►
From YouTube: Plan Commission Meeting 2-12-2020
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
E
A
C
D
A
G
F
Was
here
at
the
meeting
of
this
discussion
began
generally,
what
was
proposed
was
to
kind
of
clarify
some
of
the
more
pedestrian-friendly
uses
that
we
wanted
to
have
within
the
d2
downtown
retail
core
district.
So
real,
quick,
the
existing
regulations
within
the
d2,
the
general
purpose
of
it
stated
here
to
define
and
support
the
traditional
downtown
retail
shopping
function
of
Evanston.
The
district
is
characterized
by
street-level
retail,
storefronts
and
structures.
That
accent.
F
F
F
Basically,
as
there
are
certain
aspects
of
financial
institutions
that
do
encourage
some
pedestrian
activity,
such
as
ATM
use,
general
checking
and
savings
activities
and
things
of
that
nature.
So
this
map
outlines
where
the
existing
d2
districts
are
generally
in
the
western
part
of
downtown
long
Davis
Street,
the
southern
end
when
actually
including
part
of
Fountain
Square
and
then
north
along
the
northern
end
of
the
downtown
area,
which
would
include
Sherman
and
some
of
that
traditional
shopping
district
area.
In
that
particular
portion.
F
So
what
we
are
proposing
the
updated
proposal,
we
would
keep
this
particular
section
of
611
three-two,
where
we
have
renamed
that
to
active
use
of
grade
level.
Didn't
seem
like
anyone
who
took
in
a
special
issue
with
this
particular
section,
but
where
we
will
be
proposing
updates
to
the
amendments
would
be
within
the
permitted
and
special
uses
within
the
d2.
F
So
specifically,
where
it
says
financial
institutions,
we
would
be
changing
the
specific
language
to
within
the
permitted
uses
when
located
above
the
ground
floor
are
at
the
ground
floor
when
retail
banking
services,
such
as
checking
and
savings,
accounts,
debit
and
credit
card
uses
and
ATMs
are
provided,
and
similarly
along
those
lines
within
the
special
use
will
be
added
language.
Where
you
say
a
financial
institution
would
be
a
special
use
at
the
ground
floor
when
retail
banking
services
are
not
provided.
F
A
Thank
you,
mrs.
Jones.
Any
questions
from
the
Commission
of
of
staff
perspective
their
presentation,
okay,
hearing
none
is
there?
Are
there
any
questions
from
the
public
with
respect
to
the
presentation
all
right
hearing?
None
there
any
comments
from
the
from
the
public.
With
respect
to
the
presentation,
okay,
hearing,
none,
we
can
move
to
deliberation
and
discussion
on
the
other
proposal.
Yes,
commissioners,
yeah,
okay,.
A
So,
let's
see
for
the
the
standards
for
amendments,
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
City
Council.
Well,
the
we've
heard
evidence
from
the
from
the
staff
that
this
is
meant
to
further
retail
uses
in
the
in
the
downtown
district,
and
that
would
be
in
line
with
the
comprehensive
general
plan
whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
compatible
with
the
overall
character
of
existing
development
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
subject
property.
A
This
seems
to
be
just
strengthening
the
the
idea
that
the
first
floor
of
downtown
uses
should
be
should
be
retail
as
opposed
to
office,
so
that
doesn't
seem
to
be
an
issue
and
is
satisfied
whether
a
proposed
amendment
will
have
an
adverse
effect
on
the
value
of
adjacent
properties.
There's
no
evidence
to
that.
That
seems
to
be
satisfied
in
the
adequacy
of
public
facilities
and
services-
that's
probably
not
applicable
to
our
to
our
conversation.
A
H
The
financial
institution
wording
so
it
says
one
located
above
the
ground
floor
or
at
the
ground
floor.
That's
that
language
seems
a
little
bit
odd
to
me
because
we're
just
dealing
with
ground
floor.
So
we're
saying
if
it's
okay,
if
they're
doing
that
for
above
as
well
sorry,
this
question
for
staff
no.
F
Yet
I
get
what
you're
saying
so
it
would
be
if
there
is
some
kind
of
financial
institution
that
is
located
above
above
the
ground
floor.
That
would
include
probably
a
greater
variety
of
financial
institutions
and
not
just
the
retail
banking
aspect.
If
something,
if
there's
a
financial
institution,
that's
going
to
be
on
the
ground
floor,
we
wanted
to
just
have
those
retail
banking
aspects,
so
we
wouldn't
want
to
have
investment,
banking
or
corporate
banking.
On
the
ground
floor.
I
A
When
located
above
the
ground
floor
or
at
the
ground
floor,
when
two
retail
banking
services,
so
I
think
we
can
just
rework
this
language
to
make
it
a
little
a
little
more
clear
if
we
put
like
maybe
a
romanette
before
the
first
one,
so
like
romanette
one
when
located
above
the
ground
floor
and
comma
or
romanette
ii.
