►
From YouTube: Plan Commission Meeting 10-14-2020
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
today
is
wednesday
october
14
2020,
and
this
is
the
city
of
evanston
planning
commission
meeting.
First
order
of
business
determination,
whether
we
have
a
quorum,
miss
jones,
if
you
could
call
the
role
please.
C
D
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Miss
jones.
Next
item
is
again
we'll
need
a
motion
to
end
the
rules
to
allow
us
to
conduct
this
meeting
via
zoom.
Do
I
have
such
a
motion.
A
All
right
westerberg
seconds,
ms
jones,
please
call
the
roll
vote
on
the
motion.
G
A
A
F
A
Westerberg
seconds,
ms
jones,
please
call
the
roll
to.
B
G
A
All
right,
the
meeting
minutes
of
september
30
2020,
are
approved
next
item
on
our
agenda
is
the
only
item
on
our
agenda.
It's
old
business,
it's
the
planned
development
for
1900,
sherman
avenue,
20
lnd-0039.
A
H
Sure,
there's
a
not
a
staff
presentation
this
evening.
There
are
no
changes
to
the
plans.
However,
there
were
a
couple
clarifications
that
the
applicant
made
since
the
september
9th
meeting
I'll.
Let
the
app
can
speak
to
those
regarding
the
age
restriction,
the
affordability
and
the
ownership
of
the
project.
Okay,.
A
Thank
you,
mr
mangum,
who
will
be
presenting
those
items
from
the
from
the
applicant.
I
I
will
be
william
james
commerce
summit
representing
the
housing
authority.
Thank
you,
and
are
we
ready
for
those
please?
Okay?
So
there
was
some
ambiguity
or
question
mark
regarding
three
aspects
of
our
proposal.
One
was
the
application
of
the
age
restriction.
I
The
second
was
the
age
restriction
for
the
missing
middle
units
and
the
third
was
the
ownership
structure
of
the
project.
With
respect
to
the
age
restriction,
it
was
the
housing
authority's
intent
to
apply
a
55
and
over
age
restriction
to
all
heads
of
households.
That
would
be
all
lessees
in
the
building.
I
I
And
so
that
is
what
we
are
going
with.
And
the
third
point
of
clarification
is
the
ownership
structure
and
the
recently
amended
state
law
with
respect
to
mended
or
created,
but
a
state
law
that
allows
housing
authorities
to
develop
mixed
income.
Properties,
which
was
passed
recently,
requires
that
there
be
a
partnership
between
the
housing
authority
and
a
private
developer
private
entity,
and
it
is
the
housing
authority's
intention
to
conform
to
the
state
law.
By
having
a
one
percent
interest
with
a
private
developer.
I
A
Mr
james,
very
quickly,
the
housing
authority
would
retain
99
and
the
private
developer
would
be
a
one
percent
owner.
That's
correct
any
anything
else,
mr
james.
I
No,
those
are
all
the
clarifications
we
were
asked
to
provide
and
we
we
made
a
full
presentation
at
the
last
plan
commission
meeting,
we
have
our
presentation
available
if
any
of
the
commissioners
would
like
to
go
back
and
revisit
that
I
coordinated
with
scott
mangum
on
on
the
matter
of
the
presentation.
He
said.
No,
you
made
the
presentation
before
and
you
should
only
be
prepared
to
answer
questions.
We
have
our
full
team
available.
I
If,
if
there
are
questions
that
people
want
us
to
go
back
and
represent
certain
aspects
of
the
presentation,
we
can
do
that.
A
I
A
You,
mr
james,
all
right.
So
as
a
as
a
reminder,
this
is
a
continuation
of
our
of
our
last
meeting.
So
the
the
order
of
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
tonight
is,
I
will
take
questions
from
the
from
the
public
and
miss
jones.
Is
there
a
is
there
a
list
of
of
people
that
wanted
to
speak
tonight.
B
There
is,
I
did
send
that
to
you
through
email,
but
I've
got
it
as
well.
A
Can
you
resend
it
because
I
don't
think
okay,
I
don't
think
it
came
through
the
so
we'll
we'll
take
questions
from
the
public,
but
I
would
ask
is
that
the
questions
be
limited
to
those
items
that
were
that
have
changed
so
this.
You
know
this
brief
presentation
by
mr
james.
If
you
have
questions
about
that
and
then
I
would
ask,
I
believe
it
was
mr
erdenbach,
if
I'm
remembering
correctly,
who
had
who
had
made
the
objection
or
the
request
for
the
continuance.
A
A
A
A
I
will
call
on.
I
will
call
on
you
to
ask
questions
of
the
applicant
if
your
questions
have
not
already
been
asked
by
other
members
of
the
of
the
public.
It
looks
like
this
list
was
only
for
for
comments.
So
if
let
me
see
where
is
this
sorry,
I'm
having
technical
difficulties
here
all
right,
so
there
is
a
way
in
zoom
for
you
to
raise
your
hand,
and
I
will
see
that
you
have
your
hand
raised,
and
I
will
call
on
you.
If
you
have
questions.
A
Looks
like
let's
see,
looks
like
a
claire
claire
kelly
has
made
a
comment.
Do
you
have
a
miss
kelly?
Do
you
have
a
question
of
the
applicant
to
expand
on
your
on
your
comment
here
to
to
bring.
J
All
right,
I
just
like
a
little
more
clarification.
I've
written
to
my
alderman
alderman,
judy
fisk,
who
hasn't
explained
to
me.
The
structure
is
still
not
clear
to
me.
So
if
you
could
just
walk
us
through
a
little
bit
who
owns
the
land
who's
going
to
own
the
building,
you
say
it's
one
percent
private
developer.
I
think
we
just
need,
since
this
is
an
unusual
arrangement.
I
think
that
was
a
little
bit
brief.
I
think
we
could
use
a
little
more
in-depth
explanation
as
to
the
structure
of
ownership
who
owns
the
affordable
housing
unit.
J
I
I
To
actually
formally
hold
ownership,
as
I
mentioned
there
was
a
state
law
recently
passed
that
would
enable
housing
authorities
to
engage
in
in
mixed
income
development,
and
this
required
some
partnership
with
a
private
developer,
perhaps
so
that
there's
not
a
direct
competition
between
housing
authorities
and
private
developers,
I'm
not
sure
what
the
intent
was,
but
that
is
the
reason
for
our
intention
to
enter
into
a
one
percent
ownership
agreement
with
a
private
developer.
We
are
in
discussions
with
that
private
developer.
I
K
So
let
me
this
is
rich
monachio
bill.
Let
me
before
amy
kirsten
talks
I'll
I'll
address
this
directly,
because
it
is,
it
is
not
confusing
at
all.
Actually,
so
the
land
is
owned
by
the
housing
authority.
This
is
really
a
public
infrastructure
project.
K
K
A
Miss
mr
mr
benacchio,
just
just
to
clarify
the
timeline,
and
you
can.
You
know,
push
this
off
to
the
to
your
council
if
need
be,
but
to
clarify
the
timeline
the
the
hacc
has
been
allowed
to
have,
I
mean
sorry,
to
build
mixed
income
developments,
but
pursuant
to
a
recent
amendment,
they
are
now
required
to
have
a
private
private
developer
joint
partnership.
K
The
the
provision
that
the
private
entity
be
involved
has
always
been
there
during
our
due
diligence.
As
we
were
working
on
this
project
and
getting
the
documents
together,
we
actually
discovered
the
fact
that
that
the
law
needed
to
be
changed
to
include
the
housing
authority
of
cook
county.
So
that
was
what
was
done
recently.
A
But
but
so
how
long
has
the?
How
long
have
you
guys
been
working
on
getting
a
you
know,
joint
partner
on
this
on
this
deal?
Is
this
something
that
just
recently
came
up
or
is
it
something
that
was
being
disclosed
to
us
now.
K
A
Yeah
is
there,
is
there
anything
and
I'm
sorry,
I
forget
the
name
of
your
accounts,
there's
anything
that
your
council
wants
to
add:
amy,
carson,
amy.
L
Hi
amy
kirsten
here.
No,
the
only
thing
I'd
like
to
add
is
that
on
our
economic
disclosure
statements,
we
did
point
out
that
in
the
future
there
may
be
a
transaction
that
would
need
to
be
disclosed
to
evanston
at
this
time.
The
economic
disclosure
statements
are
accurate.
There's
a
supplemental
letter
with
that,
but
rich
has
perfectly
explained
the
the
the
statute
and
the
setup,
and
it's
all
been
as
clear
as
as
we
can.
You
know,
make
it
to
the
city
at
this
time.
A
Okay,
okay,
I
actually
have
a
few
follow-up
questions
on
on
miss
kelly's
initial
question.
The
with
respect
to
the
joint
ownership
is
the
is
it
anticipated
that
the
developer
will
own
a
a
fee
title
interest,
or
is
it
going
to
be
a
a
membership
interest
in
this
llc?
A
That's
that's
part.
One
then
part
two
is
that
llc
also
an
owner
of
the
of
the
existing
building
and
project,
or
is
it
going
to
be
more
of
a
a
ground
lease
situation
where
the
partnerships
only
was
only
relating
to
the
development
that's
being
discussed
here.
K
Okay,
so
the
the
this
is
actually
going
to
be
a
different
ele,
the
llc
that
that
owns
the
building
next
door
in
1900's
german,
that's
a
that
was
a
worthy
general
partner.
The
tax
credit
investor
is
the
99
owner
and
we're
and
we're
one
percent.
This
project
is
going
to
be
separated
out
fee
simple
and
the.
K
As
I
mentioned
the
in
order
to
satisfy
the
state
law,
the
private
partner
has
to
be
involved
in
the
project,
but
exactly
how
that's
going
to
be
we're
still
negotiating
it.
But
but
again
I
think
that
for
the
for
the
commission
and
the
public,
you
know
this
is
clearly
a
public
cook
county
housing
authority
project
right,
it's
it's,
you
know
a
very
we've.
Very
considerable
expense
has
already
been
put
into
this
and
we're
we're
gonna.
K
A
Okay
and
so
the
hacc
will
will
retain
control
and
major
decision
control.
Absolutely
yes,.
M
A
All
right,
miss
kelly.
Did
you
have
any
other
questions.
J
Yeah
I
do,
can
you
explain
why,
like
the
hh
the
housing
authority,
why
there
is
an
interest
in
investing?
I
guess
our
tax
dollars
right
in
luxury
units,
because
not
all
of
these,
only
a
few
of
these
a
small
percentage
of
these
are
affordable.
So
why
are
you
interested
in
creating
luxury
units?
Is
this
with
tax
dollars?
I'm
just
still
a
little
bit
confused
and
then
my
other
question
is
well.
K
Can
I
answer
the
first
one?
First,
sorry,
let
me
get
to
the
second
one.
I'd
be
happy
to
answer.
Your
question
fact
is
that
this
project
is
going
to
be
built
with
hero
development
subsidies,
so
they're
we're
getting
no
development
subsidies
for
this.
So
when
you
say
luxury
units
fact
is,
we
are
building
this
as
a
housing
authority
with
resources
we
have
most,
notably
the
property
that
we
own
and
equity
that
we
have
have
gathered
because
we
have
done
other
development
deals
and
this
is
being
used.
K
The
whole
the
whole
reason
we're
putting
market
rate
units
here
is
so
we
can
bring
51,
affordable
apartments
on
the
site.
That's
the
only
way
to
do
it,
so
you
know,
I
would
argue
that
this
is
a
great
use
of
taxpayers
dollars,
because
51,
affordable
units
are
being
being
provided
into
an
area
that
sorely
needs
it
without
any
development
subsidies,
there's
nowhere
near
enough
tax
credits
or
other
money
to
build
affordable
housing.
So,
yes,
this
is
a
very
unique
idea
that
we
have,
and
it's
I
don't
know
how.
K
Often
it's
been
done
where
a
public
entity
has
done
this,
but
I
can
tell
you
this
that
the
property
itself
will
be
the
legacy
of
the
housing
authority
and
all
any
cash
flow
that
comes
out
of
this
will
be
pumped
into
the
housing
authority.
So
this
is
a
great
benefit
actually
to
the
taxpayers
and
a
huge
public
benefit
in
terms
of
the
provision
of
affordable
housing.
J
So
that
we're
already
we're
under
occupied
for
luxury
units,
we
don't
really
need.
Why
don't
you
I
mean
it's
not
really
for
our
ideas.
K
J
K
Too,
because
I
I've
heard
this
now
for
a
month,
we
we
have
to
fill
this
building,
it
will
be
filled,
we're
going
to
have
a
long
list
and
51
of
the
units,
the
affordable
units,
we're
gonna
have
thousands
and
thousands
of
people
on
the
list.
For
that,
and
we
don't,
we
believe
this
site
in
this
building
is
gonna,
be
of
such
quality
that
we
are
absolutely
positively
going
to
fill
every
unit
we
have
to,
or
else
we
can't
pay
our
loan.
A
This
is
not
a
forum
for
for
argument
back
and
forth.
If
you
have
questions
to
elicit
more
information,
you
will
have
time
to
to
make
your
comments
and
about
the
about
the
project
you
know
in
shortly.
A
Any
any
other
questions,
ms
kelly,
no
okay.
Thank
you,
looks.
N
Like
hi,
I'm
sorry
thank
you,
mr
isaac.
I
have
a
question
of
the
age
restriction,
55
and
older.
N
It
said
that
the
fair
housing's
asking
for
you're
going
to
go
with
80
of
the
units
is
that
going
to
be
affordable.
Is
that
going
to
be
affordable
for
the
55
and
older.
A
No,
mr
james,
the
question
is
the
55
and
older.
Is
that
applied
equally
the
affordable
units
and
non-affordable
units?
Or
are
you
anticipating
that
it's
just
going
to
be
you're
going
to
get
to
80
somewhere
and
it
could
be?
You
know
it
could
be
a
easy.
I
Mixture,
I
mean
we
are
not
intending
to
place
a
higher
standard
on
the
age
restriction
to
the
market
or
the
the
affordable
units,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
serve
as
many
local
affordable
needs
as
we
can.
So,
I
think,
there's
some
flexibility
in
terms
of
how
that's
applied,
but
that
is
our.
Our
goal
is
applying
the
age
restriction
to
80
percent
of
the
heads
of
household
in
the
unit,
and
it
could
be
any
any
composition
remind.
A
O
A
Okay,
the
new
building,
168
and
51
are
going
to
be
affordable
and
so
you're
saying
that
you
could
conceive,
you
could
conceivably
have
117
that
are
55
and
older,
like
all
the
market
rates
are
55
and
older
and
the
and
you
hit
the
other.
A
You
know
the
balance
of
your
required
80
percent
with
the
affordable,
or
is
it
going
to
be?
Eight
percent
of
the
affordable
will
be
55
and
over
80
of
the
market.
K
Can
I
just
jump
in
here
please,
sir?
It
is
our
intent
that
this
is
a.
This
is
a
a
like:
a
lifestyle,
older
american
lifestyle
building,
it's
our
intent
that
it's
all
going
to
be
occupied
by
folks
55
and
over
as
head
of
household
okay.
I
think
so.
That's
the
intent
now
in
terms
of
like
do
we
have
you
know
the
breakdown
and
so
forth.
K
The
law
says
that
we
that
we
can't
unreasonably
deny
20
of
the
units
and-
and
maybe
amy
can
jump
in
here,
but
that's
this
is
just
a
purely
out
of
the
fair
housing
act.
Is
the
only
reason
why
this
is
even
coming
up.
