►
From YouTube: Planning & Development Committee Meeting 1/8/2018
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
Good
evening,
everyone
we'll
get
started.
Thank
you
for
your
patience.
This
is
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
meeting
of
Monday
January
8th
I'm,
going
to
call
the
meeting
to
order.
We
have
a
quorum
and
the
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
approval
of
the
regular
meeting
minutes
of
November
27th
move
approval.
Second,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
aye,
any
opposed
minutes
are
approved
first
before
we
get
started.
I
want
to.
A
Let
everyone
know
that
at
5:20
this
afternoon,
the
developer
for
the
601
Davis
property
called
the
city
staff
and
asked
for
a
continuance
until
the
next
City
Council
meeting,
which
would
be
January
22nd
two
weeks
from
tonight.
Our
normal
courtesy
is
to
when
an
applicant
asks
for
a
continuance
is
to
grant
one,
and
so
that
is
what
we
are
going
to
do
this
evening.
A
I
know
many
people
have
taken
the
time
to
come
out
tonight
because
they
believe
that
this
item
was
going
forward
on
the
agenda,
as
did
we
so
I
apologize
for
the
inconvenience
to
you
I
would
my
recommendation
would
be
to
save
your
comments
and
on
January
22nd.
We
will
be
giving
this
the
due
and
proper
time
that
it
deserves,
but
right
now,
I
just
wanted
to
let
anyone
know
in
case
they
wanted
to
head
home,
which
would
be
completely
understandable
from
all
of
our
stand
points.
A
A
All
right,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
aye,
any
opposed
all
right,
so
that
matter
is
now
tabled
until
the
date
certain
of
January
22nd.
So
now
we're
going
to
move
on
with
the
rest
of
the
items
on
our
agenda.
The
first
item-
P
1
vacation
rental,
license
for
710
Madison
Street,
has
been
asked
to
be
held
in
committee
by
aldermen
Fleming
aye
710
Madison
is
in
the
Ninth
Ward,
and
so
we
have
indicated
to
her
that
we
will
be
holding
that
in
committee.
E
A
A
All
those
in
favor
aye
any
opposed
all
right.
Okay.
That
item
is
held.
Next
item
is
p2
ordinance,
308
een
extension
of
time
for
applicant
to
obtain
building
permit
to
construct
the
planned
development
at
1815,
Oak
Avenue.
The
staff
recommends.
Adoption
of
this
I
have
this
ordinance
to
extend
the
time
for
one
year
to
the
developer
of
1815
Oak
Street
and
in
addition,
alderman
Braithwaite
has
recommended
suspension
of
the
rules
for
introduction
and
action
approval.
A
H
H
Next
to
the
railroad
on
Ridge,
Avenue
and
near
you
know,
a
historic
building,
but
also
because
of
the
nature
of
the
building,
there's
four
floors
that
have
large
open,
dining
recreation
spaces
which
have
to
be
relatively
column
free
and
we
are
limited
to
our
height.
So
typically,
when
you
have
column
free
space,
they
get
bigger
and
longer
and
the
building
goes
up
and
we
are
working
through
that
within
a
very
difficult
and
dynamic
construction
environment
where
materials
are
disappearing,
left
and
right
going
to
recovery
of
disaster
relief
areas
and
we're
adjusting
in
those
to
those.
H
A
Thank
you
very
much
well,
Ben
Fisk!
Is
that
good
all
right?
Thank
you
all
right.
So,
let's
return
now
to
the
motion
that
was
made,
which
has
already
been
seconded
to
grant
the
extension
of
time
and
also
why
don't
we
move
that
for
why
don't
we
vote
on
that
first
and
then
we'll
move
to
the
suspension
of
the
rules?
Oh
well,
that
just
happened
at
the
house
that
happens
at
the
council.
Correct,
moved
approval
right,
so
it
has
been
moved
and
seconded.
So
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
hi
any
opposed.
Okay,
all
right!
A
So
that's
that
the
suspension
of
the
rules
will
take
place
at
the
council
level.
Okay,
all
right,
Thank,
You,
alderman,
Braithwaite,
all
right!
So
next
is
item
p3
ordinance
for
Oh
18,
amending
portions
of
the
city
of
Evanston
zoning
ordinance
to
amend
the
requirements
within
the
c1.
