►
From YouTube: Planning & Development Committee Meeting 3/12/2018
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
B
B
A
So
we
have
no
one
to
speak
on
p1o
as
we
get
to
each
agenda
item.
If
you
have
signed
up
to
speak
on
that
item,
then
I
will
call
on
you
before
we
discuss
each
item.
So
first
item
on
our
agenda
is
p1
ordinance,
39,
o
18,
granting
major
zoning
relief
for
a
new
two-story,
134
thousand
200
square
foot
community
center
at
1801
Main
Street,
the
new
Robert
Crown
Center
move.
C
A
C
A
C
D
C
C
Note
here
that
I
think
it
would
be
great
if
there
were
a
way
for
someone
from
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
to
have
representation
on
the
zoning
committee
of
the
plan
Commission,
so
that
when
things
are
discussed,
there
is
some
level
of
practical
application
knowledge
that
comes
into
play.
Not
that
I,
don't
respect
our
friends
on
the
plan
Commission,
but
sometimes
they
don't
know
the
actual
cases
that
we
see
each
and
every
time.
C
So
the
proposal
that
we've
come
to
you
with
is
the
25%
encroachment
for
front
porches,
which
was
part
of
one
of
the
plans
that
was
put
before
Planning
Commission,
and
we
would
propose
that
it
has
a
maximum
porch
depth
of
8
feet.
Anything
over
an
8-foot
porch
seems
to
be
excessive
and
we
feel
that
a
homeowner
should
have
to
come
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
and
explain
why
there's
a
hardship
in
order
to
have
a
larger
than
8
foot
porch
in
looking
at
the
neighboring
communities
that
staff
spoke
with
are
reviewed.
C
Wilmette
was
the
only
other
neighbor
that
had
a
six-foot,
porch
and
Wilmette
I.
Think
everyone
will
agree
is
a
significantly
different
community
than
ours
is
there's
only
ordinance
is
written
in
such
a
way
that
it
really
does
emphasize
their
their
single-family
residences,
and
we
have
a
much
more
different,
differing
community
as
you
move
throughout
it.
So
looking
at
the
the
percentages,
this
also
helps
equalize
zoning
as
it
encroaches
into
front
yards
because
you're
working
on
percentages
instead
of
absolutes.
So
we
feel
that
that
makes
a
good
good
start.
C
We
would
ask
that
you
would
maintain
a
setback
of
10
feet
so
that
no
porch
would
encroach
closer
than
10
feet.
Of
course,
again
anybody
who
has
a
hardship
can
come
before
zba
and
ask
for
the
variance
on
that.
We
would
also
ask
that
any
increase
in
a
porch
would
require
a
major
variation
and
not
be
handled
administratively.
C
Basically
right
now,
if
somebody
comes
with
a
tent
right
now
we
have
a
10%
that
you're
allowed
to
encroach
into
the
front
yard,
which
is
two
point.
Seven
two
point:
seven
feet
on
an
average
lot
in
the
city
of
Evanston.
Obviously,
a
two
point:
seven
foot
fence
rs2
per
a
7-foot
porch,
is
not
something
that
people
would
build
or
we
would
ask
people
to
build.
C
None
of
the
neighboring
communities
that
they
surveyed
allowed
enclosed
porch
shifts
what
happens
with
enclosed
porch
is.
Is
they
don't
change
in
the
first
five
years
or
in
the
first
ten
years?
But
suddenly,
20
years
down,
the
road
windows
have
been
put
in
there's
heating
in
it
and
it's
a
room,
and
then
you
have
someone
who
comes
and
wants
a
front
porch
added
to
their
house,
because
the
previous
the
previous
owner
had
already
enclosed
that
space.
C
This
does
put
a
number
of
buildings
into
non-compliance
and
nonconformity
with
the
with
the
city.
However,
when
you're
dealing
with
front
porches
you're
dealing
with
front
porches,
this
isn't
a
change
like
an
impervious
surface
or
a
building
lot
coverage
where
all
the
sudden
you're
forcing
buildings
over.
