►
From YouTube: Plan Commission Meeting 1-22-2020
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
C
B
F
D
D
G
C
D
Right,
the
first
sort
of
second
order
of
business
is
text
amendment
and
connected
to
that.
As
a
map
amendments
the
text,
amendment
numbers
19,
pln
d,
0,
0,
9
0.
It's
a
zoning
ordinance
text
amendment
to
create
a
new
general
residential
zoning
district
designation
with
a
maximum
height
of
3
and
1/2
stories.
D
The
map
amendment
is
similar
to
that.
It's
rezoning
properties,
north
of
Evanston
Emerson,
roughly
between
Asbury
to
the
east
builder
Park
and
a
former
main
carry
railroad
property
to
the
west
in
the
black
north
of
Foster
Street
to
the
north
from
the
existing
are
5
general
residential
district
zoning
district
to
a
new
general
residential
zoning
district
with
a
height
limit
of
3
and
1/2
stories.
These
are
both
related.
D
D
Alright,
the
format
for
tonight's
hearing
is
to
gather
facts
and
information
regarding
the
petitions
provide
that
information
with
a
recommendation
to
approve
or
approve
approve
with
refinements
or
to
deny
to
the
City
Council,
where
final
action
will
occur.
In
other
words,
this
is
were
recommending
biting.
We
do
not
make
a
decision
tonight.
We
just
recommend
to
the
City
Council,
so
here's
the
summary
of
procedures
were
going
to
follow
tonight.
D
City
staff,
which
is
the
presenter
for
this
case,
will
summarize
the
petition,
after
which
the
plan
Commission
may
ask
questions
of
the
staff,
as
this
case
was
continued.
The
party
who
requested
the
continuance
will
then
present
evidence
rebutting
previously
provided
testimony
regarding
the
petition.
Afterwards,
the
plan
Commission
may
question
that
party
and
any
other
witnesses.
D
Next
members
of
the
public,
you
can
ask
questions
of
the
petitioner
when
speaking
at
the
microphones,
they
should
give
their
name
and
address
and
whether
they
have
been
sworn
in
to
testify
and
again
that
all
needs
to
be
done
up
here
at
the
microphone.
So
it
can
be
reported
the
petition.
The
petitioner
will
then
have
the
opportunity
to
answer
any
of
these
questions.
The
member
of
the
public
can
then
give
sworn
testimony,
comments,
opinions,
etc
and
again,
when
speaking
at
the
microphone,
you
must
give
your
name
and
address
and
speak
at
the
podium.
D
The
petitioner
will
then
have
the
opportunity
to
cross-examine
any
member
of
the
public
that
provided
that
testimony
after
the
public
has
completed
its
testimony.
Public
testimony
for
the
case
will
be
closed.
However,
any
member
of
the
Planning
Commission
or
the
city
staff
can
ask
questions
mccann
question
any
public
member
or
the
petitioner
finally
will
have
a
summary
and
closing
by
the
petitioner
and
optional
closing
staff.
D
Deliberation
by
the
planned
mission
based
on
evidence,
clarifying
or
summary
comments
by
each
commissioner
are
optional
and
finally,
a
motion
to
either
recommend
or
approve
with
refinements
or
denial.
Because,
there's
quite
a
few
of
us
tonight
we
can.
We
are
going
to
provide
supplements
the
testimony.
So
if
you
are
an
individual,
your
comments
and
questions
will
be
limited
to
two
months.
If
you're,
representing
a
group
or
an
organization,
your
comments
will
be
list
limited
to
ten
minutes.
H
Specifically
with
regards
to
this
particular
area,
we'll
be
looking
at
issue
2
when
there
is
a
great
amount
of
discussion
that
came
from
that,
and
they
were
essentially
two
different
sides.
It
had
one
side
that
looked
at
the
existing
character,
which
was
largely
single-family
homes,
though
some
had
been
converted
to
two
family
or
multi-unit
residences,
and
you
got
a
another
side
that
essentially
was
saying
that
if
we
were
to
down
down
that
particular
area,
it
would
take
away
a
good
amount.
H
H
Zoning
districts
so
throughout
that
discussion
finally
got
to
a
proposal
to
creates,
in
our
five
eight
districts,
which
essentially
matches
all
of
the
existing
bulk
regulations
for
the
r5
district,
but
with
the
slightly
lower
heights
of
42
feet,
whereas
in
the
r5
district
it
is
50
feet
or
5
storeys,
whichever
is
less
so.
This
evening
we
are
looking
at
possibly
rezoning
the
area
that
I
mentioned
earlier.
This
outlines
what
that
area
is.
H
This
chart,
that
is
before
you
pretty
much,
lays
out
some
of
the
more
dense
residential
zoning
areas
so
did
not
include
the
r1
and
r2
districts
as
those
are
primarily
single-family
home
zoning
districts.
So,
as
you
can
see,
there's
generally
the
same
folk
requirements
between
the
r5
and
r
r5,
a
with
the
exception
of
that
height
difference,
and
you
can
also
see
how
that
compares
to
some
of
the
lower
density,
general
residential
zoning
areas.
J
Good
evening,
sirs
and
commissioners,
and
back
before
you
from
our
session
in
October,
my
name
is
Thomas
Ram
cell
I'm,
an
attorney
in
Chicago
and
I,
represent
the
party
who
requested
the
continuance.
But
it
isn't.
The
only
party
affected
by
this
I
represented
Victoria
Katherine,
who
owns
seven
parcels
at
the
intersection
of
Emerson
and
Jackson,
which
is
something
which
is
part
about
the
area
to
be
included
under
the
proposed
Madeline.
J
So
what
I
want
to
do
is
briefly
just
instead
of
giving
the
case
I'm
gonna,
let
miss
Katherine
our
expert
George
Kissel,
whose
reports
should
be
included
in
your
packet
that
you
received
today
as
before
this
body
many
times
and
just
simply
say
that
you
know
what's
before
the
Commission
tonight
is
a
text
amendment
which
we
all
know
changes.
We
have
to
create
a
zone,
new
zoning
classification
that
applies
text
to
that
which.
J
That
is
what
takes
that
text,
and
that
applies
it
to
the
properties
included
winner,
miss
Katherine,
miss
Beth
Ryan's.
So,
in
a
way
it's
the
objection
of
the
leaf
will
present
evidence
against
the
text.
Amendment
explain
why
we
don't
think
it's
beneficial
to
Evanston
and
consistent
with
its
planning
principles.
