►
From YouTube: Plan Commission Meeting 6-9-2021
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).
C
A
Okay,
the
next
thing
we
need
is
a
motion
to
suspend
the
rules
to
allow
the
meeting
to
be
conducted
by
zoom.
A
D
E
A
E
A
A
Do
we
have
a
second
actually,
I
think
I
need
to
second
or
george,
or
I
I'll,
second
them.
A
Okay,
any
corrections
or
changes,
not,
I
think
you
can
call
the
roll.
G
G
F
F
A
And
now
could
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes
for
april
14th.
A
Is
there
a
second
a
second
okay?
I
have
a
number
of
changes.
First
of
all,
we
started
the
meeting
at
6
pm,
so
that
needs
to
change
up
at
the
top
and
then
at
the
meeting
was
called
to
order
at
6,
00
pm
and
item
number
one.
A
The
second
thing
is
we're
missing.
I
believe
that
that's
when
I
was
elected
chair
and
commissioner
draper
was
it
elected
vice
chair,
because
it
was
commissioner
isaac's
last
meeting
and
while
he
chaired
the
meeting
there's
you
know
we
we
ought
to
add
that
section
back
in.
I
believe
that's
when
that
happened.
A
Seven
of
the
minutes
for
the
comments
from
alyssa
jamison
in
the
first
line.
She
added
that
the
neighborhood
is
invested
in
development
of
the
lot
and
then
it
should
read.
Daycare
is
good,
not
god
size.
A
A
Then
also
on
page
nine
in
the
second
full
paragraph,
the
you
know
kind
of
next
to
the
last
line.
There's
a
the
she
had.
The
applicant
should
not
be
ashamed
for
running
a
for-profit
business
and
then
it
should
be
in
the
for
profit
aspect
rather
than
he
and
I
think
that's
and
then
at
the
top
of
page
12
we're
discussing
the
the
height
does
not
bother
her
and
the
requested
allowances
are
fairly
minimal,
so
not
should
be
removed,
and
I
think
that
that
concludes
my
suggested.
Corrections.
F
I
move
that
we
accept
the
corrections,
as
noted.
F
All
vote
commissioner
haley.
D
A
A
Ms
jones,
do
we
have
a
is
staff
going
to
make
a
presentation
or
walk
us
through
the
material.
B
All
right:
can
everyone
see
this?
Yes,
okay,
all
right,
so
I
think
the
zoning
committee
is
probably
pretty
familiar
with
what
the
information
that
I'm
going
to
go
over
for
the
most
part.
But
since
there
are
members
of
the
commission
who
have
looked
at
this
in
some
time,
I'll
go
through
everything.
B
So
the
the
text
amendment
that
we're
reviewing
is
actually
made
from
an
ultimate
referral
to
the
plan
commission
that
happened
in
september
of
last
year
and
that
was
to
discuss
and
consider
modifications
to
the
zoning
ordinance
and
to
change
the
occupancy
of
dwelling
units
and
the
definition
of
family.
B
Consideration
of
an
option
to
limit
the
maximum
occupancy
of
all
the
milling
units,
regardless
of
size
to
aids
occupants
whether
related
for
unrelated
and
then.
In
that
case.
Any
dwelling
proposed
for
more
than
eight
occupants
would
then
apply
for
special
needs
as
a
rooming
house.
And
this
would
mean
that
we
would
need
to
make
warming
houses
or
permitted
use
or
special
news
in
all
zone
districts
or.
B
Districts
and
then
also
consideration
of
eliminating
any
reference
to
family
in
the
zoning
regulations
for
the
occupancy
with
running
units
and
the
entire
zoning
ordinance.
So
this
was
initially
brought
to
the
plan
commission
for
discussion
in
november
of
last
year.
That
discussion
began.
The
commission
decided
to
send
this
on
to
the
zoning
committee
for
further
review.
It
was
in
the
zoning
committee
for
several
meetings
in
february
and
then
a
couple
of
meetings
in
april.
K
B
Would-
and
this
is
actually
discussed
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
within
the
alternative
that
are
laid
out
in
the
staff
report,
but
we
have
landlords
submit
floor
plans
when
they
are
applying
for
rental
registration
for
having
floor
plans
be
submitted
at
the
time
where
transfer
stamps
are
being
done
for
the
sale
of
a
house,
and
then
you
would
have
someone
determine
the
maximum
occupancy
at
that
time.
B
We
also
discussed
how
to
enforce
possible
new
or
existing
regulations
as
they
related
to
addressing
nuisances.
This
was
a
good
part
of
the
discussion.
B
In
some
cases,
this
meant
creating
operating
agreements
and
education
once
violations
are
given
and
a
determination
of
like
bill
of
you
found
adhering
to
rental
units
and
realizing
that
owner
occupied
enforcement
is
usually
done
on
a
complaint
basis,
actually
making
sure
trying
to
find
some
way
to
enforce
our
existing
nuisance,
ordinances
and
property
maintenance
codes
and
realizing
the
need
for
additional
staff
in
order
to
properly
go
about
enforcing
the
regulations
and
conduct
inspections.
G
B
But
generally
zoning
is
related
to
land
use
and
the
built
environment,
and
we
do
have
nuisance
ordinances
that
are
within
other
titles
that
are
meant
to
address
nuisances
and
standard
property
standards
for
the
housing
that's
within
evanston
and
at
one
of
the
meetings.
Also,
I
had
a
quick
consideration
of
using
the
recently
approved
administrative
reviews
process
which
right
now
is
in
place
for
commercial
properties
to
create
appropriate,
permitting
process
for
residences,
with
increased
eye
conditioning.
B
So
I
won't
go
into
too
much
detail
on
this
one,
but
this
is
the
existing
definition
of
so
we've
got
four
different
sections
essentially,
and
it's
fairly
lengthy.
The
last
item
item
b
was
actually
pretty
specific
to
the
river
fellowship
staff
did
have
some
conversations
with
them
and
no
one's
even
stepping
over
who
like
who
actually
was
around
at
the
time
when
this
was
put
in
place,
and
they
were
amenable
to
changes
to
the
code
if
it
were
to
be
based
off
of
a
drawing
unit,
configuration
and
square
footage.
B
B
And
referring
back
to
the
property
standards
regulations,
this
is
the
chart
that
pretty
much
just
displays
what
those
are
again.
It's
not
simply
based
on
the
square
footage
of
a
dwelling
unit.
It
also
configured
configures
considers
rather
the
configuration
of
that
glowing
unit
and
there's
a
certain
amount
of
square
footage
that
is
required
for
the
number
of
occupants
and
the.
H
B
K
B
Fur
housing,
inclusionary
housing
ordinances
are
title,
eight,
which
has
been
our
health
and
sanitation
code
and
specifically,
chapter
three
nuisances.
This
lays
out
various
types
of
nuisances,
as
well
as
the
abatement
and
prevention
of
those
instances
and
some
prohibited
actions
in
title
ix
deals
with
public
safety
and
chapter
5,
specifically
section
4,
using
premises.
This
defines
nuisance
premises
and
provides
procedure
for
addressing
those.
Those.
B
B
Essentially,
so
we
have
had
some
fair
housing
housing
issues
within
evanston
we've
got
some
from
that
have
occurred
since
2003
we've
had
discrimination.
Cases
filed
with
hud
and
idhr
race
was
the
most
common
issue
seen
here
at
29,
disability
at
27
and
national
origin.
At
19,
property
owners
have
advertised
rentals
for
students
only
and
then
we've
got
some
anecdotal
reports
of
different
treatment
of
female-headed
households
that
happen
to
have
teenage
boys
and
we're
seeking
rental
residence.
B
Since
I
mentioned
briefly
and
is
more
detailed
in
the
staff
report,
we
have
a
couple
of
alternatives
that
we're
proposing
those
are
based
off
of
our
initial
recommendations.
Earlier
on.
The
first
alternative
was
to
remove
the
definition
of
family
from
the
zoning
code
as
it
currently
stands,
and
basically
just
reference.
The
dwelling
unit
and
over
occupancy
enforcement
would
then
be
based
on
the
square
footage
requirements
that
I
mentioned
previously.
B
B
L
B
We
reference
the
comprehensive
plan.
The
2000
plan
actually
speaks
pretty
widely
to
housing
and
neighborhoods,
specifically
and
chapter
two.
Our
neighborhoods.
Some
of
the
key
objectives
include
maintaining
the
appealing
character
of
neighborhoods
looking
for
change.
This
is
one
I
think
is
probably
common
that
we
see
in
our
meetings
and
also
promoting
activities
that
help
strengthen
communities
and
improve
labor
equality
of
life
and
also
recognizing
the
effect
of
housing
on
the
quality
of
neighborhoods
and
specifically
in
chapter
three,
which
deals
with
housing.
B
So
I
do
want
to
note
that
in
the
at
this
point,
21
years
since
the
plan
was
approved,
there
have
been
a
lot
of
changes
that
have
occurred
with
regards
to
how
people
view
families.
So
this
is
something
that
we
do
want
to
take
into
consideration
as
we're.
A
Actually,
I'd
like
to
kind
of
start,
I
I
think
that
I'd
like
to
kind
of
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
context
and
some
of
the
discussions
that
we've
had.
I
think
it's
very
important
to
remember
that
the
purview
of
the
plan
commission
is
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
zoning
ordinance
enforcement
happens
in
other
parts
of
the
city
code.
A
Is
ms
jones
has
kind
of
provided
an
overview,
but
there
are
a
couple
of
specific
links
to
the
zoning
ordinance,
family
definition
and
other
ordinances
and
actually
in
the
zoning
ordinance
itself
beyond.
Just
the
the
name
of
you
know
the
various
districts,
first
of
all
in
the
zoning
ordinance,
the
affordable
or
the
accessory
dwelling
unit,
amendments
that
we
adopted
the
city
adopted
fairly
recently.
A
That
specifically
defines
the
occupants
of
a
refers
back
to
the
definition
of
family
for
for
that
occupants,
for
who
can
be
in
a
accessory
dwelling
unit.
A
The
other
point
is
that
in
the
fair
housing
ordinance
you
know,
as
as
ms
jones
described
it's,
it's
basic
parameters
are
to
address
discrimination
and
discriminatory
behavior,
but
one
of
this
in
the
definition
section
of
that
ordinance,
it
defines
a
dwelling
unit
as
a
room
or
group
of
rooms
designed
for
occupancy
of
one
family,
as
defined
in
the
evanston
zoning
ordinance.
So
there's
a
specific
link
that
would
be
impacted
if
we
do
away
with
the
definition
of
family
all
together.
A
That
would
be
impacted,
and
I
think
that
that
that
needs
to
you
know
those
considerations
ought
to
be
taken
into
consideration
during
our
discussion
and
as
ms
jones
outlined,
the
staff
memo
you
know
provided
two
alternatives,
but
I
would
like
to
propose
a
third
approach
that
addresses
the
broad
range
of
the
differences
in
the
types
of
families
that
have
been.
A
You
know
how
families
have
evolved
and
that
I
would
suggest
you
know
it
really
kind
of
gets
to
the
notion
of
functional
families
or
chosen
families.
I
think,
are
the
terms
that
I've
seen,
and
so
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
kind
of
an
alternative
three
would
be
to
modify
the
type
a
family
definition
to
be
one
or
more
persons
related
by
blood
marriage,
adoption
or
similar,
formal
or
informal
household
relationships,
reflecting
a
shared
responsibility
for
the
common
welfare
of
all
household
members,
living
together
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit.