If
we
are
telling
people
that
have
enclosed
front
porch
cannot
be
allowed,
then
it's
only
the
enclosed
front,
porch
that
we're
addressing
when
the
1993
zoning
ordinance
was
written.
C
We
forced
a
number
of
buildings
into
nonconformity
because
that's
the
way
our
community
is
built,
and
so
we
don't
feel
that
that
would
really
be
a
trade-off.
All
right.
That
would
really
be
detrimental
to
people
who
have
an
enclosed
front.
Porch
existing
and
again
I,
don't
know
if
I
mentioned
or
not,
but
the
the
other
neighborhoods
that
were
surveyed
do
not
allow
these
enclose
front
porches.
So
I
feel
it's
something
that
Evanston
should
definitely
look
into.
C
Don't
have
a
memo
for
you.
I
have
some
notes
that
I
put
together
and
I
had
a
I
talked
with
staff
on
Friday,
and
they
had
asked
us
to
look
at
trying
to
to
fit
what
we
felt
was
acceptable
into
one
of
the
three
proposals
that
was
out
there,
the
two
that
were
presented
to
plan
commission
or
the
third,
which
was
the
one
that
they
had
put
together
out
of
those
two
well.
A
B
B
A
C
C
C
A
E
It's
already
been
approved
by
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
Illinois
Department
of
Natural
Resources
and
the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
They
have
an
application,
that's
been
submitted
to
the
city
and
is
pending
right
now.
The
Breslow
is
simply
want
to
make
sure
that
this
ordinance,
that's
being
proposed
would
not
prevent
their.
The
issuance
of
this
permit.
E
The
property
seems
to
have
been
targeted
by
some
of
the
neighbors
and,
in
fact,
seems
to
be
the
genesis
of
this
entire
movement.
To
have
this
ordinance
amended.
There's
been
claims
that
I've
seen
I've
been
at
meetings.
I've
looked
at
the
record
before
the
city
claims
that
the
breslow
property
was
filled
at
some
time.
As
I
mentioned,
the
brezel
has
bought
the
property
in
2013
and
it's
in
exactly
the
same
condition
with
respect
to
the
east
part
of
the
property
that
it
was
when
they
bought
it.
They
haven't
done
anything
to
it.
E
If
the
property
was
filled,
they
didn't
have
any
notice.
I
looked
at
their
title
policy,
there's
no
indication
in
their
title
that
there
was
anything
that
happened
there,
so
they
have
no
knowledge
of
it.
If
there
was
fill
on
the
property,
it
happened
at
least
before
2006,
because
there
is
a
topographic
survey
from
that
year,
showing
that
the
the
grading
of
the
property
on
the
east
side
is
the
same
as
it
is
today
or
was
the
same.
E
Now
all
lakefront
property.
If
you
look
at
Google
Maps,
it's
pretty
obvious
that
all
lakefront
property
has
been
filled
or
otherwise
artificially
altered
in
some
some
form
or
fashion,
all
of
them
virtually
all
of
the
properties
that
the
backyards
go
right
up
to
the
lake.
There's
a
revetment
or
a
seawall.
In
some
cases,
there's
a
beach.
It
goes
right
up
to
it
and
then
it
drops
down
or
or
not
depending
on
the
the
water
level,
and
that's
one
of
the
points.
The
water
level
is
actually
the
lot
line
and
it
varies
from
time
to
time.
E
So
to
the
extent
anybody
can
say
that
there
was
property
filled
here
and
and
if
the
argument
is
it
was
lake
bed
that
was
filled.
How
do
you
know
what
the
lake
bed
was
when
this
presumably
happened
and
we
have
no
I
again,
we
have
no
information
that
it
did
happen.
We
have
cooperated
with
the
city
to
do
soil,
borings
and
everything
else
to
demonstrate
that
the
property
is
structurally
sound.
So
we
don't
think
there
was
any
issue
there.