J
It's
the
application
of
that
text
through
the
map
amendment
that
most
directly
affects
my
clients,
who
again,
who
owned
seven
properties
and
just
as
a
brief
summary
here,
I
think
that
the
reason
we're
here
and
I
think
the
evidence
is
the
discussion
is
going
to
show
is
that
there
was
a
misunderstanding:
miss
Katherine
and
her
late
husband
spent
20
years
20,
starting
in
the
late
90s,
investing
in
the
properties
that
are
this
text
amendment
and
the
map
amendment.
They
are
seven
properties
again
at
Jackson
and
Emerson.
J
Without
her
permission
and
hearing,
she
wasn't
even
at
began
talking
about
acquiring
more
personal
property
and
proposing
a
hundred
units
for
this
area
and
actually
wanted
additional
zoning
leaf
from
the
zoning
bodies
to
increase,
not
decrease,
increase
capacity,
injuries
density,
so
we
they
could
get
a
hundred
units.
Miss
Katherine
had
nothing
to
do
with
that.
Nothing
and
when
she
heard
about
it,
she
got
out
of
a
contract
broke
the
contract.
She
began
addressing
the
public.
J
She
had
a
public
hearing
here
and
I
believe
that
the
Alderman's
referral
Vista
staff
was
a
result
of
a
coup,
total
honestly,
a
misunderstanding
and
something
that
Miss
Catharine
never
intended
to
do.
She
was
not
the
person
who
did
it.
She
always
planned
this
she'll
talk
to
you
about
to
build
within.
J
As
of
right,
Sonne
under
the
r5
classification
and
she's,
going
to
tell
you
that
if
this
isn't
applied
to
her-
or
this
doesn't
pass,
that's
exactly
what
she's
gonna
do
and
she's
gonna
require
it
now
in
any
contract
moving
forward,
so
she
has
been
significantly
impacted
by
a
we'll
call
him
a
business
partner
who
frustrated
that
20-year
plan
as
she
and
her
late
husband
had
to
build
within
zoning.
Of
that
he's
been
in
reliance
on
zoning
laws
and
their
continued
applicability
to
her
properties.
J
I
will
finish
up
just
briefly
by
saying
that,
in
its
report,
the
staff
does
not
reckon
to
this
body
that
it
approved
this.
They
only
represent
recommends
that
there
be
a
discussion,
it
doesn't
say
we
should
do
this
or
we
shouldn't
do
this.
That's
up
to
you
and
miss
Corinne
will
address
this
further
now,
but
I
just
want
to
add
as
a
thought,
I'll
hit
it.
J
Our
talk
about
her
to
get
more
done
is
that
should
Evanston
in
its
wisdom
decide
that
a
new
zoning
classification
is
appropriate
and
create
a
map
that
will
then
apply
it.
We
respectfully
request
that,
if
that
approval
happens
to
be
with
refinements,
which
is
to
exclude
the
20-year
seven
properties
that
have
been
the
subject
of
Miss
Catherine's
investments
of
almost
two
million
dollars,
investments
in
Evanston,
in
its
people
and
in
its
future.
J
K
K
K
D
J
K
J
K
Well,
when,
when
Mike
passed
away,
I
knew
that
I
was
kind
of
between
a
rock
and
a
hard
place.
I
was
missing
two
properties
and
additionally,
I
did
not
have
enough
expertise
and,
frankly,
stamina
and
willpower
to
do
this.
On
my
own,
so
I
decided
to
purchase
and
overpay
for
the
other
two
properties
and
sell
them.
Sell
the
parcels
to
a
developer,
who'd
be
more
qualified.
J
J
K
Have
to
be
honest,
that
I
was
so
busy
and
crazy
at
that
time
running
the
other
business,
that
I
wasn't
pay
attention,
paying
attention
exactly
to
what
he
was
doing
and
what
he
was
doing
is
prolonging
the
closing.
Prolonging
the
closing.
Prolonging
the
closing
I
was
too
busy
to
question
that
and
what
he
was
doing
behind
my
back
from
what
I
understood
from
Melissa
was
that
he
was
trying
to
acquire
additional
properties
on
Emerson
and
build
a
development
that
was
way
beyond
what
was
allowed
there,
which
was
a
hundred
units
over
a
hundred
units.
J
K
J
J
K
J
K
Pure
accident,
well,
the
alderman
mentioned
it
at
that
community
meeting,
but
then
I
got
nothing
in
the
mail,
nothing
in
my
phone,
nothing
by
email
and
by
pure
accident,
while
discussing
the
properties
with
the
new
broker.
I
found
out
literally
a
few
days
before
that,
in
fact,
this
this
was
proposed.
This
5a.
J
L
K
Well,
a
considerable
about
money
and
time
went
into
assembling
these
properties
and
they
were
assembled
based
on
existing
law
which
I
have
relied
on.
I
know
this
is
getting
personal,
but
I
come
from
the
former
Soviet
Union,
where
anybody
could
just
step
in
and
take
what
you
have
built
taking
what
you
have
created
and
destroyed.
Take
it
away.
So
you
know
I,
never
thought
that
it
would
be
possible
that
I,
basing
my
decisions,
business
decisions
on
existing
laws
would
be
faced
with
this
kind
of
situation.
It's.
K
J
J
K
Definitely
you
know
if
it's
being
said
all
the
time
that
nothing
is
changes
that
you
you
know
only
the
height
is
reduced,
but
you
have
to
remember
that
whoever
develops
it
is
going
to
take
the
first
floor
for
parking
and
so
you're
reducing
the
entire
building,
you're,
condensing
it
by
30%
30
to
35%.
That's
what's
going
to
happen.
F
J
J
K
I,
just
would
like
you
to
consider
that
these
decisions,
my
decisions,
regardless
of
the
stressful
time
I
was
I,
was
in
were
based
on
the
law.
That's
what
I'd
like
to
stress
that
they
were
based
on
the
existing
zoning
and
the
unexist
in
law.
I
have
done
nothing
wrong
and
that
this
is
and
by
the
way,
the
study
from
2005.
This
has
not
come
up
at
all
in
all
this
time.
K
M
M
As
an
expert
in
the
courts
of
cook,
DuPage
Lake
will
contain
counties
and
appear
regularly
before
administrative
review
boards
about
the
region
spent
a
fair
amount
of
time
before
this
board.
Before
all
of
your
tenure.
In
the
early
to
mid-2000s,
the
Planning
and
Zoning
consultant
for
Church
Street
Plaza
Optima
towers,
mcdougal
littell
at
Mather
lifeways.
So.
M
A
report
that
covers
most
of
the
issues
with
the
proposed
text
and
map
amendments
so
I'm
just
going
to
touch
on
some
key
points
here,
and
you
know
what
I
hope
will
be
a
relatively
short
presentation.
