►
From YouTube: Planning and Development Committee Meeting 6-26-2023
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
D
E
A
A
Well,
it
was
councilmember
Kelly
second
by
council
member
Kelly,
all
in
favor,
say
aye.
C
A
Aye
and
he
knows
any
abstentions,
the
motion
carries
the
minutes
are
approved
that
moves
us
to
public
comment.
We
are
going
to
proceed
with
public
comment
from
people
in
person
and
then
we'll
do
online
public
comment.
We
have
a
total
of
one
two,
three,
four,
five:
six,
seven,
eight
nine
ten
eleven
people
signed
up
for
public
comment
and
the
limit
is
two
minutes
per
person.
So
we'll
we'll
we
will
start
with
Haley
guyon
Jack,
Weiss
and
David
Galloway.
F
Thank
you
good
evening,
council
members.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
So
this
relates
to
agenda
item
P1
for
your
consideration
this
evening
resolution
2
2r23
our
concerns,
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
Crosby
theater
LLC.
We
have
raised
concerns
with
the
city
council,
land
use,
commission
and
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
about
these,
the
development
next
door,
and
in
our
view,
the
resolution
appears
to
be
submitted
in
a
way
that
it
is
inadequate
under
Illinois.
F
Law
Illinois
requires
inclusion
into
in
for
there
to
be
submitted
simultaneously
with
a
Subdivision
plat
inclusion
of
any
study
or
studies
which
shall
show
typographically
the
elevation
of
land
prior
to
the
commencement
and
how
the
studies
should
demonstrate.
The
change
changes
to
Elevation
would
impact
the
flow
of
water,
the
adjoining
stakeholder,
the
adjoining
property
owned
owner
and
legal
stakeholder
next
door.
F
1817
Church
Street
has
previously
raised
with
the
p
d
committee
concerns
of
water,
drainage
issues
and
the
fact
that
this
resolution
does
not
include
any
such
studies
showing
the
topography
and
how
the
flow
of
water
and
surface
area
will
be
changed
raises
substantial
concerns.
We
are
a
Historic
Landmark,
Next
Door,
and
we
continue
to
struggle
with
flooding
issues
on
multiple
occasions
and
we
have
failed
to
see
plans
shared
about
this
development
and,
of
course,
the
study.
F
Herein
is
required
under
state
law
and
so
we're
again
faced
with
a
resolution
without
the
necessary
elements,
and
we
feel
we
need
more
information
before
this
can
proceed.
So
we
would
really
respectfully
request
the
committee
to
at
least
hold
this
item
in
committee
until
the
study
is
produced.
Thank
you.
D
D
You
may
remember:
Spark
plan
and
appearance,
Review
Committee
and
more
recently,
Dapper
design
and
project
Review
Committee
City
committee
is
designed
to
address
design
and
development
issues
in
Evanston
design.
Evidence
perception
is
that
there
has
never
been
a
professional
designer
on
either
committee
on
a
regular
basis
and
that
designs
seem
to
be
an
afterthought.
D
The
community
design
commission
you
see
proposed
tonight
puts
design
in
the
hands
of
professionals,
Architects
designers
and
others
who
understand
the
important
role
design
plays
in
nearly
every
aspect
of
the
daily
life
of
our
community.
We
urge
you
to
review
the
proposal
carefully.
Discuss
its
importance
and
move
ultimately
to
create
an
ordinance
that
will
establish
evanston's,
First
Community
design,
commission,
you
will
be
joining
others,
Chicago,
Madison
and
Ann
Arbor,
to
name
a
few
who
recognize
the
value
of
good
design
in
the
urban
setting.
Thank
you.
G
Good
evening,
council
members,
my
name
is
David
Galloway
I've
been
a
resident
of
Evanston
since
1983.
I
am
a
registered
architect,
I've
served
on
the
plant
commission
and
the
preservation,
commission
and
I'm
currently
vice
president
of
design
Evanston,
the
non-for-profit
design
advocacy
organization
that
Jack
Weiss
just
acquainted
you
with,
which
seeks
to
provide
design
advice
and
encourage
quality
design
in
the
City
of
Evanston
and
has
done
so
for
over
40
years.