A
A
D
I
have
a
question
on
alternate
one.
I
like
alternative
one
and
and-
and
I
understand
about
the
all
your
what
christopher
linwall
suggested
for
alternative
three.
I
understand
why
that
might
be
a
good
idea,
but
I
also
think
that
family
is
you're
you're,
forcing
the
definition
of
family
onto
groups
of
people
that
aren't
families
in
the
first
place.
So
it's
it's
kind
of
a
you
know.
D
Family
is
a
term
that
we
use
and
where
we
use
it
to
to
designate
a
certain
group
and
to
broaden
it
way
beyond
what
it
really
is
meant
to
be
might
not
be
the
way
to
go.
So
I
I
like
alternative
one.
I
have
a
question
on
square
footage,
though:
how
is
there
a
method
that
that's
been
determined?
How
square
footage
will
be
will
be
measured
or
are
we.
B
M
Sure,
thank
you
when
we
get
a
complaint
of
over
occupancy
and
we
send
an
inspector
out
to
take
a
look
at
a
property.
We
measure
the
room
wall
to
wall
two
sides,
and
then
we
do
the
calculation
for
how
large
the
room
is.
The
first
thing
we
do
is
calculate
the
bedroom
sizes
to
determine
how
many
people
can
occupy
the
property
based
on
the
bedroom
sizes.
M
And
then
we
calculate
the
the
square
footage
for
of
the
configuration
of
the
remaining
of
the
house
in
terms
of
living,
room,
dining
room,
combined
habitable
space
and
so
often
times
you
might
be
able
to
have
eight
people
residing
in
a
dwelling
unit
based
on
the
sleeping
rooms.
But
because
of
the
configuration
of
the
common
areas,
you
can
only
have
five
and
so
based
on
the
the
configuration
of
the
common
areas
after
the
square
footage
of
the
sleeping
rooms.
That
is
what
calculates
the
maximum
occupant
load
of
the
property.
M
It's
in
the
property
maintenance
code:
it
explains
it
a
little
bit
more
in
terms
of
the
verbiage
versus
just
the
the
graphic
of
the
the
chart
that
I
think
was
provided
to
you.
But
that's
you
know.
We
always
look
at
the
bedroom
first
and
then
we
do
the
the
configuration
of
the
common
space.
M
E
Is
there,
commissioner,
before
you
go,
is
there
any
sort
of
do?
We
have
any
sort
of
a
relationship
between
common
areas
to
bedrooms
in
properties
or
is
it
just
can
for
so,
for
example,
if
things
worked
out
square
footage,
wise
could
my
apartment
be
eighty
percent
bedroom
and
twenty
percent
living
common
living
space.
M
I
suppose
it
could
be
because
it
the
the
code,
doesn't
speak
to
that.
It
speaks
to
the
the
specifications
of
the
room
itself,
so
in
terms
of
the
square
footage
of
the
sleeping
room,
and
then
it
talks
about
having
a
specific
living
room,
size
and
a
specific
dining
room
size
or
the
combined
living
room,
dining
room
space
itself.
E
Yeah,
and
and
in
the
inspections
that
that
you're
familiar
with
and
I'm
not
going
to
hold
you
to
a
number,
I
want
you
just
to
make
your
best
guess
what
is
typically
the
relationship
of
the
bedrooms
to
the
overall
square
footage
of
the
apartment.
Do
things
typically
tend
to
fall
into
a
50
50
category,
a
70-30.
M
Square
in
terms
of
spurs
from
bedroom
to
square
footage
of
combined
habitable
space.
I
think
it's
pretty
similar.
I
mean
you
might
have
a
property,
a
dwelling
unit
where
there's
four
bedrooms,
but
you
can't
necessarily
have
four
people,
because
maybe
the
combined
square
footage
isn't
enough,
but
they're
usually
pretty
similar.
If
we
have
a
property
that
has
six
or
seven
bedrooms,
there's
typically
a
kitchen
with
an
eat-in
kitchen
area,
there
might
be
a
dining
room
and
a
living
room
and
oftentimes
there's
family
room
that
you
consider
too,
as
combined
habitable
space.
M
When
we
get
a
complaint
of
over
occupancy,
that's
typically
not
the
case.
We
typically
go
in
and
it's
a
very
large
house
with
five
or
six
sleeping
rooms
and
then
lots
of
combined
space.
Have
we
seen
a
couple
where
there's
not
where
they've
made
a
dining
room
into
a
sleeping
room?
Sure
we
have,
but
that's
not
the
norm?
Okay.
Thank
you.
You're
welcome.
G
M
For
for
for
option
two,
it
would
be
permitting
rooming
houses
in
all
zoning
districts
in
order
for
a
rooming
house
to
exist
number
one.
It's
licensed
and
rooming
houses
are
inspected
annually
versus
rental
units
which
are
inspected
every
three
to
five
years
or
on
a
complaint
basis.
So
if
we
allow
rooming
houses,
they're
inspected
more
frequently
and
it's
an
annual
annual
license
for
them,
but
also
unless
the
owner
resides
on
site
at
a
rooming
house,
three
houses
are
required
to
be
sprinklered.
F
M
M
But
I
think
the
potential
for
you
know
for
keeping
somebody
on
board
to
facilitate
those
those
rental
inspections.
As
we
continue
to
increase
our
our
inventory,
I
think
it
it
becomes
important
because
we
are
really
kind
of
maxed,
often
times.
A
Okay,
hearing
none,
I
have
several
the
first
really
kind
of
goes.
You
know
if
we
don't
have
a
definition
of
family
at
all.
You
know
kind
of
why,
with
the
the
this
proposal
to
calculate
maximum
occupancy
for
all
30
000
dwelling
units
in
evanston,
is
that
even
necessary?
A
M
Well,
the
purpose
of
the
the
occupant
load
is
to
to
base
it
for
life
safety
purposes.
So
is
the
building
large
enough
to
handle
that
number
of
occupant
people
the
same
way
as
if
you
get
a
permit
and
you
build
a
church,
you
are
licensed
for
a
number
of
people
that
are
allowed
to
be
in
that
building.
When
you
have
a
banquet
hall,
there's
a
sign
on
the
door
that
says
maximum
occup
320
and
that's
based
on
the
square
footage.
M
A
A
So
have
you
got
the
floor
plans
for
those
70
units?
Yes,.
B
M
We
do
as
soon
as
as
soon
as
we
process
the
rental
registration,
we
calculate
the
occupant
load
and
we
send
the
owner
an
email
that
says
here
is
your
maximum
occupant
load.
This
is
how
many
people
are
allowed
to
live
here.
Please
don't
forget.
You
have
to
also
meet
the
requirements
of
the
zoning
code
for
no
more
than
three
unrelated,
and
then
we
go
into
the
fact
that
we're
going
to
do
an
inspection.
Your
inspector
is
copied
on
this
email.
Please
let
us
know
if
you
have
any
questions,
that's
for
all
new
rentals,
okay,.
A
And
then
I
I
think
you
know,
and
and
if
we
don't-
I
guess
one
of
the
things
I'm
struggling
about
in
terms
of
just
comprehensive
plan.
Land
use
policy.
Is
there
any
if
we
don't
have
some
sort
of
a
rule
that
there
be
one
household
per
dwelling
unit?
Is
there
anything
to
preclude
having
two
or
three
families
share
a
house.
A
Yeah
well
and
again
that
it
just
it
comes
into
a
question
of
from
neighborhood
character
and
how
we
think
of
our
neighborhoods.
Is
that
something
that's
desirable?
For
you
know
it's
part
of
city
policy.
So
that's
one
question.
N
Just
wanted
to
make
a
point
that,
right
now
we
have
a
type
b
family
that
says
two
unrelated
persons
and
their
children
living
together
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit.
I
mean
I,
I
think
that
you
know
one
of
the
we
kind
of
run
into
the
same
issue.
You
know:
how
are
we
going
to
figure
out
is
two
okay,
but
not
three,
and
you
know
it
depends
on
the
building
and
all
sorts
of
other
things.
N
I
I
think
that
when
you
say
how
many
families
can
live
together,
I
think
that,
basically,
what
we're
looking
at
is
what
hud
looks
at
when
it
looks
at
occupancy,
which
is
a
household
and
a
household,
isn't
defined
by
their
relationships
of
the
number
of
people.
N
It's
simply
defined
by
the
number
of
human
beings
that
are
living
together
and-
and
I
quite
honestly
think
that
is
an
appropriate
way
to
approach
things,
because,
no
matter
how
many
ways
we
try
to
look
at
definitions
of
family,
they
change
constantly
and
they're
different
by
different
groups
based
on
their
heritage
and
their
experience,
and
there
are
people
who
simply
consider
people
that
they
have
relationships
with
that
are
important
to
them.
That
may
not
be
related
by
blood
marriage
or
adoption
to
be
their
family
members.
N
They
may
call
them
that,
and
I
thought
that
the
commissioner's
point
about
expanding
family.
You
know
no
matter
what
we
do.
It's
it
we're.
If
we
try
to
just
make
it
include
everything,
then
it
no
longer
is
anything
one
could
argue.
So
I
I
don't
know,
I
think,
that's
a
challenging
thing
with
that
term.
A
I
A
E
But
but
using
that
exact
same
logic
by
by
trying
to
fit
everybody
into
a
family,
the
definition
of
type,
the
type
c
definition
of
family
is
a
group
of
not
more
than
three
unrelated
persons
living
together
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit.
In
a
dwelling
unit,
they
may
have
no
relationship
to
each
other
at
all,
joe
can
be
from
california.
E
Sally
can
be
from
connecticut
and
mary
can
be
from
down
state
and
their
relationship
is.
None
of
them
can
live
on
their
own
and
afford
it
so
they're
going
to
live
together
and
create
a
household
unit,
but
there
is
no
relationship
between
them.
So
the
fact
that
that
when,
when
you
use
a
term
like
family,
you
think
of
a
relational
bond
to
one
another
that
doesn't
exist
even
by
the
definition
of
a
type
c
family
under
our
own
ordinance,
yeah.
A
So
I
think
that
there
are
two
different
situations,
and
I
also
would
note
that
you
know
if
you
look
at
the
american
community
survey
data,
how
the
you
know,
which
is
essentially
the
census,
how
they
calculate
you
know
people
living
in
households,
they've
got
categories
for
you
know,
spouse,
they've,
actually,
added
cohabiting.
You
know
people
his
family,
they've
got
kids,
you
know,
child
they've
got
other
relatives
and
then
they've
got
unrelated
individuals.
So
you
know
the
census.
A
A
So
that's
just
you
know
another
another
point
to
think
about
and
then
my
final
question:
if
we
go
the
route
that's
suggested
in
in
alternate
alternative
one,
what
happens
to
the
definitions
that
we
have
in
place
and
the
regulations
for
group
houses,
group
homes
and
rooming
houses
are
those
those
definitions
needed
and
if
so,
why?
A
B
That
that
is
a
good
point.
That
would
be
something
that
we
look
at
for
some
of
those
uses.
B
I
think
there
are
also
other
items
that
are
associated
with
them
like
it
may
be
a
use
for
like
a
group
home
with
something
with
children
that
has
an
actual
staff
member
on
site,
or
something
like
that.
If
it's
something
that's
specific
like
that,
that
might
be
an
instance
where
we
keep
that
particular
definition.