So
we'll
start
with
the
proposed
text,
amendment
that
adds
the
r58
district.
So
the
slide
up
here
summarizes
the
both
provisions
of
each
district
should
be
noted
that
at
this
point,
that
in
general,
zoning
ordinances
controlled
bulk
or
how
much
could
be
built
on
a
site
either
by
prescribing
the
proportion
of
building
area
to
land
area.
M
M
C
M
So
here
we
have
a
typical
double
lot,
which
is
one
hundred
five
hundred
fifty
or
fifteen
thousand
square
feet.
If
you
apply
the
setbacks,
which,
in
this
case
front
yard
twenty-seven
sides
of
three
we're
over
25,
then
we
have
the
maximum
building
coverage,
which
is
45
percent,
in
this
case
six
hundred
six
thousand
seven
hundred
fifty
square
feet.
M
M
So,
with
the
three
and
a
half
stories
42
feet,
we
have
67
50.
Instead
of
times
five,
we
have
the
three
floors
at
the
six
seven
fifteen.
Only
about
sixty
percent
of
that
floor,
that's
under
the
peak
roof
as
allowed
and
still
haven't
count
as
a
half
story.
So
it's
a
total
of
twenty
four
thousand
three
hundred
square
feet.
That's
allowed
when
you
would
impose
a
three
and
a
half
storey
height
limit
42
feet
so.
M
The
difference
between
the
two
just
kind
of
on
a
theoretical
basis
is
about
twenty-eight
percent
loss
in
development
rights
in
terms
of
gross
floor
area.
So
now
to
take
a
look
at
a
practical
application.
This
is
Miss
catherine's
property
at
the
corner
of
Jackson
and
I
Merson.
As
you
can
see,
we
have
the
setbacks
apply
for
each
of
those
Lots.
This
is
a
prototypical
development,
that's
basically
five-story
building,
eighty
two
thousand
and
change
in
terms
of
gross
square
feet,
52
units
and
seventy
five
parking
spaces.
M
This
is
a
kind
of
a
familiar
building
prototype
for
housing
in
the
current
era.
It's
basically
four
stories
of
residential
below
a
partial
parking
podium
covered
parking
and
once
it's
a
fairly
reasonable
in
terms
of
its
density
and
reasonable
in
terms
of
its
cost
of
construction,
they
tend
to
get
finance,
they
tend
to
get
built,
they
tend
to
be
able
to
accommodate,
affordable,
have
an
affordable
housing
component
in
them.
M
C
M
We
look
at
the
same
prototype
on
the
r5,
a
we
lose
basically
the
the
fifth
floor,
and
the
half
story
in
this
case
really
doesn't
provide
us
with
in
the
additional
floor
area,
we're
talking
about
double
OD
corridor
type
buildings
that
have
sort
of
a
prescribed
depth
on
either
side
of
that
corridor.
And
when
you
look
at
only
60%
of
that
depth,
you
really
don't
have
a
room
for
units.
It's
not.
M
You
know
particularly
useful
in
a
situation
where
it's
a
single
family
home
the
area
under
a
pitched
roof
or
a
two
flat
such
as
that
you
can
actually
get
some
usable
space
in
there,
but
with
a
double
O
in
court
or
type
building
that
you
see
in
larger
Lots,
and
then
this
is
the
sort
of
four
plus
one
building
prototype
that
is
really
looking
to
you.
Give
you
any
additional
floor
area.
So
the
comparison
here
in
a
practical
application
is
more
like
a
loss
of
about
thirty
three
percent
of
your
development
rights.
M
When
you
take
all
the
practical
applications
into
consideration
in
actually
constructing
a
building
under
these
under
these
issues,
so
you
know
again.
In
summary,
the
r58
compared
to
the
r5
is
a
down.
Zoning
and
the
loss
of
development
rights
is
substantial,
so
a
labuda
talked
about
the
math
amendment
in
the
context
in
which
this
is
proposed.
M
So
this
is
a
downtown
proximity
map
from
the
2009
downtown
plan.
We
can
see
it
recognizes
that
in
that
dashed
line
the
importance
of
areas
that
are
within
walking
distance
from
the
downtown.
We
added
a
half
mile
circles
around
the
transit
to
illustrate
the
proximity
to
both
transit,
as
well
as
the
resources.
M
Next,
we'll
take
a
look
at
the
zoning
context,
so
here
we
see
surrounding
the
downtown,
which
is
colored
blue
on
the
map.
You
see
higher
density
areas,
r5
r6,
extending
the
north
for
a
few
blocks
beyond
the
downtown,
but
on
the
east
and
west.
That
area
is
constricted
by
the
presence
of
two
r1
districts.
These
are
the
two
historic
districts
here
in
Evanston,
so
the
opportunity
for
additional
higher
density
develop
in
those
areas
is
foreclosed
due
to
the
nature
of
the
properties
that
are
built
there.
M
It's
also
important
to
think
a
little
bit
about
the
land
use
context
in
the
background
in
the
history
of
the
area.
What
we're
looking
at
here
is
a
similar
man
from
1920.
You
can
see.
Almost
all
of
the
area
was
initially
developed
with
single-family
homes.
I
think
there
is
only
two
properties
to
tell
adult
properties
that
were
built
during
this
period
of
time.
M
The
current
land
use
shows
a
bit
of
a
different
configuration
where
a
fair
amount
of
the
single-family
properties
have
been
converted
to
two
flats.
There's
been
some
additional
multifamily
construction
inside
of
the
area
and,
as
importantly
at
the
periphery
of
the
areas
proposed
to
be
down
zoned,
we
see
higher
density
residential
developments
as
such
as
the
the
development
along
Ridge
and
at
the
corner
of
Green,
Bay
and
Emerson,
as
well
as
further
west,
with
the
Jacob
Blake
project.
J
M
So
as
to
explain
the
map
a
little
bit
yellow
is
a
single-family
existing
single-family
new
single-family
is
orange.
There's
new
single-family
property
towards
the
eastern
portion.
Leslie,
the
converted
properties
are
a
darker
orange
single-family,
converted
to
multifamily
and
the
red
are
new.
Multi-Family
development,
commercial
in
blue
and
institutional
in
purple
runs
out
the
key
for
the
land
use
map
just
to
clarify.
M
M
If
you
read
the
documented
focused
quite
a
bit
on
stakeholder
input
and
took
in
a
much
broader
area,
the
vast
majority
of
the
population
that
were
involved
in
this
planning
exercise
we're
residences,
single-family
homes.