G
Design
Evenson
has
supported
the
adoption
of
the
CDC
and
provided
advice
and
feedback
during
its
development.
We
think
that
staff
has
done
an
exceptional
job
in
compiling
and
analyzing
other
City's
design
commissions
and
has
created
a
proposal
that
is
appropriate
and
pertinent
for
our
needs
and
will
ultimately
be
of
great
benefit
to
the
city
and
its
residents.
A
Thank
you,
Tom
Hoffmeyer,
we
are
Grace.
Matthew
is
declining
to
speak.
So
then
we'll
go
with
Josh
Wolf
and
Bruce
Bruce
andenbach.
H
I
H
Just
a
very
brief
remark:
I
support
the
development
of
the
community
design
commission,
not
as
a
way
of
arbitrarily
restricting
design
to
a
style
or
way
of
thought,
but
to
provide
a
more
thoughtful
approach
to
considering
design
that
enhances
our
community
to
give
some
professional
thoughtfulness
to
the
whole
process
of
Designing
in
this
town.
Thank
you.
D
I
Good
evening,
I,
I'm
speaking
on
item
P3
I
live
in
the
condominium
1634
Hinman
that
wraps
at
the
Hinman
in
church.
This
is
about
I
believe
the
fourth
go
at
this.
This
planned
development
for
a
mixed-use
building
I
just
want
to
again
emphasize
that
it's
you
know
out
of
out
of
the
code,
it's
asking
for
a
special,
a
special
consideration.
The
land
use
Commission
recommends
denial
again,
it
just
feels
like
we're
going
around
around
and
how
many
times
do
we
have
to
go
through
this
before
enough?
I
Is
enough
respectfully
and
then
also
just
the
consideration
that
the
zoning
is
for
a
fixed
story
level
and
it
continues
to
not
meet
that
and
that
exists
for
a
reason,
so
I
believe
that
more
than
anything
is
a
reason
to
consider
again
denial.
Thank
you
very
much.
J
Good
evening
we're
standing
back
45
year,
45
years,
Jesus
resident
of
Evanston
talk
about
P3,
which
is
commonly
known
as
the
Legacy
I'm,
not
sure
why
it's
developers
once
more
before
us
I,
do
not
understand
why
this
development
continues
to
pursue
such
an
irresponsible
and
non-compliant
project.
This
developer
has
experience.
Surely
this
developer
conducted
his
due
to
his
own
due
diligence
and
surely
this
development
thoroughly
equated
itself
with
our
zoning
law,
ordinances
and
codes
and
based
on
that
due
diligence
and
development
experience
and
knowledge?
They
purchased
the
property.
J
J
It's
the
developer's
responsibility
to
put
forward
a
project
that
will
satisfy
their
profit
expectations
that
fits
within
the
environment
of
Our,
Lives,
ordinance
and
codes.
The
developer
cannot
expect
the
city
or
the
citizens
of
Evanston
to
ignore
our
laws,
ordinances
and
codes
to
help
make
their
project
more
profitable.
J
This
developer
has
come
before
us
more
than
three
times
now.
This
developer
has
been
rejected
by
the
land
use
committee.
It's
called
developer
risk
and
developers
they
take
it
on
this
developer,
took
it
on
Eyes
Wide
Open.
Sometimes
you
win.
Sometimes
you
lose
clearly,
they
should
lose
here
and
it's
all
they're
doing.
Thank
you.
K
K
That
is
not
giving
them
a
break
that
is
essentially
performing
Ledger
domain
or
Alchemy
as
I
called
it.
In
my
last
remarks,
it
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
zoning.
That
is
clearly
not
the
intent
of
the
zoning.
Now
I
have
been
reading
about
how
other
small
cities
have
been
dealing
with
housing,
shortage
on
affordable
housing
shortage
and
there's
some
consensus
that
it
requires
greater
height
and
density.
K
That
does
not
have
to
be
done
in
every
part
of
the
city
and
the
place
I
live.
Is
you
know,
there's
this
D4
Zone,
it's
supposed
to
be
eight
or
most
10
stories,
54
units-
you
know
it's.
