►
From YouTube: Planning and Development Committee Meeting 6-12-2023
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
A
Good
evening
everybody
we
will
go
ahead
and
get
started.
Is
the
zoom
running
we're
good
to
go
good
evening?
I
am
councilmember
Jonathan
newsomat,
sharing,
Planning
and
Development.
Today
is
Monday
June
12
2023
I'm,
calling
the
meeting
to
order
at
5,
47
p.m,
and
just
a
heads
up
for
members
of
the
committee
and
members
of
the
public
that
item
P2
has
been
removed
from
the
agenda
this
evening.
This
is
the
item
regarding
the
plan
development
for
the
daycare
center
at
3434
Central
Street.
That
item
has
been
removed
at
the
request
of
the
applicant.
A
A
B
A
A
It's
been
moved
by
council
member
Reed
seconded
by
council
member
Cottage
that
we
approve
the
minutes
of
our
meeting
from
May
8
2023,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
aye
any
opposed
any
abstentions.
The
minutes
are
approved,
which
brings
us
to
public
comment.
We
have
at
least
five
folks
signed
up,
but
we
have
less
than
22
folks
signed
up,
so
each
speaker
will
get
two
minutes
each
and
we
are
going
to
start
with
Larry
raffle
and
then
Brian,
Mahoney
and
vmara
Chambers,
so
Mr
raffle.
Please.
D
Thank
you,
I'm
speaking
to
Kensington
school,
but
I
figured
since
I'm
here,
I
might
as
well
speak.
It
might
come
back
sometimes
so
that
I
can
say
everything
I
forgot
to
say
tonight.
My
name
is
Larry
raffle
I
live
at
3509
Central
Street
in
Evanston
I'm,
a
32-year
resident
of
Evanston
I've,
served
I've,
served
on
the
plan
commission
and
the
park
board
and
I'm
also
a
landscape,
architect
and
planner,
with
40
years
of
experience,
working
strictly
for
municipalities,
but
I'm
here
to
talk
about
Kensington
schools
and
my
object
objection
to
this
project.
D
We
have
small
mid-century
homes
throughout
the
neighborhood,
and
this
is
a
large
brown
brick
development,
a
rectangular
building
on
a
triangular
site
and
I
could
tell
you
because
they've
had
to
make
so
many
different
types
of
regulations
to
the
access
and
exits
to
this
property.
It's
just
completely
inappropriate.
We
live
at
probably
the
most
dangerous
intersection
at
Evanston
at
Gross,
Point,
Crawford
and
Central
I
can
tell
you.
D
D
E
First
I
want
to
thank
everyone
today
for
listening
to
me.
I
submitted
written
comments,
I
believe
they
were
circulated.
They're
extensive
I
won't
go
over
them
in
detail.
I
just
want
to
highlight
a
few
points
number
one.
The
application
is
legally
deficient.
The
applicant
does
not
have
a
legal
or
Equitable
interest
in
the
property.
E
The
form
itself
allows
for
a
situation
where
someone
is
selling
the
property
and
they
want
the
actual
developer
or
Builder
to
handle
that
process
and
it
would
be
the
owner
of
the
property
is
the
applicant
and
they
do
a
designation
process
for
whatever
reason
they
didn't
do
that
here,
it's
an
insufficient
application.
The
applicant
is
not
legally,
it
doesn't
have
standing
or
evanston's
own
rules,
number
two
notice
at
several
stages,
but
most
importantly
at
the
last
language
commission,
which
didn't
recommend
approval
but
nonetheless
was
deficient.
E
The
city
has
been
inserting
the
phrase
pin
property
identification
Network
into
its
notice,
Provisions,
that
that's
not
what
the
law
says.
It's
plain
language
you
have
to
notify.
Property
Owners
they've
decided
they
can
delegate
that
to
a
certain
person
based
on
a
property
identification
number,
that's
not
in
the
statute.
The
city
does
not
have
authority
to
ignore
the
statute.
E
Number
three
we're
in
sort
of
a
crazy
world
where
Topsy
turvyland,
where
we're
being
told
this
won't
proceed
unless
there's
an
agreement
on
the
easement
that
enures
to
the
benefit
of
the
co-op,
and
yet
they
keep
saying
it
won't
proceed.