So
we
fully
intend
to
lease
to
to
folks
that
are
55
and
over,
because
that's
what
the
whole
building
is
going
to
be
geared
towards.
N
N
So
how
are
we
going
to
be
able
to
say
as
a
community
if
we
approve
this
51
is
affordable
housing
for
older
americans,
lifestyle
building
with
80
percent
of
the
units
for
affordable
housing
for
older
people
and
then
80
percent
hub
it
doesn't
make
sense.
The
numbers
do
not
make
sense.
Number
one
number
two
bear
with
me
back
to
the
ownership.
I
would
like
to
make
sure
if
this
moves
forward,
that
this
property
does
not
get
resold
again.
We
know
that
development
sells
within
three
to
five
years
here
in
evanston.
N
It's
a
pattern
being
seen:
you'll
they'll
go
in
and
they'll
sell
at
least
two
times,
and
so
we
would
like
to
have
the
transparency
of
the
one
percent
developer,
who
they
are
before
this
place
gets
developed.
Another
thing
number
three:
if
you're
going
to
be
an
older
american
lifestyle
building,
do
you
have
anything
in
place
for
memory
care,
assisted
living?
I'm
going
back
to
that
again
as
city
of
evanston,
we're
not
taking
care
of
our
older
adults,
we're
just
building
and
building
and
building
50
plus
senior
living
with
nothing
in
place
to
age.
N
K
Is
that
coming
you're
going
to?
Let
me
okay,
thank
you
for
asking
that,
because
let
me
try
to
explain
how
this
works,
so
this
is
being
done
by
a
public
entity,
need
the
rents
that
are
going
to
be
generated
from
the
market
rate
units
in
order
to
build
the
51,
affordable
units.
Okay,
51,
affordable,
51
units
is
a
lot.
You
know
it's
a
ton
of
money,
so
we're
subsidizing
the
51,
affordable
units
with
the
market
rate
units.
That's
how
this
is
working.
It's
internally,
subsidizing
the
mark,
the
affordable
units.
N
K
A
N
A
A
N
N
A
K
Kelly,
mr
isaac,
please
so
it's
a
great
question
actually
part
of
what
we
do
is
house
homeless
families.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
I
mean
I
I'm
putting
the
numbers
together
now,
but
we
we've
housed
either
in
our
apartments
or
with
vouchers
over
a
thousand
homeless
families.
So
your
point
is
very
well
taken,
but
the
fact
is:
there's
a
need
for
all
kinds
of
affordable
housing
and
we
we
have
a
study
that
was
done
in
evanston
in
2018.
K
It
shows
a
tremendous
need
for
affordable
housing
for
older
folks.
Well,
I
don't
disagree
with
you
one
minute
one
bit
and
we
we're
gonna.
That
has
to
be
done
as
well,
but
I
really
wanna
and
I
really
want
amy.
Could
you
address
this
because
I
this
whole
thing
with
the
80
and
fair
housing
act?
I
don't
want
that
to
get
confusing,
because
this
was
just
sprung
upon
me
as
well.
So.
L
Yeah,
absolutely
that
sure
the
fair
housing
act
says
that
if
you're
going
to
market
a
building
as
targeted
to
people
over
55,
that
no
less
than
80
percent
of
the
units
need
to
have
heads
of
households
who
are
over
85.,
there
are
over
55.
Sorry,
so
80
is
the
threshold.
L
L
There's
no
limit
on
how
many
people
you
can
put
in
who
are
over
55.,
so
the
housing
authority
of
cook
county
has
determined
that
it
is
intending
to
make
this
a
senior
lifestyle
building
they're
going
to
try
to
make
it
appealing
to
people
who
are
over
55
and
accordingly,
likely
have
more
than
that
baseline
minimum
of
80
percent.
I
hope
that
helps.
A
P
Hi-
and
this,
I
guess,
is
a
question
either
for
the
city
or
the
developer
in
their
application.
I
see
here
it
says
studio
for
affordable
housing.
There
are
16,
affordable
units,
one
bedroom,
18,
affordable
units,
so
that's
34,
affordable
units.
I
know
there's
this
missing
middle
but
nonetheless
that
rent
is
sixteen
hundred
seventeen
hundred
dollars.
So
does
the
city
count
since
this
is
the
only
you
know,
the
34
is
the
the
number
on
this
application.
P
It
does
the
city
count
this
as
having
34,
affordable
units
or
is
it
51
because
I
mean
I
just
did
a
google
search
and
there's
lots
of
you
know,
there's
that's
sort
of
like
a
vintage,
a
rate,
a
price
for
a
studio
or
a
one
bedroom
of
naturally
occurring
middle?
I
guess
so.
Is
this
affordable
housing
you
know?
Is
it
34
or
is
it
51
because
the
application
says
51.
P
I
34.,
okay,
the
the
evanston
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
has
a
standard
of
20
percent
of
the
units
being
affordable
at
either
50,
ami
or
60
ami
for
housing
developments
that
are
financed
with
public
dollars,
which
which
this
is
okay.
So
that
was
the
requirement
it
is
possible
to
to
provide
a
fee
in
lieu
of
which,
frankly,
all
of
the
other.
I
Okay,
with
our
understanding
that
nobody
has
conformed
to
a
requirement
at
this
time,
maybe.
I
But
have
not
had
not
met
that
had
not
met
the
ordinance
in
full,
so
the
the
ordinance
standard
is
20
for
this
type
of
project
and
we
are
providing
34,
but
we
are.
We
are
exceeding
the
the
ami
requirement
by
by
reserving
these
for
people
with
incomes
of
50
or
less
of
the
average
area
median
income.
So
that
is
what
we're
doing
the
missing
middle
is
an
additional.
I
Are
to
have
too
much
income
to
qualify
for
rental
assistance,
but
do
not
have
incomes
that
will
allow
them
to
rent
market
rate
units
in
in
this
area.
So
that
is
an
additional
benefit
that
we
have
talked
to
the
city
for
a
long
time
about
they're,
very
supportive
of
that
and
that's
how
we
get
to
the
51
assisted
units.
P
Does
the
city,
maybe
this
is
a
question
for
scott?
Does
the
city
is
it,
is
I
mean,
is
there
34
technically,
are
there
34,
affordable
units
or
is
it
51.
H
So
the
34
units
provided
the
20
of
the
units
complies
with
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
by
being
at
50
ami,
where
60,
ami
or
lower
would
be
required.
So
those
are
the
units
that
comply
with
iho.
The
other
units
are
in
addition
to
that.
P
L
Hi
this
is
amy
amy
carson,
the
attorney
for
the
housing
authority
in
evanston,
inclusionary
housing
ordinance.
There
is
a
definition
provided
for
middle-income
housing,
our
middle
income
household,
so
that
so
this
missing
middle
that
we're
talking
about
is
included
in
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance,
and
it
is
one
of
evanston's
priorities.
P
Okay,
I'm
just
confused
because
it's
not
in
the
application-
and
you
know
everything
I've
seen
it-
has
a
different
if
it
hasn't.
K
Missed
kelly,
you
and
I
talked
about
this
monday
night
too,
and
I
appreciate
that
conversation.
So
let
me
just
try
it
simplify
it.
These
are.
There
is
51,
affordable,
because
under
the
ordinance
we
could
just
provide
the
34
right
at
50
of
ami
for
very
low
income,
but
we
chose
to
do
17
more
units
that
are
affordable
to
the
average
person,
so
the
average
person
can
live
in
this
building
now,
whereas
before,
if
we
didn't
do
this,
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
because
those
17
rents
would
be
higher.
K
So
I
will
argue
vociferously
that
there
are
51
in
there
understanding
that
what
you're
saying
about
strictly
under
the
aro-
yes
but
we're
providing-
and
this
is
a
huge
public
benefit
as
bill
said-
we're
doing
it
because
these
units,
we
wanted
to
have
more
affordability
in
the
building.
I
And
we
wanted
to
have
a
mix
of
incomes.
I
think
it's
very
important
to
understand
that
this
is
the
whole
crux
of
of
the
development
is
to
provide
affordable
housing
within
the
context
of
a
mixed
income
development
where
you're
not
segregating
people
of
different
incomes,
but
actually
mixing
them
together,
where
we
have
people
at
the
lower
end
of
the
scale,
the
middle
end
of
the
scale
and
at
the
upper
end
of
the
scale
and
as
rich
said
only
through
this
model,
can
we
provide
the
revenue
needed
to
subsidize
the
affordable
units.
P
H
A
So
the
proposal
includes,
what's
required
by
the
we're
calling
it
the
aho
is
that
or
iho
iho,
and
the
proposal
also
includes
17
additional
units
meeting
the.
L
Which
awesome
I'm
so
sorry,
mr
chairman,
I
think
this
may
be
helpful.
The
evanston,
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
includes
a
definition
of
affordable
dwelling
units
and
that
definition
includes
the
missing
middle
target
units
that
we're
talking
about
tonight.
So,
yes,
there
is
a
20
percent
requirement
for
60
percent
of
ami.
We
are
meeting
that,
but
the
but
evanston's
definition
of
affordable
housing
does
include
these.
L
That
I'll
just
read
the
it's
called
middle
income
households,
so
the
units
that
are
being
provided
for
middle
income,
households,
the
way
that's
defined
in
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance,
they
do
meet
the
definition
of
affordable
housing.
So
I
think
we're
just
kind
of
you.
I
think
we're
clear
on
how
many
units
are
being
provided,
we're
maybe
going
around
and
around
about
what
this
definition
is.
Q
A
It's
very
clear
from
the
applicant's
response
and
from
mr
mangum's
response
that
our
34
there
are
34
units
and
those
34
units
make
this
project
comply
with
the
iho.
The
developer
is
also
setting
aside
17
more
units
that
will
that
would
otherwise
comply
with
the
middle
income,
household
definition
of
affordable
housing
and
then
the
rest.
The
balance
of
the
units
will
be
market
rate.
That's
the
answer!
A
A
J
This
really
coaching
to
what
it's
just
really
short,
I
just
we
really
need
to
have.
Can
we
please
get
a
copy
of
your
market
analysis,
because
the
big
concern
is
that
we're
going
to
lose
both
taxpayers
and
what
is
your
market
analysis?
Can
we
have
access
to
that?
Where
you
show
that,
where
you
show
the
occupancy
rates.
I
It
was
part
of
the
it
was
part
of
the
supporting
documents
and
the
application.
I
believe
it's
online.
J
I
J
I
Believe
we
will
fill
them
and
we
have
a
market
study.
We
have
a
market
expert,
I
believe
he's
on
the
call.
If
we
want
to
refer.
J
I
K
Has
gone
over
the
pain?
Well,
you
know.
The
only
thing
I
would
say
to
that
is
you
know
it
isn't
something
that,
because
eric
on
the
phone
on
the
line,
because
I
wouldn't
be
building
this
believe
me,
if
I
didn't-
have
full
confidence
based
upon
a
market
study
done
by
an
expert,
the
demand
is
there,
but
but
let
me
address
the
issue
of
taxpayer
dollars,
okay
and
I'm
here.
K
L
K
O
K
A
I'm
sorry,
mr
chairman,
no,
no,
no
worries,
so
I
I
have.
I
have
a
a
follow-up
question
to
ms
ms
kelly's
question
and
just
to
two
questions
and
either
this
is
either
for
either.
You,
gentlemen,
with
the
hacc
or
miss
kirsten
number
one
is
the
existing
building
on
the
site.
Is
it?
Is
it
deed,
restricted
for
affordable
housing,
or
is
it
just
by
virtue
of
hacc's
ownership
that
it's
age
restricted?
A
A
Number
two:
do
you
anticipate
that
the
was
part
two's
parts?
You
anticipate
that
the
financing
for
this
new
building
will
encumber
the
existing
project
number
one
and
number
two:
is
there
a?
Is
there
any
chance
that
if
this
project
doesn't
pan
out
okay,
if
it
doesn't
work,
you're
not
able
to
to
rent
it,
and-
and
it
goes
back
to
the
to
the
lender-
that
finances
the
money
for
the
construction
that
the
deed
restrictions
would
the
deed
restriction
on
the
existing
parcel
on
the
existing
building
would
be
wiped
out.
K
A
Okay,
thank
you
all
right.
Let's
see
I
there
was
miss
rozinski,
mary
rozinski.
You
have
your
hand
up.
You
have
to
take
yourself
off
you.
There
you
go.
C
Can
you
hear
me
so
one
of
the
things
in
evanston
is
that
we
have
a
great
disparity
between
ami
of
black
and
white
and
minority,
and
I'm
wondering
does
that.
Take
into
consideration
in
this
like
how
many
units
like?
Are
they
two
bedroom
units
or
the
one
bedroom
units
in
the
distribution
of
the
affordable
units,
and
is
there
any
consideration
for
the
disparity
in
income.
I
So
we
based
our
income
levels
on
the
hud
definition
of
ami
for
this,
for
this
community
for
evanston,
which
you
know
does
not
distinguish
between
white
and
black
ami,
so
I
believe
the
ami
is
around
70.
000
could
be
68,
so
that's
that's
the
ami
for
evanston,
and
so
when
we're
talking
about
50
ami,
you
know
you're
you're
talking
about
incomes
of
35,
000
or
30.
You
know
34
000
a
year.
Those
are
the
people
that
we're
serving
and
under
okay.
I
A
Okay,
ms
rozinski,
if
you
have
a
follow-up
question,
you
have
to
take
yourself
off
mute.
C
I
Well,
I
I
believe
the
housing
authority
has
the
flexibility
to
consider
all
the
applicants
that
it
that
it
gets
it's.
It's
said
that
it
anticipates
that
the
vast
majority
of
units
will
go
to
evanston
households.
It's
been
able
to
do
that
on
other
projects
and
if
it
chooses
to
to
take
the
lowest
income
applicants
first,
they
can
do
that.
A
H
Isaac,
I
do
see
a
hand
raised
in
the
video
of
jim
ed
grin.
Is
the
house
address.
L
Yes,
I
had
a
question:
could
you
give
I
I'm
we've
been
flying
around
with
a
lot
of
talk
of
these?
What's
requirements
are
in
percentages
but
in
terms
of
numbers?
What's
the
breakdown
on
the
unit?
You
know
how
many
number
of
units
are
non-subsidized
to
how
many
numbering.
A
I'll
answer
I'll
answer
that
question:
the
the
application
is
for
a
building
that
contains
168
units.
34
of
those
will
be
the
affordable
housing
required
by
the
iho
of
the
city
of
evanston.
Okay,
another
17
on
top
of
the
34,
will
be
restricted
to
middle
income,
households
as
defined
in
the
city
of
evanston
ihl,
that
adds
up
to
51
units
leaving
117
units
that
will
be
market
rate.
A
You're
welcome
bye,
any
other
questions
all
right.
It
doesn't
look
like
it,
okay,
so,
mr
ennenbach,
you
will
go
first,
having
requested
the
continuance
at
our
prior
meeting,
please
thank.
M
You,
I
think,
I'm
can
you
hear
me:
okay,
listen.
German
isaac,
commissioners,
my
name's
bruce
simon
vogue.
I
live
at
723
emerson
easily
within
500
feet,
although
I
do
appreciate
the
affordable
housing
aspects
of
this
project.
All
of
what
is
described
as
mitigation
relative
to
its
mass
outlined
in
the
proposal.
Ultimately,.