A
zoning
district,
the
Planning
Commission,
recommends
no
change
to
these
requirements
for
mix
c1
a
mixed-use
commercial
zoning,
district,
I'm,
gonna,
move,
introduction
and
I'd
like
to
speak
on
this.
If
someone
would
second
it
I,
this
is
in
response
to
my
reference
about
C
1,
a
which
predominates
it.
A
It's
overwhelmingly
C
1
a
is
a
zoning
district
that
is
overwhelmingly
limited
to
Chicago
Avenue
in
the
Third
Ward
and
on
Howard
Street.
It's.
It
is
a
very
dense
zoning
district
that
was
created
in
1992
and
then
modified
and
I
think
approximately
2000,
2001
I
call
it.
Zoning
by
blunt
instrument
and
I
recommended
that
some
changes
be
made
to
to
it
to
the
plan.
A
Commission,
the
Plan
Commission
zoning
subcommittee
did
recommend
that
several
to
changes
be
made,
and
then
the
plan
commission,
for
whatever
reason
decided
not
to
adopt
those
I,
would
like
I,
would
like
to
advocate
here
at
PD
that
the
two
changes
that
the
zoning
committee
of
the
Plan
Commission,
which
actually
study
this
issue
in
depth,
that
we
make
those
two
changes
and
they
are.
This-
is
really
getting
into
the
weeds
of
zoning.
A
A
B
B
The
courtesy
of
holding
this
in
committee
until
you
and
I
have
an
opportunity
to
talk,
because
it
is
my
intention
at
some
time
in
the
very
near
future,
to
make
a
zoning
change
on
Howard
Street.
That
would
include
the
c1.
A
and
I
I
would
just
like
some
time
and
an
opportunity
to
absolutely
before
you
make
this
change.
I
then.
A
You
would
you
like
to
second
that
in
second
all
right,
all
right,
so
the
this
this
matter
is
held
in
committee
by
the
two
Politis
aldermen
here
on
the
council,
so
tonight
all
right
at
this
moment
at
this
moment.
Yes,
all
right,
so
so
p4,
we've
disposed
of
until
January,
22nd
and
now
we're
now.
Fortunately,
we
now
have
time
to
discuss
our
discussion
items
and
we
have
some.
E
Well,
this
one
was
for
for
an
update
since
it
had
been
a
couple
months
since
we
had
provided
information
on
where
we
were
with
everything
and
the
housing
staff
and
I
meet
pretty
regularly
to
discuss
where
we
are
in
information,
gathering,
research
and
preparation
of
these
topics
for
the
group.
So
that
was
just
to
provide
that
information
and
it's
been
used
as
a
bit
of
a
guiding
document
as
we've
moved
forward.
So,
okay,
good.
G
E
E
We
yes
there's
a
little
bit
of
a
two-way
street
here
on
all
of
these
items,
but
the
idea
for
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
committee
would
be
to
bring
everybody
up
to
speed
so
on
our
on
the
city's
ordinance
that
as
it
stands
today,
that
was
adopted
and
comparable
ordinances
and
information
that
involves
inclusionary
housing.
Since
more
work
has
been
done
on
this,
since
we
adopted
our
ordinance
all.
A
Right
all
right,
I
have
just
realized
that
I
did
not
call
citizen
comment
and
we
do
have
a
number
of
people
who
are
signed
up
to
speak.
I
know
some
of
people
might
have
signed
up
to
speak
on
the
601
Davis
matter,
and
I
would
recommend
that
it
would
be
better
to
hold
your
comments
until
we
actually
are
discussing
that
here
at
this
committee
meeting.
So
I'm
going
to
start
with
the
first
name
on
the
list,
Tina
Peyton.
I
I
Because,
right
now
you
have
three
unrelated
people,
mostly
in
the
northwestern
area,
and
you
don't
regulate
that
now.
So
how
will
you
regulate
it
when
you
allow
more?
If
that's
what
you're
planning
on
doing
you
can
see?
There's
houses
for
rent,
let's
say
eight
bedrooms
for
$6,000-
that's
currently
happening
and
it's
happening
a
lot
in
the
northwestern
area
and
obviously
it's
not
gonna
be
two
families
that
are
related.
I
E
I
Are
these
people
inspected
for
vacation
rentals?
Do
you
go
and
check
them
for
smoke,
detector
or
carbon
monoxide
detectors
you
handing
out
vacation
rentals
a
lot
but
who's
regulating
that?