Yet
it
keeps
on
proceeding
from
The
Next
Step
from
one
commission
to
The
Landings,
commission
out
of
the
city
council,
so
it
doesn't
make
any
sense
that
the
matters
proceeding
but
keep
being
told
it
won't
proceed.
Secondly,
is
the
gentleman
just
here
spoke
it's
a
terrible
safety
issue.
E
I
quoted
in
my
comments,
a
comment
made:
that's
on
the
record
by
one
of
the
commissioners
of
The
Landings
commission.
He
called
that
intersection
a
six-headed
monster.
That
was
his
term.
It
wasn't
the
term
that
any
of
the
neighbors
to
the
north,
south,
east
or
west,
all
of
whom
are
opposed-
and
he
said,
that's
a
very
congested
he
he
said
he
drives
it.
Okay,
he
knows
how
congested
it
is.
He
knows
it's
dangerous
and
he
sit
as
a
600
monster
so
again
for
the
safety
of
the
neighbors,
all
of
whom
are
opposed.
E
A
You
VMware
via
Mara,
Chambers
or
adito,
suits
and
Todd
Smith.
F
I'm
going
to
speak
on
both
on
the
daycare
and
the
church
in
Daryl
I
just
wanted
to
say
for
the
daycare
that
the
same
reasons
you
guys
are
complaining
about
that
have
brought
that
you
guys
have
brought
up
are
the
same
reasons
we
brought
up
for
our
building
and
it
passed.
So
good
luck
with
that.
F
This
land
talking
about
church
and
Daryl.
This
land
has
been
baking
for
over
20
years.
Why
hasn't
this?
Why
didn't
the
city
develop
it
during
that
time?
This
wouldn't
have
remained
empty
in
another
Ward,
yes,
I
know
hodc
tried
to
develop
this
land
over
10
years
ago
and
the
neighbors
shut
it
down.
So
why
give
the
land
to
the
same
organization?
The
neighborhood
didn't
the
neighborhood
didn't
want
to
work
with
in
the
first
place.
F
This
pastor
has
publicly
stated
that
he
has
no
money
to
build
this
church,
so
why
would
he
swap
his
land
his
church?
Yes,
his
church
is
not
perfect,
but
at
least
there's
a
structure
standing
there
for
an
empty
land,
the
city
deemed
too
expensive
to
clean,
and
he
has
no
money.
Will
this
remain
empty
in
the
end,
it
probably
will.
Thank
you.
A
Next
up
is
Todd
Smith,
which
will
be
our
after
raditza,
then
Todd
Smith,
and
then
we
have
nobody
else
in
person,
gonna
be
one
more
person.
Sorry
hi.
G
I
I
spoke
extensively
about
this
over
several
months
and
again
I'm
bringing
it
up
again.
Four
million
dollars
of
our
taxpayers
money,
handing
it
over
to
a
corporation
that
their
investors
are
going
to
make
huge
profits
is
a
scam
units
that
cost
over
half
a
million
dollars
is
a
scam.
It's
not
affordable
housing.
So
we
are,
we
all
want
affordable
housing.
We
don't
want
this.
We
don't
want
our
commercial
spot
to
be
taken
in
in
replaced
with
building
of
this
kind.
We
are
for
affordable
housing.
We
also
finding
this
is.
G
This
is
Supportive
Housing
with
absolutely
nothing,
nothing
that
is
prepared
and
ready
to
handle
the
people
with
variety
of
special
needs
that
they
need
Mental,
Health,
Care,
Professionals
that
they
need.
You
know,
doctors
that
they
need
the
difference,
secure
on
the
place,
who's
who's
certifying.
The
cost
of
this
unit.
I
have
extensively
looked
into
this
on
a
national
level.
This
program
on
a
national
level
is
not
working
its
benefits,
rich
people,
it
does
not
benefit
us.
Furthermore,
my
neighbor
Vince,
who
has
provided
affordable
housing
for
40
years,
has
been
taken
to
court.
G
He
does
not
have
money
for
tuck
pointing
and
roof.
There
is
no
money
here
for
people
like
that
who
have
for
four
decades
or
more
provided
affordable
housing.