M
Overcome
the
building
being
simply
way
too
massive
and
out
of
scale
for
its
location,
the
developer
request
that
the
city
approved
two
zoning
changes,
one,
a
map,
amendment
to
change
the
zoning
from
r6
residential
to
c1a,
commercial
and
two,
then
a
special
use
for
the
c1a
to
allow
a
multi-family
residential
in
a
commercial
zone.
This
would
seem
to
be
inappropriate
and
it
appears
to
be
just
finding
a
loophole
exploding
and
exploiting
our
zoning
code
to
avoid
a
two-third
majority
vote
requirement
at
council.
M
Additionally,
how
can
we
allow
a
c1a
commercial
zoning
where
there
is
no
commercial
even
contemplated?
There
is
no
commercial
activity
proposed
for
this
project?
Can
a
commercial
zoning
even
be
permitted
in
such
a
case?
That
would
make
no
sense
developers
come
to
our
town
and
propose
projects
that
are
way
out
of
line
with
our
zoning.
They
do
so
in
full
knowledge
of
our
zoning
requirements
and
they
expect
us
to
make
major
adjustments
and
they
say
that
their
project
just
isn't
feasible
without
the
city
granting
enormous
variances.
R
M
Their
job
to
make
their
project
conform
to
our
zoning
or
do
something
else
evanston
is
our
evanstonians
are
more
than
justifiably
fed
up
with
giving
away
the
store
further.
The
developer
states
that
this
development
is
consistent
with
established
city
plans
and
development
policies,
including
the
north
downtown
plan.
The
north
downtown
plan
was
proposed,
but
never
adopted
by
the
council
and.
M
Nor
is
this
project
transitional
in
height.
Additionally,
it
should
be
noted
that
the
height
of
the
link
was
intentionally
constrained
to
the
height
of
the
existing
parliament
building.
So
should
this
project
be
so
constrained
also,
please
allow
me
to
just
mention
parenthetically
that
this
project
is
only
masquerading
as
an
affordable
housing
project.
It
is
a
bit
of
a
bait
and
switch
what
was
originally
a
thirty
percent
market.
Seventy
percent
affordable.
S
K
M
Than
the
usual
fee
and
lulu
experience,
the
10
missing
middle,
although
perhaps
nice
does
not
qualify
as
affordable
under
our
ordinance
and
only
the
20
percent
or
the
34
units
are
affordable
as
defined
and
required
by
our
city
ordinance.
Accordingly,
we
implore
this
commission
to
abide
with
our
zoning
laws
and
reject
this
project.
Thank
you.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
inbox,
all
right
so
going
down.
The
list
looks
like
there's
at
least
12
or
13
people
that
have
signed
up
and
again.
If
you
didn't
sign
up
stick
around,
I
will.
I
will
call
on
you
once
who
have
gotten
through
the
list
as
a
reminder
to
everyone.
You
will
have
two
minutes
to
speak.
I
will
as
soon
as
you
start
talking,
I
will
start
the
the
timer
when
you
hear
it
going
off.
A
Please
respect
everyone
else's
time
and
come
to
a
concise
conclusion
to
your
comments
with
that.
There
is
a
ms
van
der
wicken,
sarah
vanderwicken.
You
are
first
on
my
list.
Oh
my.
T
Goodness,
okay,
could
you
not
start
the
timer
until
I
say
my
name
no
problem
good
evening
again,
my
name
is
sarah
vanderworth.
I
live
across
the
street
from
the
proposed
new
building
in
the
sherman
garden
cooperative
apartments,
I'm
the
vice
president
of
the
residents
association,
but
I'm
not
here
representing
the
association
or
other
residents
in
my
comments.
T
T
T
This
proposal
will
provide
over
50
seniors
with
stable
housing
that
they
would
not
not
otherwise
be
able
to
afford
compared
to
the
need.
Many
of
the
objections
I
have
heard
seem
slight.
Indeed,
people
object
to
the
inconveniences
of
less
parking
and
more
traffic,
the
changing
of
views
to
which
they
are
accustomed,
etc.
T
Q
It's
close,
thank
you,
I'm
paulie
keel.
I
live
at
2320
central
street
in
evanston,
and
I'm
I'm
talking
and
speaking
in
in
great
support
of
the
project
about
the
project.
I
look
at
this
from
three
different
three
different
perspectives.
First
of
all,
I
am
a
hack
member
board
or
a
pac
member
on
their
board
of
directors,
and
I've
been
extremely
proud
to
serve
with
that
organization.
They
have
been
so
creative
and
so
so
successful
in
offering
affordable
housing
and
the
service
needs
that
they're
able
to
need
are
outstanding
compared
to
most
housing
authorities.
Q
I've
also
been
a
long
time
resident
of
evanston
and
am
just
as
proud
to
live
here
because
of
the
diversity
with
the
action
that
they
actually
support
along
along
the
north
shore
and
their
recognition
of
the
fact
that
affordable
housing
is
really
needed.
The
third
perspective
is
that
I've
worked
in
the
affordable
housing
field,
development
and
property
management
for
over
40
years.
Q
I
actually
think
the
development
is
an
improvement
to
that
corner.
I
think
the
look
of
the
look
of
the
building
is
much
more
consistent
with
how
downtown
evanston
has
developed
and,
at
the
same
time,
it's
able
to
offer
more
affordable
housing
than
any
other
development.
That
is
not
subsidized
in
the
city
of
evanston.
Q
U
Good
evening,
since
this
is
a
plan
commission
meeting,
I'm
choosing
to
focus
on
the
zoning
ordinances,
and
I
refuse
to
claim
that
this
proposal
is
quote
compatible
with
the
character
of
the
existing
development
in
the
immediate
vicinity,
and
I
assert
that
it
is
of
such
a
nature
as
to
exercise
influence
with
height
bulk
and
scale.
I
live
within
500
feet
of
the
proposed
project
and
I'm
a
neighbor
of
the
perlman.
U
Allowing
the
developer
to
perform
in
their
words,
gymnastics
to
get
around
evanston
zoning
ordinances
would
be
a
dangerous
precedent
to
set
the
developers
shared
this
image
for
the
scale
and
context
at
the
september,
9th
planned
commission
meeting.
This
blue
is
the
existing
11
story.
Perlman
and
the
glass
and
brick
on
the
three
sides
is
their
proposed
new
building.
U
U
I
do
not
see
this
as
compatible
with
the
character
of
the
immediate
vicinity.
This
amendment
would
provide
an
example
of
how
to
get
around
evanston
zoning
and
would
establish
a
height
president
for
others.
To
cite
just
as
this
developer
is
doing,
your
current
decision
relies
on
evidence
presented
that
the
link
to
the
west
was
changed
to
c1a,
to
build
the
tallest
building
in
that
zoning
and
the
planned
development
for
their
own
building
allowed
the
11
story
to
the
north.
It
would
be
called
the
emerson,
but
it
has
a
sherman
avenue
address.
U
It
would
impose
a
building
that
is
more
than
double
the
height
allowed
and
would
bring
commercial
zoning
to
this
entirely
residential
block
of
sherman
therefore
permanently
changing
the
character
of
the
immediate
vicinity
rather
than
protecting
it.
I
ask
you
to
uphold
the
current
r6
zoning
and
allow
expansion
of
the
perlman
within
the
r6
guidelines.
Thank
you.
N
Thank
you,
I'm
working
out
again,
I'm
trying
to
double
task
all
these
city
meetings.
I
just
wanted
to
be
able
again
to
echo
our
previous
cw
msw
on
ms
claire
kelly.
You
know,
I'm
not
a
fancy
girl,
that's
going
to
sit
here
and
I'm
drawing
a
15
minute
talk
or
anything,
I'm
going
to
just
get
I'm
just
very
raw
about
things.
N
This
building
is
not
sustainable
for
evanston
right
now,
we're
in
the
middle
of
coven.
We
shouldn't
be
making
these
type
of
decisions,
and
if
we
are
going
to
be
making
these
decisions,
we
need
to
be
responsible
and
we
need
to
look
at
what's
really
needed
when
it
comes
under
the
cause
of
affordable
housing
and
it's
really
about
the
children
and
it's
really
about
the
families
that
attend
the
schools
here.
I
know
that
this
is
not
what
you.
This
is
not
your
business
right
now.
I
know
that's
something
that
you
all
have
done
in
the
past.
N
N
I
do
not
want
to
see
another
building
on
the
corner
without
any
type
of
aging
in
place
for
our
residents,
our
adult
children
or
seniors,
to
retire
in
mixed
housing
and
affordable
housing.
Those
numbers
are
just
very
blurred
and
I
would
like
to
see
a
little
bit
more
transparency
with
a
one
percent
developer
and
I
really
believe
that
we
should
be
asking
questions,
because
it's
not
your
tax
dollars.
Mr
james,
you
don't
live
here.
You
don't
raise
your
family
here
and
I'm
just
saying
your
name,
because
that's
I've
heard
your
name
many
times.
N
Do
we
live?
Do
you
live
here?
I
do
okay
good,
so
you
live
here.
So
this
will
be
your
tax
dollars
as
well,
but
you're
getting
a
return
on
investment.
We're
not
we're.
Looking
out
for
our
community
members.
We
have
connections
for
the
homeless
that
I'm
sure
they
can
fill
that
51
units
and
that's
who
it
needs
to
go
to,
and
he
said
the
city
of
evanston
to
make
sure
not
anyone
else
in
county
see
there's
a
problem
here:
we're
not
taking
care
of
each
other.
N
N
If
that's
the
case,
affordable
housing.
You
know
the
origin
did
a
great
job
of
housing,
so
many
people
that
could
have
nowhere
to
live.
That's
what
we
need
to
focus
on.
N
Yeah-
and
here
so
that's
that's
just
to
say,
that's
what
we
need
to
focus
on.
I
appreciate
it
that
you
all
came
to
the
table
that
you
answered
the
door
when
the
city
of
evanston
called
you
to
do
this,
I'm
a
little
discouraged
that
you
did
not
use
a
minority
woman
in
business
to
do
any
of
your
landscaping
or
any
tree
buying
all
those
fancy,
trees
and
everything
I'm
from
texas.
So
you
can
hear
my
texas
clear.
Sometimes
you
know
we
really
need
to
refocus
this
and
we
need
to
step
aside.
It's
coved.
N
A
You
all
right
next
on
my
list
is
cecil
nicu.
A
W
Good
just
technicality,
but
my
name
is
cecile.
W
So
if
we
meet
again,
I
may
as
well
straighten
that
out
and
I'll
go
as
fast
as
I
can.
My
name
is
cecile
mchugh
and
I'm
the
owner
of
a
property
within
500
feet
of
1900
german.
I
attended
the
north
downtown
plan
meetings,
one
outcome
of
which
was
that
both
sides
of
the
1900
block
of
sherman
were
to
be
excluded
from
the
area
considered
to
be
north
downtown,
in
order
to
protect
the
character
of
both
sides
of
the
1900
block
of
sherman
by
distur,
discouraging
increased
density
on
this
block.
W
The
immediate
surrounding
area
on
all
sides
of
the
1900
sherman
lot
contains
residential
buildings,
all
of
moderate
height,
with
the
exception
of
the
link,
the
link
formerly
zoned
as
c1
to
provide
a
spot
for
convenient
stores
for
nearby
residents,
was
changed
to
a
c1a
zone
when
it
was
built.
Having
also
attended
the
meetings
related
to
the
link
project,
I
can
confirm
that
as
a
result
of
these
meetings,
the
number
of
stories
of
the
link
were
constrained
to
not
exceed
the
number
of
stories
of
the
pearlman
building
a
16
story.
W
Additional
building
at
1900
sherman
would
be
higher
than
any
building.
In
all
directions
in
the
immediate
area,
higher
than
any
building
on
the
north
side
of
emerson
and
would
drastically
increase
the
density
at
this
corner
in
our
residential
neighborhood
and
would
therefore
contradict
the
outcome
of
the
carefully
considered
north
downtown
plan.
W
W
I
implore
you
to
also
reject
the
16-story
high-rise
proposed
to
be
added
to
the
lot
at
1900
sherman.
The
building
proposed
to
be
added
to
the
1900
sherman
lot
is
even
more
outsized
for
our
neighborhood
around
1900
sherman
outside
downtown,
then
the
building
proposed
for
1621
chicago
was
for
that
downtown
area.
I
have
numerous
concerns
regarding
this
building,
including
traffic,
is
already
stop
and
go
going
west
on
emerson
at
rush
hour
between
maple
and
green
bay
road.
A
Disney
queue,
I
need
you
to
to
finish
up.
W
Okay,
thank
you.
Sorry.
One
thing
I
want
to
say
is
that
seniors,
given
coven
19
really
aren't
looking
to
move
into
high
rises
right
now
and
if
they're
not
interested
in
renting,
won't
the
building
become
a
student
high-rise
like
the
link
did
or
would
the
building
be
sold
then
would
a
new
owner
be
held
to
having
affordable
housing
or
having
housing
for
seniors?
W
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Next,
on
my
list
is
mary
rosinski.
C
Hi,
I'm
very
much
in
favor
of
affordable
housing.
I
think
evanston
needs
it.
As
I
said
earlier,
I'm
very
concerned
about
the
the
lack
of
equity
in
our
affordable
housing.
I
think
we
need
special
consideration
in
evanston
to
take
into
consideration
the
difference
in
ami,
but
I
think
as
much
as
it
would
be
nice
to
have
a
project.
C
I
agree
with
bruce
and
cw,
and
everyone
who
says
you
know
we
have
a
zoning
code.
I
think
we
need
to
readdress
our
zoning
code
and
have
a
plan
before
we
tie
up
developers
and
all
this
going
things
totally
outside
our
zoning
plan.
I
just
think
it's
crazy.
You
know
we
keep
doing
this
over
and
over
and
over
again
and
it
wastes
time
of
the
developers.
It
costs
a
lot
of
money.
It
wastes
time
of
the
residents,
takes
up
a
lot
of
space
and
takes
staff
time.
C
A
Thank
you,
mr
mosinski.
Next
on
my
list
is
jacqueline,
jacqueline.
X
Eddy
hi,
my
name,
is
jackie
eddy.
I
live
at
418
church
street
in
evanston.
I've
been
a
resident
of
the
first
award
for
over
30
years.
I
strongly
support
the
proposal
for
the
development
at
1900
sherman,
what
a
great
model
to
create,
affordable
housing
in
a
way
that
will
not
segregate
people
based
on
income
levels
on
their
website,
the
city
of
evanston
state's
vision
to
create
the
most
livable
city
in
america.
X
That
celebrates
the
diversity
of
the
city's
residents
and
is
a
vibrant
community,
comprised
of
many
strong
neighborhoods
racist
religions
and
income
levels
in
1996,
the
planned
commission
gathered
community
input
on
why
people
choose
to
live
in
evanston
residents
offered
up
45
unaided
reasons
on
this
that
weren't
on
the
initial
survey.
Most
of
those
were
mentioned
by
one
to
13
percent
of
respondents,
except
for
population
diversity,
which
was
cited
by
27
percent
of
respondents,
is
a
reason
they
choose
to
live
in
evanston.
X
The
city's
2000
comprehensive
housing
plan
states
that
evan
should
work
to
address
concerns
about
cost
and
affordability.
New
development
and
renovation
should
be
supported,
as
should
increasing
the
supply
of
affordable
housing.
Housing
units
for
evanston's
elderly
residents
and
for
those
residents
with
special
needs
are
important
components
of
this
housing
stock.