Do
you
send
the
inspector
over
to
inspect
them
their
vacation,
rental
and
I'm,
a
rental
person
too,
but
I
have
long-term
tenants.
These
people
are
circulating
a
lot.
It
can
do
a
lot
of
damage
in
a
weekend
and
also
are
they
classified
appropriately.
I
According
to
the
assessor's
office
of
Cook,
County
they're
supposed
to
be
licensed
as
a
hotel.
Is
that
currently
happening
with
the
city
of
Evanston
and
do
you
regulate
that
I
would
like
to
know
the
answers
to
some
of
those
questions
when
you
address
that
in
the
council.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
C
J
One
of
the
things
I
am
concerned
about
a
little
bit
is
the
fragmented
nature
of
the
work
that's
being
done
on
the
affordable
housing
right
now.
There
was
a
good
discussion
earlier
at
the
administration,
Public
Works
Committee
meeting,
there's
several
things
that
came
to
this
committee,
there's
other
things
that
are
happening
through
this
inclusionary
housing
committee.
That's
happening
and
I
find
it
difficult
to
see
how
these
all
tie
together
into
a
cohesive
plan
for
affordable
housing.
J
As
somebody
mentioned
during
that
a
and
PW
meeting
earlier,
there
is
only
a
finite
amount
of
money
and
so
I
think
it's
very
hard
for
these
different
groups
to
talk
about
how
they're
going
to
use
that
money,
but
I
think
the
bigger
issue
is
that
the
money
that's
available,
isn't
nearly
enough
to
do
what's
needed,
and
so
joining
forces
recommends
that
the
city
get
into
a
real
planning
process.
That
I,
don't
think,
needs
to
start
from
scratch.
J
We
have
many
many
plans
in
place
and
there's
lots
of
data,
but
I
think
we
need
a
plan
that
really
defines
what
the
need
is
and
then
defines
what
the
gaps
are,
so
that
we
can
start
working
on
how
to
fill
those
gaps.
I
think
that
all
of
the
steps
that
you're
taking
are
parts
of
that
puzzle,
but
I,
don't
think
they're
going
to
have
the
necessary
impact
without
a
broader
plan
and
without
strategies
on
how
to
fill
those
gaps.
J
J
J
K
My
name
is
Doug
sharp
I'm
here
representing
reclaim
Evanston
and
I
am
here
tonight
to
speak
against
the
Vermillion
project
and
I
know
that's
being
deferred
but
I.
Think
more
broadly,
my
comments
go
to
a
similar
topic
that
sue
Lal
block
just
spoke
about
and
I
think
that's
about
the
process
that
we've
undertaken
with
regards
to
housing
and
Evanston
with
the
city
staff
has
met
with
the
Vermillion
development
group
and
they
reported
on
December
15th.
K
K
A
F
Good
England,
the
City
Council
took
an
important
step.
This
past
fall
and
recognizing
that
housing
affordability
is
a
serious
and
immediate
issue
in
everything
deserve
a
public
policy
intervention.
So
I
suggest
that
your
affordable
housing
policy
be
a
human
rights.
Warm
to
that
end,
I
have
two
recommendations.
F
First,
I
would
urge
you
to
make
sure
that
changes
to
the
inclusionary
housing
artesunate
make
it
easier
for
developers
to
create
unit
for
low
and
moderate
income
family,
rather
than
ease
to
pay
to
feed,
to
avoid
it,
because
this
would
be
a
universal
rule.
This
would
also
ensure
that
affordable
units
would
would
open
Housing
Opportunity
in
high-income
area
to
family,
with
children
who
care
less
about
micro
units.
F
F
J
C
C
C
Basically
that
lets
get
agreement
that
we're
going
to
have
the
developments
fund
a
voucher
program,
and
you
know
I,
really
think
alderman
Rainey's
perception
that
you
know
we
need
to
do
something
for
families
and
that
high-rises
are
not
the
best
place
for
families
is
actually
a
good
insight,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
you
know
that
they
shouldn't
live
necessarily
downtown
and
I
have
a
student
at
the
high
school
and
I
was
talking
to
her
about.
You
know
she
has
a
perception
that
the
high
school,
segregated
and
I
asked
her.
C
Why
do
you
think
that
is-
and
she
said
well,
I-
don't
know
that
many
people
of
color
students,
because
there's
not
really
that
many
in
our
neighborhood
and
I.
She
said
I
just
think
the
perception
is
they.