I
have
also
said:
we
have
been
here:
small
landlords
in
Fifth
Ward,
who
have
provided
housing
for
connections
for
the
homeless,
and
they
came
against
us
to
throw
us
under
the
bus
to
hand
over
four
million
dollars
to
their
friends.
If
this
is
not
a
scam,
I,
don't
know
what
is.
Thank.
You.
H
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Todd
Smith
I'm,
a
Fifth
Ward
resident
I'm,
here
to
speak
on
the
church,
Enduro
building
I'm
all
for
affordable
housing
through
Evanston.
However,
with
that
stated,
I'm
looking
to
have
more
scattered
site
housing,
I'm
not
looking
to
have
concentrated
housing
at
that
location
because
concentrated
housing
has
been
shown
not
to
be
beneficial
to
those
that
live
in
there.
H
In
addition
to
that,
the
site
is
not
suitable,
as
we
understand
it
to
be
built
for
residential
use
right
now
because
of
the
EPA
issues
that
have
not
been
solidified
at
this
point
in
time.
In
addition
to
that,
I
don't
believe
a
financial
feasibility
study
has
done
been
done
by
the
city
and
therefore
the
project
for
a
church
perspective
should
not
go
forward.
In
addition,
there
are
14
variances
that
have
been
requested.
Never
before
has
anything
been
approved
from
the
city
standpoint
with
14
variations.
H
H
The
other
issue
that
we
have
is
on-site
security.
This
building
has
to
be
secured,
I
mean
having
that
number
of
residents
and
not
having
a
24-hour
Security
in
there
is,
is
Havoc
next
issue,
I
would
say,
is
Section,
8
will
pay,
and
we
have
validated
this
and
have
this
writing
from
section
8.
They
will
pay
standard
pricing.
We
keep
saying
it's
going
to
get
lower
pricing,
but
they.
H
I
Zoning
is
how
the
local
government
regulates
and
develops
land
within
its
control.
It
is
broken
down
into
multiple
categories,
to
help
balance
a
city
to
ensure
proper
land
use
and
provide
value
to
Citizens
that
own
property
I
stand
here
this
evening.
As
a
long
member
of
fifth
War
taxpayers
on
Daryl
Avenue,
the
Daryl
Church
Street
project
is
problematic
for
the
following
reasons:
what
is
the
purpose
of
having
zoning
and
procedures
for
committees
like
land
use
when
council
members
and
members
of
the
committee
summarily
disregard
our
concerns?
I
I
would
not
be
questioning
the
Integrity
of
these
bodies
if
they
pretended
to
be
providing
a
service,
but
they
do
not
respect
the
citizens
and
change
the
rules
and
regulations
out
of
whim
with
no
justification.
We
are
bound
by
rules.
Why
aren't
you
and
regulations
we
have
observed
you
approval
development
with
many
variants
previously,
in
the
same
situation,
it
would
have
been
remanded
for
substantial
variations
back
to
the
land
use
committee.
I
You
approve
agreements
that
are
not
in
writing
and
you
refuse
to
clean
the
contaminated
Soul
beneath
this
project,
which
is
endangering
environmental
concerns
to
my
community.
The
land
use
committee
did
not
even
follow
their
own
procedures
when
evaluating
a
proposed
development.
How
are
these
involved
parties
seeking
changes
on
land?
They
don't
even
own?
The
financing
doesn't
provide
for
attaining
generational
wealth
to
my
community
that
has
been
hit
hard
by
gentrification.
I
B
J
Hi
I'm
Sue
lollbach,
with
connections
for
the
homeless
and
I'm
speaking
in
favor
of
the
hodc
building
and
the
purchase
of
land
first.
This
has
already
been
basically
litigated
in
earlier
meetings.
This
is
just
about
the
actual
execution
of
what
was
approved.
J
Second,
in
terms
of
how
much
this
costs
this
project
is
right
in
line
with
how
much
it
costs
to
develop
housing,
it
is
almost
impossible
to
develop
a
new
unit
of
housing
for
under
three
hundred
fifty
thousand
dollars.
So
this
is
perfectly
normal
and
I
think
it
is.
It
is
unreasonable
to
expect
a
new
building
to
be
built
for
Less
in
terms
of
needing
more
affordable
housing.
We
need
more
affordable
housing
all
over
the
city,
including
in
the
Fifth
Ward.
