
close
with
us
and
and
compromised
with
us
and
and
helped
us
find
like,
I
think,
the
right
path
forward
and
so
we're
pretty
happy
with
kind
of
where
this
landed.
J
I
think
the
the
most
of
the
changes
are
really
just
again
moving
slightly
closer
to
our
alley
line.
Although
again
still
we've
had
that
fence
there
for
the
last
50
years
and
we're
not
building
up
on
that
fence
line.
That
fence
line
has
has
been
there
forever
and
will
continue
to
be
the
standard
fence
line,
but
but
yeah
I
think,
that's
it.
I
know
we've
had
a
number
of
our
neighbors
reach
out
kind
of
on
our
last
call.
J
It
was
kind
of
raised,
as
we
didn't
really
have
a
good
check
on
where
the
neighbors
were
on
this.
So
a
number
of
our
neighbors
were
nice
enough
without
us,
even
asking
to
reach
out
to
various
folks
to
raise
their
support
for
this
project
and
we're
hoping
that
with
a
positive
review
now
from
the
staff.
That
will
also
get
a
positive
outcome
here,
so
that
we
can
start
building
and
not
have
to
abandon
the
project.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
hinman,
our
hillman,
I'm
sorry
hinman's,
the
street
we
have
in
town.
So
with
that,
are
there
any
questions
from
commissioners
for
the
applicant
at
this
moment.
A
I
don't
see
any
so.
I
will
now
open
the
floor
up
to
anyone
who
wishes
to
speak
to
us
on
this
issue.
I
know
there
were
a
couple
people
who
had
before
I
do
that,
though
I
do
want
to
respond.
One
of
the
neighbors,
mr
mr
hillman,
had
had
written
to
staff
and
asked
them
to
forward
that
on
to
me
about
our
last
meeting,
and
I
just
want
to
make
something
clear
and
put
it
kind
of
on
the
public
record.
A
I
don't
respond
to
those
and
it's
not
because
I
don't
want
to
respond
to
those,
but
because
of
the
fact
that
I'm
a
deciding
member
of
this
body,
I
don't
like
to
negotiate
things
and
and
discuss
how
other
commissioners
voted
and
why
they
voted
that
way
or
anything
else
with
anyone
else.
So
that's
that's
the
whole
reason
I
will
not
respond
to
those
and
just
just
putting
that
out
there.
So
it's
not
I'm
ignoring
people.
It's
just
it's
not
appropriate
for
me
to
respond.
A
I
don't
know
if
that
person's
on
the
on
the
line
tonight,
but
I
wanted
to
put
that
out
there,
so
you
don't
have
to
respond
to
me.
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
statement
that
it
would
be
inappropriate
for
me
to
respond
directly
to
people
about
the
actions
of
this
commission.
A
So
with
that
now
I
will
go
to
anyone
if
you
would
just
raise
your
hand
if
you
want
to
speak
to
us
on
the
matter-
and
I
see
you,
sir,
but
I
don't
know
what
your
name
is,
so
you
can
go
ahead
and
unmute
yourself
and
give
us
your
name
and
address.
Please
you're
still,
muted.
K
I
live
at
I'm
a
property
owner
at
2346,
colfax,
terrace
and
my
property
is
proposed
immediately
adjacent
of
any
property
other
than
the
alley
to
this
property
under
discussion,
my
wife
and
I
have
lived
with
the
fact
that
this
residence,
as
it
exists
now,
has
been
vacant
for
over
20
years
and
is
in
a
state
of
marginal
disrepair
and
abandonment,
and
we
are
really
excited
about
the
hillman's
proposal.
K
We
are
excited
on
several
levels.
One
is
we
feel
like
it's
appropriate
for
the
space,
whereas
there
could
be
the
possibility
of
horrendous
mcmansion
type
ex
expressions
there
and
that's
not
what
this
is
and
we're
thrilled,
so
the
appearance,
the
location
of
the
property,
the
fact
that
it's
not
it's
not
encroaching,
it's
not
encroaching
inappropriately
on
our
space
and
the
just
the
care
with
which
the
humans
have
taken
to
make
it
usable
to
make
it
appropriate
for
the
the
cul-de-sac
have
just
been
terrific.
K
K
I
would
hope
that
we
could
embrace
some
amendment
and
some
some
some
some
regulations
that
really
have
don't
quite
apply
to
this
site,
but
are
being
applied
here
and
look
at
the
thing
through
those
lenses.
So
I
just
want
to
put
in
my
word.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
I
see
the
goldmans
have
turned
on
their
camera,
so
I'll.