We
don't
grow
up
around
each
other.
We're
not
you
know,
we
don't
live
together,
so
so
I
really
would
like
to
first
of
all
caution.
You
please
don't
be
you
know
rubber-stamping
this
is
you
know,
there's
been
a
perception
that
developments
it's
a
done
deal
before.
C
They
come
to
the
committee
and
I
just
heard
something
that
raises
that
concern
like
we're
going
to
fund
affordable
housing
in
Evanston
by
approving
the
high-rises.
Well,
guess
what
we
have
committees
they're
supposed
to
go
through
committees,
so
please
we
have
it.
We
have
a
committee
that
was
appointed
to
study
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance.
C
A
L
My
one
question
or
comment
is:
how
do
when
we
first
I
talked
about?
We
were
talking
about
it
more
about
renovating
existing
coach
houses
and
things
like
that.
How
do
we
incentivize
people
who
have
regular
garages
to
tear
those
down
and
build
accessory
dwelling
units,
and
what
can
the
city
do
to
make
that
something
that
makes
sense
for
a
homeowner
to
do?
And
you
know
as
their
app
is
there
a
permit
fee
waiver
or
something?
What
types
of
incentives
can
we
provide
to
make
that
a
reasonable
choice
for
a
homeowner
to
make.
E
Sure
I
can
take
a
stab
at
that.
There
have
been
some
examples
in
other
communities,
particularly
California,
that
Department
commuted
all
the
departments
say:
here's
basically
what
you
can
build.
So
it's
not
it's
very
simple
for
a
homeowner
to
go
forward
and
say:
hey
I
can
build
this,
so
it's
not
they're,
not
starting
from
scratch.
Every
time.
Here's
how
big
the
unit
could
be.
Here's
how
many
parking
spaces
you
might
have
provide
if
you're
tearing
down
a
garage
they
some
departments
in
California.
E
Our
initial
research
shows
that
they
will
fast-track
some
of
these
when
they
commit
to
providing
those
units
as
affordable
to
certain
income
levels.
So
if
we
know
somebody
comes
into
that,
I
would
like
to
tear
down
my
garage
and
build
a
accessory
dwelling
unit
over
a
new
garage.
We
can
work.
We
could
put
it
in
in
the
code
that
we
would
move
their
permit
want
faster.
E
Certainly,
if
then,
that's
the
contraction,
we
would
look
for.
If
counsel
wanted
to
say,
let's
waive
certain
permit
fees.
We
do
not
generally
ever
waive
permit
fees,
but
if
that's
something
that
we
say
we're
incentivizing
and
encouraging,
affordable
housing-
and
we
can
say
this
would
have
generated
X
and
in
permit
fees
and
that
money
is
better
used
to
get
that
unit
in
place
faster.
That's
that
could
be
of
a
benefit.
L
Yes,
I
think
there
are
people
in
my
area
of
the
city
that
would
be
interested
in
it,
but
they
don't
have
existing
coach
houses
that
they
could
upgrade.
It
would
have
to
be
a
new
construction
and
in
a
lot
of
instances
they
would
be
tearing
down
a
functional
accessory
building
that
they
have
right
now.
G
Fisk
yeah
I
just
wanted
to
remind
everybody
again
about
when
the
Kendall
place
development
was
it's
just
being
completed
now,
but
all
all
the
houses
there
I
think
it's
up
for
to
have
accessory
units
and
their
coach
houses.
So
the
developer
worked
with
the
homeowners
there
to
provide
them
and
I
think
most
of
them
are
rented
out
again.
I
think
miss
Payton
brought
up
a
good
point
that
I'm
not
sure
they're,
all
rented
out
to
family
members,
so
we're
not
enforcing
or
asking
so
I
think.
G
We
need
to
think
this
through
pretty
carefully
it's
pretty
expensive
to
build
a
garage
now,
and
especially,
if
you're
going
to
build
a
dwelling
unit
in
a
garage
and
I'd
like
staff
to
provide
us
with
a
little
bit
of
information.
We
must
have
that
based
on
old
building
permits
the
difference
in
cost
between
a
garage
with
the
dwelling
unit
above
in
a
garage
that
is
just
a
garage.
So
we.
D
Well,
while
we're
asking
staff
to
provide
additional
information
for
us,
I'd
be
interested
in
staff
working
on
an
ordinance
that
would
allow
us
basically
to
legitimize
the
rental
of
affordable,
auxilary
dwelling
units
to
non-family
members.