J
If
you
look
at
the
e-plan,
there
are
many
many
people
in
the
Fifth
Ward
who
do
not
have
housing
that
they
can
afford.
So,
even
though
there
is
some
affordable
housing
in
the
Fifth
Ward
giving
the
people
who
live
there,
there's
not
enough.
So
we
are
strongly
in
favor
of
this
project
and
hope
you
will
approve
it.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
We
are
now
going
to
go
to
zoom
comments.
If
there's
nobody
else
in
the
room.
One
final
check:
okay,
going
to
zoom,
starting
with
Jeffrey
Boucher.
K
Hello
good
evening,
chairman
and
committee
members
I
would
like
to
comment
on
ordinance
51-0-53.
My
name
is
Jeffrey
bashore
I
live
in
the
Third
Ward
at
318,
Dempster,
directly
across
the
street,
from
the
Claridge
apartment
building
at
319
Dempster.
For
the
past
two
years
we
the
neighbors,
have
been
working
with
the
city
and
hodc
the
management
company
who
improved
the
living
conditions
at
the
Claridge.
K
L
L
The
city
has
improperly
granted
zoning
relief
to
both
hodc
and
Mount
Pisgah,
a
religious
organization
to
allow
for
a
mixed-use
development
with
33
units
of
affordable
housing
and
an
ill-conceived
Church
development.
The
city
committed
reversible
error
when
it
approved
of
the
major
variations
on
these
properties,
to
the
detriment
of
many
legal
stakeholders
ourselves
included.
L
Thus
any
decision
or
recommendation
approving
the
sale
of
these
properties
based
on
the
validity
of
these
variations,
is
impermissible
and
should
have
no
effect.
There
are
solutions
available
today
to
ensure
legal
stakeholders
are
not
harmed
by
this
continued
reversible
error.
Those
have
gone,
ignored
or
otherwise,
not
entertained.
L
We
have
asked
for
the
enforcement
of
the
provisions
of
the
evanston's
current
ordinances
in
effect,
and
the
city
has
not
followed
them.
We
have
also
asked
for
basic
questions,
answers
to
basic
questions
about
the
timing,
the
plans,
the
funding
for
the
developments
both
by
hodc
and
Mount
Pisgah,
and
they
have
not
been
provided.
L
L
The
historic
thank
you
chair,
the
historic
preservation
commission
will
not
be
involved
in
the
conditions
on
the
sale
despite
an
adjoining
Historic
Landmark
and
in
summary,
the
city
has
not
followed
the
letter
of
the
zoning
code
as
it
exists
today,
but
instead
is
focused
on
a
non-existent
interpretation.
J
L
The
detriment
of
legal
stakeholders,
so,
for
these
reasons,
we
ask
that
the
committee
recommend
this
item
not
be
adopted
to
city
council
or
in
put
in
conditions
that
would
ameliorate
the
detrimental
effect
of
a
legal
stakeholder
here.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
Seeing
none?
Let's
continue
with
our
agenda
for
the
evening
and
again
we
are.
We
have
removed
item
P2
from
the
agenda,
which
leaves
us
with
only
one
item
P1
and
let's
keep
in
mind
that
council
is
scheduled
to
start
at
6
45,
so
I
hope
we
can
wrap
it
up
with
a
few
minutes
to
spare.
If
somebody
would
like
to
make
a
motion
on
item
P1,
I'll.
C
A
It's
been
moved
by
councilmember
Reed
seconded
by
council
member
that
we
approve
ordinance
51-0-23
authorizing
the
sale
of
city-owned,
real
property
at
1805,
Church,
Street,
1708,
Darrow,
Avenue
and
1710
Daryl,
Avenue
and
I
understand
that
staff
has
a
real
short
presentation
just
to
remind
us
what
what
we'll
be
voting
on
here.
B
B
B
There
was
a
discussion
in
the
project,
was
awarded
to
a
joint
venture
between
Mount
pisca
and
Housing
Opportunity
Development
Corporation
in
actually
developing
the
buildings
and
to
comply
to
the
best
of
our
ability
with
the
West
Evans
and
master
plan
and
Zoning
overlay
we're
the
church
and
the
Housing
Development
are
flip-flopped
from
the
city's
land,
which
is
on
the
corner
of
Church
in
Darrow
and
with
Mount
piscos,
which
is
on
the
interior
of
the
block
Mount.