It
really
didn't
consider
the
significant
changes
that
have
occurred
in
downtown
Evanston
and
the
positive
effect
that
they've
had
on
the
community
at
large.
It
didn't
consider
the
proximity
of
that
eastern
portion,
particularly
the
area
that
we're
discussing
now
its
proximity
to
downtown
and
there's
no
mention
at
this
time
of
transit,
oriented
development
or
even
proximity
to
transit.
M
With
respect
to
evidence
comprehensive
plan,
the
plan
was
last
updated
in
2000,
while
it
may
be
getting
a
little
bit
long
in
the
tooth.
It
does
have
still
has
relevance
and
it
does
contain
some
concepts
that
are
still
relevant
to
the
matter
at
hand.
So,
with
respect
to
housing,
the
current
comprehensive
plan
talks
about
a
demand
for
urban
housing
types
panel
homes
condominiums
talks
about
the
demand
of
baby
boomers
to
move
from
larger
single-family
homes
to
smaller,
more
manageable
housing
stock
talked
about
developments
that
meet
that
demand
or
seen.
M
And
these
developments
should
be
oriented
towards
evidence,
strong
mass
transit
attributes,
as
well
as
its
downtown,
with
respect
to
neighborhoods.
The
2000
comprehensive
plan
talks
about
an
objective,
an
important
jected,
meaning
to
maintains
the
appealing
character
about
Michigan's
neighborhoods
while
guiding
their
change.
But
it.
M
M
So,
with
respect
to
the
real
estate
tax
revenue,
we
measure
the
impact
of
changes
in
zoning
by
measuring
the
difference
in
what
can
be
built
before
the
zoning
change
and
what
can
be
built
afterwards.
So
in
any
given
situation,
not
all
buildings
are
built
to
their
zoning
capacity.
So
there's
a
certain
amount
of
area
that
can
be
built
in
addition
to
what
exists
on
the
site
we've
heard
of
that
is
own
two-bedroom,
so
they're
the
r5
district.
M
M
It
came
up
with
under
the
r5
zoning,
an
additional
you
know,
630
a
thousand
square
feet
of
additional
development
that
could
be
accommodated
under
the
existing
zoning
when
we
remove
that
additional
third
percent,
or
so
it
comes
down
to
three
hundred
and
seventy
two
thousand
and
a
loss
of
about
six
hundred
and
two
hundred
and
sixty-five
thousand
square
feet
of
developable
area.
So
if
you
try
to
quantify
what
that
means
in
terms
of
potential
loss,
real
estate
taxes
make
a
couple
of
assumptions.
M
Generally
speaking,
the
market
in
this
area,
there's
about
two
hundred
fifty
thousand
unit
for
about
a
1,250
square
foot
unit.
We
can
figure
about
that,
but
as
far
as
orders
of
magnitude,
you
know
this
is
definitely
a
ballpark
that
comes
up
to
about
$200
a
square
foot.
So
as
far
as
the
total
value
in
real
estate,
that's
about
52
million
in
lost
potential
value,
so
we
apply
the
the
tax
assessment
at
10%
and
the
equalizer
and
evidence
tax
rate
to
give
you
sort
of
the
real
number
of
about
1.45
million
in
lost
potential
revenue.
M
M
M
Conclusions
that
we
draw
from
this
earth
at
the
map
amendment
and
the
text
amendment
definitely
constituted
down
zoning.
The
properties
in
the
area
affected
by
the
down
zoning
within
walking
distance
of
downtown
evidence
and
in
near
transit
resources
Don's.
Only
the
large
area
adjacent
to
downtown
Evanston
and
near
transit
resources
fronts
counter
to
the
concept
of
transit,
oriented
development
in
the
spirit
of
Evanston's
comprehensive
plan
and
really
more
recent
planning
efforts
in
Evanston.
M
Negative
effect
on
the
development
capacity
of
the
affected
properties
and
that
could
translate
to
a
loss
of
property
value
or
potential
loss
in
real
estate
tax
revenue.
The
proposed
down
zoning
will
have
a
negative
effect
on
providing
more
affordable
housing
opportunity
with
less
development,
there's
less
opportunity
for
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
to
take
effect.
And,
finally,
the
proposed
text.
Amendment
in
my
opinion,
does
not
meet
the
criteria
that
are
contained
in
Section.
O
O
O
M
Was
probably
done
under
a
planned
development
which
allows
you
some
leeway
and
also
I
believe
it
was
done
with
affordable
with
it
was
a
HUD
project.
So
again,
additional
leeway
is
granted.
I
can't
tell
you
the
detail
about
how
that
got
approved
or
whether
there
was
a
zoning
change.
It
underlined
my
development.
D
D
Was
my
error
all
right?
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for
the
petitioner
I'm
going
to
read
out
the
names
of
people
signed
up?
If
you
don't
have
a
question,
that's
fine.
You'll
also
have
a
chance
to
comment
after
the
questions
are
all
answered.
First,
it's
Mike.
These
are
from
the
October
meeting,
Mike
Abdo
guy
ed.
C
G
Q
Q
D
D
Q
K
Q
Would
like
to
ask
didn't
one
of
your
tenants
that
just
moved
out
of
the
building
at
on
the
alley
on
Jackson?
What
was
the
rent
for
one
for
that
building?
Because,
as
far
as
I
know,
that
was
a
little
income.
J
Q
And
I'm
asking
a
question
because
it
is
important
to
know
that
about
affordable
housing,
and
so
my
comment
is
permanent.
Yes,
I
mean
my
question
is
pertinent,
because
I
want
to
know
that
she
had
affordable
housing,
she's,
pretending
that
she's
not
having
portable
housing
and
that
this
new
building
is
creating
affordable
housing
and
so
I
want
to
know,
and
it
is
pertinent
hi
what
was
the
rent
in
the
building
that
she
is
currently
has?
What
was
the
rent
before
she
to
ask
everybody
to
move
that
is
relevant?
There
was
a
market
rate.
J
J
D
F
Q
Q
R
D
S
C
T
T
D
T
T
T
F
C
D
D
L
D
J
L
L
B
U
B
U
J
J
U
Just
trying
to
get
clarification
on
the
history
of
this
process,
the
study
that
was
done
in
2005,
that
you
say
you
are
not
part
of
that-
and
you
know
we're
here
to
talk
about.
You-
know
you're
in
you're,
not
in
favor
of
changing
the
zoning
and
we're
residents
of
the
area
that
are
in
favor
of
changing
the
zoning
according
to
the
plan
that
was
done
in
2005.
So
that's
why
I'm
asking
the
questions?
Okay,
I,
move
to
strike
that
question.