The
hope
is
that
there
are
some
of
these
Coach
houses
out
there
that
aren't
currently
being
rented
to
anybody,
and
so
that
would
add
to
our
affordable
housing
stock.
But
you
know
that
would
be
a
first
step
anyways
to
make
it
make
it
legal
for
for
us
to
open
that
up
and.
D
E
B
A
D
F
D
A
E
B
And
I
think
I.
Think
alderman
Ravel's
motion
is
a
good
one,
because
we
should
legitimize
that
and
I
see
no
reason
why
they
couldn't
be,
but
I.
We
spend
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
renting
out
coach
houses
for
affordability,
but
I'm,
just
not
so
sure
how
realistic
that
is
that
Coach
houses
are
rented
to
people
who
need
affordable,
housing,
I
think
that's,
probably
coach
houses
and
affordability.
I
think
it
might
be
a
misnomer
so,
but
it
would
be
good
to
add
to
the
housing
stock
I'm,
always
in
favor
of
that
I.
A
B
A
G
E
G
Copy
I
just
wanted
to
add
one
thing
to
that.
I
would
certainly
be
in
support
of
that,
but
I
would
really
want
to
see
that
only
in
houses
that
are
owned
or
occupied
so
that
there's
some
there's
some
contact
for
the
folks
living
in
the
Coach
houses
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
more
control.
L
I
was
just
gonna
say
you
know
one
of
the
things
the
advantages
of
the
coach-house
and
I
get
particularly
in
the
area
that
I
represent.
Is
it's
an
opportunity
to
create
housing
in
a
part
of
town
where
there
isn't
any
and
also
I,
think
the
benefit
to
the
homeowner
is
important.
You
know
a
lot
of
people
who
want
to
stay
in
their
house,
as
they
age
would
probably
be
comforted
by
having
the
opportunity
for
the
additional
income
and
the
additional
person
living
on
their
property.
A
B
G
What
I
would
really
like
to
do
and
what
I
think
is
missing
from
this
particular
item
is
a
conversation
rooming
houses.
We
have
grooming
houses
in
my
ward,
some
longtime
rooming
houses
that
work
beautifully
and
I.
Think
if
we're
really
trying
to
address
not
only
the
needs
of
students,
but
also
the
needs
of
people
as
they
retire
and
continue
to
want
to
age
in
place,
a
rooming
house
affords
a
lot
of
benefit
it
because
we
license
them
they're
inspected.
A
I
I
agree:
alderman,
Fisk
I
think
we
should
again
have
that
topic
brought
forward.
You
know
it's
very
interesting
to
realize
that
we're
sort
of
operating
in
Reverse
from
what
Evan
studentid
in
the
1950s,
which
was
to
down
zone
residential
areas
and
eliminate
room
any
rooming
houses
in
most
residential
districts,
because
there
was
there
was
a
housing
crunch
back
then,
but
people
didn't
want
to
see
that
they
were.
They
wanted
to
push
people
out
further
into
the
suburbs.
So
if.
G
G
All
the
units
in
that
particular
building
to
now
be
three-bedroom
units
and
I'm
sure
that
if
we
made
it
for
unrelated,
they
would
expand
it
to
be
four
bedroom
units,
and
that
means
taking
dining
rooms
are
taking
making
kitchens
smaller
or
staying
within
the
same
footprint
of
space,
but
trying
to
cram
more
bedrooms
in
and
I
think.
That's
a
not
a
good
way
to
go
and
and
I
think
that
again
should
be
part
of
our
discussion
that
we
look
at
that
with
staff
mmm-hmm.
A
D
I
have
to
say,
I
feel
pretty
ignorant
about
rooming
houses,
so
I
would
appreciate
basically
a
little
white
paper
that
describes
what
is
what
is
a
rooming
house
and
and
I
guess
what
we
we
restrict
them.
We
or
we
prohibit
them
in
certain
of
our
zoning
districts
and
what
is
the
history
of
them
here
in
Evanston,
because
I
do
it.
That
would
be
a
very
interesting
opportunity
to
explore.
Yeah.
A
E
B
Realized
this
is
my
reference
and
at
the
time
I
made
it
I
said
that
I
had
read
way
too
much
pro
and
con
on
this
issue.