B
Both
of
these
developments,
hrdc's
development
and
mount
piscas
were
approved
by
City
Council
on
April
10th,
and
this
is
the
implementation
of
the
sale
of
that
property
and
they're.
Actually,
three
transactions
that
implement
the
sale,
which
is,
in
effect,
a
donation
of
the
property
to
hodc,
which
will
generate
Illinois,
affordable
housing,
tax
credits
that
help
fund
the
development.
B
Those
are
the
lots
from
an
aerial
view.
The
right
hand,
lower
part,
is
one
parcel.
That's
1805
Church,
the
two
to
immediately
to
the
top
are
the
Daryl
properties
and
the
two
to
the
left
are
Mount
piscus
properties.
So
this
is
how
it
looks
when
you
draw
it
out
in
colors
to
show
which
is
what
property
is
owned
by
whom
Mount
pisgah's
property
is
shown
in
blue.
The
cities
is
in
red
they're,
not
the
same
size.
Mount
Pisces
is
about
75
feet
wide.
The
cities
is
an
additional
lot
wider
than
that.
B
So
what
the
the
way
this
will
be
implemented
is
two
Parcels
of
land
will
be
swapped
in
essence,
between
the
city
and
Mount,
Pisgah
Mount
pisca's
property
is
shown
in
the
kind
of
orange
colorant
left
in
the
seas
and
part
of
the
city's
land
that
will
be
swapped
is
the
purple
on
the
right.
Those
Parcels
are
both
75
feet
wide.
B
There
is
a
center
parcel,
which
is
the
cities
which
the
city
will
retain
after
the
swap
of
the
properties
which,
again
it
will
be
a
sale
for
one
dollar
each
way,
Mount
pisgah's
property
will
be
the
blue
parcel
on
the
right,
and
the
city's
land
will
be
the
red
Parcels
on
the
left.
Those
Parcels
are
the
exact
same
size
as
the
initial
parcels,
then
the
actual
sale
of
the
land
to
hodc
for
that
red
portion
will
be
for
one
dollar
to
generate
the
donation,
hex
credits,
so
that's
the
actual
transactions
that
will
take
place.
B
There
are
draft
sale
agreements
in
the
packet
for
your
consideration.
They
are
not
final,
but
they
give
you
the
background
of
it.
That's
it.
A
M
Just
wanted
to
ask
my
colleagues
to
to
not
hold
this
tonight
and
tonight
or
not
to
support
or
to
not
support
a
table
to
not
motion
for
a
table.
This
is
for
enter.
M
This
item
is
in
particular,
is
for
introduction
today
and
we'll
go
on
to
the
26,
if
approved
through
this
committee
and
Council
for
action,
and
we
have
time
in
between
to
try
to
you
know,
work
out
an
improvement
plan
that
both
the
tenants
of
1319,
Dempster
and
hodc
and
members
of
the
community
living
the
immediate
area
can
work
out.
M
If,
for
those
who've
been
following
this
discussion,
when
we,
when
this
body
this
committee,
along
with
Council,
approved
the
development
that
was
brought
to
us
by
the
land
use
commission,
the
language
commission
recommended
approve
of
the
project.
I
made
an
amendment
requiring
hodc
to
work
with
the
parties
that
I
just
named
to
develop
an
improvement
plan,
and
so
I
would
hope.
We
don't
have
to
rehash
that
tonight.
The
amendment
was
made,
it
was
voted
on,
the
direction
was
given
and
nothing
has
changed
since
then,
in
that
there
my
understanding
is
they're
working
through
it.
M
There's
a
meeting
tomorrow.
Let's
let
that
play
out,
move
this
on
to
the
26th
and
see
what
they
can
come
up
with
and
I'll
I'll
hold
their
chair.
I
may
have
other
comments
depending
on
what
is
said.
Thank
You,
chair.
N
You
yeah
I
very
much
want
to
support
this.
We
do
need
more
affordable
housing,
but
I
also
agree.
I
would
like
to
see
us
moving
forward
with
mixed
mixed
income.
Buildings
I
at
this
point,
but
so
I
do
have
concerns.