X
I
believe
the
unique
character
community
character
of
our
livable
city
that
celebrates
economic
and
racial
diversity
is
at
risk,
and
I
support
the
city
council
for
making
affordable
housing
one
of
its
top
priorities,
I'm
extremely
proud
to
live
in
a
city
that
is
leading
the
country
in
conversation
and
action
around
reparations
and
the
commitment
made
by
our
city
council
to
end
structural
racism,
racism
and
achieve
racial
equity.
A
strong
commitment
to
create
affordable
housing
options
across
our
community
will
be
one
of
the
most
effective
tools
we
can
use
toward
our
reparations
efforts.
X
A
Y
Thank
you,
hi.
I'm
sue
lolbach
from
connections
for
the
homeless,
and
I
lead
a
coalition
called
joining
forces
for
affordable
housing.
Joining
forces
supports
the
city
of
evanston
in
making
affordable
housing
one
of
its
top
priorities
for
the
year
and
because
we
support
this
goal,
we
also
strongly
support
the
housing
authority
of
cook
county
development
at
1900
sherman.
Y
Y
Second,
we've
heard
concerns
tonight
that
the
building
does
not
have
enough
affordable
units.
I
also
would
like
to
see
more.
However,
I
also
know
that
there
are
no
easy
and
legal
ways
to
create
new,
affordable
housing
in
the
numbers
we
want
and
need,
given
the
complexities
and
obstacles
created
by
our
finance
tax
and
legal
systems,
as
well
as
the
real
estate
and
land
markets.
Y
This
is
more
than
any
other
effort
has
created
in
the
more
than
10
years
since
I
first
started
working
on
this
problem
and
more
than
anything
else
being
proposed
will
do
instead
of
just
tweaking
something
paving
the
way
or
piecemealing
the
solutions
to
the
problem.
The
housing
authority
has
found
a
way
to
create
affordable
housing.
They
are
actually
doing
it.
For
me,
that's
enough
to
urge
you
to
support
this
development
last.
Y
We
believe
that
the
design
of
the
building
with
the
city's
oversight
will
responsibly
address
the
impacts
of
increased
density,
and
we
hope
that
the
building
will
change
the
character
of
evanston
by
providing
greater
housing
choice
for
people
of
lower
economic
means.
We
ask
that
you
provide
a
recommendation
in
favor
of
the
1900
sherman
building.
Thank
you.
A
Z
Hi
I'm
bonnie
wilson.
I
live
in
the
first
ward.
Can
you
hear
me
yep?
I
live
in
the
first
ward,
I'm
a
member
of
the
joining
forces
for
affordable
housing
committee
that
sue
lewenbach
just
mentioned.
I've
also
was
a
member
of
the
age-friendly
task
force
housing
committee
and
have
been
a
member
of
other
various
affordable
housing
committees
in
evanston
for
the
past
10
years
I
have
lived
in
evanston
for
47
years
and
been
a
realtor
in
evanston
for
over
35
years.
I
am
also
a
senior
real
estate
specialist
as
a
realtor
in
evanston.
Z
A
Thank
you
next
on
my
list
is
larry
donahue.
R
Hello:
everyone,
my
name
is
larry
donahue,
I'm
the
chair
of
evanston's
housing
and
homelessness
commission,
and
I
strongly
support
the
project
that
the
housing
authority
of
cook
county
is
proposing
for
1900
sherman.
The
main
reasons
I
support
this
project
are
these.
First,
the
project
will
provide
a
significant
number
of
new
affordable
units
for
seniors
in
evanston.
R
R
Second,
the
project
is
self-sustaining,
financially,
as
it
is
mixed
income
and
hence
will
require
no
financial
contribution
from
the
city,
but
there
is
a
third
benefit
that
I
think
is
quite
important
and
speaks
to
what
I
believe
are
core
values
of
life
in
evanston,
diversity
and
equity.
R
On
this
point,
it
is
good
to
have
affordable
housing
available
throughout
evanston,
to
provide
choice
for
evanstonians
of
all
income
levels
and
all
racial
and
ethnic
backgrounds.
So
much
of
evanston's,
affordable
housing
stock
is
currently
concentrated
in
just
a
few
areas.
In
our
city,
the
1900
sherman
building
is
in
a
different
area,
the
first
ward,
and
so
it
will
provide
some
affordable
housing,
some
choice
outside
of
those
areas.
A
Next
on,
my
list
is
melinda
russo.
AA
AA
This
is
a
step
towards
creating
the
evanston
that
my
family
believes
in
a
city
where
we
care
for
all
people
in
our
community,
particularly
those
who
find
themselves
in
vulnerable
situations,
a
city
where
we
respect
and
support
our
senior
citizens
and
a
city
in
which
we
truly
value
racial,
ethnic
and
economic
diversity.
I
strongly
encourage
you
to
vote
in
favor
of
the
1900
sherman
project,
thanks
very
much
for
your
time.
A
S
Okay,
I
am
my
name-
is
lily
hill.
I
live
at
2715
woodland
in
the
sixth
ward,
but
I'm
representing
bird-friendly
evanston
and
I'm
more
talking
about
the
design
of
the
building.
We've
had
correspondence
and
I
had
hoped
that
I
would
be
able
to
ask
questions
from
the
developers,
but
I
didn't
fit
into
the
first
question
period.
So
I'm
not
really
quite
sure
how
to
approach
this.
There
is
in
the
wonderful
design
of
the
building.
S
There
is
a
wonderful
curve,
that's
made
of
glass
and
we
have
asked
our
developers
whether
this
is
a
problem
will
be
a
problem
for
birds,
because
birds
will
look
at
this
this
corner
and
if
it's
a
see-through
corner,
which
it
appears
to
be
they'll,
just
they'll
just
hit
the
windows
and
and
and
die,
and
we're
trying
to
prevent
that
we're
trying
to
encourage
bird-friendly
design-
and
I
know
that
the
developers
have
have
very
nicely
and
cooperated
with
us
to
to
make
the
to
make
the
balconies
very
friendly
and
to
make
the
lower
part
of
the
building
bird
friendly.
S
But
this
is
an
answer
that
we
just
don't
seem
the
question
that
we
don't
seem
to
be
able
to
get
an
answer.
To
is
whether
this
is
going
to
be
a
see-through
corner
or
not,
and
they
were
going
to
get
back
to
me,
but
never
did
so.
I.
What
we
need
is
an
answer
to
a
question,
except
that
this
is
a
comment
period,
so
I'm
not
really
quite
sure
how
to
present
this.
A
S
D
Yes,
my
name
is
jim
edward
and
I'm
a
resident
of
the
sherman
gardens
project
when
we
originally
bought
in
here
there
was
a
two-story
building
where
the
link
is
since
they
built
the
link.
It's
created
more
of
a
wind
effect
when
there's
strong
winds,
it's
hard
to
walk
down
the
alley,
sometimes
down
the
street
when
it's
a
strong
wind.
So
I
look
at
this
building
and
see
that
16
stories
tall
and
very
massive
in
terms
of
the
size
of
it,
I'm
afraid
that
it's
going
to
be
quite
a
creation
of
a
wind
tunnel.
D
D
So
and
I
I
understand
it's
going
to
be
for
senior
citizens
but
they're,
going
to
have
a
hard
time
going
out
with
the
wind
howling
between
the
pearlman
and
the
16
story,
building
and
then
across
the
street,
our
seven
story
building
and
then
the
link
you
know
with
its
eight
stories.
It's
gonna
be
quite
a
wind
tunnel
around
here
and
I'm
quite
concerned
about
this,
and
when
I
originally
heard
about
this
building,
the
first
proposal
I
heard
was
not
to
be
at
16
stores.
It
would
be
more
on
the
proportions
of
the
pearlman
project.
D
I
thought
well,
okay.
I
could
live
with
that,
but
now
I'm
looking
at
this
new
thing
and
it
looks
massive
compared
to
the
pearlman-
I'm
really
concerned
about
that-
and
we've
already
got
a
quite
a
few
senior
city
housing
on
emerson.
Already,
there's
the
pearl
one.
There's
gonna
be
this
there's
another
one
at
maple
and
emerson,
there's
another
one
about
four
blocks
further
down
on
emerson.
You
know,
so
why
don't?
Some
of
these
projects
get
spread
around
the
rest
of
downtown
or
the
west?
D
A
All
right,
thank
you,
miss
mr
edgar,
claire
kelly.
You
are
next
on
my
list.
J
Yes,
I'm
here
sorry,
okay,
so
first
I
we
desperately
need
affordable
housing
units
in
this
town,
and
we
can
see
the
demographics
of
this
town
has
changed
and
everything
else
affordable,
housing
units
is
does
not
is
not
exclusive
concept
to
providing
buildings
that
mesh
well
with
the
neighborhood.
We
all
act
like
we're
this
blind
city,
and
we
just
got
to
take
anything.
J
We
can
have
affordable
housing
units
and
we
can
have
buildings
that
work
well
with
the
city
that
are
appealing
that
are
aesthetic
and
that
don't
ruin
the
nature
of
a
neighborhood
and-
and
we
go
on
like
this-
is
the
only
way
we
can
get
is
to
build
this
huge
glassy.
Building
that
resembles
something
more
like
would
be
out
at
o'hare.
J
And,
furthermore,
you
know
this
idea
that
oh
they're
going
to
give
us
they're
going
to
meet
our
iho.
Well,
it's
a
planned
development.
We
actually
have
the
right,
our
city
council,
our
representatives
have
the
right
to
they
could
ask
for
30.
They
could
ask
for
40.
J
So,
let's
like
not
make
it
like
it's
their
right
to
just
give
us
this
amount
and
aren't
we
lucky?
No,
we
could
ask
for
a
lot
more
if
we
wanted
to
so
I
just
want
to
be
clear
like
it
when
you're
a
planned
development
we
can
ask
for
whatever
we
think
we
need
for
you
to
vote
to
break
our
zoning
rules,
and
you
know
it's
not
like.
Oh,
isn't
this
great
they're
not
going
to
give
us
a
feel
they're
going
to
put
it
on
put
the
units
in
there?
J
No,
I
mean
you're
asking
for
huge,
very
variances
to
our
zoning
against
what
the
neighbors
would
like
to
see,
and
I'm
also
really
concerned
about
this
notion.
This
private.
Can
you
please,
before
it
ends,
give
us
a
few
examples
of
similar
developments
where
you
have
partnered
with
a
private
developer
at
a
one
percent
or
whatever
ownership
before
this
is
over
tonight,
so
that
the
residents
can
at
least
look
at
look
at
these
establishments
that
the
hacc
has
done
in
partnership
with
private
companies,
private
developers?
J
I
think
we
should
be
able
to
see
that
and
look
at
how
that's
worked,
because
right
now,
you're
you've
said
over
and
over
again,
mr,
I
forgot
your
name
from
the
hacc
that
you
rely
on.
You
rely
on
the
rental
of
these
luxury
units
to
pay
for
these
affordable
housing
units,
which
we
desperately
need.
Now,
I'm
questioning
that,
because
our
city's
own
website
says
that
our
vacancy
rate
is
like
20
20,
so
I
don't
know
what
market
analysis
you've
provided,
but
I
do
hope
it
is
up
on
the
website.
J
I
want
to
look
at.
Does
it
conflict
with
the
cities,
because
how
are
you
going
to
rent
out
those
units
when
our
own
city
is
saying
like
20
of
these?
We
have
a
vacancy
rate,
so
I
even
question
the
viability
of
the
c,
the
hacc
even
providing
these
units.
I'm
not.
I
even
wonder
if
we
wouldn't
be
better
off
with
a
private
developer,
because
then
at
least
we
can
get
it's
guaranteed
this.
J
These
are
taxpayers
paying
for
this
for
its
hacc
to
go
into
this
venture
to
to
rent
out
luxury
units
when
our
city
already
has
an
enormously
high.
Even
I
think
it's
even
much
higher
than
what
the
city's
saying
vacancy
rate
I
mean
this
just
doesn't
seem
like
a
a
really
solid
plan
and
a
good
way
to
be
using
taxpayers
dollars.
We
should
have
why
can't
we
build,
we
should
be
able
to
build
a
an
affordable
housing
and
entirely
see.
J
Hacc
should
give
us
an
entirely
and
a
building
of
entire
affordable
housing
units
within
our
zoning.
That's
what
hacc
is
supposed
to
do.
Not
you
know
clearly
who
does
stand
to
benefit
with?
No
doubt
is
this
developer.
I
mean
he's
going
to
benefit
he's
going
to
take
our
tax
dollars.
We
have
no
guarantee
that
you're
going
to
be
able
to
rent
out
units
at
luxury
rates.
To
then
provide.
You
know
you
say
you
depend
on
those.
I
just
I'm
really
concerned
about
this
venture.
J
I
I
just
I
question
it
and
I
absolutely
want
you
to
provide
us
with
other
examples
so
that
we
as
residents,
can
look
at
it
and
additionally,
yes,
we
had
no
community
meeting
to
ask
questions
our
aldermen.
We
had
nothing
in
the
first
ward,
where
we
could
go
in
and
question
this.
I
mean
this
is
it
I
mean
this
is
really
not
a
way
to
run
an
operation
and.
A
J
I'm
sorry
I
did
I
did.
I
just
want
to
say
I
live
right
near
I'm
on
colfax
street
and
we
have
a
lovely
hacc
unit
right
behind
us
entirely.
A
hundred
percent,
affordable
housing
units
love
it
it's
my
this
is
my
neighbor
and
also
noy
street.
That
was
a
a
building,
a
brick
building,
not
a
glassy
building
nice
brick
building
that
met
our
iho
and
met
the
zoning.
It
can
be
done
with
this.
J
A
You
miss
kelly
all
right,
that
is
the
end
of.
A
Yeah,
I'm
I'm
I
was
gonna,
ask
I
was
gonna,
ask
I
didn't.
I
don't
have
you
on
my
list,
but
you
can
be
the
first
one.
That's
not
on
my
list
to
have
your
account.
P
I'm
sorry,
I
I
don't
know
what
happened,
because
I
did
fill
that
out
yeah
I
would
I
would
agree.
Affordable
housing
is
absolutely
needed
in
the
city
of
evanston,
but
it
really
has
to
balance
with
our
zoning
with
the
planned
commissions,
the
standards
and
conditions
that
you
guys
are
charged
to
follow.
You
can't,
I
don't
think
you
can
go
off
the
track
because
of
certain
you
know.
One
building
has
a
characteristic
or
not,
especially
in
this
case,
when
it,
let's
look
at
it,
it's
70
percent
luxury.
P
Unfortunately,
this
building
the
first
version
there
was
supposed
to
be
50
of
missing
middle
units
and
instead
it
got
reduced
down
to
10.
So
this
is
primarily
a
luxury
building.
It
really
does
not
give
a
trump
card
to
for
forego
our
zoning.
To
this
level
I
mean
the
height
is
a
hundred
percent
higher.
P
This
is
a
residential
zoning
area
and
really
an
important
thing
that
I
ask
you
to
remember
is
the
context
of
where
this
development
is
it's
an
important
site,
because
it's
a
huge
jump
as
this
side
of
emerson.
The
north
side
of
emerson
is
the
dividing
line
between
the
very
dense,
downtown
evanston
area
and
the
residential
area
north
of
it,
and
what
you
do
today
will
set
a
precedent
for
feud
for
the
future
of
our
residential
neighborhood,
and
what
will
happen
is
residential.
P
This
is
kind
of
a
very
vulnerable
area
for
developers
in
northwestern.
This
will
kind
of
open
the
door
north
of
sherman
from
you
know,
north
of
emerson,
down
sherman
to
build
16-story
mega
developments
into
this
area.