N
V
Hello,
my
name
is
Mike
I'm,
the
owner
of
the
property
at
1926
Asbury,
since
2005
I've
lived
in
Evanston
for
15
years
of
my
life,
I'm
opposed
to
the
Downloads.
A
downsizing
specifically
to
my
street
I
have
no
opinion
to
the
rest
of
it,
but
has
very
Avenue,
specifically
between
Green,
Bay
and
Emerson.
V
The
street
has
many
commercial
buildings,
including
a
gas
station,
a
plumbing
company,
a
funeral
home
strip,
mall
that
wraps
around
to
Emerson.
The
street
itself
is
an
a.1
designated
traffic
street,
which
is
the
highest
congestion
street
that
can
be
given
to
a
suburban
street.
It's
where
18
wheelers
can
basically
drive.
There's
no
stop
signs.
It's
2-2
traffic
lights
there
and
you
know
just
the
whole
street
itself-
is
exposed
to
a
lot
of
traffic,
including
the
Train
and
things
like
that.
It's
not
a
single-family
home
designation.
V
Really,
you
know
the
only
person
is
gonna
step
into
something,
that's
a
little
bit
larger
for
that
particular
street
and,
frankly,
I
think
you
provide
good
sound
production
for
all
those
streets
that
are
going
behind
it
just
because
of
how
heavily
traffic
that
is
I
understand.
You
know
the
concerns
my
neighbor,
but
I
have
no
opinion
one
way
or
the
other
going
west
of
Asbury
I.
Just
rather
not
the
map.
Amendment
applied
to
that
has
very
Street
I
believe
going
to
be
joined
by
a
few
people
at
some
point
that
are
part
of
that
Street.
P
My
name
is
Timothy
Samuel
Timmy,
unless
you're
my
mom
I
own,
a
home
in
1910
Wesley
and
three
years
ago
after
living
in
Chicago
for
over
20
years,
we
decided
that
we
wanted
to
make
a
move
out
of
the
city
having
spent
much
time
in
Evanston
and
loving
it.
The
decision
to
move
here
was
an
easy
one.
Our
goal
was
to
get
away
from
the
density
of
our
old
neighborhood
in
the
city.
We
found
a
house.
P
Zoning
wasn't
on
our
minds
at
the
time,
because
the
surrounding
blocks
contain
mostly
single-family
homes,
some
one
two
flats
and
some
modest
apartment
buildings
after
having
attended
many
fifth
Ward
meetings.
We
realized
that
the
overwhelming
majority
of
folks
who
have
lived
here
for
much
longer
than
we
have
wanted
nothing
to
do
with
large
residential
buildings.
They
would
like
nothing
more
than
to
allow
only
single-family
homes
going
forward.
That
being
said,
we're
realistic.
We
welcome
development.
P
P
G
And
I'm
in
support
of
the
zoning
change
so
are
30
of
the
residents
living
there.
I
have
signatures
collected
here
so
other
than
what
TV
said
is
just
want
to
add
that
the
I
think
it
reflects
what
the
community
wants
saved
as
reflected
in
these
signatures
and
also
has
the
community
involvement
in
the
2005
report.
G
Showed
I
also
want
to
talk
about
the
slightly
misleading
graphics
that
we
used
to
show
the
the
neighborhood
on
my
block
of
Wesley
there's
about
25
buildings,
there's
exactly
three
that
are
not
single-family
homes
of
those
three
non
there's
over
three
stories.
So
you
know,
even
a
four
half
building
would
stick
out
and
then
change.
Yeah
that'd
be
the
characteristics
of
the
neighborhood.
R
Good
evening
my
name
is
Linnea:
Latimer
I
live
in
2114
Emerson
I'm,
a
lifelong,
proud
evans
done
in
raised
in
the
fifth
Ward,
where
some
of
my
most
cherished
memories
are.
My
educational
background
includes
finance
and
information
technology.
I
currently
work
as
a
systems
analyst
for
Northwestern
University
I'm
involved
in
my
community
and
I
serve
as
the
advocate
for
those
who
cannot
find
their
voice.
I
was
appointed
as
his
board
ambassador,
which
is
a
city
funded
program.
R
I
am
motivated
by
the
next
generation
of
leaders
and
I
aspired
to
create
an
environment
that
will
foster
their
personal
growth
and
development.
My
parents
moved
to
the
city
in
the
60s
and
bought
their
first
home
in
80s.
I
am
a
first
generation
Estonian
and
I
do
not
intend
on
being
the
last.
Let
me
ask
y'all
a
question
how
many
of
you
on
this
panel
are
familiar
with
the
fit
board?
R
You're,
not
many
of
you
shop.
There
keep
their
worship
there
too.
Many
of
us
in
that
area
is
home
to
a
developer.
It's
a
cash
cow.
Over
the
years
I've
seen
my
neighborhood
changed
right
before
my
eyes.
My
family
founded
founded
united
faith
Church
located
1321
foster,
our
doors
have
been
opened
for
47
years,
I
have
driven,
walked,
fight,
skipped
down,
Jackson
and
Wesley
more
times
than
I
can
count
what
used
to
be
considered
the
most
dangerous
streets
and
everything
are
now
lined
with
half
a
million
dollar
homes.
R
R
R
It
also
mentions
that
such
such
development
could
feed
desirable
of
various
parts
of
understand
and
should
be
encouraged
as
a
valuable
improvement
to
the
community
in
this
real
property
tax
base.
Unquote,
in
quote,
there
are
plenty
of
urban
housing,
some
approved
by
this
very
home
panel,
the
type
of
development
that
is
desired
in
the
fifth
Ward,
our
office
spaces,
a
school
libraries,
restaurants,
a
grocery
store,
not
more
affordable
housing,
that's
never
bored
about.
For
the
people
who
live
in
that
area.
R
Q
R
Likely
to
own
their
own
home
as
middle-class
and
elite
White's,
some
white
members
of
Evanston
and
Chicago
real
estate
establishment
and
some
financial
institutions
from
Evanston
in
Chicago,
provided
mortgages
and
construction
loans
to
black
people
who
are
building
or
purchasing
homes
in
triangular
area
and
garnet
place.
It
also
states
that
area
were
given
board
grades.
R
The
shady
red
were
said
to
have
detrimental
influences
and
undesirable
populations.
Our
invitation
ovens
I,
stand
here
before
you
today,
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
fifth
Ward
single
mothers,
students,
families
that
are
caring
for
extended
families,
meaning
there
are
some
mothers
out
there,
who's
taking
care
of
mom
grandma
and
their
sisters,
kids,
who
deserves
to
live
in
that
area
that
is
in
walking
distance
of
downtown
and
all.