This
isn't
anywhere
near
that
and
I
bought
my
condo,
with
the
understanding
that
that
was
the
zoning
that
I
was
living
in.
K
The
zoning
is
in
a
way
a
promise
to
the
residents
that
the
city
places
some
constraints
on
what
it
is
willing
to
do
to
generate
revenue,
and
what
I
sense
here
is
a
means
justify,
as
The
end
justifies
the
means
argument
and
those
arguments
never
end
well,
so
I
urge
you
once
again
to
reject
this
proposal.
Thank
you.
A
L
L
This
I'm
testifying
about
the
alley,
because
we
just
saw
on
the
city
site
a
little
notice
from
hrg.
That
said
well,
they
would
be
very
helpful
in
managing
the
alley
and
and
the
Alley
traffic
and
and
that
they
would
bring
the
community
into
this.
Well,
I
did
not
sign
up
to
be
a
24-hour
a
day
crossing
guard
or
traffic
policeman
on
an
alley
which
is
in
fact
mostly
if
at
all
15
feet,
not
a
20.
L
My
husband
and
I
were
there
several
times
last
week,
re-measuring
and
in
order
to
get
it
to
20,
you
would
have
to
Shear
off
all
the
utility
entrances
and
exits
from
all
the
buildings
that
have
them,
including
the
First
United
Methodist
Church,
which
has
been
in
its
position
current
position
since
1911.,
so
they
would
have
no
electrical
conduit,
no
water
exit
and
no
gas
exit
or
entrance,
and
that
goes
for
the
building
on
the
corner
on
the
Davis
Street
Corner
as
well.
This
the
southeast
corner
of
the
alley
as
we
measured
it.
A
M
Sorry,
okay,
widening
the
alley
is
an
impossibility,
especially
at
the
South
End,
where
you'd
have
to
tear
down
the
buildings
on
either
side
of
the
alley
to
do
it.
Think
of
them
as
the
pillars
of
Hercules
or
the
Straits
of
Gibraltar
they're
there
you
cannot
widen
the
alley.
The
zoning
plan
I
wish
to
remind
you,
is
a
promise
to
area
residents.
It
was
created
to
guarantee
the
geography
of
the
immediate
neighborhood
people
living
in
residences.
M
N
I
will
briefly
highlight
my
comments
with
the
following:
Five
Points
I
strongly
encourage
each
of
you
to
review
the
public
record
of
Horizon
Realty
group's
continued
tax
abatement,
which
may
well
establish
the
course
of
conduct
to
follow
simply
put
by
another
Evanston
residence.
This
proposed
development
is
nothing
more
than
a
money
grab
by
Horizon
Horizon
Realty
Group
is
not
a
developer.
That
Evanston
should
trust,
as
evidenced
by
their
long
history.
That
suggests.
Approval
of
this
application
will
not
end
well.
N
A
Thank
you
very
much.
That
brings
us
to
the
end
of
our
list
of
people
that
have
signed
up
for
public
comment.
Is
there
anybody
that
we
have
missed
either
in
person
or
online
speak
now
or
forever
hold
your
peace
going
going
gone?
Okay,
we
are
going
to
hear
some
more
written
public
comment
from
director
flax
when
we
get
to
that
item
on
the
agenda,
so
we'll
Reserve
that
for
right
now
and
move
on
with
items
for
consideration
the
first
one
of
which
is
item
P1.
C
A
A
Last
time
this
committee
met
we
approved
for
introduction
and
ordinance
that
would
that
would
approve
the
swap
of
the
property,
the
sale
of
the
property
before
we
can
do
that,
we
need
to
subdivide
the
property,
so
we're
not
talking
about
selling
the
property
with
this
item
just
the
act
of
subdividing
it
so
with
that
clarification,
I'll,
open
it
up
to
questions
and
comments,
starting
with
council
member
Ravel.
P
Thank
you,
chair
nuzma
council
member
reval,
members
of
p
d,
Alexandra,
ruggie,
Deputy,
City
attorney.