Let
them
go
ahead
and
speak
next.
H
Yeah,
I'm
bob
goldman,
my
wife,
ann
ryan,
we're
at
2353
colfax
terrace,
which
is
just
across
the
cul-de-sac
from
the
property
under
discussion,
and
I
think
ann
wanted
to
to
say
something.
I
I
I
believe
the
city
fined
the
owners
at
that
time
because
the
fence
was
falling
apart,
so
it
has
been
a
neighborhood,
eyesore
and
and
completely
dilapidated.
I'm
surprised
that
you
know
kids
haven't
broken
into
the
house
or
or
something
has
happened
to
it
because
of
the
dilapidated
nature.
So
we
have
been
thrilled
that
the
hillmans
have
been
interested
in
joining
the
cul-de-sac.
We're
a
very
tight
knit
little
group
on
this
cul-de-sac
and
we
welcome
them
with
open
arms
and
are
so
pleased
that
they're
willing
to
undertake
the
rehab
of
this
dilapidated
house.
I
So
we
fully
support
and
welcome
them
and
look
forward
to
their
children
growing
up
in
the
cul-de-sac.
We're
the
neighborhood
bike,
riding
bike,
riding
learning
circle
for
every
kid
in
the
neighborhood.
They
come
over
and
ride
in
the
cul-de-sac
because
we
have
so
little
traffic.
So
we
really
welcome
the
hillmans
and
and
hope
that
this
will
go
through
this
evening.
A
Thank
you
was
there
anyone
else
who
wished
to
speak
to
us?
I
don't
think,
there's
that
many
other
people
on
the
line.
A
J
No,
I
think
we'd
just
like
to
thank
everyone
for
their
time
and
particularly
for
our
neighbors,
those
we
know
and
those
we
just
met
on
this
call
for
for
phoning
in
and
providing
that
support.
We
really
appreciate
and
thank
you
melissa
to
you
as
well
for
all
of
your
support
over
the
last
couple
of
weeks
too.
Thank
you.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
hillman.
Seeing
nobody
else
who
wants
to
speak
on
the
matter?
I
will
go
ahead
and
close
the
record
so
that
we
can
begin
our
deliberations
and
ask
commissioners
if
there's
anybody
who
would
like
to
start
us
off
on
the
discussion
and
if
not,
I
will
start
us
off
or
commissioner
linvall
start.
F
F
As
as
you
know,
I
voted
for
the
last
scheme
and
I'm
happy
about
a
couple
of
things.
One
is
that
mr
hillman
did
not
sell
the
property
and
has
come
back
to
us
with
a
I.
I
consider
a
slightly
revised
scheme,
although
the
numbers
of
the
variations
have
come
down
quite
a
bit.
So
the
second
thing
is
that
I
always
thought
that
the
the
concept
for
the
the
site
was,
and
it's
a
very
unique
site-
and
I
kind
of
agree
that
all
the
zoning
regulations
really
don't
apply
to
this
site.
F
D
Okay-
and
I
appreciate
the
the
that
the
number
of
variations
has
been
greatly,
you
know
reduced,
and
I
think
my
one
comment
is
that,
just
in
terms
of
maintenance
and
and
dealing
with
leaves
that
are
going
to
fall,
you
know.
D
Go
ahead,
I
was
getting
some
feedback
there
yeah.
I.
I
just
think
that
that
you
know
you
ought
to
think
about.
You
know,
rather
than
a
1.5
north
interior
side,
your
yard,
you
might
want
to
consider
going
to
two
or
two
and
a
half
feet.
If
you,
you
know
if
you
can
just
because
I
think
it
may
make
maintenance
easier
in
the
long
run.
Although
that's
you
know,
I'm
I'm!
Okay
with
you
know
the
1.5
setback.
D
D
It's
just
yeah,
but
that's
my
only
real
real
comment.
I
I
think
that
the
the
front
and
and
rear
yard-
or
I
guess
it's-
the
fence
and
the
and
the
rear
yard
setbacks
are
certainly
appropriate.
L
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
so
I
I
will
join
my
colleagues,
I
like
the
project
and
I
would
say
it's.
It's.
L
Good
project
and
a
kind
of
a
innovative
project-
and
my
my
vote
will
be
yes
for
this
project.
Definitely
the
one.
The
one
note
that
I
will
afford,
and
it
is
just
architecturally
if
you
consider
reducing
the,
I
will
call
it
the
weight
of
the
fences
in
a
manner
that
they
are
much
more
appropriate,
either
with
vines
with
something
else.