I
mean
you,
that's
that's
why
all
these
buildings
usually
are
built
just
for
northwestern
students.
So
please
keep
this
in
mind
and
if
you
think
it
won't
be
a
precedent,
remember
the
controversy
around.
I
don't
think
you
guys
were.
P
You
were
commissioners,
but
the
nine-story
link
building
this
sort
of
jumped
the
shark
had
jumped
across
and
residents
fear
was.
It
would
create
a
precedent
that
developers
would
exploit
and
begin
building
such
stretch
properties.
The
plan
commission
in
the
city
assured
us
no.
This
was
not
the
case
because
it's
an
existing
property
here.
It
was
a
special
situation.
It
was
zoned
commercial
already,
and
there
was
a
reasons
yet
here
we
are,
that
is
being
used
as
a
precedent
to
go
to
16
stories.
P
I
ask
you
to
hold
hold
the
developers
to
a
10
story,
building
hold
them
to
what
is
reasonable,
that's
even
higher
than
the
zoning,
but
it's
reasonable
to
the
area.
I
also
talked
to
the
developer
about
pursuing
low-income
tax
credits
to
help
support
bring
the
height
down.
So
it's
a
win-win.
I
talked
to
the
developer
about
a
model
like
on
howard
street
and
well
there's
a
hundred
there's
a
there's:
a
60
unit,
senior
senior
low,
affordable
housing
unit
that
was
just
approved
on
howard.
P
It's
about
to
be
built
that
used
low
income,
tax
credits
and
city
money.
Also,
this
develop.
This
developer
did
the
same
in
chicago
heights.
It's
a
four-story,
completely
affordable,
housing
property.
This
should
be
maybe
an
addition
to
perlman
send
back
to
the
developers
to
to
get
it
lower
or
can
yeah
conditionally
approve
it.
Then
it
must
be
maintained
at
10
to
12
stories
you
your
charge
again
is
the
zoning
and
the
standards
in
every
single
case.
It's
almost
ridiculous.
P
P
Up
scale
and
mass
is
is
not
is
out
of
is
not
is
not
in
in
the
line
of
immediate
of
the
immediate
descent,
the
vicinity,
it's
not
compatible
again
and
again,
it's
not
compatible
so
okay,
so
I
ask
you
to
please
keep
it
to
a
reasonable
level.
This
is
a
primarily
luxury,
just
one
more
thing
this.
This
is
the
city's
report
of
vacancy
of
the
luxury
housing
and,
it
does
say,
18.7
vacancies
in
these
new
buildings
in
2019.
P
A
Bye,
all
right
does
anyone
else
want
to
digitally
or
anybody
put
up
their
hand.
Tony
ray,
I
see
your
hand
up.
AB
A
AB
AB
A
Thank
you,
ms
ray
mrs
edgren
looks
like
you
had
your
hand
up.
L
Yes
and
it's
ava.
L
I
I
wanted
to
make
a
couple
of
comments.
One
is
when
we
first
heard
about
the
building
and
I
was
in
sherman
gardens.
I
talked
a
few
of
the
residents
down,
they
were
kind
of
anxious
about
us,
and
now
this
will
be
good.
You
know
we
had
heard
it
would
be
that
it
would
be
approximately
mirroring
the
perlman
building
and
we
are
happy
to
have
that
as
neighbors.
L
We
find
that
to
be
a
real
asset,
and
I
was
very
fond
of
the
idea-
and
I
talked
to
you
know
I
you
know
sort
of
thought.
No.
This
would
be
good,
it's
going
to
be
in
scale,
it'll,
be
fine,
and
when
we
found
out
what
the
final
scale
was,
it's
not
set
back,
and
it's
not
just
a
little
bit
taller
if,
as
everyone
says,
twice
is
twice
as
tall
and
much
more
much
wider
from
the
front
to
the
back
of
the
lot
and
that's
kind
of
that's
kind
of
annoying.
L
That's
a
very
apt
prediction
that
ever
others
have
said,
and
I
feel
as
if
it's
kind
of
you
know:
affordable
housing,
affordable
housing,
but
it's
two-thirds
more
than
two-thirds
much
more
is
going
to
be
luxury
housing.
It
seems
like
a
sig
leaf
for
the
luxury
housing.
It
doesn't
seem
like
it's
really
doing
the
job
it's
being
emphasized
here.
You
know
I'd
rather
see
the
building.
Okay,
it
can
be
mixed
juice,
but
for
that
proportion
is
really
out
of
whack
with
what's
appropriate.
L
If
there's
a
need
for
an
affordable
housing,
that's
what
we
should
be
doing,
especially
when
we're
using
public
funds
and
even
if
you're,
not
issuing
a
bond
or
raising
taxes.
It's
still
public
money,
it's
public
assets
that
could
be
put
otherwise
into
something
else,
and
I
think
this
whole
project
is
missing
the
mark
for
its
stated
objectives.
L
I
am
so
that
is
those
are
my
major
concerns.
I
also
have
another
concern
that
we
have
known
about
us
through
word
of
mouth,
and
I've
got
one
more
thing,
because
this
is
very
important.
We
found
out
a
couple
days
before
the
last
meeting
what
the
proposal
was
on
a
little
bitty
piece
of
paper
in
front
of
the
pearlman
building
that
was
like
at
knee
heights.
L
A
Okay,
thank
you
all
right
is.
Are
there
other
people
that
would
like
to
make
a
comment
before
I
close
up
that
portion
of
the
meeting
can.
A
Oh,
it
looks
like
saul
cleveland.
AC
AC
Those
resources
in
the
form
of
the
building
part
of
the
height
issue
is
that
you
need
to
have
enough
luxury
units
to
develop
the
subsidy
level
to
support
the
affordable
units.
It's
an
economic
equation
that-
and
I
believe,
also
as
an
architect
and
one
who's
developed
in
evanston
that
the
view
from
the
ground,
the
view
from
surrounding
areas
is
hardly
going
to
be
made
noticeable.
AC
I
had
the
addition
of
two
or
three
extra
stories
of
height
on
the
new
edition.
I
strongly
support
the
the
activities
of
hack
in
this
particular
instance,
because
it
is
probably
the
only
way
without
bringing
in
extra
outside
resources
to
create
the
housing,
the
affordability
that
is
necessary
in
the
city.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
AD
All
right
good
evening,
everyone,
so
I
wanted
to
say
that
this
affordable
housing
words
are
always
being
thrown
around
so
loosely,
and
it's
just
something
that
developers
are
saying
now
in
order
to
get
their
project
pushed
through.
AD
All
the
recent
developers
that
have
built
or
been
approved
recently
have
studios
and
one
bedroom,
and
just
a
very
small
amount
of
two-bedroom,
maybe
two
or
three
out
of
100
or
more
units,
so
we're
really
not
dressing
addressing
affordable
housing
problems,
we're
just
using
that
words
in
order
to
get
the
project
built
in
order
also
not
to
pay
the
in
lieu
of
money,
and
so
I
would
hope
that
you
all
will
really
investigate
your
decisions
about
just
putting
up
more
and
more
tall
buildings
with
luxury
housing,
which
is
pushing
the
low
income
and
minority
people
out
of
evanston,
and
the
height
is
inappropriate
and
e2
already
set
a
precedent
a
long
time
ago,
and
you
said
it
wasn't
going
to
and
everybody
that
comes
to
develop,
wants
to
be
taller
and
taller
and
taller
soon.
AD
We're
gonna
have
the
sears
tower
in
evanston.
It's
outrageous
and
you
need
to
stop
this.
This
is
outrageous
that
you
keep
on
allowing
these
high
skyscrapers
and
keep
throwing
affordable
housing
words
around.
It
is
not
affordable.
Housing
consider
the
people
that
really
need
affordable
housing.
This
is
two
three
and
four
bedrooms.
You
cannot
tell
me
what
recent
out
of
the
albion
or
the
avador
or
1815
ridge
that's
coming
up.
AD
None
of
those
people
have
any
apartments
for
affordable
housing,
and
you
cannot
say
that
that
you
can't
do
this
without
putting
all
this
money
in
I've
been
providing
affordable
housing
for
over
50
years
here
in
evanston,
three
two
three
and
four
bedrooms
for
people,
and
I
have
never
gotten
any
help
from
the
city
or
anybody
else.
So
if
you
can't
put
it
in
the
bank
or
yourself,
then
don't
build
it.
Thank
you.
A
A
All
right
hearing
none,
we
will
close
that
portion
of
the
of
the
meeting
up.
At
this
point,
I
would
ask
if
the
applicant
has
any
further
comments,
if
they'd
like
to
respond
to
any
of
the
the
comments
or
make
any
kind
of
you
know
final
appeal
in
their
cause.
Yes,
mr
chairman,.
K
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
having
us
back
this
evening
and
appreciate
everybody's
comments.
Certainly,
we
know
there's
a
lot
of
emotion
on
both
sides
and
we
we
do
understand
it.
You
understand
both
sides
of
the
issue.
K
This
is
a
very
bold
proposal.
There's
no
question
about
it
for
a
public
agency
to
take
something
like
this
on.
It
is
outside
of
the
norm
to
be
sure,
but
I
think
you
know
I
really
want
to
attach
myself
to
the
comments
of
our
two
commissioners,
who
I
think
spoke
very
eloquently
about
the
need
and
the
and
the
wisdom
of
doing
a
project.
This
way
this
is
an
absolute
leveraging
of
a
resource.
K
A
resource.
A
public
body
is
very
fortunate
to
have
which
is
land
in
a
good
area.
That's
what
we're
leveraging
here.
That's
why
we're
not
building
a
four-story
building
here
like
we're
doing
in
other
parts
of
the
county
we're
building
to
the
area.
We
have
a
parcel
that
we
can
leverage
and
the
only
way
to
leverage
it
without.
R
K
Subsidy
is
by
building
market
rate
units
that
in
essence,
pay
for
that's
what
we're
talking
about
here.
The
market
rate
units
pay
for
51
apartments
that
are
affordable,
34
for
very
low
income,
people
34
for
very
low
income
people
and
17
for
for
average
folks
that
really
need
it,
and
I
want
to
say
this:
I
don't
really
want
us
to
get
thrown
off
track
with
red
herrings
and,
and
the
whole
issue
of
the
private
developer
is
a
total
red
herring.
This
is
a
public
project
that
I
stand
behind
and
this
is
the
housing
authority's
endeavor.
K
We're
not
selling
this
property,
we're
constructing
this
property
to
be
a
benefit
to
the
city
of
evanston,
and
I
believe
the
architecture
and
the
design
standards
that
we're
going
to
meet
here
are
going
to
be
a
benefit
to
the
community.
I
understand
the
height.
K
K
So,
while
I
understand
that
the
comments
and
concerns
raised
by
some
of
the
neighbors,
I
think
the
public
benefit
here
for
evanston
outweighs
and
actually
supports
the
amendment
to
the
zoning
code.
A
Thank
you,
mr
monachio
did.
Do
you
have
any
interest
in
responding
to
the
the
bird-friendly
sure.
K
Question
yeah:
we
have
talked
to
miss
hill
on
I'm
sorry
we
didn't
get
back
to
you
on.
Your
last
question
is,
is
greg
on
the
is
greg
on
the
line
with
us
today
or
not
bill.
O
Yeah
and
I
apologize
for
not
getting
back
clearly
too,
I
I
did
respond
in
part.
We
don't
consider
that
to
be
a
see-through
corner,
because
there
will
be
multiple
interior
partitions
intersecting
that
glass
at
the
curve,
so
that
should
restrict
views
through
the
glass
to
the
other
side.
O
I
think
what
she
might
be
referring
to
is.
I
had
offered
to
check
one
of
our
other
projects
that
had
a
similar
curve
facade
and
they
just
haven't
gotten
back
to
me
yet
to
see
if
they've
had
any
issues,
because
we
felt
it
might
be
a
similar
condition,
but
to
answer
a
question
about
being
see-through,
we
with
those
interior
partitions.
I
don't
see
that
being
the
case.
O
E
Please
obviously
height
is
is
a
big
issue
here
and
zoning,
and
what
you're
asking
for
I'm
just
wondering
given
the
given
the
the
economics
and
I
understand
about
how,
in
a
typical
project,
how
the
for
the
market
rate
units
pay
for
the
affordable,
so
you
know
we're
all
in
favor
of
having
more
affordable.
So
I
I
do
understand
those
economics,
but
but
given
that
there's
there's
concern
about
height,
is
there
any
way
that
you
can
change
your
proforma?
E
For
example,
like
you
said
the
no
subsidies?
Well,
maybe
pursuing
some
subsidies,
or
you
know,
instead
of
even
instead
of
providing
the
units
on
site
providing
them
off-site
which
might
be
cheaper
to
lower
lower
the
building.
Are
there
any
other
other
things
you
could
pursue,
that
that
would
give
us
the
affordable
and
allow
you
to
build
a
affordable
in
some
way,
but
lower
the
height
of
the
building.
K
You
know
we
did
consider
some
different
models
early
on,
but,
to
be
honest,
it
became
clear
that
if
we
were
gonna
make
this
building
work
financially
and
bring
affordability
to
scale
that
we
do
need
15,
15
floors
of
of
residential
housing.
K
So
you
know
to
change
it
at
this
point,
commissioner,
as
we
are
pretty
far
along
in
the
design
and
very
far
along
in
the
financing
of
the
project,
would
would
really
be
very
difficult
if
not
impossible.
For
us.
I
do
respect
the
question,
but
you
know
we've
been
going
down
this
path
for
quite
a
while
now
and
we're
you
know
with
with
the
city's
blessing.
Hopefully
we
will
be
in
the
ground,
so
it
would
really
be
a
180
degree
turn
for
us
to
do
something
like
that.
E
I
there
I,
I
guess
what
I'm
asking
is,
and
I
and
I
don't
mean,
as
this
is
a
threat
at
all,
but
but
you
know
you
you
and
I
don't
know
how
the
plant
commission
is
going
to
vote
and
I
certainly
don't
know
how
the
city
council
is
going
to
vote,
but
but
would
that
would
would
looking
at
these
things
be
an
alternative
to
not
not
doing
the
project
at
all
that
that's
why
I'm
asking
the
question?
Oh.
K
You
know
I
I
have
to
we:
we've
worked
very
hard
on
this,
and
we've
had
dozens
of
conversations
in
the
community
commissioner,
and
this
is
the
path
we're
on
so
if
by
some
unfortunate
for
some
unfortunate
reason,
the
city
of
evanston
did
not
approve
this
project.
I
I
have
to
be
honest.
I
I
I'm
all
in
on
this.
I
haven't
given
a
whole
lot
of
thoughts
of
what
the
alternative
is.
I
would
have
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board.
K
E
A
Okay,
so
there
have
been
a
number
of
issues
raised
throughout
the
throughout
the
two
meetings.
What
what
stands
out
to
you.
A
Commissioners,
well,
you
know
I'll
I'll
I'll,
just
I'll
just
start
and
and
I'm
not
sure
how
many
of
us
were
on
the
on
the
commission,
when
the
the
I
think
it's
called
the
link
just
west
of
this
property
was
was
being
considered.
It
came
came
to
us
under.
A
I
came
to
the
you
know
the
commission
under
two
or
three
different
iterations,
and
what
I
will
say
that
is
that
the
final
design
was
probably
the
worst
design
that
was
presented
to
us,
but
it
checked
other
boxes
that
were
of
significant
concern.