W
R
R
T
T
Am
coming
here
tonight
to
let
you
know
that
we
have
for
last
10
15
years
fighting
for
this
area
for
our
community.
If
you
know
the
history
of
that
area,
it
had
gone
down.
We
did
400
members
survey
the
people
around
this
community
and
we
asked
them.
What
would
they
like
to
see
in
this
community?
And
the
people
are
saying
we
want
something
for
our
kids
for
after
school
so
that
they
aren't
on
the
streets
or
they
aren't
dealing
with
don't.
T
This
is
the
last
area
in
this
in
the
fifth
Ward,
where
we
have
little
land
value
slips
and
we
need
to
be
preservative
for
the
things
that
the
people
want
in
this
neighborhood
and
they
have
told
us
from
the
surveys
and
we've
talented
and
we
have
the
data
from
it.
They
want
something
for
our
kids
to
learn
the
technology
where
they
can
get
jobs
for
the
future
and
that's
not
being
given
to
them
and
then
that's
why
we're
fighting
for
this
neighborhood?
We
are
tired
of
this
affordable
housing
crap.
T
T
T
T
T
To
me,
every
hole
in
the
block
received
damage
when
they,
when
they
blessed
it
up
black
long
parking
lot.
Every
home
foundations
were
correct.
We
had
to
replace
things
even
a
brand
new
building
on
the
corner,
a
two-story.
They
were
cracks
in
there
in
there
and
their
walls
and
I
wrote
to
the
two
of
Washington
to
the
housing
department
to
tell
them
what
they
were
doing
to
our
neighborhoods,
and
we
all
had
to
replace
the
work
that
needs
to
be
done.
C
T
Our
neighborhoods
all
for
developers
to
come
here
and
somebody
from
Northbrook
go
up
there
and
take
the
money
and
run
away
the
bank
and
we
were
left
with
overcrowding,
this
crime,
everything
else.
You
don't
think
about
that.
When
you
take
this
money
and
you
build
these,
these
high-rises,
we
don't
need
high-rises.
We
found
that
dr.
Blackburn
panel
in
Indianapolis
that
individual
homes
are
better
than
high-rises.
T
You
can
count
what
a
kid
is
big
when
it's
in
a
sea,
family
or
two-story
homes,
but
not
what
is
selling
a
huge
house.
Then
they
learn
on
State
Street
projects
and
Cabrini
Green.
Is
this
what
you
want
Aniston
to
turn
into
that
they're
having
problems
over
there
and
the
buildings
that
they
just
built
across
the
street?
For
me,
the
former
police
chief
said
there
were
95
incidents
of
crime
in
one
year.
S
Q
Q
To
me,
14:21
Emerson
should
not
have
been
acquired
and
should
not
be
in
this
new
development.
For
those
of
you
that
don't
know,
14:21
Emerson
was
it
in
the
NSP
two
home,
and
that
was
given
government
money,
part
of
the
18
point,
1
million
dollars.
So
here
you
are
taking
away
affordable
home.
That
was
given
government
money
to
have
an
affordable
family,
live
in
an
affordable
unit
and
a
single-family
home.
So
now
that's
been
acquired
and
now
you're
planning
on
turning
that
down
as
well.
Q
Also
one
of
the
previous
speakers
said
that
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
at
Emerson
and
Asbury
and
Green
Bay
I
know
that
I've
been
in
my
home
at
11:22
Emerson
right
at
Ridge.
We
have
the
busiest
intersection
we've
been
there
over
100
years
and
I
love
where
I
live
and
we're
the
only
house
on
the
block
because
of
development
like
this
e
to
the
link,
the
reserve,
1717
ridge,
all
high-rises,
all
not
affordable.
So
this
discussion
about
affordable
housing
is
a
farce,
because
what
you
do
is
take
single-family
and
no
rise
development
and
build
high-rise.
Q
G
Q
L
L
First,
off
I
it'll
keep
it
short,
but
I
think
it's
strange
that
in
response
to
my
question
earlier,
that
they
weren't
involved
at
all
in
the
2005
study
that
would
have
affected
so
many
of
their
properties.
And
it's
been
15
years
that
they've
known
that
I
mean
this
has
been
a
possibility,
this
rezoning
for
15
years.
So
it's
not
like
it's
a
huge
surprise,
coming
up,
no
we're
keeping
the
zoning
in
our
neighborhood
r5
and
not
making
the
Zoning
adjustment
recommended
in
2005.
L
I
was
asking
the
fifth
floor
to
shoulder
density
that
a
commission
studies
determined
is
not
in
keeping
with
the
character
and
capacity
of
the
area.
Honestly,
our
neighborhood
would
more
appropriately
be
zoned,
are
four
or
are
three:
it's
predominantly
some
family
homes
to
increased
or
walk-ups
townhomes
and
low-profile
apartment
buildings.
Some
neighbors
aren't
supportive
of
this
rezoning
because
they
don't
feel
like
it
goes
far
enough.
L
My
feeling
is
that
rezoning,
at
least
to
r5
a
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction
towards
better
protecting
us
from
developments
like
the
monstrosity
recently
proposed
by
Dumanis
for
the
lots
at
Jackson
and
Emerson
neighbors
that
support
this
rezoning
are
being
portrayed
by
opponents
as
anti
development,
anti
affordable
housing
standing
in
the
way
of
much-needed
tax
revenue.
The
truth
is,
we
do
want
development
and
affordable
housing.
We
would
love
development
of
reasonable
density,
particularly
at
the
corner
of
Jackson
and
Emerson.
Since
the
affordable
housing
there
is
no
longer
being
maintained
or
occupied.
L
As
far
as
standing
in
the
way
of
additional
tax
revenue,
we
provide
tax
revenue
to
Evanston
hope
to
continue
providing
tax
revenue
to
vets.
It's
done,
but
I
moved
to
Evanston
to
escape
the
density
of
Chicago.
If
the
plan
is
to
turn
our
neighborhood
into
Lincoln,
Park
Hill
Drive
residents
like
me
away
all
we're
asking
is
that
future
development
reflect
the
character
of
our
neighborhood
and
respect
to
reasonable
limits
to
density,
not
compromise
our
neighborhoods
livability,
the
2005
study
determined
that
rezoning
would
help
that
happen.
U
Hello,
Carolyn
Dellucci,
1924,
Wesley,
Avenue
I'm,
also
the
former
executive
director
of
downtown
Evanston
from
2008
to
2014,
so
I
really
am
familiar
with
the
whole
downtown
district.