E
One
of
the
interesting
things
was
when
I
attended
a
meeting
on
January
18th.
One
of
the
engineers
from
the
city
made
a
comment
that
said
there
that
Evanston
no
longer
has
any
natural
Lakeshore
remaining
so
somehow
or
another.
Over
the
years
the
the
lakefront
has
been
altered.
There
is
nothing
natural
on
the
lakefront,
so
I
ask
that
this
ordinance
should
not
be
used
to
deny
the
breslow
as
their
pending.
Permit
application.
E
Don't
allow
the
city
to
be
used
in
the
middle
of
a
squabble
between
neighbors,
the
permit
should
be
issued
expeditiously.
The
city
uses
I
DNR's
regulations
as
the
standard
for
these
types
of
permits
and
as
I
mentioned,
I
DNR
has
already
issued
the
approval
for
this.
I
dnr
has
the
expertise
again
at
that
January
18th
meeting.
E
There
was
a
comment
by
I
believe
one
of
the
engineers
from
the
city
that
said
we're
not
coastal
engineers,
so
the
city
and
and
I
wouldn't
expect
the
city
to
have
that
expertise
with
three
superior
agencies
having
that
X,
all
of
whom
have
weighed
in
and
said
that
this
project
should
be
approved.
So
we
ask
that
you
approve
it
and
that
you
know
it
happened.
Expeditiously
they're
ready
to
start
on
the
project
and
they'd
like
to
get
the
revetment
in.
Thank
you
thank
you.
I
have.
A
F
G
Evening,
deputy
city
attorney
Michelle
Mason
cup
I
am
unaware
of
mr.
Callahan's
situation.
I
I
know
another
attorney
in
my
office,
drafted
this
ordinance
and
attended
the
community
meetings,
but
I'm
unaware
of
a
specific
property
and
an
ordinance
being
targeted.
For
that
reason
we
are.
We
are
aware
for
a
long
time
that
this
ordinance
is
needed.
We
don't
have
anything
that
makes
sure
that
homeowners
notify
the
city
that
they're
going
to
be
altering
revetment.
G
F
They
must
have
been,
but
I
I
mean
we've.
Certainly
those
of
you
who
have
lakefront
in
your
districts
and
I've
been
involved
with
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
before,
and
anybody
who
gets
approval
from
County
Corps
of
Engineers
has
been
through
a
lot,
so
it
would
be
just
a
shame.
Anybody
who's
been
through
that
arduous
process
to
be
rejected
by
some
Municipal
Code
issue.
G
Not
trying
to
hold
up
a
process,
but
we
certainly
are
still
in
municipality,
and
so
we
still
want
to
understand
what
is
being
proposed,
and
the
issue
that
we
seek
to
address
is
that
the
city
of
Evanston
would
learn
about
it
after
it
was
approved.
We
didn't
know
that
this
was
going
through
this
other.
You
know
governmental
process.
This.
F
A
Rainey,
yes
use
me,
this
property
is
in
the
Third
Ward
and
we
have
been
aware
of
it.
I've
been
made
aware
of
it,
and
this
isn't
this
property
isn't
being
targeted,
but
it
is
a
concern
and
highlights
the
point
that
the
city
is
the
last
agency
to
be
notified
in
this
process
and
what
the
point
of
this
ordinance
is,
as
Miss
Mason
cup
says
it
that
the
city
be
notified
as
early
as
possible
and
then
be
able
to
participate
with
the
various
other
agencies
too.
A
If
we
have
any
concerns
so
having
the
I
mean
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
and
the
IDNR
and
the
IEP
a
don't
necessarily
have
the
same
jurisdictional
concerns
that
we
do
and
it's
important
that
being
the
fourth
governmental
entity.
We
should
be
at
the
table
from
the
very
beginning
and
in
addition,
as
you
know,
as
you
know,
if
you
own
a
parcel
of
lakefront
property,
whatever
you
do
to
your
own
particular
parcel
has
impacts,
and
it
has
the
potential
to
impact
other
properties
up
and
down
the
shore
from
you.