This
Law
Department
did
have
an
opportunity
to
review
the
state
of
Illinois
Platt
act
and
based
on
the
exception,
provided
for
the
Sailor
exchange
of
parcels
of
land
between
owners
of
adjoining
and
contiguous
land.
We
don't
need
those
studies,
so
it's
not
required
at
this
time.
A
Anybody
else
all
right,
seeing
no
further
discussion.
I
will
call
a
roll
call
vote.
B
Council
member
Reed
aye
councilman
aye,
councilmember,
Ravel,
council
member
Burns,
aye
council,
member
Kelly,
no
council,
member
nusma.
A
A
I'm
sorry,
with
my
microphone
on
nmp1
passes
on
a
vote
of
six
to
one
moving
us
on
to
item
P2.
If
somebody
would
link
that.
C
A
Q
If
you
wouldn't
mind,
if,
if
chair,
if
you
and
he'll
be
brief,
but
I
I
received
emails
today
that
were
confusing
and
healed,
the
applicant
will
talk
about
this
briefly,
please,
but
it
was
very
clear
from
the
beginning
that
they
had
no
interest
in
pursuing
a
liquor
license.
They
met
with
community
members
during
the
fifth
War
meeting.
So
if
you
could
just
put.
A
A
Thank
you.
So
your
quest,
councilmember
Reed
councilman.
A
Q
What
you
told
us
during
the
meeting
and
then
that'll,
be
it
I'll,
have
something
recorded
that
I
can
forward.
R
On
to
the
residents
yeah,
so
yeah,
there's
not
going
to
be
any
liquor
sales
or
lottery
sales
or
anything
of
that
sort.
The
convenience
store
will
only
have
grocery
store
items
deli,
sandwiches
as
well
as
tobacco,
but
other
than
that.
No
liquor.
A
S
R
Yeah,
so
our
main
focus
is
going
to
be
on
our
deli
sandwiches.
We
currently
have
a
location
on
Sheridan
and
Hollywood,
which
is
called
Hollywood
Deli.
R
So
we
just
want
to
replicate
our
previous
store
and
our
main
focus
is
going
to
be
selling.
You
know:
convenience
store
items
as
well
as
Deli.
S
R
R
A
Don't
know
a
zoning
questions,
I
recognize
attorney
ruggie.
P
Called
in
the
convenience
store
and
then
the
store
versus
the
deli,
the
the
deli
is
included
in
as
the
part
of
the
convenience
store.
So
it's
still
the
primary
source
of
income
for
the
business
is
the
convenience
store,
yep,
okay,.
R
Mostly
convenience
store
and
then
yeah
sorry
and
then
the
end
of
the
store
will
be
mostly
like
the
deli
counter.
So.
Q
C
K
R
R
T
C
A
Any
other
discussion
all
right
see
none
director
Flex.
Could
you
call
the
roll.
J
A
All
right
that
brings
us
to
item
P3,
which
is
of
some
interest
for
the
folks
assembled
tonight
and
council
member
Reed.
Are
you
yes.
C
C
A
It's
been,
it's
been
properly
moved
by
councilmember
Reed
seconded
by
council
member
Burns
before
we
get
into
the
discussion
just
want
to
lay
out
the
ground
rules.
We're
going
to
begin
this
with
director
flax
reading
a
brief
summary
of
written
comment
that
we
have
received
and
then
in
accordance
with
city
council
rule
6.4,
the
applicant
will
deliver
a
presentation
no
longer
than
10
minutes,
followed
by
a
presentation
from
objectors
who
have
availed
themselves
of
their
right
and
informed
staff
of
their
intention
to
do
so.
A
At
that
point,
this
will
then
be
turned
over
to
the
committee
for
discussion.
This
is
per
city
council
rules
not
to
be
considered
a
hearing,
and
it's
it's
not
an
opportunity
for
cross-examination
of
witnesses.
The
questions
will
come
from
committee
members
and
the
answers
will
come
from
folks
that
the
chair
recognizes
so.
A
Having
said
that,
let's
hear
a
brief
summary
of
written
comment
that
we
have
received.
B
Paul
and
Gene
Breslin
did
send
in
their
comments,
in
addition,
and
you
all
have
that
in
your
packets,
that's
out
on
your
in
front
of
your
seats.