At
the
ground
floor,
when
retail
banking
services,
such
as
checking
savings
accounts
such
as
checking,
slash
saving
accounts,
debit,
slash
credit
card
uses
and
then
I
think
we
should
change
the
and
ATMs
to
or
ATMs
right.
A
F
And
I
think
in
cases
like
that,
we
might
be
looking
more
so
at
the
amount
of
use
that
is
an
ATM.
So
if
you've
got
maybe
like
a
lobby
area,
that's
got
ATMs
and
then
just
a
small
investment
banking.
But
if
it's
gonna
be
mostly
Investment
Banking,
if
it's
gonna
be
75
or
80%
investment,
banking
and
you
just
have
an
ATM
kind
of
on
the
storefront,
then
that
wouldn't
yes.
A
Megan,
do
you
have
that
to
to
read
out
to
everyone
or
Jimmy
to
try
to
read
that
out
again,
so
people
can
ministers,
don't
understand
what
what's
being
changed.
A
Permitted
use
would
read
as
follows:
financial
institution
open,
parens
romanette
one
when
located
above
the
ground
floor,
comma
or
romanette
ii.
At
the
ground
floor
when
the
ground
floor
is
primarily
used
for
retail
banking
services,
such
as
checking
savings,
accounts,
debit,
credit
card
uses
or
ATMs
article
when
the
are
provided
doesn't
fit
the
way
I
read
it
lets
you
can.
E
E
Back
the
romanette
ii
when,
when
at
the
ground
floor,
provided
that
retail
banking,
primarily
retail
banking
services,
are
included
retail
banking
services
at
a
minimum,
need
to
have
checking
savings,
debit
and
ATMs.
I'd
like
to
see
all
three,
because
he
teams
doesn't
strike
me
as
I
don't
to
your
point
carol,
and
so
I
think
you're
lying
would
just
saying
primarily
read
banking
retail
banking
and
that
at
retail
banking
should
include
at
a
minimum
those
three
elements
which
then
will
ensure
that
it's
truly
a
pedestrian
attracting
facility.
E
D
A
A
A
Is
the
installation
of
an
ATM
at
at
the
street,
unlike
the
facade
of
a
building?
Is
that
a
is
that
a
zoning
issue
or
Monnet
ATM
within
a
within
a
store?
Is
that
a
zoning
issue?
It
doesn't
seem
to
me
that
it
wouldn't
be
right,
see
if
we
got
rid
of
if
we
got
rid
of
ATM
and
just
left
that
in
there
I
think
that
would
that
would
be
more
clear
staff.
Would
you
have
an
objection
to
that?
Are
there
any
unintended
consequences
that
we're
not
thinking
of
I?
Think.
A
A
J
K
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I'd,
just
like
the
ask
one
question-
and
maybe
this
is
looking
into
this
too
carefully,
but
we
referenced
financial
institution
and
then
we
say
retail
banking
services
would
it
be
advisable
to
say
retail
financial
services
because
I'm
thinking,
like
it
investments
brokerage
that
had
retail
a
retail
component
to
it.
K
A
A
lot
of
our
a
lot
of
our
discussion
in
the
last
last
meeting
about
this
was
that
since
this
one
since
he's
like
it's
really
a
subset
of
downtown,
that's
not
the
whole
downtown
area,
but
it's
a
subset
of
downtown
that
the
the
like
the
goal
of
that
area
is
to
have
retail
ground
full
retail
and
to
drive
people
coming
in
and
out,
and
so
the
you
know.
The
discussion
I
got
ultimately
focused
on
okay.
Well,
we're
not
good!
A
We
don't
want
just
any
kind
of
financial
institution
on
the
first
floor,
yeah,
but
banking
services,
where
people
are
coming
in
or
out
in
and
out
where
that
can
help
drive
other
types
of
retail
and
so
and
I'm,
not
gonna
speak
for
the
Commission,
but
that's
where
our
our
discussion
considered
those
those
uses,
and
at
least
at
that
time
the
idea
was
keep
those
out
of
this
district,
except
for
on
floors.
Two
and
above
floors.
K
A
A
A
J
Thank
You
mr.
chairman
members,
the
Commission
members,
the
public
estate
of
the
request
is
for
a
map
amendment
to
remove
the
West
Evanston
overlay
designation
from
the
subject
property.
There's
a
bit
of
background
on
this
area
and
planning
there
was
the
West
Evanston
master
plan
adopted
in
2007,
which
looked
at
the
area
along
the
old
Mayfair,
railroad
right
away,
running
from
Green
Bay
Road
down
Southwest
through
the
city.
J
There
are
many
goals
within
that
that
plan,
including
completing
the
the
street
network,
to
be
a
grid
that
goes
through
where
a
lot
of
those
streets
are
disconnected
by
the
the
form
of
rail
right-of-way
additional
goals
to
do
with
housing
in
the
area.
A
lot
of
the
development
that
was
forecasted
was
for
townhome
development,
multifamily
development
in
those
areas
that
plan
built
off
of
the
canal,
Green
Bay,
Road,
Ridge,
Avenue,
Church,
Street
report.