The
housing
in
the
district,
the
commercial
area
recently
in
2000
and
my
husband
bought
the
house
in
2008
and
we've
been
rehabbing
it
ourself
at
1924
of
Wesley
Avenue.
So
you
know
we
really
looked
at
moving
into
an
area
that
was
single-family
home
walkable
to
the
downtown
I.
U
Just
really
want
the
Planning
Commission
to
consider
there's
over
600
new
housing
units
coming
online
in
the
downtown
district
and
I
really
think
that
we
need
to
take
a
look
at
what's
happening
with
those
units
and
are
they
filling
up?
Are
people
renting
them?
What's
the
vacancy
rate
before
we
really
start
to
encroach
onto
these
outer
neighborhoods
I
understand
the
whole
concept
of
transit,
oriented
development,
and
this
is
really
kind
of
far-reaching
I
understand
it's
walkable
to
the
downtown.
It's
not
really
a
commercial
area.
Emerson
Street
would
not
support
commercial
development.
U
It's
just
not
a
walkable
street
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
there.
So
you
know
I
just
really
want
you
to
really
take
a
look
think
about
the
study
that
was
done
in
2005.
We've
been
questioning
it
for
years
of
how
come
the
zoning
was
never
changed.
According
to
that
study,
that
was
done.
You
know
it's
2020.
Now
it's
a
15
year
old
study.
U
S
Good
evening
my
name
is
Brenda
Greer
and
I
live
at
1620
foster
the
Emerson
square
buildings.
Development
I've
been
in
I've,
been
a
residence
of
Edison
as
a
Jew
January,
the
29th
I'll
be
71
years
old.
I
was
born
and
raised
here
in
Epstein
I've
just
been
attending
the
meetings
as
of
2019
I
am
aware
that
the
citizens
were
not
in
agreement
to
the
first
development
plan
at
Emerson
and
Jackson
I.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
the
citizens,
concerns
and
hope
during
this
development.
It
continues.
S
I
do
hope
that
the
taxpayers
and
citizens
concerns
continue
to
be
considered.
I
hope
that
a
development
will
go
forth
down
that
it
started,
but
with
consideration
of
those
who
live
here
in
Harriston
to
consider
affordable,
rent
and
not
discriminate
as
to
who
will
live
in
these
properties.
What's
happening
now,
with
these
developments
and
higher
rental
fees
is
pushing
longtime
residents
and
their
family
members
and
their
grandchildren
out
of
the
city
of
Edison
that
want
to
stay
and
live
in
this
vicinity.
S
I
was
a
tenant
and
would
have
had
to
leave
everything
if
it
not
were
for
the
paintings.
I
did
leave
for
a
time
and
lived
in
Skokie
for
nine
years,
because
I
that
was
the
only
place
I
could
find
affordable
rent
when
I
had
to
move
to
a
hard
strip.
If
it
weren't
for
the
paintings
I
would
have
had
I
had
to
move,
I
would
have
had
to
leave
Skokie
and
Heather.
Stern
are
together,
so
I
do
hope
that
the
plan
can
go
forth.
S
I
hope
that
the
developers
can
meet
the
residents,
the
taxpayers
and
everyone
in
the
middle
and
that
whatever
needs
to
be
done.
As
far
as
the
parking,
the
garage
of
the
zoning
code,
that
everyone
can
come
to
some
type
of
agreement,
because
we
do
need
change,
but
we
do
not
need
to
continue
to
push
every
stone
citizen.
They
care
about.
The
people
and
the
community
out.
F
W
N
N
W
Of
like
what
we
ideally
like
to
to
see
happen
is
to
have
the
entire
block
of
as
we
Avenue
removed
from
the
down
zoning
and
leave
its
current
zoning.
The
plans
that
we
are
looking
to
do
and
we
have
been
in
discussions
with
the
city
of
I'm,
with
the
Zoning
Department
I'm,
the
affordable
housing
department,
our
to
do
two
four-story
buildings
and
eight
and
nine
unit
buildings,
and
one
would
be
a
condominium
building
the
other
unit
building
would
be
an
apartment
building.
W
So
there's
been
no
new
condominium
buildings
built
in
Anniston
in
the
last
ten
years,
there's
been
very
limited:
supply
of
new
construction
homes
for
people
to
live
it,
and
our
proposal
is
to
create
something
and
also
to
the
affordable
housing.
We
would
be
offered
to
affordable
housing
units
within
this
development
to
the
city
of
Evanston
and
the
current
did.
Some
of
the
properties
are
wmw
delightfully.
My
means
are
afraid
to
flats
they're
they're,
not
very
good
up
keeping
in
the
entire
street
I
think.
N
It's
important
to
note,
too,
that
mr.
Cleary
is
in
full
compliance
with
the
current
r5
that
he
is
prepared.
Preliminary
plans
he's
met
with
staff,
both
the
zoning
staff
and
the
affordable
housing
staff,
and
is
fully
prepared
to
comply
with
the
current
codes
and
has
spent
a
great
deal
of
money
and
time
in
that
regard.
So
we're
against
the
r5
a
in
summary,
especially
as
it
relates
to
1900
a
slurry
which
is,
it
should
be
more
of
a
buffer
if
there
was
gonna,
be
any.
W
D
D
D
Commissioners
I
just
like
to
point
out
one
thing
that
what's
before
us
is
not
we're
not
planning
we're
not
being
asked
to
rezone
the
property
from
to
increase
the
height
or
asked
to
rezone
the
property
to
decrease
by
height
the
height.
Would,
if
we
refuse
to
accept
us
or
just
not,
recommend
it,
the
height
will
not
change.
Okay.
Does
everybody
understand
that
I
hope
so
right.
J
C
J
J
I,
don't
know
who
the
petitioner
is
I
think
we
have
a
right
to
cross-examine
the
petitioner
I
think
we
have
a
right
to
see
studies
I,
don't
see
a
petitioner,
miss
Katherine
and
the
other
people
who
object
to
this
simply
want
to
be
left
alone.
They're,
not
asking
the
city
of
evidence
to
do
anything,
to
change
anything
they're
asking
you
to
follow
its
own
rule
of
law
and
what
I
think
it's
happening
here
and
I'm
hoping
the
Commission
will
understand.
This
is
akin
to
changing
the
rules
in
the
middle
of
the
game.
J
J
J
I,
don't
think
anyone
who
spoke
here
on
either
side
if
it
was
their
issues,
their
money,
their
property,
their
kids,
their
schools
would
want
the
rules
changed
in
the
middle
of
the
game,
so
we're
asking
that
the
court
or
we're
asking
that
the
caressing
that
this
Commission
we
essence
of
this
Commissioner.