B
But
if
it's
something
that's
a
little
bit
more
general
where
there
aren't
where
there
isn't
necessarily
programming
associated
with
it,
then
we
might
be.
You
might
have
to
reconsider
what
those
definitions
are.
A
You
know
when
I
looked
at
the
definition
and
it's
been
a
while,
since
I've
looked
at
the
group
home
definition,
but
the
type
one
the
four
to
eight
people
are
allowed
in
all
you
know
their
permitted
uses
in
all
of
our
residential
districts
and,
as
I
recall,
the
only
requirement
was
there
be
supervision,
not
necessarily
on-site
supervision.
But
you
know
some
sort
of
programming
which
is
kind
of
why,
when
the
connections
for
the
homeless
were
discussing
their
their
arthouse
property,
I
I
thought
that
that
actually
would
be
an
appropriate
group
home
use.
A
While
I
presume
they
don't
need
on
somebody
living
on
site
with
the
young
adults
who
are
you
know
the
formerly
homeless,
youth
going
through
their
transition
program.
I
presume
that
there
is
some
level
of
supervision
and
mentoring
and
and
staff
support
for
those
individuals,
but
but
that's
something
that
again
that
their
you
know
the
the
concern
that
I
have
on
eliminating
the
definition
of
family
altogether
is
that
there
are
these
kind
of
maybe
unintended
consequences,
or
at
least
things
that
may
need
to
change
as
well.
E
I
mean
I
I
I
don't
want
to
jump
in
if
there's
other
commissioners
who
have
not
spoken
who
have
thoughts,
but
I
don't
see
anybody
raising
a
hand
or
anything
so
I'll
go
ahead.
I
mean
I,
I
think
alternative
one
is
a
strong
option.
I
think
that
there
are
ways
to
address
the
issues
that
that
that
come
into
play
here,
I
think
the
like,
I
said
I
think
the
use
of
the
word
family
is
confusing
in
and
of
itself,
as
opposed
to
using
terms
like
household
and
things
like
that.
E
E
A
Okay,
I
guess
then,
let's
you
know,
move
to
alternative
two.
If
no
one
else
has
anything
to.
A
Discuss
and-
and
I
think
I
I
have
really
kind
of
you
know-
questions
to
why
the
number
eight
was
picked.
You
know
the
proposal
was
to
go
from
three
unrelated
to
eight
unrelated.
I
presume-
and
you
know
why
that
number
and
not
a
different.
B
B
Sorry,
I
think
there
were
one
or
two
examples
where
this
was
a
number
that
was
chosen
again.
This,
I
think,
goes
back
to
some
earlier
discussions
from
some
years
ago.
That
was
also
con
made
a
consideration
with
regards
to
increasing
that
maximum
amount
it
in
some-
and
it
looks
like
sarah-
has
some
additional
comments.
N
I
I
think
that
it
was
an
attempt
to
get
to
a
threshold
based
on
other
places
that
had
similar
regulations.
That
seem
to
be
a
large
number
of
people
relative
to
so
you
know,
I
don't
think,
there's
an
absolute
reason
for
eight
other
than
it's.
You
know
that
pretty
good
side,
pretty
good
size,
household
yeah
I
mean,
but
but
also
you
know
it
it.
N
It
is
a
substantial
number
of
people,
but
I
did
also
want
to
make
a
quick
point
because
about
rooming
houses,
rooming
houses
also
don't
necessarily
have
kitchen
facilities,
and
things
like
that
that
the
rumors
are
in.
So
there
are
some
differences
in
in
what
rooming
houses
provide
to
just
lots
of
people
living
in
a
more.
A
That
was
kind
of
my
other
question.
Can
someone
pre
please
explain
what
the
difference
is
between
a
rooming
house
and
just
a
large
single
house
that
people
are
sharing
and
and
why
would
we
need
to
have
you
know?
Why
would
we
need
to
go
re?
You
know
re
require
or
permit
rooming
houses
in
every
zoning
district.
N
Well,
I
can
attempt
to
address
some
of
that.
One
of
the
things
about
the
roomie
houses
is
right.
N
Now
is
they
are
only
allowed
in
higher
resident
higher
density,
residential
areas,
and
so
one
of
the
things
you
know
an
interesting
note
in
our
definite
our
in
our
definition
of
family,
our
d
definition
that
was
for
reba
fellowship
interestingly
enough,
they
are
not
allowed
to
have
that
type
of
family
in
a
r1
or
r2,
plus
there's
some
very
interesting
notes
on
how
many
cars
they
can
have
that
household
can
have.
N
So
I
mean
I,
you
know
that
particular
thing
I
thought
was
really
quite
weird
in
our
code,
but
I
think
that
one
of
the
things
about
rooming
houses-
because
we
looked
at
this
in
our
when
we're
overall
looking
at
our
housing
planning,
the
definition
of
rooming
house-
is
really
archaic
and
needs
to
be
looked
at
separately.
N
Frankly,
there
are
funny
things
in
there
like
how
often
the
proprietor
of
the
rooming
house
has
to
provide
clean,
linens
and
towels,
which,
to
my
knowledge,
is
not
being
done
in
any
place,
and
I
honestly
think
that
one
of
the
things
that
we
might
not
want
to
look
at
is
looking
at
housing
types
now
referred
to
as
co-housing,
and
things
like
that,
which
are
really
much
more
of
interest
and
and
are
actually
growing,
especially
in
europe,
but
in
growing,
as
in
certain
parts
of
this
country
as
ways
of
providing
people
different
lifestyles
and
those
can
be.
N
There
are
a
range
of
what
falls
under
co-housing,
but
it
doesn't
necessarily
mean
everybody.
You
know
some
of
them
have
very
specific
requirements.
You
know
you
have
to
be
the
one
who
hosts
the
family
meal,
the
the
the
the
the
household
meal.
Every,
however
often
I
mean
they're
very
they're,
constructed
very
differently
and
have
different
ideas
on
how
their
responsibilities
are
are
very
set,
sometimes
have
very
set
rules
on
what
the
individual's
responsibilities
are
to
the
well-being
of
the
co-housing
household.
N
A
You
know
even
in
reading
this,
you
know
I've
read
both
the
requirements
for
the
the
rooming
house
occupancy,
which
is
in
a
different
it's
in
the
housing
regulations
and
I've
read
the
definition.
That's
in
the
zoning
ordinance
and
it's
it's
not
entirely
clear
what
we're
talking
about.
So
I
guess
one
piece
of
information
that
would
be
helpful
is
how
many
rooming
houses
do
we
have
in
town.
A
N
It
would,
I
think,
be
very
different
from
the
current
rooming
house,
because
it
is
simply
a
way
of
it
would
be
a
way
of
of
reviewing
who
could
be
just
family,
size
or
household
sizes
living
in
a
single
dwelling
unit
that
have
over
a
certain
number
of
people,
not
necessarily
family,
related
or
anything
like
that,
but
it
also
doesn't
preclude
having
something
that
is
more
like
co-housing
or
a
a
different
structure
that
wouldn't
necessarily
be
covered
at
the
time
that
the
eight
people
living
in
a
dwelling
unit.
N
That
was
to
provide
a
way
of
looking
at
how
many
people
are
there
and
this
space.
I
don't
believe
we
had
really
we.
We
do
know
that
we
would
have
to
look
at
how
rooming
house
is
defined,
but
we
haven't
done
that
at
this
time
and
you're
right.
If
we
were
really
to
pursue
that,
we
would
have
to
come
back
with
more
information
for
you.
E
But
but
according
to
code,
currently
a
rooming
house
is
not
a
dwelling
unit.
N
N
And
most
of
the
rooming
houses
we
have
right
now,
I
believe,
are
actually
things
like
their
some
of
our
the
sorority
and
fraternity
houses,
I
believe,
are,
are
classified
as
rooming
houses.
Are
they
not
angel
rooming.
M
Houses
right
now
are
hotels,
they're,
sororities
and
fraternities
they're,
the
on-campus
student
housing
that
is
maintained
by
northwestern
and
then
I
believe
we
have.
Probably
I'm
gonna
go
off
the
top
of
my
head,
because
I
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me.
I'm
sorry,
probably
10,
maybe
licensed
rooming
houses
that
are
not
hotels
or
sororities
or
fraternities
yeah.
We
have
very
few
when
you
take
out
the
hotels
and
the
the
dorms
that
are
classified
as
rooming
houses,.
F
And
why
would
we
want
to
extend
rooming
houses
into
every
every
district
again
with
alternative
to
why
that
changed.
A
Was
this
going
back
because
one
of
the
real
early
discussions-
and
maybe
even
I'm
I'm
trying
to
remember
maybe
the
first
zoning
committee
meeting
where
there
was
a
suggestion
that
you
go
with
essentially
alternative
one?
But
you
know
and
then
have
a
maximum,
no
more
than
eight
people
in
a
dwelling
unit
period,
which
I
raised
concerns
about
the
possibility
of
having
large
traditional
families
which
suddenly
you'd
have
a
single
family.
A
You
yeah
a
real
fam,
traditional
family,
occupying
a
single
family
dwelling
unit
and
if
they
have
an
extra
kid
they're
suddenly
over
the
the
eight
person
limit-
and
you
know
the
suggestion
was
you
know:
well,
they
can
get
a
rooming
house
license,
which
you
know
that
I
find
problematic
on
many
levels:
fair
housing
being
one
of
them
and
discriminating
against
family
units,
and
actually
that
point
was
made
in
some
of
the
background
material.
That
was,
you
know,
provided
that
I
re-read
this
afternoon.
A
That
actually
was
a
concern
about
whether
or
not
that
would
stand
up
to
legal
scrutiny.
But
but
I
think
you
know
just
for
number
two
I
mean
I.
I
think
that
that
allow
you
know
that
you
know
the
eight-person
limit.
I
I
find
that
problematic.
I
don't
know
what
the
right
number
is,
but
that
that
troubles
me.
N
A
People
you
know
how
they
create
families
today
is
is
kind
of
an
important
thing,
and
I-
and
I
think
there
is
a
distinction
between
you-
know:
five
people
from
very
yeah
five
different
states
deciding
to
live
together
to
you
know,
share
expenses
versus
a
household
where
there's
there's
some
sort
of
of
you
know
real
relationship.
A
A
Well,
yeah:
there
are
different
situations
and
I
think
that
that's
yeah
and-
and
you
know,
even
if
you
go
back
to
the
belter
definition
where
it
was-
you
can
be
related
by
blood,
marriage
or
adoption.
That's
one
or
you
can
be
two
people
living
together
that
you're
not
related
so
and-
and
I
think
that
one
of
the
things
I
think
is
kind
of
nice
about
evanston's
definition
is
we
do
say
you
know
the
the
the
four
different
categories
say
that
there
are
four
different
kinds
of
households
that
you
know.
A
A
A
You
know
I've
got
a
very
small
three-bedroom
house.
I
can
have
seven
adults
living
with
one
bathroom
and
small.
You
know
very
small
rooms,
and
I
could
you
know,
extend
a
hall
and
I
could
probably
have
nine
would
not
be
desirable,
but
you
know
you
know.
I
think
that
there
there's
when
we're
looking
at
at
the
the
standards.
I
think
we
have
to
go
back
to
what
you
know
the
kind
of
what
the
you
know,
the
comprehensive
plan
which
we
haven't
discussed
in
a
long
time
and
what
are
our
neighborhoods,
what
they
should
they
be?
A
You
know
you
know
what
what
is
their
character
it
gets
down
to.