It
was
adopted
by
the
City
Council
in
2005.
J
J
This
is
how
it's
shown
within
the
overlay
district,
and
then
the
legend
on
here
shows
the
different
zoning
districts
in
that
area
and
the
building
types
it
would
be
constructed
there
so
notably,
and
the
parcels
that
we're
discussing
tonight
is
the
the
blue
with
a
new
public
neighborhood
street,
which
would
be
an
extension
of
Jackson
further
north.
All
the
way
to
connect
to
Simpson
to
create
that
connectivity
between
Simpson
and
foster.
That
does
not
exist
currently
and
then
a
street
to
connect
Wesley
and
Jackson,
where
those
to
terminate
currently
the
housing
type.
D
J
J
The
applicant
has
proposed
to
remove
this
area
from
the
overlay
district
and
has
stated
to
staff
that
he
plans
to
submit
for
planned
development
in
the
future.
If
the
map
amendment
moved
and
is
removed
from
the
overlay
district,
the
anticipated
plans
are
for
townhomes
and
for
a
multi-unit
building
in
this
area,
and
then
we
have
the
standards
for
amendments
when
we
get
to
that.
Following
the
applicants
discussion,
discussion
of
the
public
and
discussion
of
the
the
Commission,
it
includes
a
summary
of
the
staff
report.
Thank
you.
J
L
Just
so
I
understand
kind
of
the
logistical
application,
so
there's
a
reference
in
the
staff
report
of
two.
So
if
the
overlay
district
is
removed
from
the
properties,
it
indicated
that
the
applicant
would
follow
the
West
Evanston
master
plan.
So
just
logistically
like
what
is
covered
by
the
master
plan
versus
that.
Is
it
really
into
the
form
based
code
that
the
overlay
covers
versus
the
master
plan
would
cover
the
building
types?
Or
can
you
clarify
that
sure.
J
M
M
A
Mean
I'm
gonna
interrupt
you
for
one
second
I'm,
sorry
I'm,
just
I'm
going
out
of
order
here.
First
story:
if
I
could
have
you
and
anyone
else
that
plans
on
asking
questions
or
speaking
today,
raise
your
right
hand
and
please
swear
or
affirm
that
the
testimony
you're
going
to
give
is
going
to
be
truthful.
A
M
M
M
It
says
this
is
exactly
what
you
have
to
do,
and
part
of
the
requirement
is
to
create
a
brand
new
road
at
the
top
of
webs
Wesley
Avenue
linking
Jackson
Avenue
and
the
site
that
we
have
is
probably
a
hundred
feet
deep
and,
as
you
know,
a
road
with
sidewalks
infinitely
I
probably
takes
up
30
another
six,
probably
45
50
feet
so
to
try
fit
a
townhouse
in
behind.
That
would
be
very,
very
difficult.
M
So,
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
of
the
West
Evanston
overlay
district,
we
came
up
with
a
plan
to
create
townhouses
along
the
stretch
of
land.
That's
there,
so
the
overlay
district
calls
for
type
2
townhouses.
So
what
we?
What
we're
envisage
doing
is
two
and
a
half
two
three-story
tall
townhouses
and
the
apartment
building.
That's
on
that
side
is
actually
in
an
hour
five
zoned
area,
so
it's
actually
not
in
the
West
sevens
and
overlay
district
at
all.
It's
actually
so
the
underlying
zoning
of
the
top
piece
of
land
where
townhouses
is
the
underlying
zoning.
M
M
It
would
cost
approximately
over
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
submit
a
plan
development
application
to
the
Commission
in
episode.
So
the
safer
way
for
me
as
the
land
owner
is
to
remove
the
district
to
remove
the
overlay
map
and
then
create
detailed
plans
for
the
city
of
Evanston
and
go
through
the
process
of
a
planned
development.
But
for
me
to
go
through
that
planned
development
process,
I'm
gonna
spend
over
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
just
in
plans
and
environmental
work
and
also
in
civil
engineering
work.
So
it's
really
a
cost
issue
more
than
anything
else.
M
You
know.
But
overall
you
know.
If,
if
the
city
wanted
me
to
say,
I
can
only
do
townhouse
here.
I'd
have
no
problem,
saying
all
townhouses
and
it
would
just
be
a
matter
of
it
would
be.
You
know,
I
could
sign
a
stay.
Dork
give
you
an
undertaking
that
we'd
only
do
townhouses
in
this
area
that
it's
part
of
the
overlay
district
and
I.
M
I,
don't
know
what
else
I
can
tell
you.
You
know,
but
I'm
happy
to
to
give
an
undertaking
that
on
this
parcel
and
of
what
we
would
go
and
proceed
with
through
the
planned
development
process
on
the
area
of
the
overlay
is
only
for
townhouses
I
could
I.
Could
you
know
and
I
could
definitely
give
you
that
undertaking?
Shall
we
call
it?
You
know
what
I
mean
and
whatever
you
know,
whatever
we
need
to.