In
addition,
Candace
heathi
wrote
in
in
opposition
with
largely
focused
on
the
scale
of
the
development
being
out
of
scale
to
the
neighborhood.
Also
Adina
clyman
wrote
in
in
opposition
again
scale
of
the
development
and
additional
traffic
hollywaythen
representing
the
North
Church
Condominium
Association
wrote
primarily
about
the
alley
management
plan
being
insufficient.
B
A
All
right,
thank
you.
So
now
we
will
recognize
Jeff
Michael
for
a
10
minute
presentation.
Jeff
is
the
applicant
for
this
project.
T
Go
ahead,
thank
you.
Thank
you
Jonathan
and
thank
you
to
the
Indy
committee.
As
Jonathan
said:
I'm
Jeff,
Michael
I'm,
the
Chief
Operating
Officer
of
Horizon
Realty
Group,
the
applicant
and
developer
of
the
proposed
Legacy
project.
In
the
interest
of
time,
the
rest
of
my
team
they'll
introduce
themselves
if
and
when
they're
called
upon
to
speak.
T
In
a
moment,
I'm
going
to
seed
the
floor
over
to
Jonathan
Amarillo
Jonathan
is
an
attorney
with
Taft
Law
Firm
John
handles
cases
before
the
United
States
Supreme
Court,
the
Illinois
Supreme
Court,
the
United
States
court
of
appeals,
the
Illinois
Appellate
Court
I'm.
Sorry,
the
U.S
court
of
appeals
for
the
seventh
circuit,
among
others.
He
is
currently
president
of
the
Appellate
Lawyers
Association
and
has
served
on
the
boards
of
the
Chicago
Bar
Association,
the
Chicago
Bar
Foundation,
the
Illinois
Bar
foundation
and
number
of
charitable
organizations.
T
He
is
also
currently
chairing
the
search
committee
tasked
with
finding
the
next
Cook
County
Inspector
General
John
has
been
tasked
with
addressing
the
seminal
issue
at
hand
that
has
to
do
with
the
objection
to
height
relating
to
this
project.
He
authored
a
letter
dated
May
25th,
which
is
part
of
your
packet,
outlining
our
legal
and
policy
position
with
respect
to
the
matter
and
he's
here
tonight
to
further
expound
on
that
matter.
Jonathan.
U
Thank
you
committee
members
for
allowing
me
to
speak
with
you
for
a
few
minutes
tonight.
I'm
going
to
get
right
to
the
point
we
heard
from
several
members
of
the
opposition
tonight
that
105
feet
is
a
hard
limit
under
the
Evanston
zoning
code.
I'm
here,
to
tell
you
that
is
wrong,
is
a
matter
of
law.
I
interpret
statutes
for
for
a
living,
I
know
what
I'm
talking
about
on
this
point.
Let's
look
at
those
statutes.
U
The
first
one
obviously
is
61158
regarding
Building
height
the
base,
and
that
says
that
the
base
zoning
height
limit
for
the
D4
district
is
105
feet,
but
it
also
says-
and
this
is
the
part-
that
the
opposition
ignores
the
same
ordinance-
also
says
that
that
limit
doesn't
count
parking
levels
for
which
you
can
add
another
40
feet.
So
that
brings
the
base
limit
up
to
145
feet.
U
Then
we
look
at
6,
11,
110,
specifically
subsection
c1d,
and
that
says
that
the
city
May
Grant
allowances
for
this
D4
District
up
to
another
40
feet,
and
it
then
repeats
the
language
regarding
parking
levels
and
how
those
don't
count.
So
it's
emphasized
Rising
there
I
think
that
these
Provisions
are
meant
to
be
read
in
a
complimentary,
not
a
contradictory
way.
What
does
that
mean?
It
means
that
the
limit
for
the
D4
district
is
185
feet.
U
U
If
we
look
at
the
benefits
that
the
Legacy
project
will
bring
zoom
out
from
165
feet
and
look
at
the
broader
landscape
here
for
a
minute,
it
is
no
secret
that
cities
around
the
country
are
hurting
right.
Now
they
need
investment.