I
am
afraid
that
the
inappropriate
material,
for
instance,
will
make
them
look
too
heavy,
and
I
actually
really
like
the
inventive
thinking
of
making
the
fireplace
part
of
the
house.
L
I
really
like,
but
once
again
I
would
advise
to
be
considerate
about
the
weight
visually
of
these
things
that
are
out
of
the
house.
So
these
are
my
comments.
Thank
you.
A
If
not,
I
will
just
go.
I
appreciate
the
the
reduction
in
the
number
of
variances.
You
know,
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
we
try
to
to
keep
projects
as
close
to
the
zoning
ordinance
as
we
can.
The
one.
The
one
problem
I
I
do
still
have
with
this
is:
is
the
1.5
north
interior
side
yard
setback
because
of
the
fact
that
I
think
that
could
be
easily
accommodated
by
shifting
that
portion
of
the
house
south
and
so
that
that's
the
one
that
I
just
really
struggle
with
here.
A
I
have
no
problem
with
the
rear
yard.
I
think
the
fence
in
the
front
yard,
as
long
as
we're
talking
along
the
alley
there
is
highly
appropriate
and
is
is
very,
is
very
important,
especially
on
this
type
of
a
property
where
you
look
into
an
alley.
So
as
people
come
to
the
front
of
their
homes
on
the
cul-de-sac,
they
aren't
looking
at
trash
cans
in
the
back
of
garages,
and
everything
like
that,
so
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
those
two
variations.
A
I
I
still
have
a
problem
with
the
1.5,
but
I
think
I'm
kind
of
in
the
minority
on
that.
So
I
guess
we
will
go
ahead
and
go
through
our
standards.
All
right.
F
Can
I
ask
a
question
and
sort
of
make
a
comment
on
on
your
comment,
commissioner.
The
north
clarification,
the
north
yard
setback.
The
1.5
is
along
the
alley.
F
And
typically,
we
don't
have
in
evanston
large
setbacks
along
the
alley.
My
my
fence
is
right
on
my
la
property
line.
It
just
so
happens
that
this
is
such
a
unique
situation
here
that
it
falls
under
a
different
category,
but
it,
but
I
think
we
need
to
recognize
that
it
is
the
alley
the
reality
it
is
the
alley
it.
A
Is
the
alley
and
our
alleys
do
require
a
three-foot
setback
on
garages?
Fences
are
different,
but
any
structure
we
require
a
three-foot
setback
on
and
this
is
a
side
yard,
not
a
rear
yard.
It's
a
uniqueness
to
this
property
and
I
don't
think
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
convince
each
other
here.
I
think
I've
made
my
point
and
you've
kind
of
made
your
point
and
I
think
we
disagree
on
it.
F
A
A
You
know
just
in
general
comments
so,
rather
than
keeping
us
here
late
with
you
and
I
discussing
philosophies,
I
think
we'll
we'll
go
ahead
and
move
through
the
standards
and
as
I
mentioned,
you
know
I
I
support
the
other
two.
It's
that
one
in
particular
that
I
have
a
problem
with.
So
in
order
to
make
a
determination
of
any
any
property
variations,
we
must
find
that
seven
standards
are
met
and
the
if
we
feel
that
they
can
be
met
through
applying
conditions
on
properties.
A
I
believe
that
this
standard
has
met.
We've
heard
discussion
about
how
this
is
a
property
that
sat
vacant
for
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
of
20
years.
You
know
and
driving
by
and
looking
at
the
property,
obviously
there's
not
been
much
done
to
it.
It
exists
only
because
it
was
built
well
at
the
time
it
was
built,
but
it's
not
been
maintained
for
some
period
of
time.
So
obviously
improving
this
property
will
will
bring
property
values
up
in
this
neighborhood.
A
So
I
believe
that
standard
is
met.
Number
two.
The
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
This
one
is
obviously
we
we.
We
want
people
to
try
to
redevelop
decrepit
and
I'll
use
that
term.
I
guess
it's
not
necessarily
appropriate
for
this
particular
building,
though
that
has
been
somewhat
run
down
and
and
empty
for
the
past
20
years
we
seek
to
have
those
redeveloped
where
we
can.
A
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
is
also
met.
Number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
This
is
one
where
I
think
on
the
two
that
I
I
believe
should
be
met,
which
are
the
rear
yard
and
the
fence
along
the
front
yard.
I
believe
those
are
both
met.
I
have
a
problem
with
this
one
for
the
1.5
north
yard.