M
Appease
the
city
of
Evanston
to
go
down
that
road
cuz
it's
I
live
in
the
area,
you
know
it's,
it
suits
townhouses.
The
city
of
Evanston
is
missing
a
lot
of
reason.
We
priced
new
construction
and
housing
in
the
last
ten
years,
there's
been
very
very
little.
You
construct
an
affordable
family
working
family
houses
in
Avastin.
There
aren't
any,
and
it's
missing
and
I've
talked
to
several
people.
Who've
I
go
to
school,
with
parents,
who've
moved
from
other
areas
and
finding
new
construction.
M
You
know
which
has
a
higher
efficiency
standards
which
is
cheaper
for
cost
of
living.
It's
very
difficult
to
find
in
Everson,
there's
tons
of
apartment
buildings,
there's
all
the
apartment
buildings
you
want
in
the
world
in
Everson,
but
there's
very
few
new
construction
home.
You
know,
houses
with
with
homeowners,
living
them
and
I.
Think
it's
one
thing
that
having
some
misses
that
it
doesn't
have.
You
know.
A
Are
there
any
any
questions
from
the
commission
of
the
applicant?
Mr.
H
D
M
Plan
doesn't
but
no
but
I,
you
know
I,
think
in
in
the
big
scheme
of
things.
This
piece
of
this
piece
of
land
has
laid
idle
for
30
odd
years
and
nothing
has
happened
on
and
it
the
reason
nothing
has
happened
on.
It
is
because
of
the
previous
ownership,
fathers
and
the
what
what
happens
to
the
son
has
come
over
and
above
and
put
an
overlay
on
the
district.
If
you
remove
that
overlay,
this
parcel
will
get
developed,
people
will
come
live
here.
M
E
J
M
Has
nothing
to
do
with
the
store
sugar
does
not
require
the
storage,
the
West
Evans
in
overlay
to
meet
two
demands
at
the
West
Evanston
overlay,
and
you
would
have
to
have
control
of
the
storage
facility
plus
the
the
car
parking
lot.
That's
next
door
to
it.
The
tone
by
Walgreens,
which
is
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
road.
So
you
would
have
to
have
an
accumulation.
You'd
have
to
buy
the
parking
lot
from
from
Walgreens
and
you'd
have
to
have
the
storage
facility
as
well.
So.
A
At
this
point,
we'll
open
up
the
discussion
to
members
of
the
public.
This
is
an
opportunity
for
you
to
ask
questions
of
the
of
the
applicant.
It's
not
not
time
for
a
comment
just
yet.
If
you
have
a
comment,
there's
gonna
be
an
opportunity
right
after
this
this
portion.
So
if
you
have
questions
you
want
to
elicit
more
information.
Now
would
be
the
time
there's
a
sign-in
sheet
and
no
one's
signed
in.
But
you
guys
can
you
raise
hands
come
up
and
you
can
sign
it
afterwards,
all
right
so
who
would?
A
N
M
Or
so
my
understanding
is
the
way
the
West
Evanston
overlay
district
is
is
superimposed
on
top
of
the
over
overlying
zoning
on
the
area,
the
whoever
it's
it's,
it's,
it's
essentially
they're,
creating
a
master
plan
for
this
whole
area.
Part
of
that
master
plan
for
this
whole
area
would
require
purchase
of
the
self
storage
area
purchase
of
the
parking
lot.
M
That's
across
the
road
from
the
Walgreens
purchase
of
my
property
and
adjacent
properties,
all
the
way
down,
Green,
Bay
Road
as
well,
and
then
come
in
and
construct
a
brand
new
road
linking
Wesley
to
Jackson,
which
was
which
would
be
over
300
feet
right,
150,
approximately
300
feet
of
brand-new
roadway,
so
I'm
not
an
expert
on
cost,
but
to
build
300
feet
of
brand-new
roadway
in
the
city
of
Evanston.
It's
not
it's!
It's
it's.
N
I
M
Have
to
buy
the
parking
lot
next
door
across
the
road
from
the
Walgreens.
There's
a
there's,
a
parking
lot
there
so
you'd
have
to
buy
the
two
of
those
and
then
you
would
have
to
build
a
brand
new
road
between
linking
Wesley
to
Jackson
and
then
extend
Jackson
all
the
way
up
to
what
is
that
that
is
Simpson?
No,
it's
a
Simpson
to
the
dort.
M
N
M
Think
it
was
done
in
an
era
when
there
was
mass
development
and
where
things
like
this
could
happen,
because
there
was
a
lot
of
development
going
on
and
a
lot
of
money
being
spent
on
new
construction
on
development
and
a
big
plan
like
this
could
work.
If
somebody
very
big
came
in
and
bought
up,
everything
in
red.
M
M
Somewhere
around
500
thousand
to
five
hundred
fifty
thousand
I
think
somebody
should
be
able
to
buy
one
these
townhouses,
what
a
mortgage
for
two
thousand
dollars
and
what
and
then
Plus
property
tax
is
an
insurance.