The
Legacy
project
proposes
to
bring
a
60
million
dollar
investment
to
this
city.
Its
benefits
are
legion,
significant
tax
revenues
for
the
city,
measured
in
the
millions
and
tens
of
millions
of
dollars
over
time,
much
of
which
will
go
to
our
Public
Schools
213
new
residents
to
the
downtown.
U
Excuse
me:
in
a
market
that
is
in
97
percent
occupied,
there
is
an
extreme
housing
shortage
in
Evanston.
It
will
create
ground
floor
retail
to
revitalize
a
flagging
block.
It
will
create
35
new
jobs
to
run
the
building
with
local
residents,
given
preference
for
those
jobs,
it
will
create
hundreds
of
new
construction
jobs.
It
will
create
apprenticeship
programs,
a
building's
trade
Employment
Program
for
local
residents.
It
will
create
a
scholarship
program
for
local
residents.
U
It
will
ease
congestion
on
Chicago
Avenue,
despite
what
you
heard
from
some
members
of
the
public
here
tonight,
and
it
will
pay
for
repairs
to
the
surrounding
public
ways.
Perhaps,
most
importantly,
in
a
lot
of
regards,
it
will
bring
affordable
housing
to
a
ward
that
has
zero,
affordable
housing
units
in
market
rate
buildings.
None.
U
Now
when
we
address
the
opposition,
we
have
to
weigh
all
those
benefits
against
what
they're
saying
we
know
for
a
fact,
as
a
matter
of
law
that
their
interpretation
of
the
ordinance
is
is
wrong,
but
their
primary
concern
is
height.
They
argue
that
the
Legacy
doesn't
provide
a
quote:
unquote:
suitable
transition
between
adjoining
districts.
That
term
is
used
in
ordinance
61151.
U
It's
not
expressly
defined
there
now
the
opponents
say
that
this
means
that
the
definition
for
suitable
transition
is
entirely
discretionary,
entirely
subjective,
but
we
know
that
that
can't
be
right,
even
discretion,
as
a
matter
of
law
needs
to
be
cabined
within
some
standards.
Where
do
we
find
those
standards
here
we
find
them
in
the
ordinances
which
I
just
reviewed,
which
allow
a
building
of
this
height
very
clearly.
That's
the
only
way
you
can
look
at
these
ordinances
and
have
them
make
any
sense
and
not
be
contradictory.
U
The
ordinance
said
it
is
this
community's
public
policy
to
promote
demographic
diversity,
to
grow
a
local
Workforce,
to
give
people
of
low
and
moderate
income
means
and
chance
of
being
members
of
this
community,
something
that,
with
housing
prices
rocketing
everywhere
across
the
country,
including
in
Evanston.
It's
really
hard
to
find
these
days.
The
Legacy
project
will
bring
affordable
housing
to
this
Ward
for
the
first
time.
Look
at
that
again
does
not
have
a
single
unit,
not
a
single
unit
of
affordable
housing
in
a
market
rate
building.
That
is
an
incredible
fact.
U
The
Legacy
will
change
that
as
per
this
City's
stated
policy
now,
considering
all
that
a
denial
here
would
create
real
problems
for
the
city
regarding
the
proper
reading
and
application
of
the
iho
section,
6118
I'm,
sorry,
six,
eleven
One
Eleven,
a
of
the
iho
says
that
develops
developers
are
entitled.
That's
the
city's
word
not
my
word
entitled
to
bonus
market
rate
housing
units
for
every
affordable
unit
at
a
ratio
of
four
to
one.
The
Legacy
will
have
10,
affordable
units,
as
I
said
before.
That
means
that
the
Legacy
gets.
U
U
If
an
allowance
isn't
given
the
Legacy
will
be
denied
those
40
units
that
are
that
is
entitled
to
As
a
matter
of
law.
Now,
let's
say
for
the
sake
of
argument
that
the
project
gets
voted
down
here
today.
I:
ask
you
this:
what
does
that
say
to
other
developers
about
the
city's
commitment
to
things
like
inclusionary
housing?
U
U
U
A
Thank
you.