A
Setback,
but
I
think
that
I'm
in
the
minority
there-
probably
the
only
one-
maybe
even-
who
feels
that
way,
so
I
don't
believe
it
has
met,
but
I
believe
that
a
number
of
my
other
commissioners
believe
that
it
has
been
the
property
number.
Four.
The
property
owner
would
suffer
a
pr,
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty,
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience
that
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out.
A
I'll
kind
of
reiterate
my
finding
on
three,
I
don't
think
that
the
the
the
movement
of
the
north
property
or
the
north
wall,
two
at
least
three
feet
or
possibly
even
the
five
feet.
I
think
that's
that's
not
going
to
to
put
the
project
in
jeopardy
or
drastically
change
things
to
a
point
that
it
creates
a
hardship
for
them,
but
I
believe
that
again,
I'm
in
the
minority
there
and
that
most
of
the
other
commissioners
believe
that
that
has.
That
is
not
the
case.
Commissioner
lindwall
did
mention.
A
You
know
consider
if
this
is
your
plan,
how
you
rake
leaves
from
the
trees
things
like
that
if
you've
got
a
very
small
space
in
between
the
wall
and
a
fence
along
there
number
five,
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property.
This
particular
property
the
homeowner
intends
to
build
and
live
in.
They
are
not
building
anything
that
that
that
would
would
generate
an
income
for
them.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
A
Number
six,
the
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship-
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property.
This
one
again,
it's
we've.
We've
heard
lots
of
discussion
about
how
it's
a
somewhat
weird
property,
because
you
have
a
slant
along
the
the
rear
yard,
which
is
poplar,
and
you
have
the
cul-de-sac
and
the
property.
Actually
the
mid.
A
The
front
yard
property
line
begins
in
the
middle
of
the
cul-de-sac,
so
it
is,
it
is
a
unique
property
and
those
conditions
have
not
been
created
by
mr
hillman,
so
I
believe
that
standard
is
met
and
number
seven.
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
this
before
this
body.
Again,
I
will
say,
I
think,
on
the
two
variations
that
have
been
requested
regarding
the
rear
yard
and
the
fencing
across
the
front
yard
to
screen
the
alley.
I
have
no
problem
with
those.
A
I
still
have
a
problem
with
the
1.5
side
yard
setback
on
the
north
side
of
the
property
along
the
alley.
Does
anybody
want
to
add
anything
to
my
findings
on
those
standards.
L
So
there
is
no
fence
over
there
and
I
I
I
think
that
there
will
be
no
problem
with
leaves
or
serving
this
part
of
the
yacht.
That's
why
I
think
that
it's
it's
okay
with
me.
Okay,.
A
Seeing
no
one,
I
will
ask
miss
jones.
If
she
would
please
call
the
role
or
I'm
sorry.
I
need
a
motion.
First
on
22
zmjv0018
for
colfax
terrace.
D
There
are
also
conditions
that
dapper
recommended.
D
Okay,
I
I
will
move
approval.
D
Properly,
I
will
move
approval
of
the
requested
variations
for
2356
colfax
terrace
22,
zm
jb-0018.
A
Okay
and
there's
a
second
from
commissioner
halleck
all
right.
Let's
talk
about
the
conditions
that
were
discussed
at
dapper.
I'm
gonna
bring
those
up.
A
So
there
were
a
couple
conditions
and
I
don't
know
miss
clocks
if
you
want
to
chime
in
here.
I
know
this
has
kind
of
been
a
moving
target
somewhat.
So
I
don't
know
if
dapper
looked
at
the
exact
same
plan,
we're
looking
at.
A
Okay,
so
it
appears
that
dapper
had
two
two
conditions
that
they
wanted
to
discuss,
which
was
that
the
bike
room
location
be
revised
to
attempt
compliance
so
miss
klotz.
Do
you
want
to
talk
about
what?
What
exactly
the
concern
was?
There
sure.
G
There
there
was
discussion
about
whether
the
bike
room
could
be
shifted
to
to
the
south
to
comply,
and
it
my
understanding
is
that
it's
tricky
because
of
tree
locations
and
and
how
to
not
impact
roots
the
most
and
it
was
left
as
if
there
is
a
way
to
shift
the
bike
room
without
further
impacting
any
trees
and
also
not
extending
into
the
front
yard
setback
that
that
would
be
a
good
thing,
but
it
that
was,
if
it's
possible,
so
that
that's
why
the
condition
was
stated.
The
way
that
it
was
okay.
A
We'll
just
have
a
quick
little
discussion
on
this.