So
I
think
that
that's
those
are
considerations
that
have
to
be
part
of
the
discussion
and,
as
I
kind
of
noted
at
the
beginning,
I
think
that
we're
going
to
have
to
acknowledge
that
there
are
a
lot
of
pieces
to
this
discussion,
not
all
of
which
relate
to
the
zoning
ordinance,
and
you
know
if
we
have
a
definition
of
family
and
what
should
it
be.
F
Is
it
possible
to
make
a
distinction
between
intentional
families,
that
is,
groups
of
people
who
do
come
together
for
housing
and
also
have
a
connection
between
them
and
people
who
are
simply
sharing
the
dwelling
unit?
For
a
short
time,
I
can
see
the
problem
that
you
keep
splicing
the
definition
of
family
and
keep
pulling
it
further
and
further
apart.
F
It
just
seems
to
me
that
what
we're
wrestling
with
is
trying
to
meet
the
needs
of
folks
who
do
have
relationships
who
do
have
an
extended
family
and
are
trying
to
find
the
right
housing
for
that.
But
you
counter
that
with
the
fact
that,
as
a
university
town,
we
have
a
constituency
of
students,
let's
be
honest
about
it,
who
will
just
want
to
room
together
to
share
costs
and
to
minimize
those
costs
and
there's
a
difference
there
as
to
how
we
want
to
accommodate
them.
F
I
think,
and
even
in
the
material
that
we
got
before
the
meeting,
you
know
they
talk
about
the
experiences
in
boston
and
other
towns
in
ames
iowa,
where
there
is
this
back
and
forth
between
town
and
gown
and
trying
to
preserve,
needs
and
meet
the
needs
of
constituents
within
neighborhoods
who
want
to
have
families
there
versus
a
short-term
student
housing
setup.
A
E
Okay,
I
mean
I'll
just
say:
I'm
not
a
big
fan
of
alternative
two
at
all.
I
think
it's
it's
kind
of
a
a
situation
where
we've
created
an
alternative,
no
offense
miss
flax,
but
we
have
created
an
alternative
for
the
sake
of
having
an
alternative,
but
there
are
lots
of
issues
I
see
in
that
from
the
from
the
random
number
of
eight
to
rooming,
rooming
rooming
houses
being
permitted
everywhere
sort
of
thing.
So
I
am
not
a
huge
fan
of
alternative
number
two.
N
D
I
would
I
would
agree
with
that.
I
I
think
the
alternative
too
is
there's
so
many
problems
with
it.
I
still
like
alternative
one.
As
for
the
reasons
that
I
said
earlier,
I
the
only
thing
that
I
would
say
about
alternative
one
is
that
I
think
this
this
the
way
of
calculating
square
footage
and
someone
brought
up
number
of
bathrooms
and
other
things
that
I
I
think
maybe
it
should
be
revisited,
but
otherwise
I,
like
the
spirit
of
alternative.
D
A
Okay,
any
other
commission
discussion.
A
A
One
of
the
things
that
we
had
asked
the
zoning
committee
level,
I
think
pretty
much.
At
least
two
of
the
meetings
was
for
staff
to
provide
specifics
on
where
family
is
mentioned,
and
and
and
also,
I
think,
going
along
with
that
now
you
know
what
would
be
the
impact
you
know
what
would
be
the
ripple
effect,
because
I
don't
think
you
know
I.
I
am
not
comfortable
with
with
proceeding
with
suggesting
that
that
you
know
we
shouldn't,
we
should
eliminate
the
family.
A
Just
you
know
definition
without
knowing
all
of
those
things.
I
personally
am
in
support
of
retaining
the
family
definition.
As
as
I
mentioned,
I
would
expand
the
the
type
a
family.
So
we
get
something
more,
you
know,
so
it's
closer
to
kind
of
various
kinds
of
intentional
families.
As
commissioner
westerberg
was
describing-
and
you
know-
and
I
also
think
we
we
need
to
kind
of
grapple
with-
you
know
how
how
extensive
our
you
know,
types
of
co-housing
are
we
comfortable
with?
A
Is
it
okay
for
two
or
three
unrelated
families
to
share
a
dwelling
unit
if
the
space
allows,
or
is
that
kind
of
a
you
know,
bridge
too
far
for
the
community
and-
and
I
think
that
that's
ends
up
needing
to
be
a
community
discussion,
so
my
my
preference,
my
personal
preference,
would
be
that
we
kind
of.
If
we
do
anything,
would
we
be
to
retain
the
definition
of
family?
A
You
know,
addressing
you,
know,
kind
of
expanding
the
type,
a
definition
and
cleaning
up
the
you
know
the
occupancy
rules
that
talk
about
servants,
because
that's
clearly,
you
know
archaic
language
at
this
point
and
and
waiting
until
the
city
council
and
the
community
has
had
that
broader
discussion
of
what
the
strategy
should
be
because
you
know
because
the
other
issue
that
we
have
that
we
discussed
at
the
zoning
committee
that
we
haven't
discussed
really
here,
is
really
the
the
fact
that,
with
the
student
households,
what
what
has
happened
is
that
you
have
property
owners
who
have
purchased
larger
single-family
houses
near
campus,
with
the
intent
of
leasing
them
to
large
groups
of
of
university
students
and
charging
between
six
and
eight
thousand
dollars
a
month
in
rent,
which
is
a
level
that
is
not.
A
A
A
If
the
supply
is
you
know,
taken
by
by
students
who
are
banding
together
in
groups
of
five
or
six
to
afford
these,
these
higher
rents
that
landlords
are
asking
were
really
kind
of
working
against,
affordable
housing.
You
know
so
that's
you
know,
that's
a
part
of
the
discussion
that
we
we
talked
about
a
bit
in
committee,
but
you
know
it's
not
really
necessarily
relevant
to
you
know
the
changes
in
the
zoning
definition,
but
it
certainly
is
a
policy
question.
E
Yeah
in
doing
just
kind
of
a
quick
search
through
the
code
online
in
the
zoning
code,
there
are
95
mentions
of
the
word
family
and
I
would
say
just
a
brief
count
here.
I
didn't
do
any
sort
of
magical
calculation,
but
I
would
say
that
98
of
these
refer
to
single
family
to
family
those
sorts
of
things,
family
necessity,
things
like
that
and
and
not
relating
to
the
definition
of
family
itself,
right.
A
A
Don't
but
again,
if
we,
you
know,
but
there
are
other
things
that
that
are
related
like
the
definition
of
group
homes
and
you
know
maybe
not
rooming
houses,
but
certainly
the
definition
of
group
homes,
and
I
think
you
would
have
to
look
at
what
the
potential
impacts
you
know
what
other
parts
of
the
code
are.
You
know
are
impacted,
I
mean
you
can't
just
go
through
and
say
well,
we'll
just
delete
any
reference
to
family.
B
So
I
I
did
the
same
exercise
with
the
zoning
code
and
commissioner
rogers
is
correct,
that
a
lot
of
the
reference
is
to
it's
essentially
to
the
actual
building,
so
single-family
multi-family
two-family
things
of
that
nation.
There
are
some
references
to
familial
status
or
I'm
mentioning
a
family
for
family
necessity
and
things
of
that
nature.
B
We
do
understand
that
this
would
not
simply
be
changing
one
section
of
the
code
and
then
just
deleting
something
we
would
have
to
take
a
deeper
look
at
where
family
is
referenced
and
adjust
as
need
be,
and
look
at
other
portions
of
the
code
that
might
mention
family
or
mention
that
part
portion
of
the
zoning
code
that
would
need
to
be
adjusted
to
fit
whatever
alternative
ends
up
being
adopted,
so
that
that's
an
exercise
that
we
already
know
that
we're
going
to
have
to
do
and
that
that
would
take
some
time
to
do
that.
B
E
Let's
also
quick
question
for
you
miss
jones.
If,
if
we
were
to
eliminate
the
definition
in
the
zoning
ordinance
of
a
family.
E
B
B
B
N
N
There's
only
a
part
in
our
code
that
references
it,
because
it's
our
definition
it
cross
refere,
commissioner
linwall
pointed
that
out,
but
that
that
would
be
changed.
We
wouldn't
have
to
have
that
reference
then,
but
the
but
the
definition
of
family
per
the.
I
have
that
my
pile
of
paper
here.
If
I
can
find
the
right
thing.
O
A
It's
the
it's
the
it's
in
the
housing
regulations.
It
is
the
fair
housing
ordinance.
It's
under
the
definitions.
O
A
Here
it
is
it's
under
the
definition
section
and
we
have
a
definition
for
dwelling
unit,
which
is
a
room
or
group
of
rooms
designed
for
occupancy
by
one
family,
with
eating
sleeping
and
living
facilities
or
lodging
rooms,
as
designed
in
as
defined
in
evanston.
Zoning
ordinance
title
six
of
this
code.
Yes,.
A
Yeah,
but
still,
then,
then
we're
back
to
the
zoning
code,
where,
if
you
eliminate
and
say
we're
not
going
to
define
family
or
we're
not
going
to
define
what
constitutes
a
household,
then
you
still,
you
know
you're
still
kind
of
in
a
potential
at
least
an
ambiguity
as
to
what
you're
talking
about
so
it
kind
of
gets
back
to.
You
know
how
many,
how
many
families
or
how
many
households
can
live
in
a
dwelling
unit.
N
N
Right,
so
if
the
occupancy
max
occupancy
load
for
a
dwelling
unit
were
five,
I'm
just
making
this
up,
then
a
household
of
no
more
than
five
people
could
reside
there.
N
L
L
G
Is
this
a
premature
discussion,
given
that
all
these
issues
are
still
out
there
and
if
one
were
inclined
to
support
alternative
one,
as
I
am,
is
it
is
this
really?
You
know
I
I
personally
wouldn't
feel
comfortable
moving
that
direction
without
having
a
good
sense
of
what
the
ripple
effects
are
or
or
not
I
mean
that's
that's
what
I'm
sort
of
grappling
with
is.
Is
this
really
premature
until
we've
sort
of
have
a
better
understanding
for
some
of
these
consequences
in
other
areas,.
D
I
I
agree
with
that,
but
can't
we
can't
we
vote
on
a
direction
with
the
understanding.
Let's
say
we
vote
on
alternative
one,
with
the
understanding
that
this
has
got
to
be
played
out
throughout
the
zoning
code
and
to
see
what
the
impact
is
and
if
there
is
a
significant
impact
that
can't
be
resolved,
and
I
frankly
cannot
believe
that
it
can't
be
re,
there's
going
to
be
issues
that
can't
be
resolved.
I
think
you
guys
are
we're
talking
about
these
silly
little
things
that
are
there's
easy
solutions
to.
D
So
I
I
really
don't
think
that
that
we're
going
to
come
up
with
anything,
but
we
can
vote
on
a
policy
or
a
direction
with
the
understanding
that
that
that
would
have
to
be
all
checked
out,
which
is
fine,
but
I,
but
I
I
mean
we're
just
going
round
and
round
in
circles
on
this
on
this
issue.
It
seems
to
me.
E
I
would
agree
with
that
and
I
think
I
think
we
need
to
move
in
a
direction
and
allow
that
to
happen.
I
mean
we
keep
talking
about
premature
discussions,
but
we
just
keep
having
discussions,
and
so
unless
there
is
a
direction
to
the
discussion-
and
I
think
that
comes
from
having
something
put
forward
in
writing
and
a
direction
based
off
of
how
that's
going
to
impact
other
areas.