A
And,
ultimately
you
know
the
biggest
issue
was
was
the
height,
and
I
think
a
few
people
today
have
have
you
know,
referenced
those
those
meetings-
and
I
I
was
at
those
meetings
and
the
height-
was
a
significant
factor
and
the
developer
did
lower
the
height
and
they
ultimately
got
a
building
that,
I
think,
probably
wasn't
as
well,
definitely
wasn't
as
attractive
as
the
buildings
that
were
proposed
previously
on
that
site.
A
A
I
think
the
I
think
the
project
I
think
the
the
whole
concept
of
what
hacc
is
trying
to
do
here
is
is
laudable.
I
I
I'm
I'm
in
favor
it
in
favor
of
it.
I
hope
it
happens
here
and
I
hope
it
happens
in
numerous
other
places.
A
I
hope
this
is
a
you
know,
a
wake-up
call
to
our
our
governments
to
provide
more
funding
to
allow
the
hacc
to
enter
into
actual
partnerships
with
developers
to
help
subsidize
affordable
housing
in
in
new
developments
instead
of
getting
instead
of
getting
the
fees
in
lieu.
A
I
think
I
don't
know
how
much
of
the
fees
in
lieu
that
our
city
has
spent.
I
don't
think
it's
much
and
it
sort
of
defeats
the
purpose
of
wanting
affordable
housing,
so
the
entire
concept
of
what
the
hacc
is
doing
with
their
with
their
site,
I'm
I'm
all
for
it.
But
what
but,
where
I
sort
of
draw
the
line.
Is
that
we're
looking
at
this
from
a
zoning
perspective
and
how
it
affects
the
the
area,
and
I
do
think
16
stories
is
too
tall?
A
You
know
I
I
don't
know
where
I
would
draw
the
line.
I
don't
know
if
11
would
be
would
be
better
if
12
would
be
better.
A
You
know
I
probably
wouldn't
consider
12
to
be
too
high,
given
the
the
other
benefits
that
are
being
provided
by
this
project,
but
I
I
think
16
is
too
high
so,
and
I
mean
what
what
what
do
you,
commissioner,
what
the
commissioners
think
about
you
know
the
the
development
as
a
whole,
any
design
issues
height.
You
know
bulk.
F
I
have
a
few
comments.
Please
chair
isaac,
I
think
there's
so
much
in
this
project.
That's
easy
to
like
I
I
commend.
I
commend
them
for
putting
together
a
concept
which
I
think
could
work
very
well
and
for
that
reason,
I'd
love
to
see
it
move
forward.
As
you
say,
I
have
a
couple
of
small
concerns
with
the
design,
but
I
don't
think
they're
that
relevant.
F
I
I
think
the
key
issue
is
how
many
zoning
changes
should
we
allow
to
get
a
building
like
this
in
place.
We've
talked
about
transitional
neighborhoods.
You
want
to
preserve
character.
You
also
want
to
allow
the
city
to
grow
and
that's
important
and
getting
rid
of
a
parking
lot
and
having
a
building
like
this.
There
is
certainly
a
wonderful
way
to
begin
to
see
that
growth
happen.
F
I'm
just
I'm
a
little
torn
here,
because
I'm
concerned
about
the
balance
between
the
public
benefits
and
the
size
and
mass
of
the
building,
and
mostly
just
what
it
does
to
the
neighborhood
that
exists
there.
Now
I
think
it's
a
great
building.
I
just
am
not
sure
it's
the
right
building
for
that
space.
For
that
place,
I'm
a
wonderful
project,
but
again,
I'm
concerned
about
the
bulk
and
I'm
concerned
about
the
zoning
changes
we
sort
of
have
to
go
through
to
make
this
work.
E
I'd
like
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
chair
isaac
mentioned
about
the
the
the
link.
I
wasn't
part
of
the
commission
when
that
project
went
through.
I
observed
it
peripherally,
but
this
kind
of
thing
what
happened
to
the
link
always
happens
in
my
experience,
looking
at
projects
in
chicago
as
well,
which
is
that
the
developer
comes
in
with
a
building,
that's
a
certain
height
and
it's
usually
nicely
proportioned,
and
you
know
it
allows
a
plaza
on
the
ground
floor
which
this
building
does
also
and
then,
and
then
everyone
gets.
E
You
know
crazy
about
the
height
and
the
developer
comes
back
and
says:
okay,
we'll
lower
it
and
chop
off
some
floors
and
what
you
get
is
a
big
fat
dumpy
building,
which
is
kind
of.
I
think
what
happened
on
the
link,
so
I
that
that
is
that
that
just
happens
over
and
over
again.
So
personally,
I
am
not
generally.
E
I
don't
generally
think
that
height
is
the
biggest
issue,
although
I
think
in
this
case
we
do
have
to
look
at
the
zoning
and
that
the
the
the
ask
is
is
100
higher
than
the
zoning
allows,
and
and
that's
and
that's
huge,
that's
huge.
It's
interesting
though.
The
other
thing
I
think
about
is
this
idea
of
transition,
and
we
had
a
similar
case
come
up
on
chicago
avenue
where
we
we
did
not
approve
that
project,
and
I
I
just
I
mean
other
people
can
help
you
with
this,
but
understanding
this.
E
But
but
in
that
case
it
was
a
tall
building
and
then
directly
to
the
east
was
a
two-story
building.
When
I
look
at
this
site,
it's
a
little
bit
different
and
that
in
that
there
are
nine
story
buildings
or
that
height
around
around
this
project,
and
so
the
transition
to
the
residential
neighborhood
of
two
and
three
stories
is,
is
more
gentle
than
than
the
chicago
site.
So
in
that
sense
I
think
it's
it's
a
better
situation,
although
I
still
have
a
problem
with
the
100
percent.
Ask
on
the
height.
AE
And
I'll
follow
on
with
commissioner
halek's
comments
there.
I
agree
with
what
sort
of
been
stated
to
ask
for
raising
it
to
16
stories
does
seem
to
be
a
little
bit
out
of
proportion
for
that
area.
AE
There's
definitely
is
already
a
precedent
for
large
residential
towers
in
evanston
and
because
there's
that
president,
that's
already
happened,
I'd
say
that's
where
we're
moving
towards,
but
I
do
see
a
line
from
sherman
avenue.
I
believe
yeah.
Once
you
get
east
of
sherman,
it
does
feel
a
lot
different.
So
this
is
right
on
the
cusp,
where
it's
it's
feeling
like.
Okay
16
is
a
little
bit
too
high
for
that
corner,
but
I
do
like
a
lot
of
things
in
the
set,
the
some
of
the
characters
of
the
building.
AE
I
like
how
it's
angled
on
the
corner,
and
I
think
it
doesn't
nice
with
the
roundabout
portico
share
the
public
amenity
space
on
the
ground
floor.
I
think,
is
really
generous
and
great
to
have
a
setback.
AE
I
guess
I
would
love
to
see
if
these
this
building
interacted
a
little
bit
more
with
the
existing
housing
that
it's
connected,
that
it's
right
next
to
it
just
seems
like
it's
very
separate
that
this
is
the
luxury
building
and
that's
the
public
housing
and
that
there's
no
connection
they
can't
use
the
spaces
like
that.
AE
I
I
feel
like
is
a
big,
missed
opportunity,
but
I
also
really
applaud
the
idea
that
we're
adding
these
affordable
units,
the
middle
income
units,
I
think,
is
also
a
benefit,
and
that
can
also
help
really
have
these
people
stay
there
long
term
I
mean
those
are
going
to
be
great
units
once
you
get
in
there
and
we
want
long-term
residents,
so
I
mean
there's
a
lot
of
great
benefits,
but
again
I
am
a
little
bit
torn
here
with
16
stories.
A
Any
other
open
comments.
G
Chairman,
if
I
could,
I
I
actually
support
this
project.
I
think
we
have
a
low-income
housing
issue
in
evanston.
We
need
to
address
it.
I
you
know,
as
many
have
expressed
I'm
concerned
about
the
height
as
well,
and
I
think
your
point
in
terms
of
this
being
a
wake-up
call
needing
additional
federal
state,
whatever
funds
for
low-income
housing
is,
is
well
taken,
but
that's
not
the
world
we
live
in.
I
think
we
have
to
sort
of
deal
with
the
reality
that
faces
us
all.
These
projects
require
trade-offs.
G
None
of
them
are
perfect,
as
all
the
commissioners
have
indicated,
I'm
also
torn
it's,
not
a
slam,
dunk
one
way
or
another
for
me,
but
I
51
you
know
low
and
middle
missing.
Middle
housing
units
is
an
attractive
proposition
and
I
think
if
the
height
drops,
as
I
understand
it,
it's
even
12
the
numbers
don't
work,
the
economics
don't
work,
and
so
for
that
reason
again
not
an
easy
call.
I
I'm
I'm
very
much
in
favor
of
this
of
this
on.
O
G
K
G
Of
other
alternatives
to
to
to
get
us
to
where
we
get
51
additional
low
and
middle
housing
units
onto
the
market.
So
I
very
much
support
this
proposal,
not
an
easy
call,
but
in
favor.
Thank
you.
A
Commissioner,
hugo,
so
is
it
I'm
sorry.
Is
there
a
commissioner
that,
like
to
speak.
V
Commissioner,
johnson,
yes,
I'm
also
in
support
I
suck
in
a
lot
of
things
that
commissioner
hugo
said-
and
I
I
wanted
to
add
to
that
by
by
pointing
out
that
this
development
does
supports
mixed-use
goals
of
our
community.
It
supports
walkability
and
increased
transit
usage,
it
being
a
very
transit,
accessible
location
and
while
there
certainly
are
trade-offs
with
any
development
and
the
resistance
to
height.
V
V
There
is
a
trade-off
and
and
that
a
shorter
building
is,
is
not
always
by
knee-jerk
a
better
building.
So
in
all
it's
it's.
This
certainly
isn't
isn't
a
perfect
proposal,
but
for
but
for
those
reasons
mentioned,
I
I
do
support
this.
A
Commissioner,
johnson,
I
have
a
question
and
this
isn't
really
a
question
for
for
all
the
commissioners,
but
because
you
you
touched
on
it
for
a
second,
there
were
comments
by
some
of
the
members
of
the
public
about
how,
because
this
is
it's
a
residential
only
building,
we
shouldn't
consider
a
zoning
change
from
r6
to
a
commercial
district
to
c1a.
A
I
mean
what
I'll
say
is
that
the
the
the
zoning
the
zoning
code
allows
for
residential
only
buildings
in
c1a
right?
This
is
not
it's
not
a,
not
something
special
in
that
in
that
regard,
but
the
I
think
some
of
the
issues
that
the
public
had
were
changing
the
zoning
from
residential
commercial
and
then
only
providing
residential
units
on
the
site.
Do
you
see
that?
Do
you
see
that
as
an
issue.
V
I
I
see
that
as
something
that
should,
amongst
those
those
individuals
who
are
who
are
against
this
development,
the
fact
that
the
the
the
project
asks
for
the
ability
to
put
in
a
more
intensive
use,
the
commercial
use
but
decides
not
to
and
and
goes
with,
residential
only
should
be
seen
as
something
as
a
relief
to
those
individuals
that
are
against
this.
You
know
having
an
apartment
building
only
without
any
retail
is
generates
less
traffic,
less
activity,
less
noise,
less
garbage
less
loading.
V
So
you
know
if,
if
I
were
someone
that
was
on
the
fence
about
this
project,
it
being
truly
mixed
use
within
one
building
and
then
heard
that
the
developer
actually
plans
to
only
do
residential
with
it,
which
is
lower
impact.
I
would
I
would
take
that
as
a
relief.
Okay,.
G
A
G
One
question:
if
I
could
turn
to
the
to
the
develop
to
the
applicant:
what
is
the
height
level
which
it
becomes
economical?
What's
the
minimum?
What's
the
sort
of
minimum
height
level
at
which
it
becomes
economically
feasible,
do
you
have
those
those
calculations,
14,
13
12,
and
what
what's?
What?
What
for.
A
The
mr
james,
the
my
presumption,
is
that
for
every
floor
that
you
lose
that
the
the
number
of
you
number
of
affordable
units
would
decrease
proportionately.
I
Well,
we
haven't
done
a
range
of
of
different
programs
to
prove
that
that
that's
the
case,
I
think
there
was
some
efficiency
and
scale
that
could
be
lost
if
you,
if
you
knock
five
stories
down,
for
example,
I
don't
think
it's
directly
proportional,
so
the
answer
is
we'd
have
to
actually
do
performance
for
each
new
version
of
the
program.
To
really
be
sure
of
that,
you
know
what
what
what
number
of
units
would
would
result
in
what
decrease
in
affordable
units.
A
So
so
the
the
if
the
height
got
lowered
the
the
project
couldn't
sustain
51
units.
That
much
is
clear
and
it
would
but
it
would
still
sustain
a
number
of
affordable
units,
but
you're
not
sure
whether
it
would
be
proportionate
to
the
number
of
units
lost.
I
Yes,
yes,
my
my
suspicion
is
that
the
decrease
in
the
total
number
of
units
would
have
a
proportionally
higher
increase
and
or
decrease
in
the
number
of
affordable
units.
E
I
I
think
this
is.
This
is
a
very
good
point
that
commissioner
hiko
brought
up.
I
I
because
I
think
we're
all
struggling
with
this
and
we
we
see
the
advantage
of
affordable
housing
and
but
but
we
have
a
problem
with
so
much
of
an
ask
on
the
zoning
code.
E
Is
it
possible
to?
I
don't
even
know
how
to
ask
the
question
did
to
to
come
up
with
a
height
that
that
we
would
all
be
comfortable
with
and
then
have
the
developer.
E
Give
us
react
to
that
in
terms
of
how
much
affordable
housing
that
would
provide.
I.
G
I
I
mean
there's
always
a
way
to
do
things,
so
we
said
in
our
earlier
presentation
last
last
meeting.
If
we
build
outlined
a
lot
line,
we
can
certainly
reduce
the
height.
I
don't
think.
K
Anybody
would
want
that
and
I
could
jump
into
bill
for
a
second.
If
we
go
outlined
a
lot
line,
you're
right,
I
still
don't
think
it
would
work,
because,
let
me
just
add
this
to
commissioners:
we
didn't
when
we
put
this
together,
we
didn't
say
well
we're
gonna
go
for
16
and
we'll
take
13..
We
didn't
do
that.
Maybe
you
don't.
Maybe
folks
don't
believe
that,
but
we
didn't.
K
This
is
the
this
is
the
height
we
need,
and
we
just
we
at
the
city's
urging
did
not
put
commercial
in,
because
you
know
if
we're
forced
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board,
we
will
perhaps
absolutely
generate
more
income,
and
then
we
will
absolutely
take
advantage
of,
if
necessary,
the
the
commercial
that
we
have
to
build,
but
we
we
are
not
putting
commercial
here
at
the
city's
request.
So
again,
just
I
don't
want
to
sound.
You
know.
K
I
Yes,
and
let
me
just
say,
we
did
initially
propose
an
11
story
building
we
tried
to
keep
in
scale
with
the
the
permanent
building,
but
we
couldn't
do
it
and
provide
the
affordable
housing
that
would
make
a
difference
in
evanston.
I
So
that's
why
we
we
had
to
increase
the
height,
and
it
is
unfortunate
that
there's
you
know
a
sacrifice
to
be
made
to
achieve
affordable
housing.
But
that's
that's
the
reality
and
we
ask
that
you
looked
at
this
proposal
holistically
for
for
both
the
benefits
and
the
requests
for
accommodation,
and
we
think,
after
all
the
said
and
done.