So
I
was
confused
and
was
hoping
for
some
input
and
I
hadn't
heard
too
much
from
anybody
on
it.
But
one
of
the
things
I
got
to
thinking
about
was-
and
my
my
point
was-
that
investor
owned
properties,
in
other
words
where
the
owner
did
not
reside,
should
not
be
allowed
to
have
an
Airbnb,
but
then
I
got
to
thinking
and
and
the
reason
I
thought.
B
That
was
because
that
would
interfere
with
the
number
of
affordable
housing
units
in
the
city.
But
then
I
got
to
thinking
a
place
like
e
to
which
is
the
rental
or
415
Howard,
which
is
a
rental
huge
number
of
units.
What
would
it
matter
to
affordable
housing
if
two
or
three
of
those
units
were?
You
know
Airbnb
z--,
that
wouldn't
matter
at
all,
and
then
we
would
be
penalizing
somebody,
you
add
a
three
flat
or
a
five
flat
or
a
twenty
four
unit.
B
Building
so
I
mean
that
where
it
gets
confusing
and
muddies,
my
thinking
so
I'm
not
sure
but
I
I
do
think
it
the
effect.
Airbnb
s
have
unaffordable.
Housing
is
the
fellow
and
I
keep
using
him
as
an
example,
the
guy
from
Reno
or
Tahoe?
Who
says
what
was
me?
You
know
I'm
a
very
experienced
landlord
I
live
in
Lake,
Tahoe
and
I
rent
out
these
three
flats
in
Judith's,
Ward
and
I
have
students
in
there
sometime
and
he
was
very
confused
about
when
he
has
leases
and
when
he
doesn't
have
leases.
B
He
wants
to
do
Airbnb
s
for
the
whole
building
all
three
units,
and
he
he's
is
very
hard
for
him
to
rent
them
out
to
regular
tenants.
Well,
I,
don't
believe
that
for
a
minute,
I
believe
he
could
rent
them
out
at
a
regular
market
rate,
but
instead
he
can
make
more
money
by
doing
Airbnb
s
or
to
students.
So
that's
an
example
of
where
Airbnb
ease
do
interfere
with
family
housing
at
an
affordable
rate.
So
I
don't
know.
Maybe
we
should.
Maybe
we
should.
B
D
I
found
it
very
interesting.
The
paper
that
we
were
given
in
our
packet
I
had
no
idea.
There
were
so
many
different
aspects
to
regulating
short-term
rentals,
I
guess,
I'm
I'm
still
in
the
camp.
That
thinks
would
be
nice
to
have
our
Airbnb
s
be
owner
owner
occupied,
but
but
I'm
happy
to
continue.
The
discussion
with
my
colleague,
alderman
Rainey
and.
G
A
He
probably
does
yes.
Iii
also
think
that
this
is
a
very
interesting
topic.
It
was
interesting
to
me
to
look
at
the
communities
that
require
owner-occupied
like
Madison,
Cambridge
and
Boulder
and
then
like
the
communities
that
don't
require
it
like
Austin.
Well,
it's
Texas
no
knock
on
Texas,
but
just
Texas.
You
know
and
government
regulation
don't
go
together,
but
st.
Paul
Minnesota
now
Minnesota
and
government
regulation
do
go
together,
but
so
III
think
these
and
yet
Alexandria
Denver
and
Lake
Tahoe
we're
all
thinking
this
over.
A
So
you
know,
I
I
do
I
think
this
is
an
issue
that
we
just
should.
We
should
keep
an
eye
on,
and
I
tend
to
lean
to
be
in
the
camp
with
aldermen
rebel
on
this
by
agree,
alderman
Rainey
that
we
should
probably
observe
it
and
see
what
happens.
I
can
understand
why
some
communities
and
these
places,
like
Alexandria
Virginia
across
the
river
from
DC
they're,
probably
concerned
that
they're
losing
a
sense
of
community
or
these
vacation
places
are
losing
a
sense
of
community
and
the
affordability
aspect.
A
So
but
I
I
think
it's
something
that
a
whole
new
entity
that
are
coming
into
the
you
know
now
enough
of
them
are
arriving
that
they
are
having
some
impact,
so
I
think
we
should
need
to
continue
studying
it
as
well
and
you're
right
all
of
my
radio
right
now
we
have
a
one-year
license
and
we
can
see
what
happens.
You
know
and
also
watch
what
these
other
communities
end
up
doing.