D
Can
can
we
move
on
a
vote?
Are
we
ready
for
that?
I
I
I
mean
I
I
don't
know
why
we
need
to
have
any
more
discussion,
but
that's
just
my
impatience.
I
guess.
P
And
again,
this
is
me
chairperson.
Can
we
have
public
comment?
I
signed
up
to
speak
about
this
issue
and
I
would
like
to
make
my
public
comment
about
this
issue
before
you
vote.
C
Hi,
it's
karen
sorry,
I'm
putting
my
children
to
bed.
You
want
to
go
to
someone
else.
Second
and
I'll
be
the
second.
A
Okay,
larry
donahue.
L
Hi,
thank
you,
chair
lindball.
I
submitted
some
comments
in
writing
earlier
today.
I
hope
you
all
had
a
chance
to
read
them.
I
essentially
support
alternative
one,
and
I
agree
with
the
comments
that
we
just
heard.
There's
been
a
lot
of
discussion
and
it's
really
time
to
to
vote.
I
support
alternative
one.
I
think
that's
a
very
reasonable
approach.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
rob
biesenbach.
A
Q
Also
kid
issues
yeah
I've
been
in
this
meeting
before,
and
I
just
feel
it's
important
to
continue
to
get
on
the
record.
The
real
world
impacts
that
this
these
proposed
changes
will
have
specifically
on
the
neighborhoods
adjacent
to
the
university.
Q
I
have
a
flyer
in
my
hands,
but
I've
redacted
it
one
of
my
neighbors
received
this
from
a
real
estate.
Agent
hope
all
is
well
with
you
and
your
family,
I'm
a
recent
graduate
of
northwestern
university
and
a
local
real
estate.
Professional
several
buyers
are
interested
in
living
around
the
northwestern
campus,
including
me,
and
your
home
fits
our
geographic
criteria.
If
you're
interested,
I
would
love
to
set
up
a
time
to
meet
now.
Q
I
don't
know
this
enterprising
young
gentleman,
it's
possible
that
he
wants
to
buy
the
home
near
the
university
in
order
to
provide
affordable
housing
for
evanston
residents.
Somehow
I
doubt
it
mainly
because
this
is
not
an
isolated
circumstance.
Neighbor
after
neighbor
on
block
after
blocks
around
in
the
university
have
been
inundated
with
pitches
from
real
estate.
Prospectors
phone
calls,
doorbells
flyers,
postcards
and
all
the
rest
and
they're
getting
that
kind
of
attention.
Q
Because
of
this
very
discussion,
I
think
I
think
the
real
estate
prospectors
they
smell
money,
and
they
know
that
they
that
this
will
open
up.
It
will
serve
up
this
neighborhood
on
a
silver
platter
to
them.
They'll
come
in
and
do
what
they've
been
doing
buy
up
these
big
homes,
carve
them
into
tiny
chunks,
not
give
not
make
affordable
housing
but
rent
them
out
to
students
that
more
than
a
thousand
dollars
a
pop.
Q
I
know
zoning
is
one
piece
of
this,
but
it
has
a
huge
impact
and
I
know
there's
been
discussion
about
enforcement
mechanisms
and
stepped-up
penalties,
which
absolutely
is
necessary
because
enforcement
has
been
lacking
in
the
past,
but
I
think,
as
we
all
know,
where
money
is
involved,
people
will
find
creative
ways
around
the
world.
So
I
just
continue
to
urge
everyone
to
please.
Q
Please
really
make
sure
we
understand
this
issue
and
the
real
world
impacts
and
what
will
happen
to
the
area
around
the
university.
It
will
be
given
over
to
off-campus
student
housing
and
it
will
become
a
non-stop
24,
7
beer
pong
and
all
night
rager
party
in
this
neighborhood,
and
there
there
won't
be.
You
know
that
many
residents
living
here
anymore,
thank
you.
A
Thank
you
next
up
on
my
list
is
david
gilham.
I
hope
I
pronounced
that
right.
I
Hi
there
thank
you,
commissioner,
so
my
name
is
david:
I'm
a
northwestern
graduate
undergrad
and
graduate
school
and
I'm
a
landlord
in
the
area.
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I
was
senior
as
well
and
let
everybody
know
that's
been
talking
about
absentee
landlords
and
profiteering
that
that
is
not
representative
of
many
of
the
landlords
in
the
area
myself
included.
I
I
understand
that
there
are
exceptions
to
the
rules
that
there
are
bad
actors,
that
there
are
bad
landlords
and
there
are
bad
tenants
in
some
of
these
buildings,
but
I
will
say
in
my
case
that
I
feel
very
proud
to
say
that
I'm
contributing
to
the
neighborhood,
in
my
case
I've
purchased
properties
and
invested
heavily
into
them
to
make
them
nicer
than
they
ever
were
before
I
do
rent
to
students.
I
don't
have
complaints
about
my
student
tenants.
I
I
don't
profit
greatly
off
of
the
students.
I
know
that
they're
paying
less
rent
by
living
in
my
properties
and
they
would
be
by
paying
2
300
a
month
for
a
single
one
bedroom
unit
in
e2.
So
I
do
think
there
is
a
benefit
to
it.
I
I
think
that
there
are
other
ways
to
handle
disciplinary
issues
or
issues
like
parking
that
have
been
brought
up
besides
taking
care
of
it
through
zoning.
I
So
I
am
very
much
in
favor
of
modernizing
the
rule
and
taking
care
of
issues
that
are,
you
know,
related
to
conduct
and
other
things
outside
of
the
zoning
and
would
be
in
favor
of
something
like
an
alternative
one.
A
Okay,
next
up
how
about
tina,
peyton.
P
Hi
good
evening,
everyone,
okay,
so
I
have
several
comments
to
make
and
questions.
So
as
far
as
the
occupancy
limit
of
eight
for
any
family,
it's
not
reasonable
and
I
agree
with
chair.
It
would
be
discriminatory,
so
some
of
you
may
or
may
not
know
me-
I'm
tina
payton.
My
family
has
owned
and
operated
real
estate
here
in
evanston
for
over
50
years
we
provide
a
student
housing
as
well.
We
have
afford
many
of
our
units
are
affordable
housing.
P
P
So
if
you're
saying
family
of
eight,
then
you've
already
disqualified,
someone
who
is
for
affordable
housing
program
in
here
in
evanston
and,
as
you
know,
it's
very
hard
to
find
three
and
four
bedroom
units
for
affordable
housing
programs
here
in
evanston,
so
you
have
already
eliminated
large
families
on
such
a
short
availability
list.
P
Also,
I
think
this
discussion
about
lifting
and-
and
you
can
have
eight
or
or
nine
people
in
the
house,
so
the
gentleman
that
just
spoke.
Yes,
you
may
be
a
landlord
here
in
evanston.
Like
myself,
I
try
to
follow
the
rules
here,
I'm
heavily
inspected
and
there
are
a
lot
of
absentee
landlords
in
the
first
and
fifth
ward,
maple
garnet
foster
pratt
the
city
knows
this
and
they
are
neglecting
to
inspect
these
landlords.
P
Of
course,
there's
even
on
a
listing,
you
can
go
out
there
right
now
and
see
that
there's
homes
for
rent
they've
cut
it
up
into
six
to
ten
bedrooms
and
renting
it
out
for
eight
to
ten
thousand
dollars
a
month.
You
know
that's,
not
a
single
family
person,
renting
a
house
for
ten
thousand
dollars
a
month,
so
it
is
up
to
the
city
of
evanston
to
do
inspection
and
not
calling
these
rooming
houses
or
whatever
there's
a
lot
of
complaints
in
the
ward
of
the
first
and
fifth
ward
and
there's
no
inspection.
P
So
I
disagree
also
with
you
wanting
to
add
another
inspection
inspector
for
low-income
housing.
That
is
unfair.
I
rent
to
a
lot
of
low-income
housing
and
I'm
regularly
inspected
by
the
city,
section
8
connections,
whatever
a
program
I'm
doing
and
you're
not
inspecting
the
people
that
are
violating,
which
is
traditionally
in
the
first
or
fifth
ward
around
campus.
P
P
So
sometimes
you,
the
there's
a
complaint
at
the
building
and
an
inspector
comes
out
unannounced
to
the
landlord
and
there
may
be
10
people
in
the
household
at
the
time
of
the
inspection.
But
there
may
be
only
four
people
on
the
lease.
So
now
you
have
sent
a
violation
to
me
as
a
landlord
and
you
don't
even
know
the
circumstance.
P
So
it's
very
important
to
coordinate
with
the
inspector
and
miscellaneous
complaints
also
for
the
nuisance,
ordinance
of
three
or
more
complaints
in
12
months
you
may
have
a
disgruntled
tenant
in
the
building,
which
has
happened
to
me
over
the
last
year
and
during
covid.
As
you
know,
it's
a
moratorium
on
evictions.
P
So
some
tennis
decide
to
say
and
do
what
they
want
to
and
just
randomly
call
the
city
of
evanston
and
make
complaints
when
they're
being
excused
from
the
apartment,
and
so
that
needs
to
be
revisited
also,
so
you
need
to
stop
picking
and
choosing
who
you
want
to
make
the
rules
for
because
this
is
just
a
bonanza
for
just
what
a
previous
speaker
spoke
about,
buying
big
property,
single-family
homes
chopping
it
up
and
allowing
them
to
break
the
rules
because
you
don't
inspect.
P
This
needs
to
be
fair
and
equitable
inspections
and
rules
across
the
board,
not
just
for
some
people
and
when
you're
making
these
rules-
and
you
know,
regulations.
Why
don't
you
consult
with
some
landlords
who
this
will
affect?
I
do
have
just
a
couple
of
more
things
to
say:
are
you
talking
yeah?
Can
you
wrap
up,
though?
Yes,
I,
yes,
I
am
because
I
want
to
okay,
so
I'm
also
discussing
boarded
up
housing
on
jackson
and
emerson.
P
That's
a
perfect
example
of
code
violations
not
being
followed
you're
only
supposed
to
have
a
board
up
here
in
evanston
for
six
months,
these
properties
have
been
boarded
up.
Six
of
them
all
together
for
over
one
over
one
year,
it's
been
about
a
year
and
a
half
since
they've
been
boarded
up.
So
this
is
a
perfect
example
of
you're
making
up
rules
and
not
following
through.
I
have
spoken
at
this
meeting
and
many
other
meetings.
City
council.
I've
asked
everyone
to
follow
up
on
this
and
no
action.
P
So
I'm
asking
you
to
consider
that
you
need
to
think
these
policies
over
and
violations
should
go
to
the
appropriate
parties
enforced
all
across
the
board,
fair
and
equitable,
because
this
is
what
you
all
are
claiming
that
you
are
want
to
be
fair
and
equitable.
Then
I
suggest
you
consider
what
you're
doing
here
tonight.
Thank
you
all
right.
A
C
So
so,
thank
you
so
I
want
to
so
I
you
know
I've
had
a
lot
of
conversations
over
the
last
month
with
many
of
my
neighbors.
You
know
we
all
agree
that
affordable
housing
should
be
improved
in
evanston,
but
I
I
think
the
goals
can
be
accomplished
in
a
much
more
narrowly
tailored
way
as
written.
Neither
of
the
alternative
alternatives
proposed
by
the
city
will
address
the
concerns
that
have
been
repeatedly
erased
by
the
residents
that
surround
northwestern
university.