It
doesn't
appear
that
any
of
the
commissioners
really
have
a
problem
with
the
placement
of
the
bike
room
except
for
me,
so
I
don't
think
that
that
that's
a
condition
that
necessarily
we
are
in
favor
of
putting
in
place
is
that
the
general
just
shaking
your
heads-
yes,
okay
and
the
second
one-
was
the
fence
segment
along
the
alley
between
the
attached
garage
and
poplar
avenue
be
no
taller
than
42
inches.
A
Now
this
would,
they
would
be
required
for
the
site
triangle
to
come
into
play
here.
Is
that
correct?
The
last
eight
feet.
G
The
way
the
zoning
site
triangle
works
it
it
extends
from
if
the
curb
truly
came
to
a
to
a
point
and
it's
measured
out
from
there.
So
the
zoning
site
triangle
is
not
the
best
safety
wise,
so
that
condition
was
requested
by
public
works
to
to
ensure
better
visibility.
So.
G
And
and
the
applicant
did
state
at
dapper
that
they
had
no
problem
with
that.
So.
A
I
saw
him
shake
his
head
during
that
he
just
gave
us
a
thumbs
up
there,
so
I
believe
that's
a
condition
that
we
could
we
could.
We
could
apply
here
and
it
makes
sense
in
order.
The
applicant
has
no
issue
with
it
and
it
does
make
sense
for
safety
to
make
sure
that
anybody
coming
down
the
alley
does
not
hit
anybody
coming
up.
Poplar
avenue,
although
poplar
is
a
dead
end
there,
but
we
don't
want
any
accidents
to
occur,
but
particularly
with
pedestrians,
so
that
would
be
a
condition.
A
I
think
that
we
should
put
into
place.
So
if
there's
a
a
motion
to
add
that
into
the
original
motion,
we'll
take
a
vote
on
that,
then
first.
So
if
somebody
wants
to
make
a
motion
that
the
fence
segment
between
the
alley
and
the
attack
between
the
the
alley
attached
garage
and
poplar
avenue
be
no
taller
than
42
inches
moved
by
puketel.
Is
there
a
second.
D
A
H
D
A
Yes,
so
that's
a
six
to
zero
vote
since
we've
lost
commissioner
cullen,
so
that
will
be
part
of
the
original
motion
so
now
any
other
changes
that
anybody
would
like
to
make
before
we
vote
on
the
original,
and
I'm
gonna
wait
for
just
a
moment
to
make
sure.
Commissioner,
if,
commissioner
colin,
can
you
maybe
reach
out
to
her
and
see
if
she's
trying
to
get
back
and
the
only
reason
I'm
doing
this
is
because
we
need
six
concurring
votes
and
with
only
seven
members
and
me
voting.
A
No,
I
don't
want
to
hold
up
your
project
for
two
weeks,
so
if
we
can
try
to
get
her
back
on
to
cast
that
vote
for
us,
so
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I
will
ask
miss
jones
to
call
the
roll
we'll
take
the
vote.
A
I
will
not
close
and
announce
the
results
of
the
vote
so
that
if
commissioner
cullen
joins
us
back,
we
can
wait
for
that
to
close
out
the
vote.
B
C
C
K
E
A
And
it's
dear
rogers,
my
vote
is
no,
so,
with
a
vote
of
six
to
one,
the
motion
does
carry
so
the
project
is
approved
with
those
three
variations
that
were
requested.
A
A
With
that,
we
will
move
on
to
other
business.
We
have
revisions
to
our
land,
use,
commission
rules
and
procedures,
and
my
understanding
this
is
the
discussion
about
the
concurring
votes
and
how
we're
handling
that,
while
we're
in
a
transition
period
and
trying
to
word
it
so
that
it
makes
sense,
miss
klotz.
Are
you
taking
us
through
this
one
as
well?
I
mean:
do
you
want
to
just
touch
on
it
or.
G
Sure
so
it's
a
revision
just
to
one
paragraph
of
the
rules,
the
way
the
rules
were
written,
they
were
intended
to
be
the
final
rules
when
we
have
our
final
membership
of
nine.
Unfortunately,
that
meant
that
it
was
a
little
unclear
in
in
a
previous
case,
and
our
law
department
asked
us
to
to
clarify
that
even
during
this
transitional
membership,
what
is
the
vote?
A
Yes,
is
there
a
way
that
this
could
be
put
into
the.
A
The
section
on
our
transitional
so
when
we
move
to
a
final
board
of
nine
people
which
we're
getting
very
close
to
we've
already
had
we've
already
lost
one
member,
so
we're
down
to
ten.