You
know
what
I
mean
right:
okay,
I
think
that's
I
think
$500,000
550
somewhere
that
sort
of
over
it's
probably
the
market
price,
that
the
market
could
substained
they'll,
be
about
2,000
square
feet,
each
two
parking
spaces
in
the
rear,
right
front
garden
on
them.
M
N
M
A
N
N
M
It
would
mister
what
did
what
you
don't
see
on
this?
What
you
don't
see
on
this
map
is
here
at
the
end
of
Jackson,
on
the
other
side
is
a
parking
lot
that
is
owned,
that
is,
staff
parking
for
the
Walgreens
across
the
other
side
of
the
road,
and
you
don't
see
it
on
this
map,
but
next
time,
you're
driving
by
there
you'll
notice
it
now
because
I've
told
you,
which
is
right
beside
the
public
storage
area,
what
that
is,
that
is
part
of
the
ownership
of
Walgreens.
M
M
A
O
Could
thank
you,
I'm
Jeff
masters,
1918,
Wesley,
I,
guess
I,
don't
understand
if
the
storage
facility
doesn't
go
away,
you're,
putting
a
road
between
the
storage
facility
in
the
front
of
these
properties,
you're
you're,
putting
a
and
so
then
you're.
Looking
at
the
storage
facility
from
the
front
of
the
house
and
the
back
of
the
house
looks
at
us:
I'm
not
picturing
this
and
so
sure.
M
What
we
envisage
is
is
creating
a
new
private
road
linking
Jackson
to
Wesley,
essentially
a
private
alley
or
a
private
road
controlled
by
the
development,
and
you
know
paid
for
by
the
development
and
the
parking
for
each
of
the
chalices
would
be
off
of
that
alley.
So
that
alley
will
be
between
that's
a
private
alley.
Show
we
call
private
alley
or
a
private
roadway,
which
I
think
is
the
correct
terminology,
would
Evanson
its
private
roadway,
but
essentially
it's
a
private
alley.
So
by
being
by
it
being
private,
the
city
doesn't
maintain
it.
M
The
city
doesn't
have
to
page
elijah's.
The
city
doesn't
have
to
fill
the
bottles
on
the
residents
of
that
area.
No,
your
alley
behind
house
is
the
responsibility
of
the
city's
and
the
private
alley.
It
kind
of
slightly
slightly
different.
It's
my
understanding,
but
correct
me.
If
I'm
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong.
A
O
A
J
So
the
overlay
district,
you
know,
does
a
couple
things.
It
calls
out
the
area
for
the
public
roads,
and
so
again,
this
that's
in
kind
of
like
the
the
medium
blue
on
the
diagram
up
here
and
then
calls
for
the
regulations
for
the
development
as
well.
So
the
regulations,
the
townhomes,
would
be
there.
J
If
that
overlays
is
removed,
it
would
revert
to
the
underlying
zoning
district,
which
in
this
case
is
r4,
which
is
a
multi-family
residential
district,
so
the
regulations
of
that
district
would
apply
and
there
are
a
variety
of
housing
types
that
could
be
built
there
outside
of
only
townhomes.
That
could
be
built.
M
Here
at
the
underlying
zoning
here
is
our
four,
which
is
less
than
what
it
is
on
Wesley,
which
is
currently
r5
and
what
is
on
Jackson,
which
is
our
five
as
well,
which
is
a
higher
density,
zoning
and
a
taller
zoning
is
allowed.
So
it's
actually
lower
density
and
lower
height
restrictions
than
all
the
properties
to
the
south
of
it.
Does
that
make
sense.
I
P
P
J
So
the
first
question
it
would
remove
the
requirements
of
the
overlay,
including
like
on
this
diagram,
where
you
see
the
green,
the
open
space
there
so
as
I
think
it's
a
Issac
asked
question
earlier.
One
of
the
ways
to
tie
the
two
together
would
be
through
a
simultaneous
application
for
a
map
amendment
and
a
plan.
Development
at
that
point,
you'd
be
approving
a
plan
development
and
that
plan
development
would
have
a
plan
that
would
show
exactly
what
would
be
on
there
and
we
approved
as
hand-in-hand
as
a
part
of
that.
P
P
A
Other
option,
the
only
other
option
would
be-
would
be
to
amend
the
the
plan
or
either
amend
the
plan
or
remove
the
property
from
the
plan.
Those
would
be
the
two
options
of
providing
the
applicant
with
some
relief.
There
might
be
some
others,
but
I
believe
that's.
Those
would
be
the
two
main
ones
right.
J
As
far
as
the
building
itself,
kappa
noone
could
ask
for
variations
from
the
plan
through
the
variance
process.
However,
the
location
of
public
streets
is
only
allowed
to
be
adjusted
by
I
think
ten
feet
from
the
centerline
of
the
street.
So
that's
really
where
that
the
crux
of
it,
the
public
improvements
there
and
you
know
essentially
where
that
blue
or
the
new
street,
the
new
east-west
connection
is,
is
proposed
in
the
zoning
district.