C
As
most
of
my
neighbors
mentioned
in
the
last
meeting,
and
in
this
article
that
was
provided
in
the
meeting
packet,
these
neighborhoods
will
have
a
direct
and
immediate
impact
that
will
not
be
to
increase
affordable
housing
to
evanston
residents,
but
will
be
for
landlords
to
convert
single
large
single
family
homes
into
student
housing.
The
result,
unquestionably
will
be
a
rapid
turnover
in
these.
C
What
neighborhoods
from
single
family
homes
to
de
facto
student
dorms,
I'm
a
resident
of
the
first
ward
and
I'm
also
an
attorney
I've,
experienced
review
experience,
reviewing
zoning
laws
and
applying
them
in
other
circumstances.
In
the
past
month,
in
my
personal
capacity,
I've
reviewed
dozens
of
don't
zoning
ordinances
around
for
college
towns
around
the
country.
I
have
a
vested
interest
in
this,
so
I'm
very
passionate
about
reviewing
these
organs
and
I'm
doing
this
on
my
own
time.
C
We,
commissioner,
westerberg
and
windwall
both
recognized
that
there
there
are
potential
alternatives.
I
specifically
liked
the
boston
ordinance
that
offers
additional
flexibility
to
non-traditional
families
by
limiting
them
to
a
for
unrelated
rule
limiting
before
unrelated
role
to
student
housing.
C
I
I
noted
in
the
memo
that
the
the
came
with
the
packet
that
that
the
city
had
noted
that
the
court
over
to
return
that
role
but
rule,
but
respectfully
I
read
that
case
it
doesn't
even
address
the
boston,
ordinance
and
the
boston
ordinance
as
it
stands
still
stands
today.
That
says
that
they're
limiting
dwellings
to
no
more
than
four
undergrads.
C
Additionally,
I
looked
at
the
decatur
statute
related
to
the
the
talked
about
this
unusual
eight
run
related,
which
again,
I
think,
is
an
outlier
based
on
the
research.
I
did
on
my
own
time
I'm
fine
looking
at
ordinances
across
the
country
at
various
different
college
towns,
even
that
ordinance
talked
about
limitations
as
to
student
housing,
specifically
dormitories,
which,
honestly,
when
you
have
a
large
house
that
could
potentially
have
10
or
11
people-
and
you
know
commissioner
linwell
talked
about
her
own
house
about
how
you
could
add
a
little
bit.
C
You
know,
add
walls
here
and
there
and
make
you
know
a
three
bedroom
house
into
a
seven
bedroom
house.
I
think
that's
very
much
the
case
in
most
of
the
houses
along
orington
avenue,
so
that
decatur
ordinance
specifically
excludes
dormitories,
fraternities
and
sororities.
C
Finally,
you
know-
I
I
think
you
know
there's
you
know
to
to
commissioner
linwell's
point
earlier
today.
You
know
how
many
houses
are
we
really
talking
about
here?
That
will
be
impacted
by
this
rule.
C
C
You
you
have,
you
know
wealthy
out
of
town
investors,
you
have
wealthy
out
of
town
families
who
are
buying
homes
for
their
their
children,
who
go
to
northwestern,
and
will
you
know
with
the
intention
of
having
their
child
and
six
or
seven
of
their
friends
live
in
the
house?
You
know
what
is
the
impact
to
you
know
to
our
community
based
off
these
these
conversions
of
these
homes?
You
will
have
families
who
will
leave
the
area.
C
You
know
you've
already
seen
that
in
places
like
around
fireman's
park,
where
there's
an
extensive
number
of
student
homes,
families
don't
live
there
anymore.
You
know,
there's
a
lot
less
families
that
you
know
in
that
area.
I
think
you
will
see
that
happen
in
other
parts
of
evanston
around
the
campus
and-
and
so
I
I
think
you
know,
I
will
urge
this
commission
to
pause
to
better
understand
what
impact
this
will
really
have
on
the
community,
because
my
concern
is
that
in
this
area
what
will
happen
is
not
affordable
housing.
C
You
know
people
who
want
affordable
housing
can't
afford
the
thousand
dollars
a
month
that
students
will
pay
as
the
article
that
the
city
provided
in
the
packet
illustrates.
You
know
these
students
will
pay
a
thousand
dollars
a
month.
I
looked
at
the
northwestern
average.
You
know
room
and
board
amounts
they're,
paying
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
for
room
and
board.
If
you
have
eight
or
ten
students
in
these
homes,
they
are
going
to
out
bid
every
single
time,
a
community
of
evanston
residents
who
may
want
to
rent
these
homes
and
or
buy
these
homes.
C
A
Thank
you.
I
have
joseph
kaczynski.
R
Yes,
I'm
here.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
agree
with
miss
tina.
I'm
sorry
miss
teen.
I
don't
get
your
last
name
regarding
the
inadequate
adequacy
of
inspections.
R
The
current
family
rule
is
not
enforced,
and
that
has
led
to
the
detriment
of
the
neighborhoods
adjacent
to
northwestern
I'm
requesting
that
we
enforce
the
current
rule
before
we
develop
any
before
we
do
any
changes
and
or
develop
a
plan
on
how
to
address
the
problems
that
you're
hearing
coming
from
residents
that
are
around
northwestern
I'm
a
cpa,
and
this
is
kind
of
an
application
of
internal
control.
R
You
really
is
is
unwise
to
eliminate
a
control
without
imposing
first
some
kind
of
compensating
control.
R
We
have
one
around
the
corner
next
door
to
you,
commissioner,
who
wasn't
even
aware
that
there
were
changes
in
the
lessors,
the
lessees
of
her
building,
and
you
know
we
get
all
the
beer
pong
and
all
the
noise
and
loud
music.
R
Without
some
that
happens,
some
kind
of
compensating
control.
We
are
likely
in
the
current
environment
to
further
expand
the
disruptive
student
housing,
which
is
out
of
character
with
the
neighborhood.
R
A
O
O
As
well
as
miss
payton,
I
do
think
we
have
some
very
serious
issues
right
now
that
we
have
to
address.
In
order
to
I
mean
the
goals
might
be
noble.
I
assume
this
is
all
about
affordable
housing
right.
I
think
that's
what
this
this
discussion
is
about
providing
affordable
housing,
but
in
fact,
I
think,
as
we
examine
the
potential
impact,
we'll
see
that
it's
it's
going
to
do
anything
but
provide
more
affordable
housing
in
this
area.
O
In
the
first
ward,
we
see
that
landlords,
particularly
absentee
landlords
who
don't
live
in
evanston,
are
taking
in
12
13
14
15
000
a
month
as
it
is
right
now
with
our
current
policy
and-
and
I
think
we
have
to
be
very
careful
because
once
we
change
that,
we
have
to
understand,
what's
going
to
happen,
that's
going
to
increase
it's
going
to
become
even
more
expensive
and
create
even
make
housing
even
less
affordable.
So
I
so
I
really,
I
feel
it's
so
important
that
we,
you
know
we
we
can.
O
O
This
is
an
extremely
an
extreme
problem
in
this
in
in
this
ward,
where
we
do
have,
and
it
is
related
predominantly
to
absentee
landlords
and
to
student
housing,
and
I
also
first-hand
experience
my
son,
who
graduated
from
northwestern
lived
in
two
of
these
off-campus
housing
places
that
were
turned
into
multi-unit
dwellings,
one
on
maple,
a
famous
house,
and
by
the
way
it
was
a
frat
house,
but
it
wasn't
a
rooming
house.
O
It
was
a
house
simply
converted
into
a
frat
house
that
from
everything
I
could
tell
it
looked
like
it
had
never
been
inspected.
When
I
went
to
his
floor,
you
know
we
had
three
three
people
living
on
every
there
were
more
though
there
were
more
than
three
on
every
floor,
so
you
know
upwards
of
ten
people
on
his
floor.
O
You
know
he
had
some
weird
contraption
plugged
into
the
wall
outside
his
bedroom
and
I
said
gus.
What
is
that
he
said?
I
don't
know
it
looked
like
an
easy
bake,
oven
that
was
plugged
in
to
sort
of
create
a
unit,
and
this
is
a
problem
that
landlord
owns
many
homes
and
is
collecting
large
amounts
of
money,
and
there
were
many
young
men
packed
into
this
house,
and
it's
really
is
essential
that
we
talk
about
both
the
absentee
landlord.
O
With
the
exception
of
mr
gil
ohan
and
by
the
way,
mr
and
I
I'm
sorry
about
my
pronunciation,
I
would
love
to
meet
you
and
I'd
love
to
see
your
homes
at
some
point,
but
it
is
essential.
These
are
young
adults,
who've,
never
lived
on
their
own,
most
of
them
for
they're
living
on
their
own
for
the
first
time,
and
these
are
landlords
who
don't
live
predominantly
do
not
live
in
evanston
and
that's
why
we
see.
O
In
some
cities,
such
as
providence,
rhode
island,
there
have
actually
been
ordinances
created
that
actually
target
or
incorporate
absentee
landlords
and
student
housing,
and
I
think
that
is
we.
We
have
to
address
that.
If
we're
going
to
be
realistic
about
the
situation,
if
we're
simply
going
to
change
this
rule
without
considering
impact,
then
please
keep
in
mind.
We
are
not,
in
fact,
if
we
aren't
addressing
all
the
issues
that
miss
payton
talked
about
that
ms
nelson
talked
about.
O
We
aren't
in
fact,
really
looking
to
create
more
affordable
units,
and
we
also
need
to
address
the
adu
ordinance
that
was
recently
passed.
That
ordinance
is
just
now
starting
to
come
into
play
where
and
we're
seeing
right
now,
an
uptick
in
absentee
landlords
buying
up
homes
because
guess
what
now
in
essence,
one
can
create
a
multi-unit
house,
a
multi-unit
dwelling
by
working
around
it
by
creating
internal
adu
and
we're
seeing
that
in
this
ward.
O
Just
by
you
know
it's
not
that
much
different
from
creating
a
multi-unit
dwelling
within
a
single-family
resident
zone
by
calling
it
an
internal
adu
just
means
you
have
to
segment
some
part
of
the
first
floor
or
whatever
floor,
you're,
creating
it
off
that
doesn't
isn't
part
of
that
idea.
That
makes
sense
so
so
suddenly
we're
seeing
that
we
can
have
homes
converted
this
way,
so
they
could
be
allowed
to.
You
know
have
up
to
six
students,
six
students
living
in
a
house
which
we've
seen
over
and
over
and
over
again
violation
of
occupancy.
O
So
right
now
I
really
I
I
ask
that
we
hold
off.
I
think
it
is
very
premature
to
be
moving
forward
on
this.
I
think
we're
not.
We
really
need
to
understand
the
implications.
I
think
we
need
to
do
things
like
look
first
before
we
go
forward
on
something
like
this,
which
will
explode
in
terms.
O
If
we
go
forward
and
allow
you
know
increasing
the
number
of
unrelated
people
in
house,
we
have
landlords
that
are
just
waiting
to
move
in
on
that
and
that's
really
going
to
harm
not
only
the
integrity
of
our
neighborhoods.
It's
going
to
harm
affordability
and
dave
davis
stands
with
me
on
this.
We
really
need
to
see
first,
better
enforcement.
O
O
So
I
think
we
should
wait
to
see
if
we're
able
to
pass
that
modification
to
the
current
adu
ordinance
where
it's
requiring
internal
adus.