Is
there
a
way
that
that
could
be
put
in
there
so
that
when
we
do
our
final
set
of
rules,
we
literally
just
strike
out
the
paragraph
on
the
transitional
board
and
we
have
a
number,
because
I
think
the
wordiness
of
this,
where
it's
accurate,
gets
very
confusing
to
people
who
don't
understand
our
rules.
M
No
law
does
its
law's
opinion
that
having
a
number
just
like
an
actual
specific
number
is
not
a
good
idea.
Just
because
you
know
this
situation
was
pretty
unique,
but
just
on
the
off
chance
that
it
would
happen
again.
M
I
think
it
is
pretty
wordy
just
to
clarify
that
it
is
the
total
number
of
commission
seats
and
not
the
number
of
seated
commissioners,
but
you
know
we
just
wanted
to
err
on
the
side
of
making
it
absolutely
clear,
even
though
it
is
probably
more
verbose
than
you
know
is
ideal
okay,
but
it
is
law's
opinion
that,
having
an
actual
number
there
is
not.
You
know
it
isn't
a
good
idea.
A
All
right,
I
will
defer
to
law
on
that,
although
I
think
this
makes
it
slightly
more
confusing
for
somebody
outside
who's
reading
our
rules
because
of
the
verbosity
of
the
I
don't
know,
if
that's
a
word,
even
verboseness,
of
the
of
the
way
it's
put
as
opposed
to
just
being
able
to
give
a
number,
since
we
are
a
unique
body
with
our
determining
power
and
having
to
have
a
certain
number
of
votes
but
law's
the
one
who,
if
we
ever
go
into
court,
is
going
to
have
to
defend
this.
A
I
don't
have
to
so.
I
was
just
looking
at
a
way
to
try
to
make
it
more
clear
for
people
citizens
who
read
our
rules
and
to
understand
fully
what
we're
talking
about
here.
So
I'm
fine
with
that.
A
The
way
that's
worded,
the
thing
that
I
do
want
to
mention
right
now
is
that,
because
of
this
rule,
it's
vitally
important
that
commissioners
try
to
make
meetings
because
of
the
fact
that,
with
the
determination
aspect
of
this,
as
you
saw
tonight,
if
we
lost
one
person
and
only
had
six
people-
and
we
have
five
people
vote
yes
and
one
person
vote,
no
that
continues
it
for
another
two
weeks.
A
So
I'm
not
talking
to
anybody
necessarily
in
this
room
because
you're
all
here,
but
that
we
should
try
to
make
efforts
to
do
this
because
of
the
fact
that
missing
a
meeting
can
delay
somebody's
project
by
two
weeks.
On
that.
F
Can
I
add
something
to
that
when
I
joined
the
commission
several
years
ago?
F
I
thought
there
was
a
policy
that
said
that
if
you
miss
two
meetings,
maybe
in
a
year
I
don't
remember
exactly,
but
I
know
there
was
something
that
tried
to
you
know
say
that
hey
you
know:
they're
you've
got
to
be
there
and
if
you're
not
there,
if
you.
A
Yes,
so
in
our
rules
we
do
have
I'm
trying
to
find
the
exact
section,
so
I
can
give
you
the
exact
wording.
We
have
placed
something
in
our
rules
so
that
melissa.
Do
you
know
exactly
where
that
is.
G
I
don't
remember
offhand:
we,
we
ended
up
with
a
combination
of
what
the
zoning
board's
old
policy
was
and
what
the
plan
commission's
policy
was.
I
don't
remember
exactly
what
it
is.
I.
A
The
chair
goes
to
the
mayor
because
the
mayor
is
the
one
who
ultimately
has
the
authority
to
remove
members
or
to
discuss
with
members
their
commitment
to
this
board
and
so
that
we
can
actually
do
our
business,
because
when
I
first
joined
zba
we
waited
for
two
months
for
the
seventh
member
to
show
up,
because
we
had
a
three
to
three
vote
and
that
project
was
stalled
for
two
months.
Until
that
person
could
vote
they
came.
A
They
voted
and
resigned
all
in
one
meeting,
but
we
needed
to
have
them
do
that
in
order
for
it
to
happen.
So
you
know
we
do
take
attendance.