Five
additional
floors
is
not
gonna
cause
the
sky
to
fall
and
and
the
whole
area
become
unlivable.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
james.
We're
gonna
get
back
to
the
commissioner
deliberation
scott.
I
think
the
this
this
may
be
a
question
for
you
if,
like
if
we
were
to,
if
we
were
to
you,
know,
have
a
vote
and
approve
the
project
but
recommend
a
lower
height.
H
Work,
that's
a
good
question,
I
mean.
Essentially
you
have
the
the
developments
that's
been
presented.
You
know,
I
think
you've
heard
from
the
developer.
There
believe
constraints
on
the
development
and
the
height,
so
I
don't
know
that
you
necessarily
have
an
alternative
in
front
of
you
to
recommend
that's
different
than
the
project
presented,
because
if
the
applicant,
you
know,
request
continuance
to
come
back
with
something
different,
then
that
would
certainly
be
a
different
story.
Okay,.
A
All
right,
okay,
so
shall
we
move
to
the
to
the
standards?
Commissioners,
I
don't
hear
anything
from
you
and
we're
just
going
to
move
on
all
right
scott.
Can
you
put
those
up.
A
Okay,
so
this
is
for
planned
development
should
we
should
we
go
in
order
because
we're
we're
being
asked
to
change
it
to
c1a,
first
right
and
then
and
then
do
a
plan
development?
Does
that
make
sense?
Scott.
H
Yes,
let
me
check
and
see
if
the
map
standards
are
in
here.
H
Yeah,
I
do
not.
Unfortunately,
I
do
not
believe
they're
within
this
presentation.
I
could
pull
those
up
in
just
a
minute.
H
Z
A
All
right,
so
this
these
standards
relate
to
the
request
to
amend
from
our
re,
amend
the
zoning
for
the
lot
from
r6
to
c1a
and
I'll.
Just
read
it
out
loud.
Wisdom
of
amending
the
text
of
the
zoning
ordinance
or
zoning
map
is
a
matter
committed
to
the
sound
legislative
direction
of
the
discretion
of
the
city
council
and
is
not
controlled
by
any
one
standard
making
their
determination.
A
However,
the
city
council
should
in
determining
whether
to
adopt
or
deny
or
to
adopt
some
modification
of
the
planned
commission's
recommendation
of
the
plan
commission's
recommendation.
This
is
the
right
okay.
This
is
still
for
us,
though
we
we're
going
to
consider,
among
other
factors
of
following
whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
consistent
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
comprehensive
general
plan,
as
adopted
and
amended
from
time
to
time
by
the
council.
Okay,
commissioners,
what
do
you
think
does
changing
the
zone
zoning
from
r6
to
c1a?
E
A
There
there
was
at
least
a
portion
of
the
link
was
was
r6.
If
my
recollection
serves
me
correct.
A
Any
other
comments
or
thoughts
on
that
item.
Okay,
whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
compatible
with
the
overall
character
of
existing
development
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
subject
property.
A
Well,
the
the
the
existing
building
is
already
exceeds
r6
and
would
would
would
fall
into
place
under
the
c1a
and,
like
we
just
said,
the
property
just
across
the
alley
is,
is
a
c1a
whether
the
proposed
amended
will
have
an
adverse
effect
on
the
value
of
adjacent
properties.
A
Well,
the
adjacent
properties
are
the
link
to
the
north,
the
well
the
building.
That's
already
part
of
this.
This
development,
I
believe
the
sherman
gardens,
is,
we
said
it's
seven
stories
or
seven
and
a
half
stories,
so
I
don't
know
that
this
is
gonna,
have
an
adverse
effect
on
on
that
the
adequacy
of
public
facilities
and
services
solely
with
respect
to
the
changing
of
the
zoning.
I
don't
think
there's
there
is
a
an
issue
there.
A
A
A
I
think
it's
17
or
yeah
17..
Yes,
there
we
go
sorry,
so
planned
development
is
a
special
use
and
so
we're
going
to
go
through
the
special
use
standards.
First
first
standard
is:
it
is
one
of
the
special
uses
specifically
listed
in
the
zoning
ordinance
plan
development
is,
it
is
in
keeping
with
purposes
and
policies
of
the
adopted,
comprehensive
agenda.
A
I'm
sorry
it
isn't
a
reminder
for
the
non-commissioners.
Please
have
your
mics
on
mute,
please.
It
is
keeping
with
purposes
and
policies
of
the
adopted
general,
comprehensive
general
plan
and
the
zoning
ordinance
as
amended
from
time
to
time.
A
It
will
not
cause
a
negative
cumulative
effect
when
its
effect
is
considered
in
conjunction
with
the
cumulative
effect
of
various
special
uses
of
all
types
on
the
immediate
neighborhood
and
the
effect
of
the
proposed
type
of
special
use
upon
the
city
as
a
whole.
So
in
this
context,
we're
talking
about
the
plan,
develop
a
plan
development
and
having
a
plan
development
on
this
site,
at
least
in
my
opinion,
does
not
have
a
negative
cumulative
effect.
A
It
does
not
interfere
with
or
diminish
the
value
of
property.
In
in
the
neighborhood,
the
planned
development
doesn't,
but
I
think,
there's
a
similar
standard
in
the
in
on
another
slide.
That
will
maybe
we'll
we'll
expand
on
this,
because
I
think
there
is
some.
There
is
some
concern
that
a
a
property
of
of
of
this
height.
A
Would
have
would
have
interfere
or
diminish
the
value
of
property.
Can
it
be
adequately
served
by
public
facilities
and
services?
There
doesn't
seem
to
be
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
issue
with
the
plan
development.
There
does
not
cause
undue
traffic
congestion,
they've
they're,
putting
in
a
port
co-share.
A
They
have
a
they're
asking
for
parking,
but
again
we're
not
having
any
commercial
uses.
So
I
I
don't
think
that
there
is
an
issue.
There
preserve
significant
historical
architectural
resources,
not
applicable
to
a
parking
lot,
and
I
don't
believe
we've
heard
that
there
were
any
historical
or
architectural
significance
of
the
building
to
which
this
is.
This
project
is
going
to
abut,
preserves
significant
natural
and
environmental
features.
Again.
A
This
is
a
parking
lot,
so
what
they're
doing
is
actually
adding
natural
environmental
features
and
complies
with
all
other
applicable
regulations
of
the
district
and
which
is
located
in
other
applicable
ordinances,
except
to
the
extent
such
regulations
have
been
modified
through
the
plant
development
process
or
the
grant
of
a
variation
which
is
we're
going
to
be
that's
going
to
be
satisfied
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
A
Mr
mangum,
okay,
as
a
special
use
plan
development
involves
such
special
considerations
of
the
public
interest
that
it
shall
be
required
to
adhere
to
the
specific
plan
development
standards
established
in
the
zoning
district
in
which
it
is
located.
A
Compliance
with
the
standards
shall
govern
the
recommendations
of
the
plan
commission
applicable
to
the
planned
development
and
the
action
of
the
city
council
in
order
to
ensure
that
an
approved
plan
development
is
in
harmony
with
the
general
purposes
and
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
The
planned
commission
shall
not
recommend
approval
of,
nor
shall
the
city
council
approve
a
planned
development
unless
each
shall
determine
based
on
written
findings
of
fact
that
the
planned
development
satisfies
the
specific
standards
established
in
the
zoning
district,
in
which
the
plan
development
is
located.
Okay,
that
that
is
a
call
to
action.
A
All
right
standards
and
guidelines
for
plan
developments
in
c1a
district.
Each
planned
development
shall
be
compatible
with
surrounding
development
and
not
be
of
such
a
nature
in
height,
bulk
or
scale
as
to
exercise
any
influence,
contrary
to
the
purpose
and
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
as
set
forth
in
61,
6-1-2
purpose
and
intent
of
this
title.
Okay,
so
here
we're
getting
into
in
into
the
meat
of
the
of
the
requests
here.
A
It's
it's
my
it's
my
belief
that
the
that
the
height
would
not
be
compatible
with
the
surrounding
development,
and
so
I
I
would
say
that
that
it's
this,
this
condition
is
not
satisfied.
What
I
I
know
I
know
there
were:
there
were
thoughts
to
the
contrary
on
the
commission.
Would
anyone
like
to
to
speak
up
in
that
regard?.
O
E
I
don't
know
what
the
word
the
compat
the
word
compatible
is
such
a
subjective
word.
I
I
think
so
to
me
it's
about
it's
about
the
intent
of
the
the
zoning
and
whether
it's
compatible
with
that,
and
I
don't
think
it
is.
A
Okay,
any
other
comments
on
this
on
this
condition.
A
A
Well,
at
this
point,
you
have
to
presume
we're
already
in
c1a
and
we're
looking
at
the
at
the
project
now
and
whether
the
the
project
as
proposed
would
be
compatible
with
surrounding
the
surrounding
development
and
not
be
of
such
a
nature
in
height,
bulk
or
scale
as
to
exercise
any
influence.
Contrary
to
the
purpose
and
intent
of
the
zone.
A
Okay,
hearing
no
other
comments,
we're
going
to
move
on
to
the
next
item.
Each
plan
development
shall
be
compatible
with
and
implement
the
adopted,
comprehensive
general
plan,
as
amended
any
adopted
land
use
or
urban
design
plan
specific
to
the
area,
this
zodian
zoning
ordinance
and
any
other
pertinent
city
planning
and
development
policies.
A
Well,
this
this
site
is
already
a
mixed
use.
I'm
saying
not
mixed
use,
but
you
know
what
what
I
would
consider
a
a
commercial
use
with
a
you
know:
what
is
it
a
ten
story?
Apartment
building?
I
I
don't
think
that
the
the
the
use
as
far
as
the
plan
development
is
incompatible.
I
would
say
that
this
standard
is
is
satisfied
with
respect
to
the
with
respect
to
the
plan.
A
I'm
sorry,
I
would
agree
any
other
comments
from
commissioners
on
this
item.
Okay,
each
plan
development
shall
be
completed
within
two
years
of
the
issuance
of
the
special
use
permit
for
the
planned
development
not
applicable.
Well,
at
least
you
know,
they
know
that
that's
what
they're
gonna
have
to
do.
A
No
special
use
permit
for
planned
development
shall
be
valid
for
a
period
longer
than
one
year
unless
a
building
permit
is
issued
and
construction
is
actually
begun
within
that
period
and
is
digitally
diligently
pursued
to
completion.
Okay,
again,
not
really
for
us
to
chime
in
on
all
landscaping.
Treatment
within
the
plan,
development
shall
be
provided
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
set
forth
in
chapter
17,
landscaping
and
screening
of
this
title
and
shown
on
the
required
landscape
plan
submitted
as
part
of
the
planned
development
application.
We
saw
the
landscape
plan.
A
I
think
it's
actually
a
pretty
pretty
good
one
and
we
haven't
heard
any
evidence
to
the
that
that
what
they're
proposing
is
not
in
in
compliance
with
with
our
zoning
ordinance.
So
I
would
say
that
that's
satisfied.
A
Let's
see
for
all
boundaries
of
a
planned
development
immediately,
a
budding,
a
residential
property
that
shall
be
provided,
transition,
landscape
strip
of
at
least
10
feet
consisting
of
vegetation,
vegetative,
screening,
fencing
or
decorative
walls
in
accordance
with
the
manual
of
design,
guidelines
and
chapter
17,
landscaping
and
landscaping
and
screening.
A
You
know
one
one
question
I
have
here
and
this
is
gonna
be
a
question
for
scott.
Is
that
we're
changing
this
lot
from
r6
to
c1a
and
to
the
north?
If
my
memory
serves
me
correctly,
is
we
we
have
a,
we
have
a
r6
to
the
north,
and
so
does
this?
Does
that
come
into
play?
I
know
I
know
the
effectively.
A
The
north
of
the
pearlman
is
not
being
touched,
but
you
know
does
does
this?
Does
this
come
into
play.
H
Here
generally,
not
applicable,
the
the
perlman
building
does
provide
relief
from
that
north
property
line.
Okay,
but
there's
a
significant
setback
from
the
north
property
line.
Okay,.
A
All
right,
all
right,
so
we're
going
to
say
that
that's
satisfied,
then
walkways
developed
for
a
planned
development
shall
form
a
logical,
safe
and
convenient
system
for
pedestrian
access
to
all
dwelling
units.
All
project
facilities,
as
well
as
any
off-side
destination
likely
to
attract
substantial
pedestrian
traffic.
A
Having,
I
don't
believe,
we've
we've
seen
anything
in
the
application
or
the
packet
or
any
evidence
to
the
contrary
that
this
is
not
satisfied.
So
I'd
say
this
is
satisfied.
A
Location,
construction,
operation
of
parking
loading
areas
and
service
areas
shall
be
designed
to
avoid
adverse
effects
on
residential
uses
within
or
joining
the
development,
and
we
heard
at
the
prior
meeting
we
heard
about
how
the
parking
and
the
loading
worked,
and
I
I
I
believe
that
it
wasn't
going
to
affect
the
existing
link
link
site.
A
I
remember
asking
a
question
about
that,
so
I
would
say
that
this
is
satisfied,
but
again,
commissioners,
if
you
have
any
contrary
thoughts
on
what
I'm
saying
out
loud,
please
chime
in
even
if
you
agree,
feel
free
to
chime
in.
F
I
would
only
say
that
I'm
used
to
seeing
either
two
loading
areas
or
a
longer
larger
loading
area
for
a
building
of
that
size.
Q
A
Do
you
think,
do
you
do
you
think
that
a
long
you
know
for
for
what's
being
developed,
you
think
one
long
is
is
really
needed
for
a
residential
building.
A
F
I
suspect,
I
suspect,
not
because
there's
no
commercial
use,
I
think
it's
more
a
question
of
moving
vans
and
the
impact,
if
they
can't
get
in
you
know,
impact
on
the
alley.
A
B
A
God,
yes,
it's
it's
going
to
be
25
feet,
yep,
okay,
all
right
principal
vehicular
access
points
shall
be
designed
to
prevent
smooth
traffic
flow
with
controlled
turning
movements
and
minimum
hazards
to
be
vehicular
and
pedestrian
traffic.
I
will
say
that
that's
satisfied.
A
The
planned
development
shall
provide,
if
possible,
for
underground
installation
of
utilities,
both
in
public
ways
and
private
extensions
thereof.
Scott
are
the
are
the
utilities
being
being
buried
here?
I
I
believe
they
probably
already
are
with
the
pearlman,
and
I
would
imagine
that
they're
they're
going
to
be
in
in
this
project
as
well.
H
I
think
there
are
some
utility
poles
in
the
alley,
if
I
recall
correctly,
and
the
developer
can
jump
in,
it
was
different.
They
they
weren't
certain,
yet
whether
those
got
to
be
relocated
or
moved
in
some
way,
but
I
don't
believe
they're
planning
to
underground
the
existing
comment
roles.
A
Okay,
so
we're
going
to
say
this
is
probably
not
not
satisfied
unless
scott
are
you
aware
of
any
any
impediments
to
being
able
to
put
the
utilities
underground.
A
For
every
plan
development
there
should
be
provided
a
market
market
feasibility
study.
That's
been
satisfied
for
every
planned
development.
Invoking
or
I'm
sorry,
involving
20
dwelling
units
or
more
they'll
should
be
provided
traffic
circulation
impact
study.
Scott
I'm,
my
recollection,
is
not
as
good
on
that
on
that
item,
I
believe
there
was
one.