A
F
A
It's
not
my
understanding
that
the
city
is
attempting
to
hold
this
up.
What
we
are
doing
is
trying
to
make
sure
that,
because
we
have
had
some
changes
proposed
with
individual
property
owners
along
the
lakefront,
that
the
city
know
about
them
and
be
able
to
participate
as
soon
as
someone
goes
to
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
or
IDNR
or
iepa
because
having
it
come
to
us
and
and
say
well,
everyone
else
has
checked
it
off.
B
I'll
start
with
moving
for
introduction,
so
we
can
discuss
and
deputy
counsel
amazing
cup
my
understanding
that
this
is
prospective
right.
You
know,
ordinarily,
when
we
pass
an
ordinance
like
this.
It's
not
something
that's
being
retroactively,
applied
to
something
that's
already
in
process.
Is
that
currently
the
case?
Okay,.
F
E
A
A
H
Well,
I
do
have
several
comments
and
questions.
I,
guess
and
it
seems
to
me
in
the
purpose
section
I
think
we
could
be
clearer
about
what
we
are,
what
the
intent
is,
because
I
think
we
are
tending
to
allow
property
owners
to
protect
their
shoreline,
while
making
it
clear
that
such
protective
measures
do
not
create
private
property
for
zoning
purposes
and
I
guess.
I
would
like
to
see
some
kind
of
language
to
that
effect
in
because
we
know
anywhere.
H
H
So
we
are
going
to
be
requiring
that
applicants
note,
provide
notice
to
property
owners
within
625
feet
of
the
proposed
project,
and
so
I
guess.
My
question
is
maybe
to
Gary
Gerdes
what
so,
what
what
do
we
expect
the
city's
going
to
do
at
that
point?
With
these,
the
notices
will
be
set
out,
and
what
do
we
do?
We
have
an
idea
of
what
kind
of
our
process
we
might
have
at
that
point
for
any
kind
of
if
neighbors
have
concerns,
are
they
going
to
contact
us?
Are
we
going
to
have
a
process.
I
Chair
alderman,
Gary,
Gerdes,
building
an
inspection
service,
division
manager,
so
the
just
the
notification
actually
the
way
that
we
set
up
the
notification
is
that
we
pretty
much
have
four
sections
of
the
city
that
are
impacted
from
Sherrod
along
the
south
all
the
way
through
the
north,
so
that
625
feet
would
capture
all
residences
in
the
first
three
and
then
up
to
the
north.
Where
we
have
more
properties,
it
would
capture
at
least
five
or
six
residents
going
up
order
or
down
water.
So
and
then,
if
case
maybe
it
would
include
well
met.
I
Also,
if
there
is,
you
know,
impact
there,
so
we're
requiring
notification
within
10
days
of
the
joint
eight
agency
application
for
any
type
of
comment.
We
don't
it
there's
not
a
public
process
with
with
a
permit.
You
know,
but
there
is
that
notification.
So
if
there
is
concern-
because
you
know
a
protection
can
impact
another
property,
so
we
do
want
to.
You
know
allow
for
any
type
of
comment
from
the
public.
H
So
conceivably
I
mean
if
people
are
merely
repairing
an
existing
revetment
that
would
be
pretty
straightforward,
I
would
think.
But
if
someone
is,
you
know
putting
in
a
new
structure
like
a
breakwater
or
something
conceivably,
there
would
be
neighbor
concerned
and
so
at
what
we're
just
going
to
sort
of
feel
our
way
as
we
go
forward
with.
I
This
well,
it's
all
part
of
the
joint
agency
process
also,
so
there
is
that
public
comment
and
I
think
that
you
know
the
purpose
of
this
is
that
we
have
concurrent
review.
So
our
comments
are
there
also,
so
so
neighbors
do
have
the
opportunity
to
voice
their
concern
during
the
joint
agency
process.