I
have
the
same
concerns.
N
I
think
that
the
Luc
expressed
with
regard
to
the
financial
feasibility
of
deconstruction
on
that
lot
and
I
do
wonder
if,
in
the
event
that
I'm,
not
you
know,
I,
will
consider
not
holding
this
tonight,
but
I
I
nevertheless
would
like
to
explore
the
option
of
what
happens
if
that
lot
remains
empty
and
because
of
you
know,
because
of
issues
around
Financial
viability
to
build,
if
there's
a
way
any
way
that
that
can
revert
back
to
the
city,
I'd
hate
to
see
the
city
give
away
a
lot
and
then
end
up
with
an
empty
lot
that
we
now
don't
own.
N
And
but
of
course,
my
main
concern
being
a
first
ward
council
member
is
about
the
hodc
building
on
the
Claridge
at
Dempster
and
I
am
grateful
to
both
the
chair,
chair
of
the
hodc
board
and
Richard
Koenig,
for
agreeing
to
meet
with
the
neighbors
and
myself
and
council
member
Wynn
tomorrow
evening
to
discuss
ways
to
improve
permanent
ways
lasting
ways,
improvements
for
319,
Dempster,
I
I.
You
know
I,
hope
and
expect
that
we'll
see
get
some
formal
agreements
on
ways
to
implement
again
permanent,
lasting
improvements
and
we'll
come
forward
with
some
proposals.
N
I
will
feel
much
more
comfortable
about
supporting
this
and
final
action
once
once.
Those
are
in
hand
so
I,
you
know
we.
We
need
to
have
some
commitment
to
on-site
management.
We
have
some
now
and
that
has
improved
the
quality
of
living,
but
we
need
you
know
a
firm,
a
commitment
going
forward,
that's
funded
by
hodc,
a
plan
where
you
know,
hrdc
leadership
will
meet
with
tenants
to
hear
concerns,
as
well
as
surrounding
Neighbors,
at
least
on
an
annual
basis
and
others.
N
So
I
look
forward
to
supporting
this,
providing
that
we
do
get
some
sort
of
formal
written
agreement
on
some
of
these
really
essential
fronts.
We'd
like
to
see
a
significant
reduction
in
police
and
fire
calls
there.
So
we
we
feel
that
if
most
of
these
measures
are
implemented,
we
will
in
fact
see
a
significant
reduction
in
our
place
and
fire
calls
where
there's
hundreds
hundreds
and
over
the
years.
N
N
This
was
this
plan
got
started
with
the
former
city
council
term
and
I
wonder
if
you
could
tell
me
I
know
it
said
that
the
that
this
this
lot,
the
city,
the
sale
of
this
public
property,
it
said-
would
be
sold
to
an
entity
to
be
created
by
a
Mount,
Pisgah,
Ministry
Incorporated
and
the
Housing
Opportunity
Development
Corporation.
So
was
there
an
entity
created
by
these
two,
as
stated
in
ordinance,
4-0-0-21.
B
Because
the
two
developments
are
actually
physically
separate,
it
was
unnecessary
to
have
an
agreement
of
that
kind
because
it
was
not
joined
by
keeping
them
separate.
It
makes
it
very
clear
in
the
way
the
property
is
transferred,
that
one
of
the
concerns
that
some
people
have
raised
is
that
Mount
Pisgah
is
getting
direct
support
from
the
city
for
their
development,
which
is
absolutely
not
true.
B
B
They
tore
down
so
I
think
that,
although
they
may
not
have
all
their
financing
in
place
at
this
time,
we
have
numerous
other
properties
throughout
the
city
that
we
have
people
who
have
made
plans
but
have
not
provided
financing
for
how
they're
going
to
proceed
with
that
in
advance
of
approval.
N
N
O
Thank
you,
council,
member
nuzma,
members
of
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
I
believe
when
that
ordinance
was
passed
as
well.
I
think
at
that
time
we
didn't
realize
that
the
church
had
to
go
on
the
corner.
N
Thank
you,
and
that
is
a
bit
of
my
concern-
that
this
is
very.
This
is
significantly
different
than
what
we're
based
the
ordinance
that
we're
basing
it
on
so
I'm
a
little
bit
concerned
about
that.