I
think
we
also
need
to
look
at
things
like
either
the
option
to
revoke
rental
registration
or
to
look
at
perhaps
having
the
licensing
rental
licensing,
with
the
option
to
revoke
for
violation,
because
we
have
violation,
after
violation,
after
violation
from
absentee
landlords
for
occupancy
and
and
nobody
in
my
world
wants
to
evict
students.
I
don't
hear
anybody
wants
to
do
that.
O
What
we
want
is
some
some
firm
ordinance
and
codes
and
enforcement
put
in
place,
we're
all
about
affordable
housing
and,
oh
by
the
way,
when
you
have
owner
occupied
student
housing,
no,
there
aren't
any
problems.
So
when
somebody
lives
in
the
home
in
this
ward,
it
works,
it
works
beautifully.
It's
a
beautiful
way
to
provide
student
housing
when
you
have
when
it's
owner
occupied
and
again
david.
I
know
that
you
are
definitely
an
exception.
O
I
I
look
forward
to
visiting,
or
at
least
seeing
the
homes
that
the
the
property
that
you
own
also
we
have,
I
believe,
one
rooming
house-
that's
actually
certified
or
licensed
as
a
rooming
house,
and
that
I
also
is
not
a
problem
from
everything.
I've
heard
this
works
for
it
very
well,
it's
not
just
because
it
allows
up
to.
However
many
people,
it's
because
there
really
are
some
strict
rules.
Yes,
I'm
sarah,
maybe
some
are
obsolete,
but
the
fact
that
they
get
inspected
and
licensed
every
year
and
they
really
do
just
have
one
kitchen.
O
So
it's
not
just
packed
full
with
randomly.
There
is
a
supervisor.
So
all
of
these
from
what
I've
heard
are
the
rooming
house
and
this
award
actually
works.
Well,
so
I
again,
I
just
really
want
to
ask
that
we
hold
off
and
there
are
other
things
we
want
to
get
in
place
here,
like
a
disclosure
form
at
the
point
of
sale,
because
frequently
we
have
landlords
claiming
plausible
tonight
that
when
they
bought
it,
they
were
told
that
they
could
do
this
and
then,
of
course,
again
nobody
wants
to
kick
anybody
out.
O
So
they're
able
to
continue
on
with
you
know,
house
households
full
of
like
10
11
young
adults,
and
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
disclosure
form
where
they
sign
off
fully
understanding
the
code
and
the
zoning
all
of
these
measures-
and
you
know,
disclosure
forms
improving
enforcement
rental
registry-
the
option
to
revoke
either
rental
registration
or
or
implementing
a
licensing
program
waiting
in
to
see
if
we
need
to
modify
our
current
adu
ordinance
so
that
it
requires
owner
occupied
owner
occupancy
for
internal
and
attached
adus.
O
A
Thank
you,
sue
lolobach,.
J
Yep
yeah,
hello,
everybody,
I'm
sue
lobach.
I
am
with
connections
for
the
homeless
and
head
up
our
program
called
joining
forces
for
affordable
housing.
J
I'd
like
to
say
that
it
seems
that
there
are
some
sort
of
troubling
assumptions
underlying
portions
of
the
discussion
tonight,
as
well
as
underlying
the
current
code
related
to
this
as
it's
written.
Those
assumptions
are
that
only
groups
of
people
who
have
an
acceptable
relationship
with
each
other
are
acceptable.
J
Households
that
somehow
it's
appropriate
and
right
for
the
city
to
define
which
relationships
are
acceptable
and
which
are
not
that
the
priority
is
to
preserve
the
character
of
the
neighborhoods
that
we,
whoever
that
is
want
to
live
in
even
if
people
in
need
of
housing
are
excluded,
that
students
are
not
legitimate
residents,
but
renters
are
not
legitimate
residents.
The
people
who
want
to
share
housing
so
they
can
afford
it,
are
not
legitimate
residents
and
that
the
city
has
the
right
to
determine
who
is
a
legitimate
resident.
J
In
response
to
these
assumptions,
we
believe
that
every
person
deserves
housing,
whether
they
are
part
of
a
family
or
not,
and
if
sharing
housing
with
people
who
aren't
family
provides
affordable
opportunities,
it
should
not
be
an
option
for
the
city
to
deny
to
to
deny
that
at
the
real
crux
of
the
matter.
I
think
and
more
to
what
you
know.
Some
of
the
comments
have
been
about
is
that
northwestern
only
provides
housing
for
approximately
20
of
its
students.
J
The
communities
around
northwestern's
campuses
must
accommodate
the
rest
close
to
20
000
people
who
are
not
here
with
family
members.
Because
of
this,
and
because
of
the
desperate
need
for
more
affordable
units.
We
believe
that
evanston
in
particular
needs
more
rental
units
both
for
students
and
for
non-students,
providing
more
rentals,
could
drive
housing
costs
down,
relieve
the
pressure
on
single-family
owner-occupied,
neighborhoods
house,
more
students
and
free
up
more
rental
housing
for
non-students.
J
The
three
unrelated
role
is
not
the
answer
to
the
problem
of
tensions
related
to
student
and
non-student
housing.
This
tension
will
only
be
resolved
when
the
university
and
the
municipality
together
address
the
need
for
more
rental
housing
in
locations
that
don't
pit
students
and
non-students
against
each
other.
J
J
Rather,
this
law,
that's
perceived
as
protecting
a
few
neighborhoods
around
the
university,
is
in
fact
putting
restraints
on
all
neighborhoods
in
the
city.
Repealing
the
current
ordinance
will
allow
flexibility
that
is
not
currently
possible
and
not
allowing
it
is
irresponsible.
While
we're
living
through
a
housing
crisis.
J
We
support
the
first
recommendation
by
staff.
We
urge
you
to
approve
it
and
to
implement
it
as
soon
as
possible,
and,
in
addition,
we
believe
that
the
university
and
the
city
need
to
start
a
process
immediately
to
increase
the
amount
of
rental
housing
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
both
students
and
non-students.
Thank
you.
S
I
would
like
to
speak.
I
I'm
bonnie
wilson,
I
hi
bonnie.
I
I
play
my
speech
for
a
minute
and
a
half,
so
I
I
will
be.
I
will
be
very
brief.
Thank
you
for
letting
me
speak
one
of
the
I'm
bonnie
wilson.
One
of
the
definitions
is
a
family,
as
described
in
the
evanston
64-1-14
occupancy
of
drilling
units.
S
Excuse
me
under
type
d,
family
subsections,
a
and
b.
This
definition
of
family
includes
a
husband
and
wife
married
to
one
another
and
their
children
as
a
tribute
to
pride
month
this
month
of
june.
I
feel
it
is
important
that
the
city
of
evanston
no
longer
uses
the
words
husband
and
wife.
Evanston
should
no
longer
be
telling
residents
how
they
should
live
together
and
telling
couples.
If
you
are
not
described
as
a
husband
and
wife,
you
are
not
a
family.
S
I
feel
it
is
important
that
the
word
family
not
be
used
as
a
definition
under
occupancy
of
drawing
units,
and
I
agree
with
your
with
your.
I
agree
with
you
about
alternate
one
that
the
staff
that
the
memo
that
the
staff
sent
out
on
june,
the
4th
that
occupancy
should
be
based
on
property
standards,
regulations
and
increasing
the
number
of
maximum
unrelated
residents
in
a
unit
from
three
to
eight,
then
making
rooming
houses
available
in
all
residential
districts
over
occupancy
would
be
based
on
the
property
standards
square
footage
requirements.
S
This
would
apply
both
to
owner
occupied
and
rental
properties.
I
have
been
a
real
estate
agent
in
evanston
for
the
last
36
years
and
what
people
are
saying
about
evanston
about
real
estate
agents
that
people
are
buying
homes
around
northwestern
these
homes
are
a
million
over
a
million
dollars,
sometimes
up
to
two
million
dollars.
I
can't
unders.
I
can't
I've
never
seen
in
all
my
years
of
doing
real
estate
that
that
people
are
buying
these
homes
for
their
kids
and
changing
them
to
rooming
houses
or
to
to
rent
them
out.
S
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Anyone
else.
E
K
Hi
yeah
I
had
signed
up
to
talk,
oh
anyway,
right
anyway,
welcome
I'll,
be
quick.
This
is
now
the
second
meeting
I've
attended.
I
I
think
once
again
you're
putting
everything
into
a
pot.
K
K
I
learned
tonight
that
the
house
down
the
block
that
has
nine
students
living.
I
guess
I
can't
call
it
a
rooming
house.
I
don't
know
what
you
call
that,
but
it's
nine
people
and
nine
cars
and
these
people
signed
leases.
It's
truly
not
a
family.
Is
this
what
we
want
in
our
neighborhoods?
I
I
don't.
You
know
we
bought
our
house
because
we
wanted
a
single
family
house.
K
A
All
right,
so
I
think
we
now
need
to
go
back
to
the
commission
for
discussion.
A
What
I
would
like
to
suggest
again.
This
is
an
item
that
that
is
for
discussion.
So
I'm
not
sure
I
think
we
have
a
city
attorney
on
on
our
staff.
What
I
would
suggest
is
we
kind
of
go
through
and
indicate
individually
what
our
preferences
are.
We
have
the
the
alternative
one.
A
We
have
alternative
two
and
then
I
had
suggested
the
alternative
three,
which
was
really
to
deal
with
just
the
definition
of
what
the
type
a
family
is,
and
I
think
it
would
probably
be
helpful
for
staff
and
for
us
to
just
kind
of
explain
our
reasoning
and
I
guess
I'm
going
to
go
first
and
then
we
can
go
down
the
line.
A
E
E
I
I
would
like
us
to
explore
alternative
one
in
more
detail
again.
You
know
a
couple
couple
issues
have
come
up
in
congress
in
in
the
in
the
public
comment.
I
don't
think
that
this
this
rule
is
creating
affordable
housing
throughout
the
city.
I
don't
think
that's
what
it's
intended
to
do.
I
think
it
is
intended
to
make
some
housing
more
affordable,
but
it's
not
like,
like
I've
mentioned
before
I,
I
don't
see
affordable
housing
being
a
1.5
million
dollar
home
up
near
the
you
know,
the
campus.
E
You
know,
we've
heard
lots
of
issue
about
enforcement.
Things
like
that.
You
know
lots
of
that.
Stuff
falls
outside
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
which,
I
don't
believe
is
is
our
purview.
I
mean
we,
yes,
it's
it's
things
that
we
do
will
affect
it,
but
but
that
really
is
up
to
the
city,
to
figure
out
how
to
make
everything
work
together.
E
Our
our
particular
concern
is
is
in
is
in
title
six
of
the
zoning
ordinance
and
then
you
know
I
keep
hearing,
you
know,
developers
are
snatching
up,
properties,
developers
can
only
buy
what
people
are
willing
to
sell,
and
so,
if
people
in
the
neighborhood
are
selling
to
developers,
they
are
changing
the
neighborhood
that
they
are
leaving.
This
isn't
a
situation
where
developers
are
are
using
some
form
of
imminent
domain
to
lay
claim
to
properties.
E
E
A
G
Yeah,
I
am
inclined
to
support
alternative
one.
I
really
found
the
arguments
that
sue
lawbach,
I
believe
made
for
me
resonated,
and
you
know
in
addition
to
what
commissioner
rogers
has
just
indicated.
So
I
I
I'm
inclined
to
to
support
alternative
one.
F
You
know
my
problem
with
alternative.