A
The
zoning
administrator
may,
at
his
discussion,
require
of
the
applicant
additional
studies
or
impact
analyses
when
he
determines
that
a
reasonable
need
for
such
investigation
is
indicated.
I
will
presume
that
that
was,
if
requested,
that
the
applicant
fulfill
that
obligation,
and
that
is
the
end
of
our
standards-
that's
correct!
Okay!
Thank
you,
scott,
okay.
So
any
further
deliberation
from
from
the
commissioners.
E
Please
just
make
a
statement.
I
I
really
would
like
to
see
a
compromise
here
between
the
the
height
and
the
and
then
the
number
of
affordable
units
and,
however,
that
happens,
I'm
just
saying
that
I
think
that
would
be
a
that
would
be
a
nice
outcome
of
this.
A
H
Motion,
mr
chair,
I
would
suggest
maybe
the
commission
think
about
whether
any
of
the
commissioners
would
vote
differently
for
from
a
map.
Amendment
versus
having
everything
in
one
motion
feels
that
they
would
vote
the
same
either
way.
Then
it
in
my
mind
would
make
sense
to
have
one
motion
considering
all
those
requests.
But
if
anyone
feels
differently
then
then
this
would
be
the
time
to
talk
about
separately.
A
If
you
feel,
if,
if
you're
going
to
vote,
wait
so
scott
you're
you're
saying
that
if
you're,
if
someone's
going
to
vote
yes
to
change
it
to
c1a,
but
no
on
the
planned
development
that
we
should
separate
the
two.
AE
A
A
Understood:
okay,
all
right!
Well,
you
know
what
instead
of
polling
the
the
commissioners,
why
don't
we
just?
Why?
Don't
we
just
separate
it?
Why
don't
we
just
yeah?
I
agree
the
first
item.
Okay,
is
there
a
motion
to
to
approve
the
change
of
zoning
for
this,
this
site
from
r6
to
c1a.
E
I
moved
to
change
the
zoning
from
r6
to
c1a.
A
E
G
A
Okay,
so
the
second
half
of
this
is
the
planned
development
and,
let's
see
so
there
it
just
as
a
reminder.
Commissioners,
there
is
the
there
is
the
request
for
the
planned
development
with
the.
Let
me
see
where
are
the.
A
Less
parking
than
this
is
required
under
c1a
in
let's
see,
increase
the
number
of
units
like
density,
doing
one
short
loading,
birth
versus
two
and
then
the
dimensions
of
the
short
loading
birth
being
10
by
25
instead
of
10
by
35
and
as
a
further
reminder,
the
that
staff
has
set
forth
a
number
of
recommendations
should
we
should
we
see
fit
to
approve,
and
so
the
motion
or
our
motion
or
I'm
sorry
we
should
can.
A
We
should
at
least
consider
those
recommendations
at
some
point
during
our
deliberation
or
you
know
our
motion
practice
so
with
that
being
said,
is
there
a
motion
to
approve
this
plan
development.
A
G
I
was
going
to
offer
an
amendment
to
the
motion,
but
yeah
I
can
we
can
have
the
main.
I
don't
know
how
the
rest
of
the
commissioners
like
to
proceed,
whether
put
on
the
floor,
the
main
amendment
and
then
the
main
emotion
and
then
add
the
staff
recognition
as
an
amendment
or
for
me
to
move
the
the
whole
package.
A
I
I
would
say
let
let's,
if,
if
you,
if
you're
willing,
make
your
motion
to
approve
the
amount,
approve
the
pd
with
the
recommendations
from
staff
and
then,
if
there
need
to
be
any
changes
to
those
recommendations,
we'll
we'll
we'll
deal
with
those
through
amendments.
A
Okay,
there
is
a
motion
on
the
floor
from
commissioner
huco.
Is
there
a
second.
V
A
Commissioner
johnson
seconds,
okay,
any
any
amendments
to
the
to
the.
A
Motion
I
would
propose
an
amendment
to
reduce
the
height
of
the
height
of
the
height
of
the
structure,
from
16
stories
to
12
stories.
E
I'd
like
to
move
that
we
add
the
amendment
to
reduce
the
height
to
12
stories
and
understand
that
this
may
reduce
the
amount
of
affordable
housing
as
part
of
as
part
of
that
move.
A
Okay,
any
deliberation
on
the
on
the
motion.
G
G
As
you
drop
each
floor
again,
this
isn't
a
perfect
solution,
but
I
think
it's
the
best
one
we
have
given
given
the
need
for
affordable
housing
and
if
it
were
easy,
we'd
have
affordable
housing
done,
but
we
don't
it's
tough
and
history
has
shown
it's
tough
and
and
again
here
we
have
a
creative
solution
that
works
economically
and-
and
I
think
we
start
dropping
the
floor,
the
the
height
we
start
losing
that
affordable
housing
and
again
I
don't
have
a
sense-
the
proportion
of
the
loss.
G
But
you
know
this
all
the
trade-off
and
for
me
I
would
I
would
go
for
the
affordable
housing
versus
the
height.
A
I
I
I
agree
with
a
lot
of
of
what
you're
saying
commissioner
huco
the
lens
that
I'm
looking
at
it
from,
is
that
that
I
I
love
the
project
and
I
want
I
want
this
to
be
built,
but
you
know
I.
I
feel
that.
A
The
the
I
feel
that
the
height
is
a
is
an
issue,
and-
and
I
don't
know
that
the
you
know
the
the
mission
of
the
applicant-
should
change
my
vote
or
change
my
feelings
about
the
height
in
in
the
neighborhood.
A
You
know,
I
I
think
that
the
the
the
height
in
general,
in
an
effort
to
be
as
consistent
and
you
know,
with
respect
to
the
zoning
ordinance
and
to
this
neighborhood
as
possible.
I
don't
think
that
I
can
in
good
conscience
support
a
height,
that's
higher
than
than
12
and
and
12
is
probably
even
pushing
it
for
me,
but
I'm
I'm
willing
to
do
it
because
of
the
because
of
this
project,
and
I
I
believe
in
it,
but
you
know
that's
that.
A
That's
that's
where
I'm
coming
from,
and
I
I
understand
that
it
will
end
up
being
less
affordable
units
and
that's
that's
unfortunate,
but
you
know
from
a
zoning
from
a
zoning
perspective.
I
feel
that
I
need
to
vote
vote,
for
you
know
at
least
at
least
push
for
a
lower
height.
That's
you
know.
A
Well
remember,
this
is
just
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council,
and
so
the
city
council
would
would
take
what
we've
what
we've
sent
them
and
you
know
they
could.
They
could
very
easily
ask
the
applicant
to
to
come.
You
know
come
back
to
them
with
okay,
because
this
is
the
recommendation
if
we
approve
it,
as
recommended
by
the
plan
commission.
What
does
it
look
like
for
us,
and
so
I
I
think
I
think
the
city
council
just
just
reviews
it.
A
It's
passed
us
at
that
point.
The
city
council
reviews
it
from
from
their
perspective
and
they
either
take
a
recommendation
with
the
changes
that
the
you
know,
applicant
will
say,
have
to
be
made
as
a
result,
or
you
know,
potentially
the
city
council
sends
it
back
to
us.
I
I
I
don't
know,
I'm
not
sure
that
we
have
do.
We
have
corporation
council
on
on
the
call
with
us
today,
scott.
A
Yeah,
I
I'm
not
sure
that
this
happens
very
something
like
this
happens
very
often,
but,
mr
george,
do
you
have
a
a
thought
on
this?
I
know
this
is
putting
you
on
the
on
the
spot
somewhat
here.
AF
Yeah,
can
you
repeat
the
the
question
about
what
I
miss?
I
I
heard
it.
Can
you
yeah?
Can
you
just
repeat
the
question.
A
Yeah
yeah
sure
so
so
the
the
idea
is
that
the
the
applicant
has
set
forth
a
a
proposal
for
a
16-story
building
and
there
is
a
there
is
a
motion
on
the
floor
to
you
know
to
change
the
approval
from
a
16
story
to
a
12-story
building,
that's
going
to
affect
the
number
of
the
number
of
you.
That's
going
to
affect
the
number
of
units
being
provided
on-site.
It's
going
to
affect
the
bulk.
It's
going!
It's
going
to
affect
the
the
number
of
units
required
to
be
provided
under
the
iho.
A
It's
going
to
affect
a
number
of
things,
but
in
the
interest
of
moving
this
forward
and
well
I
mean
we
don't
even
know
if
the
motion
will
pass.
But
the
question
was
okay.
If,
if
that
motion
passed
and
the
plane
commission
sent
to
the
city
council,
yes,
we
we
recommend
approval
of
this
planned
development,
but
with
four
floors.
Four
stories
less,
which
you
know,
changes
a
whole
bunch
of
other
things
in
the
application.
A
How
would
how
would
that
you
know
be
dealt
with
or
resolved.
AF
That's
that's
a
really
good
question.
I
would
I
mean
yeah
because
that's
fundamentally
changing
the
proposal.
It
is
so
you
know,
I
guess
you
you're
free
to
make
that
amendment
to
make
that
motion,
to
amend
it,
to
12,
to
make
it
to
12
stories
and
not
make
any
other
sort
of
amendments.
But
in
reality
you
are
changing
the
proposal
and
I
mean
I
don't
know
that
they
could
come
to
city
council
with
that
same
proposal,
just
12
stories
instead
of
16
stories.
You
know
what
I
mean
well,
just
as.
A
H
And
if
I
think
could
mr
chair
just
thinking
about
the
the
logistics
and
feasibility
of
this,
the
next
step,
whatever
the
recommendation
is-
is
for
staff
and
the
city
corporation
council
to
prepare
an
ordinance
for
this?
That
ordnance
has
to
identify
certain
site
development
allowances
that
are
being
requested
for
the
proposal.
H
So,
as
you
mentioned,
changing
the
height
of
the
building
would
have
a
cascading
effect
on
the
rest
of
the
development,
so
there'd
be
less
parking
spaces
required.
You
know
the
number
of
units
would
be
changing,
so
the
site
development
allowance
would
be
changing
in
a
way
that
we
could
not
even
calculate
without
revised
plans.
But
my.
A
My
my
like
devil's
advocate
response
to
that
is
you
still
prepare
that
same
ordinance?
Even
when
we
say
we,
you
know
we
recommend
rejection
of
the
oven,
correct
all
right
regardless,
that's
what
you
would
do.
So,
even
if
we
were
to
make
a
recommendation
to,
you,
know,
approve
but
change,
but
you
know
approve
but
approve
with
less
less
height.
A
A
You
know,
in
conjunction
with
the
developer,
come
back
with
a
with
an
ordinance
for
us
to
review
that
that
deals
with
that.
H
Yeah-
and
so
I
it's
a
good
point,
what
I
think
is
that
would
essentially
be
saying
you're
you're
recommending
against
the
project,
and
they
should
come
back
with
a
different
project
and
then
that
project
would
be
different
would
have
a
different
site
development
allowances.
R
H
Instead
of
12
conditions,
13
conditions,
one
of
those
conditions
is
that
the
building
should
be
no
higher
than
12
stories,
because
that
would
then
change
many
other
aspects
of
that
same
ordinance
that
we
would
not
be
able
to
calculate
so
it's
up
to.
X
I
H
Would
suggest
that
if
they're
members,
that
would
you
know
are
uncomfortable
with
the
height
and
and
feel
they
should
vote
against
it
because
of
the
proposed
height
of
the
building
that
that
should
be?
You
know
a
reason
why
you're
recommending
making
your
vote
a
negative
vote.
If
that's
that's,
how
you
feel
and
then-
and
you
could
state
that
you
know
what
what
height
you
felt
was
most
appropriate
level
story
was
appropriate
and
that
would
be
conveyed
in
that
manner
to
the
city
council.
G
A
But
I
I
commissioned
hiko,
I
that's
why
I
asked
the
the
follow-up
questions.
What
would
be
what
would
be
dead
is
the
51,
affordable
units,
so
the
project
itself
would
not
be
dead
in
the
water.
It
would
be
there's
no
way
to
get
51
units,
so
it
would
go
down,
and
what
mr
james
had
said
is
because
I
I
asked
the
question
whether
you
remove
a
floor.
Are
you
removing
a
proportionate
number
and
he
wasn't
able
to?
A
He
was
concerned
that
you
know
if,
if
there's,
if
there's,
let's
say
10
floors
with
five
affordable
units
on
each
floor,
removing
one
of
those
floors
wouldn't
mean
that
you're
only
losing
five.
You
could
end
up
losing
six,
and
that's
that
that's
what
we
he
wasn't
able
to.
You
know
tell
us
on
the
spot
there,
but
that
there
was
a
concern
that
the
efficiency
of
efficiencies
would
be
lost
and
you
could
lose
more
units
proportionally.
G
Well,
fair
enough,
I
understand
that
the
lower
the
building,
obviously
the
less
affordable
units
we're
going
to
have,
but
there
is
there
a
point
where
the
housing
authority
is
going
to
say
we're
out
of
this
thing
period
because,
yes,
we'll
have
less
affordable
units
whatever,
but
is
there
some
point
where
they're
just
regardless
of
what
the
mix
winds
up
being
they
just
say
this?
Is
this?
Isn't
you
know.
A
I
I
I
I
I
again
I'm
just.
I
agree
that
that's
that's
a
that
is
a
that
is
a
risk,
but
I
would
also
point
out
that
pretty
much
every
applicant
that
comes
before
us
has
some
version
of
that
statement.
When
they're,
when
they're
requesting
relief
from
the
plan
commission.
E
A
Well,
if,
if,
if
that's
possible,
if,
if
that's
possible,
I
mean
you
know,
we
we're
either
recommending
we're
either
recommending
approval
or
denial
of
the
application
yeah,
and
so
you
know
your
your
comments,
your
comments,
all
of
our
comments
will
will
show
up
in
the
in
the
minutes
and
you
know
hopefully
be
re,
be
reviewed
and
considered
by
by
city
council.
A
A
Are
there
any
other
amendments
to
the
to
the
motion?
A
Hearing
none
miss
jones.
Will
you
call
role.
A
B
Z
O
V
A
Isaac,
I
would
like
to
say
that
I'm
in
favor
of
this
project,
but
because
of
the
height,
I
feel
that
I
feel
that's
too
too
high
for
the
area
and
therefore
I
have
to
wrote
no.
A
And
so
well,
that'll
that'll
show
up
right
that
it's
a
it's
tied
and
it's
a
the
recommendation
of
of
denial
when
it's
a
tie
or.
A
Okay,
so
to
everyone
on
the
call.
Thank
you.
We
I'm
not
sure
if
we
have
any
more
any
more
business
but
james
and
mr
monastic.
Thank
you
very
much
and
good
luck
with
the
at
the
city
council.
A
What
is,
is
there
anything
else
on
our
on
our
business?
I've
lost
my
my
agenda.
Oh
here
we
go.
Is
there
any
public
comment
on
not
related?
Not
related
to
this
item
has
passed
us
20,
20
plnd
dash
0.0039
is
over.
So
if
there's
public
comment
with
some
other
issue,
I
will
I
will
recognize
a
member
of
the
public
to
have
their
say
hearing
none
seeing
none
is
there
a
motion
to
adjourn.
AB
A
Three
per
second,
we'll
we'll
do
it
by
the
books.
This
time,
ms
jones
call
role
for
adjournment.
A
All
right
plan
commission
of
the
city
of
evanston
is
now
adjourned.
Thank
you
all
take.