I
also
feel
that
for
that
corner
lot,
if
you're
going
to
have
units,
that's
the
ideal
place
for
the
units
is
on
the
corner,
where
you
get
much
more
light.
So
all
this
also
concerns
me
that
we
would
instead
move
the
the
living
units
into
the
middle.
N
You
know
wedge
between
buildings
and
leave
the
corner
lot
for
a
potential
church,
so
again,
I
hope
to
support
this
going
forward.
I
hope
that
we
can
see
really
firm
agreements
worked
out
with
hodc
leadership,
to
ensure
a
higher
quality
and
more
safe
living
arrangement
for
the
residents
and
for
the
tenants
at
319
Dempster.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
I
am
supportive
of
this
land
swap
I.
Do
think.
Some
of
the
concerns
that
councilmember
Kelly
is
Raising
are
worth
consideration
for.
Policy
changes
in
the
future.
I
do
think
that
there
is
value
to
ensuring
that,
particularly
if
any
City
finances
are
involved
and
really
not
particularly
really
only
if
City
finances
or
city
land
is
involved,
that
someone
receiving
money
from
the
city
or
receiving
Land
from
the
city
would
have
to
demonstrate
a
financial
ability
to
complete
a
project
that
completely
makes
sense
to
me.
C
Also
I
do
think
that
in
also
it's
worth
us
looking
at
holding
on
to
some
of
our
land
I'm
fine
here
this
makes
sense,
the
swap
for
the
church
and
the
but
I
do
think
in
the
future.
Again,
policy
change,
I'm,
happy
to
maybe
support
a
referral
or
something
along
those
lines
that
we
should
make
an
effort
to
hold
on
to
our
city
assets
and
maybe
look
toward
models
where
we're
engaging
in
long-term
leases
that
amount
to
similar
cost.
C
For
you
know,
as
someone
who
wants
to
use
city
land
but
where
possible,
if
we
can
hold
on
to
some
of
our
land
to
create
a
potential
opportunity
in
the
future,
I
think
that's
worth
it,
and
so.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
Reed
councilmember
burns
with
three
minutes
and
43
seconds.
I.
M
Don't
need
it
all
I
just
wanted
to
to
make
clear
that
the
church
is
just
getting
land
that
they
already
own
in
a
different
location.
I
just
want
to
make
that
very
clear.
So
the
example
that
was
just
provided
is
not
really
apply
to
this
situation,
because
the
the
church
owns
land
currently
we're
just
asking
them
as
part
of
this
deal
to
and
they've
agreed
to
it,
obviously
to
now
own
land
next
to
it
of
the
same
size
and
and
vacant
land.
That
has
nothing
on
it.
M
So
it's
really
up
to
to
them
to
raise
the
funds
to
develop
it,
but
I
just
want
to
be
clear:
hodc.
We
we
understand
exactly
where
they're
getting
a
majority
of
their
funding,
and
it
is
not
uncommon
when
a
project
of
this
size
gets
low-income
tax
credits
from
the
federal
government
that
the
local
municipality,
especially
one
that
has
said
for
the
last
two
administrations
that
affordable
housing
is
the
top
priority,
would
then
kick
in
funding
to
see
the
project
through
while
I'm.
M
M
What
they're
talking
about
is
just
the
system
of
low-income
tax
credits
that
there
are
investors
that
buy
low
income
tax
credits
that
allow
for
affordable
housing
projects
to
occur
so
much
so
that
ninety
percent
I
believe
is
the
number
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
Richard
of
the
affordable
housing
in
this
country
is
done
in
this
way,
and
so,
if
there
is
this
grant
conspiracy,
the
whole
government
is
in
on
it
and
you
probably
need
to
be
addressing
another
body
and
not
this
one,
but
I
just
wanted
to
to
to
to
just
make
make
it
clear.
M
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
Burns,
seen
no
further
requests
to
be
recognized.
I
will
ask
for
a
roll
call
vote
on
item
P1
and
again.
This
is
for
introduction.
A
Hi
the
motion
carries
by
a
vote
of
six
to
one
if
there
are
no
additional
items
for
discussion,
seeing
no
further
business
to
come
before
this
committee.
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned
at
6
25
and
see
everybody
back
here
in
20
minutes
for
Council.