A
I
take
note
of
the
attendance
I'm
meeting
with
the
mayor
on
monday,
just
to
sort
of
introduce
myself
to
him
and
kind
of
introduce
him
to
land
use
commission
now
that
we've
kind
of
become
this
different
body,
and
so
that's
one
of
the
things
I
will
be
discussing
with
him
is
that
from
time
to
time,
I
may
be
coming
to
him
asking
him
to
speak
with
people
to
either
reinforce
their
commitment
or
ask
them
to
to
you
know,
move
on
so
that
we
can
have
a
board
that
actually
functions
again.
F
And
I
think
it's
something
that
all
of
us
should
be
reminded
of
too,
because
it's
it's
very
easy
to,
let's
just
say,
look
at
the
agenda
and
say
I'm
not
interested
in
those
subjects.
So
I
don't
attend
and
still
be
a
part
of
the
commission,
which
I
think
is
wrong,
and
so
I
think
everybody
needs
to
be
reminded
of
this
of
this
policy
right.
A
L
Yes,
I
I
have
a
kind
of
a
question
that
probably
will
speak
that
I
did
not
read
all
the
things,
but
in
the
case
that
we
move
back
to
in-person,
will
it
be
allowed
that
some
of
us
are
joining
remotely
or
not.
A
My
understanding
and
I'll-
let
ms
klotz
discuss
this,
but
my
understanding
is
the
city
discourages
that,
because
of
the
staff
that
they
require,
they
require
to
have
technical
staff
on
hand
to
coordinate
the
people
in
the
room
with
the
people
that
are
digitally
there.
For
example,
ms
jones,
right
now,
I
believe,
is
running
our
zoom
meeting,
but
when
we're
in
an
in-person
meeting
with
lots
of
other
activity
going
on
it's
difficult
for
her
to
do
that.
So
we
have
somebody
who
comes
in
in
order
to
do
that.
A
Specifically
so
city
staff
is
not
really
equipped
to
handle
the
hybrid
meetings,
so
they
discourage
those.
A
Any
other
questions
I
mean
we've
gotten
a
little
off
the
main
topic
here,
but
it
all
kind
of
tied
together
with
this.
M
The
edition
of
the
language
that,
referring
to
the
seats,
whether
they're
appointed
or
vacant,
is
meant
to
clarify
that
it
is
the
number
of
seats
that
are.
You
know
on
the
commission
as
a
as
a
whole,
not
the
ones
that
are
currently
occupied.
A
So
when
you
say
mem
when
you
say
members,
you
think
of
the
people
who
are
physically
in
a
seat,
but
we
also
have
to
count
the
empty
seats.
So
if
we
had
four
people
and
there
were
three
empty
seats-
and
this
is
just
an
exaggeration-
we
would
never
be
able
to
do
any
business
because
I
guess
it
would
be
four
and
five.
So.
M
M
Also,
where
you
know
you
can
tinker
with
the
language
a
lot,
but
it
would
you
know
there
still
might
be
some
ambiguity
there.
I
think
the
fact
that
we're
having
this
discussion
and
staff
knows
what
it
means
we
would
be
able
to
clarify
that
that
yes,
it
indeed
is
meant
to
be
the
number
of
commissioned
seats
and
not
the
number
of
seated
commissioners.
At
that
current
moment,.
C
E
Okay,
yeah,
I
see
how
that's
adding
some
clarification,
and
I
I
guess
I
just
do-
have
one
question
which
is
slightly
off
the
topic,
but
can
you
can
the
attorney
maybe
comment
on,
maybe
why
the
approach
is
to
have
concurrent
votes
of
a
majority
of
seats
rather
than
making
sure
there's
a
quorum
one
and
then
having
a
majority
of
the
quorum.
M
M
With
that
number
five
it
was,
it
was
written
as
five
votes
as
needed,
and
you
know
when
it
was
contemplating
a
nine
nine
person
board
and
you
know
like
it,
didn't
make
any
sort
of
what
what
should
I
say
if,
if
the,
if
the
number
of
commissioners
there's
a
vacancy
or
two,
if
those
eight
or
if
it
was
two
vacancies
zone,
seven,
the
number
five
was
still
there.
So
it
was
just
to
remain
consistent
with
that.
M
Whether
you
know
the
the
whether
it's
going
to
be
a
majority
of
a
quorum
or
not,
is
you
know
it?
It
could
be,
but
we're
just
we
just
you
know
state
law.
M
State
laws
would
would
suggest
that
it
should
be
a
majority
of
the
number
of
of
board
seats,
but
since
we're
at
home
I'm
getting
kind
of
the
weeds
here.
But
since
we're
in
a
home
rural
municipality,
we
can
diverge
from
state
law,
but
we're
just
doing
that
to
remain
consistent
with
what
it
was
before.