That's
my
day,
job
I'm,
this
commission,
that
this
Commission,
you
know
not
approve
this
and
I-
am
too
also
confused
about.
What's
the
mandate
there's
no
petitioner
across
exam
and
then
what
that's
the
record?
This
is.
J
Understand
that
we
have
a
right
to
cross-examine
where,
where
are
the
studies
who's
actually
behind
this
who
is
proposing
it?
Who
is
the
petitioner
I'm
not
directing
the
see
you
ma'am
I'm,
directing
it
to
the
Commission?
It's
a
legitimate
question,
wherever
we
were
being
attacked
as
if
we're
the
petitioner,
all
we
want
to
do
is
be
left
alone.
J
All
we
want
to
do
is
be
left
alone
and
be
allowed
to
use
our
property
rights,
as
is
guaranteed
by
the
Constitution,
as
the
law
of
reminds
I
didn't
want
to
make
this
a
legal
argument,
but
I
think
it's
an
important
point.
It's
not
a
new
ones,
go
to
the
petitioner.
Where
is
their
evidence?
The
staff?
The
staff
has
not
recommended
approval.
O
Boy
I'm,
this
is
like
I
can
see
both
sides
of
this.
This
issue,
on
the
one
hand,
I
I,
don't
understand
why
the
r5
was
zoned
in
the
first
place,
why
this
area
was
zoned
r5
in
the
first
place,
but
it
was
I
believe
that
and
why
I
don't
understand
that
is
because
of
the
existing
character
of
the
of
the
area.
O
It's
obviously
will
rise.
We
talked
about
it
single
families,
very,
very
short,
multi
families.
So
it's
just
surprising
to
me
that
it's
that
it
is
zoned
r5,
but
it
is
zoned,
r5
and
I.
Think
personally,
that
down
zoning
is
a
very
dangerous
thing
to
do.
I
think
that
it's
it's
it,
as
was
pointed
out
that
the
people
had
owned
these
properties,
and
it's
not
we're
not
I,
think
we
should
take
this
subject:
property
that
that
was
spoken
about
out
of
the
out
of
the
discussion,
because
we're
really
not
evaluating
that
property.
O
Maybe
that
certainly
I
mean,
in
my
opinion,
the
area
that
was
talked
about
on
Asbury,
that
is
not
a
single
family
or
clearly
and
and
and
perhaps
that
might
remain
as
our
five.
The
other
area
that
could
be
considered
because
Emerson
is,
is
a
fairly
busy
street.
Maybe
the
area
that
is
that
is
from
Emerson
north
to
the
alley
could
be
also
considered
to
remain
our
five
and
I'm
suggesting
this
just
because
I
I
can
see
both
sides
of
this
of
this
issue.
So
I,
you
know
throwing
that
out.
I.
O
F
F
F
Feeling
Commissioner
Halleck
and
when
I
was
considering
I
guess
in
a
maybe
past
the
point
where
the
city
that
can
speak
to
you
know
the
comprehensive
plan
as
it
relates
to
this
portion
of
our
five
zone.
But
it
does
seem
like
a
strange
island
of
our
five
and
what
doesn't
feel
like
it,
particularly
having
a
character
that
would
would
suggest
that,
though
the
the
entirety
of
the
area
being
considered
doesn't
have,
you
know,
isn't
uniform
in
its
character,
but
there's
certainly
areas
that
seem
more.
K
C
E
A
Are
for
you
if
I
was
brought
up,
I
believe
2005
that
looks
like
in
the
code
citations
for
the
that
section.
It
looks
like
that's
the
time
period
when
the
r48
zoning
district
was
created
and
then
just
a
little
bit
of
historical
research.
Looking
at
old
zoning
maps
the
1962
zoning
map.
At
that
time
there
were
seven
residential
districts.
There
was
an
are
seven
in
that
time
period.
This
this
area
was
on
our
six,
so
it
has
been
a
very
dense
district
for
a
number
of
years.
E
E
E
This
is
this
is
part
of
for
people
that
are
selling
off
everybody's
really
concerned
about
developers,
but
that
also
means
people
are
selling
off
their
houses
to
developers.
So
there's
an
aspect
of
single-family
housing
that
is
unaffordable
to
a
lot
of
people
and
apartments
can
be
more
affordable
in
some
aspects.
So
not
everyone
can
afford
a
single-family
either.
So
there's
that
always
that
aspect
of
having
a
mix
of
housing
types
there
is
multifamily
in
this
block.
It's
not
all
single-family,
so
I'm,
just
still
kind
of
struggling
with
this.
O
Want
to
add
to
that
someone
mentioned,
maybe
another
study
should
be
done
on
this
area.
I.
Think
to
your
point.
When
you
changed
owning
it,
it
probably
should
be
done
in
the
context
of
the
whole
city.
You
know
and
you're
you're
you're
looking
at
trends-
and
you
know
all
kinds
of
things
that
you
know
will
affect
quit
affect
the
zoning
in
some
sites
or
or
not,
but
you're,
looking
at
it
very
comprehensively,
which
is
what
I
think
should
be
part
of
a
of
a
any
sort
of
rezoning.
D
D
C
H
We've
got
the
four
standards
before
you,
the
first
being
whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
consistent
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
a
comprehensive
general
plan
is
adopted
and
amended
from
time
to
time
by
the
City
Council.
The
second,
whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
compatible
with
overall
character,
music
sting
development
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
subject
property.
Whether
the
proposed
amendment
will
have
an
adverse
effect
on
the
value
of
adjacent
properties
and
the
adequacy
of
public
facilities
and
services.
E
D
E
D
D
C
A
C
C
D
O
Because
does
this
go
now
to
City?
Council?
Yes,
can
we
add
a
recommendation
because
I
think
it's
a
really
really
important
point
that
that
when
the
this
should
be
evaluated
in
the
context
of
the
the
overall
city
plan,
the
city,
zoning
and
I-
don't
know
when
that
happens,
but
I
think
because
I
very
much
sympathize
with
the
residents
of
this
area
and
like
I,
said
I,
don't
understand
why
it
was
owned
r5
in
the
first
place,
but
I.
O
A
F
I
B
V
D
We
are
not
making
we're
we're
not
recommending
that
they
do
the
text,
men
or
the
math
amendments.
The
city
counts,
can
do
whatever
it
wants.
You
know
they
sometimes
take
our
our
point
of
view.
Sometimes
they
don't
so
the
minutes
will
be
transmitted
to
most
to
the
City
Council.
Most
of
them
watch
the
minutes
of
the
meeting
to
get
the
public
hearing.