Is
the
the
location
where
the
applicant
owns
and
is
proposing
to
put
townhomes.
I
J
A
At
this
point,
you
can
you're
gonna
take
a
seat.
Please
thank
you
very
much,
the
members
of
the
public
and
can
make
comments
with
respect
to
this
application.
I'm
just
going
to
go
in
order
of
the
people
that
signed
up
and
then,
if
there's
any
others
that
didn't
sign
up
but
would
like
to
make
comment,
I'll
open
it
to
to
you
as
well
mr.
A
O
Guess,
for
me,
my
concern
is
one
that
you've
raised
the
start
again:
Jeff
masters,
1918,
Wesley
Avenue
of
what
happens.
Why
are
you
coming
in
in
two
parts
and
I
understand
why
monetarily
I
just
worry
that
we
take
away
the
overlay
and
something
happens
to
you
and
you
decide
to
sell
your
property,
and
now
we
have
some
new
person.
O
I
might
trust
you
that
you
were
only
going
to
put
in
this
kind
of
development
in
this
area,
but
I
feel
very
uncomfortable
without
having
some
some
other
way
with
the
city
which,
because
we
went
through
a
lot
of
process
back
in
the
day
to
come
up
with
this
overlay,
we
had
the
whole
community
together.
I
was
part
of
those
meetings
we
were
in
the
fleetwood
Jermaine.
We
were
putting
housing
things
together.
O
It
was
a
pretty
big
deal,
so
removing
it
quickly
without
some
kind
of
study
or
or
additional
plan
just
doesn't
seem
to
make
sense
to
me,
given
what
we
went
through
in
the
past
and
it
just
more
of
a
commitment
for
me
as
a
property
owner
and
homeowner,
and
the
city
with
this
is
what
we're
planning
to
do
and
will
involve
you
in
the
process.
So
that's
it
for
my
comment.
Okay.
Thank
you,
sir.
I
He
said
you
know
this
really
has
to
be
studied
again,
and
you
know
the
down.
The
city's
comprehensive
plan
has
not
been
looked
at
or
updated
for
20
years
this
has
been
15
years.
There's
pressure
of
development
within
a
residential
area,
we're
in
the
2005
study.
It
says
to
downzone
this
area.
You
know
to
maintain
the
character
of
the
residential
neighborhood
and
so
I
just
really
want
to
remind
everybody
of
that.
You
know.
I
What,
if
the
parking
lot
that
walgreens
owns,
comes
up
for
sale,
we've
now
ruined
any
de
t
to
plan
this
out
into
something
that
fits
within
the
neighborhood
and
I.
Just
recommend
that
you
don't
look
at
piecemealing
everything,
but
let's
look
at
it
as
an
area
and
maybe
it's
time
to
restart
it.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
P
Yes,
I
want
to
tell
you
about
fifth
board
meetings
when
you-
and
this
all
involves
the
fifth
Ward,
there's
a
lot
of
resentment
in
the
fifth
Ward
towards
developers,
and
you
hear
over
and
over
and
over
of
broken
promises
in
the
past
for
that
area.
This
I
think,
if
you,
if
we
don't
reset
it,
if
we
don't
involve
the
community
and
what
we're
going
to
do
with
this,
what
you're
going
to
do
with
this
area
I
think
you're
going
to
have
a
lot
of
issues
with
the
fifth
Ward.
P
That's
just
just
from
what
I've
heard
from
there
very
angry
still
from
1960s
they're
mad,
so
I
just
want
I
think
you
need
to
consider
the
whole
area
and
the
people
of
that
community
and
not
over
impact
them
with
people.
Do
you
know,
because
the
density,
the
stress
on
the
streets
and
in
parking
and
all
that
I
think
needs
to
be
looked
at
before
you
decide
to
change
anything
that
you
made
on
the
the
master
plan
of
Evanston.
G
Hi
everyone,
I'm
Christopher,
Kochel,
I'm,
1910,
Leslie
and
I
just
want
to
reiterate
what
several
people
have
said.
It
feels
like
we're
making
some
decisions
about
this
area,
both
at
the
last
meeting
and
this
meeting,
based
on
studies
that
are
20
years
old
or
plans
that
are
20
years
old
studies
that
are
15
years
old
and
I'm
wondering
if
we
need
new
data
new
information.
So
we
can
make
better
informed
decisions
about
what's
going
on
in
this
area,
there's
obviously
light.
Obviously
a
lot
of
tension
with
the
neighbors
there
and
I'm
not
saying
that
this.
G
If
we
bring
that
density
in
and
don't
also
address
some
of
these
other
issues
that,
like
that,
like
Jackson
being
a
one
way
narrow
street,
it's
going
to
cause
all
kinds
of
problems
in
that
area
and
and
we
don't
want
to
ruin
our
neighborhood
with
density
that
hasn't
been
properly
planned
for
so
I.
Think
new
studies
are
definitely
a
good
idea.
Thanks.
A
Sir
excuse
me,
if
you
wouldn't
mind,
thank
you
all
right.