Also,
so
I
think
it's
just
we're
trying
to
add
in
city
of
Evanston
in
that
initial
review
period.
Okay,.
H
I
H
And
then
I
guess
I
have
a
question:
I
did
sort
of
glance
through
the
very
extensive
floodplain
ordinance
under
Section
4
13
for
duties
of
the
city
engineer
it
talks
about
how
this
does
not
apply
to
organizations
which
are
exempt
from
this
chapter.
/
Illinois
compiled
statutes.
I
was
wondering,
is
that
Northwestern
or
how
Western
this
would
apply.
H
All
right,
so
they
would
be
providing
notice
to
neighbors
if
they
want
to
do
something
correct
right,
okay
and
then
just
a
little
bit
further
in
that
section,
it
talks
about
rules
this.
Our
enforcement
officials
will
promulgate
rules
and
regulations
as
necessary
to
administer
and
enforce
the
provisions
of
this
chapter
subject,
however,
to
review
an
approval
of
IDNR,
OWR
and
fema
for
any
ordinance
changes
so
have
we
already
shared
these
proposed?
We.
I
H
I
H
I
That
would
be
language
that
will
be
very
similar
or
the
same
as
I
DNR's
language,
because
that
is
in
I
DNR's
language
that
they
do
have
they
in
the
memo
section.
I
think
there's
sentence
in
there
that
that
states
that
okay
property
owner
has
the
right
to
fill
in
order
to
protect,
and
so
we
can
happy
to
include
it
here,
but
it
is
in
the
ID
and
our
regulations.
Okay,.
I
I
I
It
it's
that
the
language
says
it
allows
the
placement
of
film
materials
in
public
water
for
the
purpose
of
banks,
Shore
Bluff
protection,
so
it
is
a
it
is
allowed
to
go.
You
know,
I
mean
each
property
has
unique
characteristics.
It's
like
this.
This
is
not
stating
that
a
protection
cannot
go
past.
It
is
stating
that
private
Property
cannot
be
created.
Ryan.
I
Yeah
yeah,
so
there
are
going
to
be
circumcised.
You
know
I
think
it
is
our
and
if
we
can
get
the
the
shoreline
protection
to
be
on
private
property,
that's
what
we
want.
You
know,
but
you
know
that's
not
going
to
be
every
case
aren't
going
to
be
situations
where
it
does
need
to
to
creep
out,
and
if
that's
the
case,
then
protection
can
be
there.
It
just
does
not
create
private.
H
I
B
As
you
were,
talking
about
I
put
my
head,
I
did
see
paragraph
seven
does
say:
one
of
the
purposes
is
to
protect,
conserve
and
promote
the
orderly
development
of
land
and
water
resources.
So
does
that
covered
enough?
It's
identify
his
protection
and
comes
in
conservation
of
land
at
the
top
before
so.
B
You're
gonna,
be,
if
you,
if
you
make
it
this
is
broad
you're
gonna
make
it
more
limited.
So
it
seems
to
me
you're
trying
to
do
the
opposite.
You're
trying
to
get
seems
like
you,
try
to
make
it
broader,
not
limit
it.
So
if
you
make
it
more
specific,
you're
gonna
be
making
it
less
broad.
So
it's
up
to
you.
If
you
wanted
to
like
I,
said
I,
don't
have
a
strong
opinion.
Why.
A
Don't
we
see
what
language
mr.
Gerdes
comes
up
with
and
then
we
can
decide
how
it
reads
next
time
and
why
don't
do
where
action
is?
Okay,
all
right,
any
other
questions
for
mr.
Curtis.
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you!
It's
been
moved
and
seconded
for
introduction
all
in
favor.
Please
say
aye
aye
all
right.
That
concludes
our
agenda
item.
So
now,
I
believe
we
need
to
adjourn
all
those
in
favor
right
all
right.
Thank
you.
Everyone,
the
the
council
meeting,
will
start
at
8
o'clock.