One
continues
to
be
the
fact
that
you
are
removing
a
definition
that
that
provides
perhaps
an
artificial
structure,
but
there
is
nothing
to
take
its
place,
which
does
not
face
some
of
the
realities
of
what
is
going
on
in
a
couple
of
the
districts
of
the
city,
and
I
totally
agree,
the
city
doesn't
have
the
right
to
define
what's
an
appropriate
family
who
should
be
part
of
that
appropriate
family.
F
But
we
need
something
else
to
to
realize
that
there's
going
to
be
an
impact
to
removing
that
protection
and
there's
no
substitute
for
the
university
and
the
city
working
together
to
to
build
or
to
find
a
way
to
provide
additional
housing,
but
that's
obviously
a
long
standing
effort
that
needs
to
take
place
and
it
takes
a
long
time
and
I
I
do
think
you
need
to
dig
into
protection
for
these
two
districts.
We've
talked
on
the
zoning
committee
before
about
overlay
districts.
F
You
know
it's
a
dilemma
for
people,
it's
a
real-life
dilemma
and
I
agree.
While
you
don't
have
to
sell
to
a
developer,
there
are
already
numerous
houses
that
have
turned
a
certain
way
and
while
the
city
doesn't
have
a
right
to
decide
what
neighborhood
should
be
like,
I
think
the
community
and
community
voices
have
a
right
to
be
heard
on
that.
D
I'm
going
to
be
very
brief.
I
agree
with
all
the
all
the
comments
that
have
been
said,
especially
commissioner
rogers,
and
so
I
would
support
alternative
one.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I
think
I
think
that
kind
of
concludes
the
the
comments.
I
would
note
for
the
you
know,
members
of
the
public
on
on
the
call
we're
dealing
with
a
reference
that
was
an
aldermanic
reference
and
staff.
A
Maybe
you
could
kind
of
talk
a
little
bit
about
you
know
the
the
timing
of
of
when
we
need
to
make
a
decision
or
if
we
need
to
make
a
decision,
because
I
think
there
are
or
whether
the
the
city
council
will
take
the
you
know
the
the
next
steps,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
interrelated
issues
that
need
to
be
researched
and
addressed.
A
I
B
Yeah,
so
we
there
there
are
a
number
of
different
pieces
to
what
is
being
proposed
or
implications
so
to
speak.
It
seems
like
we
do,
have
some
kind
of
direction
on
perhaps
pursuing
a
particular
alternative.
B
We
can
look
deeper
into
that,
but
we
absolutely
do
acknowledge
that
there
are
other
impacts
that
we
do
need
to
look
at
and
there
there
are
other
items
that
are
being
worked
on,
such
as
the
landlord
tenant
ordinance
and
things
that
the
property
maintenance
ordinance
angelique.
If
I've
got
that
correct.
B
So
those
are
other
aspects
that
kind
of
tie
into
this
that
are
also
being
looked
at,
so
we
can
continue
to
refine
what
we
have,
since
this
is
discussion
tonight
with
the
knowledge
that
there
are
other
pieces
of
this
that
are
currently
being
worked
on
in
some
way
shape
or
form.
I
don't
have
a
set
timeline.
B
Unfortunately,
perhaps
sarah
or
angelique
may
be
able
to
better
provide
a
timeline
for
those
other
pieces.
But
just
so
you
know
there
are
other
portions
of
this
that
are
being
worked
on.
N
I
can
provide
a
little
bit
of
information
on
the.
We
are
working
on
a
evaluation
of
our
landlord
tenant,
ordinance,
the
nuisance,
premises,
ordinance
and
those
aspects
of
that
aspect
of
our
code.
That
is
partly
because
there
was
a
a
very
recent
actually
june.
1
was
when
the
new
cook
county,
landlord
tenant
ordinance
went
into
effect.
That
ordinance
was
based
on
chicago
evanston
and
mount
prospects
ordinance.
N
So
it's
not
like
it's
radically
different,
but
there's
some
stuff,
that's
in
it
that's
very
relevant,
and
we
also
for
us
to
look
at
and
we
had
actually
had
a
discussion
at
the
housing
homelessness.
Commission
about
that
and
part
of
that
discussion
was
also
looking
at
nuisance,
premises,
ordinance
our
nuisance,
premises,
ordinance
and
looking
at
some
of
the
examples
that
have
been
provided
in
the
packet
in
the
in
the
past.
N
I
don't
know
if
it's
in
this
packet,
we
have
a
lot
of
stuff
in
there
probably
is
like
the
boston
ordinance
and
the
hollywood.
California,
ordnance
that
that
really
are
designed
to
address
the
types
of
behaviors
more
effectively
than
I
think
our
current
ordinance
does.
But
the
types
of
behaviors
that
are
disruptive
in
the
neighborhoods
around
northwestern
we've
also
had
a
number
of
discussions
with
northwestern
dave,
davis
and
tony
kirchmeier
about
ways
to
work
better
with
students
in
off-campus
housing
and
all
of
those
are
going
to
continue.
N
I
don't
have
an
absolute
date
that
we're
going
to
be
bringing
that
forward,
but
I
also
think
that
reviewing
and
looking
more
deeply
into
the
impact
of
how
following
alternate
one
is
going
to
take
some
time
because
it
is,
it
has
to
be
done
very
carefully
and
we
have
to
look
at
the
types
of
things
that
you've
pointed
out.
We
have
to
look
at
all
the
other.
N
Parts
of
the
code
that
would
be
affected
and
things
like
group
homes
and
all
those
sorts
of
things
that
so
then
there
are
a
lot
of
other
things
on
the
agenda
for
council
and
everybody
else.
So
I
think
that
I'm
not
really
in
a
position
where
I
can
say
how
quickly
we
can
come
back
with
all
that,
but
I
honestly
think
that
everybody
believes
that
we
have
to
look
at
everything
thoroughly
and
do
a
good
job,
we're
not
recommending
that
we
come
back
next.
N
You
know
plan
commission
meeting
and
just
delete
family,
and
you
know
that's
it.
That's
never
been
our
intention,
so
I
find
it
very
helpful
to
hear
the
comments
of
of
the
commissioners,
and
I
feel
very
strongly
that
you
know
we
have
said
all
along.
We
don't
believe
the
three
unrelated
is
adequately
addressing
the
nuisance
issues
around
the
campus
and
there
have
been
there's
information
on
ways:
we've
we're
looking
at
recommending
addressing
that
more
effectively
and
to
be
effective.
N
A
P
A
All
right,
thank
you.
That's
that's
helpful,
and
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
you
know
it
seems
to
me
that
one
of
the
big
issues
as
your
as
the
city
council,
grapples
with
this
you
know
the
other
ordinances
which
are
not
the
purview
of
the
plan.
Commission,
your
budget,
obviously
is
going
to
be
a
consideration.
A
So
you
know,
unless
there's
some
reason
that
you
know
as
long
as
there's
not
a
reason
for
the
plan
commission
to
move
forward
more
quickly,
I
would
suggest
that
we
kind
of
wait
for
those
discussions
to
evolve
in
the
city
council
to
kind
of
provide
some
sort
of
direction
or
strategy
that
we
then
can
can
take
back.
I
think
that
you
know
with
the
discussion
and
the
position
of
where
the
the
commissioners
stand
on
the
issue.
You
have
some
at
least
you
have
our
our
current
sense
and
concerns,
and
so
I
would.
E
I
mean
my
personal
preference
would
be
that
we
we
take
some
sort
of
direction
giving
because
this
is
one
of
those
issues
that
just
keeps
getting
booted
down
the
line
just
further
and
further,
and
it
comes.
A
I
think
I
think
that
I
think
that
we
have,
I
mean
that's
kind
of
the.
I
think
that,
in
terms
of
of
where
the
the
you
know
the
sense
of
the
commission,
I
I
think
that
there's
there
are
a
couple
of
us
who
want
to
at
least
one
of
us.
At
least
I
want
to
stay
with
the
current
definition
or
not
or
retain
a
definition
of
family
of
some
sort
and
and
a
number
of
the
you
know.
The
majority
of
the
commissioners
on
the
call
today
are
interested
in
pursuing
alternate
one.
A
E
I
I
would
ask
the
city
attorney
the
question
of
whether
we
could
make
a
recommendation
that
city
council,
I'm
sorry
that
staff
be
given
specific
direction
through
emotion,
if
that
with
because
it's
not
an
issue,
that
is
a
decision
as
such,
it
is
direction
to
staff.
So
I
would
ask
the
city
attorney
if
that,
if
that
was,
if
that
was
within
our
ability
to
do
that,
without
violating
rules.
H
A
Think
we're
kind
of
done
with
the
discussion,
but
we
do
have
one
other
item.
So
so
perhaps
we
can
go
on
to
approval
of
the
meeting
dates
through
december
of
2021.
E
So
what
I'll
do
right
now
is?
I
will
motion
that
we
table
this
while
the
city
attorney
looks
through
direction
so
that
we
can
move
on
to
another
matter.
Without
closing
this
one
out.
Oh.
A
G
D
A
A
Okay,
so
the
final
item
on
our
agenda
is
the
planning
commission
meeting
schedule
for
the
balance
of.
B
2021.,
so
that
that
calendar
keeps
the
two
meetings
a
month
that
we
have
established
and
if
there
are
no
items
we
can
cancel
as
needed.
It
also
speaks
to
having
zoning
committee
meetings
prior
to
the
planning
commission
meetings
at
6
00
p.m
as
needed.
There
is
one
date
on
there.
I
think
it's
september
8th
that
may
be
a
conflict
with
a
holiday,
but
I
would
need
to
double
check
with
that.
One.
E
Yeah
so
so
rosh
hashanah
ends
on
the
evening
of
september,
8th.
So
just
to
be
aware.
A
B
It
it
looks
like
the
governor
will
not
be
extending
the
order
that
actually
permitted
the
use
of
remote
meetings
or
solely
meeting
remote.
So
I
know
the
city,
just
in
general
is
looking
at
what
meeting
in
person
will
look
like.
B
I
think
there
will
still
be
some
capability
to
have
people
come
or
meet
or
tune
in
so
to
speak.
Remotely,
as
I
think
that's,
there
are
probably
some
residents
who
have
that
comfort,
comfort
level
and
we've
probably
been
able
to
get
a
bit
more
participation
due
to
being
able
to
have
things
remote.
B
So
that
is
a
part
that
we
are
still
taking
a
look
at.
I
think,
if
we
do
end
up
meeting
in
person,
there
will
still
likely
be
some
requirements
for
for
wearing
masks
and
things
like
that.
But
the
details
have
not
been
finalized.
As
of
yet.
A
Okay,
so
do
we
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
meeting
schedule.
H
F
A
G
B
H
E
Okay,
in
that
case,
I
would
make
a
motion
that
staff
look
further
into
alternative
one
and
at
such
time
that
they
are
able,
based
on
the
other
issues
that
are
being
addressed
throughout
the
rest
of
the
ordinances.
Come
back
to
us
with
some
verbiage
that
would.
That
would
be
more
more
appropriate
for
us
to
discuss
in
detail.
S
E
A
Q
N
N
Yes,
if
I
could,
I
just
did
want
to
note
that
we
did
receive
information
that
the
the
hybrid
and
being
back
in
person
that
megan
referred
to
is
to
start
in
july,
so
that
that
will
affect
july
meetings.
Yes,
okay,
so
make
sure,
because
they
didn't
hear
us,
give
you
a
date.