Is
there
anyone
else
from
the
public
that
would
like
to
make
any
any
comment
with
respect
to
the
presentation
at
this
time,
it's
well
within
your
right
to
come
up
and
give
a
response,
or
you
know
summary
conclusion
if
you,
if
you'd
like
otherwise,
we
can
pass
and
and
move
on
to
abrasion.
M
Just
briefly,
AB,
the
part
of
the
the
parcel
that
were
taking
the
overlay
off
you
know,
I
mean,
doesn't
restrict
the
extension
of
Jackson.
It
actually
I'm,
actually
part
of
the
plan
that
we
submitted
her,
that
we're
proposing
extends
Jackson
a
little
bit
further
and
paid
for
by
myself
and,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
I've
nope
no
problems
committing
to
in
the
part
of
the
overlay
that
we're
removing
committing
to
just
doing
townhouses
the
the
number
of
them
is
what's
what's
out
there
in
the
underlying
zoning.
That's
you
know,
that's
just
the
numbers.
It's
there.
M
You
know
I
mean
I've
no
problems
committing
to
that.
The
density
further
south,
which
was
addressed
I,
think
at
the
last
planning
meetings.
Where
you
know
the
RFI
zoning
to
the
south
of
here
is
an
extremely
dense
zoning
and
it's
allowed
by
as
a
rice.
This
is
not
it's
a
lower
zoning.
It
allows
less
units
less
high,
higher
less
height
restrictions
than
the
other
units.
You
know
so
I
just
know
any
comments.
Okay,
I!
Thank
you
all.
J
So,
probably
with
this
plan
there
there
are
a
large
number
of
sizable
parcels
and
some
of
those
that
that
have
been
available
and
then
are
available.
Now
there
have
not,
to
date,
been
many
large
parcels
that
have
been
aggregate
it
and
redeveloped
and
someone
that
may
have
to
it
market
condition.
Some
of
it
has
to
do
with
TIF
was
developed
and
established
in
this
area.
J
Can
I
check
on
that?
I
I
think
it
is
a
complicating
factor
depending
on
the
parcel
and
and
how
much
of
the
parcel
is
scheduled
for
right-of-way,
essentially
that
some
of
the
parcels
and
like
like
this
one
included
with
majority
of
the
parcel
is
itself
is
scheduled
to
be
right-of-way
in
the
plan.
But
what.
H
A
K
Johnson
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
have
a
question
for
staff
I'm
reading
the
the
West
West
Evanston
master
plan
and
I'm
wondering
I'm
looking
specifically
at
these
the
five
guiding
principles
and
if
the
overlay
is
removed
in
this
development
goes
forward,
I'm
wondering
in
their
professional
opinion
how
that
would
affect
the
principle
number
one:
reconnect:
the
community
complete
terminating
streets
and
sidewalks,
and
remove
old
railroad,
routine,
retaining
walls
and
number
three
increase.
The
walkability
of
the
neighborhood
so
providing
a
walkable
block
pattern
with
continuous
and
wide
sidewalks
and
provides
safe
passage
for
bike
bicyclists.
K
So
I'm
just
wondering
if
this
development,
if
the
overlay
is
removed
and
this
development
goes
forward,
it
seems
like
what
we're
talking
about
is.
Does
that
mean
the
extensions
of
the
road
north-south
less
likely
to
happen?
The
extension
the
road,
the
east-west
east-west
road
will
not
happen
and
will
that
hold
that
impact
connectivity
of
this
neighborhood
isolationists
neighborhood
walkability
and
those
types
of
things
yeah.
J
I
mean
it
would
certainly
be
compromising
those
goals
to
some
extent.
The
plan
is
shown
here
would
would
extend
Jackson
somewhat
further
north
to
connect
with
the
proposed
development,
but
not
all
the
way
up
to
Simpson.
It
would
not
necessarily
that
could
be
possible
in
the
future,
although
it
would
take
additional
property
acquisition,
as
the
applicant
mentioned.
It
also
would
create
some
sort
of
connection
between
Wesley
and
Jackson,
as
in
a
24-foot.
J
A
A
You
know,
as
it
extends
not
just
on
this
map,
but
all
the
way
down
it's.
You
know
it
is
a
bit
I
want
to
say
haphazard,
but
it's
not
it's,
not
one
contiguous
block
right
in
main
the
main
driver
there
I
believe,
is
in
or
these
old
right
of
ways
that
that
service,
like
the
backbone
for
a
lot
of
this
west
overlay
district.
A
But
what
are
the
commissioners
think
about
the
prospect
of
removing
you
know
one
parcel
from
from
the
overlay
district
and
what
does
that
do
to
the
to
the
other
parcels
that
remain
right,
so
the
the
self
storage
area
or
the
or
the
the
parking
lot
for
Walgreens
or
any
of
these
other
parcels
that
were
not.
We
are
not
considering
today,
but
by
agreeing
to
remove
this
parcel
we
are,
you
know,
affecting
the
you
know
the
viability
of
those
areas
for
what
the
master
plan
calls
for.