E
G
Just
just
to
add
on
to
that.
Yes,
when,
when
the
zoning
board
of
appeals
was
the
determining
body,
it
had
seven
members
and
the
ilcs
state
code
that
applies
to
non-home
rule
communities
specifically
says
that
for
final
determinations,
a
zoning
board
must
have
seven
members
and
a
final
determination
must
have
at
least
four
votes,
regardless
of
how
many
members
are
appointed
at
that
time.
Now
that
that
does
not
apply
to
evanston,
because
we
are
home
rule.
But
following
that
best
practice,
we
have.
We
want
to
apply
the
same
thing.
G
E
I
hear
you,
I
guess
I'm
just
I'm,
I'm
getting
a
vibe
that
that
the
concurrent
the
the
the
majority
of
of
concurrent
majority
of
seats
is
presenting
a
bit
of
a
burden
on
on
on
this
group
to
be
able
to
move
things
along
just
in
the
last
few
meetings.
E
You
know
things
have
been
moved,
I
mean
I
mean
we
just
started
this
in
2022
and
we've
already
had
numerous
examples
in
our
meetings
of
cases
being
continued
and
making
sure
we're
like
looking
for
one
vote
and
I'm,
I
guess
I'm
just
expressing
concern
that
I
I
I
think
this
this
burden
might
be
difficult.
A
And
I
think
that
goes
back
to
the
commitment
of
the
commissioners
on
the
board
that
that
we
need
to
have
people
who
are
committed
to
being
here
because
of
the
fact
of
that,
the
you
know
the
downside
of
that
is.
Like
miss
klotz
said
I
mean
we.
If
we
we
have
a
majority,
you
know
our
quorum.
When
we
get
to
nine
is
five,
so
you
can
get.
A
A
K
A
So
that's
a
situation
again
where
it's
nice
to
know
who
is
coming
and
everything
else
right
now,
I'm
happy
when
one
person
is
gone
because
because
we
don't
end
up
with
a
five
to
five
tie
on
things,
but
that's
something
also
to
to
consider
as
well.
A
I
think
we've
kind
of
talked
about
this.
I
don't
know
if
anybody
has
anything
else
they
want
to
add,
if
not
I'll,
just
ask
if
there's
a
motion
to
adopt
the
rules
with
the
changes
that
have
been
proposed
by
law
and
staff.
D
A
Second,
second,
from
lindwall
miss
jones,
would
you
are
any
further
discussion
hearing
none
miss
jones.
Would
you
call
the
role
please.
I
A
Rogers,
yes,
so
with
a
vote
of
seven
to
zero,
the
motion
carries
and
the
new
rules
are
adopted.
Just
a
real
quick
note.
I
found
the
rule
that
we
were
talking
about
earlier.
So
if
a
commissioner
has
has
failed
to
attend
four
consecutive
meetings
is
when
the
we
speak
to
the
mayor
about
removal
from
the
commission.
A
If
somebody
misses
four
months
worth
of
meetings
they're
automatically
removed,
I
can't
see
us
ever
having
somebody
on
the
board
for
four
months
without
them
attending
anything
or
not
having
an
excused
absence
or
something
like
that.
So.
C
Oh
matt,
I
do
have
a
question
so
in
in
my
case
I'm
planning
it
to
go
in
for
surgery.
K
C
A
So
I
would
prefer
that
we
talk
about
this
offline
instead
of
in
a
public
meeting,
because
this
is
a
recorded
public
meeting
and
I
don't
want
you
to
have
to
disclose
anything
or
have
any
discussions.
A
C
A
A
I
will
now
say:
if
there
is
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
any
public
comment?
If
there's
anybody
here
from
the
public
who
wishes
to
address
us
on
any
land
use
issues,
I
see
we
still
have
a
few
members
of
the
public
with
us.
A
A
Second,
from
second
from
commissioner
puktel,
all
those
in
favor-
this
is
not
all
vote.
Please
say
I
I
with
that.
We
stand
adjourned
and
our
next
meeting
will
be
on
april
13th.
B
A
So
april
13th
will
be
our
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
A
A
That
is
scheduled
to
be
in
person
at
this
time,
unless
something
weird
happens
with
the
governor
making
a
different
proclamation.
But
I
don't
I
don't.
Even
we
wouldn't
even
know
that,
because
his
proclamation
runs
through
the
second,
so
we
would
have
to
notice
this
meeting
as
being
an
in-person
meeting
and
we
would
have
to
meet
in
person
to
conduct
any
business.
It.