C
A
Why
would
we
consider
removing
one
parcel
that
isn't
necessarily
like
at
the
end?
It
basically
makes
up
the
you
know
the
the
central
area
of
this
portion
of
the
of
the
overlay
district,
and
so
you
know
it's
removing
one
parcel.
It
would
seem
to
me
to
be
compromising
the
balance
of
the
of
this
west
over
this
portion
of
the
west
overlay
district
I
mean,
do
you
I
mean?
Do
you
agree?
Do
you
disagree.
D
H
I
think
cheer
your
question:
if
we
remove
that
parcel,
you
know
it
will
be
very
difficult
to
replicate
this
to
make
this
plan
reality.
But
are
we
also
that
fair
to
say
that
this
was
this
plan
was
done
15
years
ago
and
it
hasn't
been
developed
because
some
of
these
parcels
are
not
free
to
be
developed,
so
I
think
what
the
applicant
is
trying
to
get
here
is
they
know
they're
trying
to
make
this
work
for
now,
and
should
we
think
of
that?
A
Well,
you
know
I'll,
say
candidly,
that
you
know
the
what's
been
diagrammed
as
the
as
a
proposal
for
what
you
know
what
the
applicant
thinks
that
their
developments
going
to
look
like
I
think
it's
a
smart
use
of
space
and
I
think
it.
You
know
I
think
if,
if
done
right
and
brought
brought
here
for
us,
you
know
I
could
easily
see
myself
supporting
it
but
I'm
having
an
issue
with
doing
it,
piecemeal
and
removing
this
parcel
and
removing
this
parcel
and
not
knowing
exactly
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
with
it.
A
And
so
you
know
I
think
that's
that's.
Ultimately,
my
my
hang-up
with
with
this
application
is
that
we're
we'd
be
doing
one
step
without
the
other
and
the
one
step
is:
is
you
know
compromising
the
I
guess,
integrity
of
the
overlay
district,
and
so,
if,
if
I'm,
going
to
support
that
I
think
that
I
need
to
see
not
just
the
first
step,
but
also
the
second
step,
but
I,
don't
know
what
do
you?
Mr.
K
With
those
points
that
the
piecemeal
nature
and
the
the
you
know,
I
do
understand
it's
it's
less
expensive
to
do
with
this
art
from
the
developers
perspective,
but
it
room
balloon.
The
overlay
does
Wow
a
great
bit
of
uncertainty.
As
one
of
the
residents
mentioned,
the
developer
could
sell
the
property.
K
The
developer
kind
of
were
were
we're,
allowing
a
greater
deal
of
uncertainty
and
to
have
the
the
request
or
the
removal
of
the
overlay
connected
in
tandem
with
what
the
site
development
plan
would
be,
give
greater
assurance
to
the
the
residents
and
to
this
body
as
far
as
what
actually
is
going
to
get
built
there.
So
I
I
do
agree
with
the
the
two
points
that
you
just
made.
D
H
Think
on
to
that
point
that
once
you
get
to
the
further,
along
with
the
site
development
I
mean
you
should
be
able
to
work
with
the
city
of
Evanston
to
give
a
little
bit
more
guidance
on
the
road
aspect.
Maybe
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
a
private
drive,
but
it
would
be
dedicated.
So
what
would
be
the
difference
like
we
have
those
discussions?
Maybe
there
could
be
a
public
partnership.
Those
sorts
of
things
I
think
that
this
I
think
this
development
could
work
as
well.
H
A
A
C
A
L
I
think
this
kind
of
gets
at
the
points
that
have
been
raised,
which
are
you
know
if
it
was
of
spend
about
as
townhomes
then
it
would
potentially
be
in.
You
know
consistent
with
a
comprehensive
plan
and
with
the
overlay
district,
but
there's
no
guarantee
of
that.
So
we're
not
voting
on
whether
it's
you
know
on
this
townhome
proposal,
so
I
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
guarantee
that
it
would
be
consistent,
necessarily.
A
Whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
compatible
with
the
overall
character
of
existing
development
and
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
subject-
property-
well,
we're
not
changing
the
zoning
right,
but
we
are
removing
the
property
from
the
overlay
which,
which
would
give
this
parcel
different
rights
than
the
than
the
surrounding
property.
That
being
said,
the
underlying
zoning
I
believe
the
testimony
was
that
it
was
r4.
I,
don't
see
that
being
much
different
than
what
is
under
in
the
overlay.
A
A
A
A
C
I
just
like
to
say,
I'm,
not
sure
that
the
west
overlay,
district
and
I
do
remember
one
that
was
passed
and
there
were
a
lot
of
marvelous
goals
to
it.
I'm
not
sure
it's
been
effective
and
Scott.
Your
comment
that
the
TIF
district
was
completely
unsuccessful.
So
I,
you
know
I.
If
we
don't
do
something
to
develop
this
property,
is
it
gonna
sit
around
for
another
10-15
years.