Let's,
let's
hear
the
the
posing
presentation
first
and
then
we
will
hold
off
in
questions
for
now.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
The
chair
will
recognize
Bill,
frotcher
and
I'm
sorry
Bob
froacher
and
Bill
Brown,
as
representatives
of
those
in
opposition
to.
V
This
thanks
chair
news.
We
have
hard
copies
if
the
Council,
if
the
p
d
committee
members
will
like
them
but
I'll
leave
it
up
to
you.
A
V
Allows
you
to
write
notes
on
them.
Go
ahead
bill
thanks,
thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
share
our
concerns
on
Bob,
Fletcher
and
Evanston
resident.
My
colleague,
Bill
Brown
is
chairman
of
the
board
of
the
First
United
Church
of
Evanston.
Our
document
is
lengthy,
but
I
will
focus
on
only
three
pages.
Pages
three
four
and
five
I
will
speak
to
the
points
that
were
just
raised.
Let
me
be
clear:
we
are
not
saying,
don't
build
any
building
there.
V
That's
not
what
we're
saying
this
is
not
an
All
or
Nothing
sort
of
deal,
and
the
lawyer
who
just
spoke
argues
he's
more
informed
than
our
land
use.
Commission
I
would
argue
to
the
contrary.
Given
that
they've
been
doing
this
for
a
long
time,
he
only
cited
a
single
point
which
he
found
fought
with,
which
was
related
height,
there's
many
standards
of
approval,
which
he
did
not
speak
to.
We
will
speak
to
those
please
note.
The
page
numbers
are
in
Gray
on
the
bottom
right
of
each
page.
Please
move
to
page
three.
V
Why
are
we
here?
I've
heard
some
confusion
about
this,
just
want
to
make
clear
the
city's
Council
Authority
the
city
council's
Authority
is
clear,
as
shown
in
the
third
bullet
here
per
6316
of
the
city
code.
The
city
council
approves
or
disapproves
any
application
for
hype
on
50
feet.
Special
use,
including
a
plan
development.
The
proposed
Legacy
is
both
a
plan,
development
and
a
special
use.
So
the
developer
has
the
right
to
apply
to
you
for
approval
on
a
plan,
development
and
a
special
use.
V
V
Those
are
documented
as
city
code,
including
in
the
D4
transition
District,
which
is
a
special
district.
The
Luc,
including
Luke
chairman
Rogers,
found
that
the
Legacy
proposal
failed
to
meet
four
critical
standards
of
approval
at
its
March
28th
meeting
and
voted
to
deny
approval
and
recommends
denial
of
approval
to
the
city
council.
Additional
Evanston,
City
staff
determined
the
legacy
is
non-compliant
and
four
site
development
allowances
are
required.
V
Please
move
to
page
four.
These
next
two
pages,
just
summarize
the
facts
and
the
reasons
for
desire
denial
it's
much
more
than
just
height.
First,
the
economic
benefits
cited
are
significantly
overstated.
The
Legacy
economic
benefit
analysis
included
four
major
flaws
that
we
found,
including
ignoring
the
loss
of
the
hundred
and
ten
thousand
dollars
in
annual
taxes
currently
generated
by
the
existing
land
and
buildings
and
assuming
100
building
occupancy.
When
calculating
tax
receipts,
we
likely
missed
other
errors.
They
made
the
flaws.
We
found
reduced,
total
cumulative
net
revenue
through
2035
by
30
percent.
V
V
V
You're
likely
aware
this
building
is
in
the
D4
transition
District,
a
number
of
people
have
already
mentioned.
It
is
specifically
designed
to
be
a
step
down
to
the
residential
area
on
Hinman
directly
behind
it.
In
addition
to
all
this,
the
proposed
buildings
neighbors
oppose
it.
You
have
heard
from
some
of
them.
There
are
many
others,
First
United,
Methodist,
Church
and
other
residents
in
neighboring,
condos,
Homes
and
Apartments.
They
know
this
area
better
than
any
of
us.
V
They
believe
the
building's
Too
Tall,
but
more
than
that
too
dense
will
create
congestion
and
dangerous
conditions
both
on
Chicago
Avenue
and
in
the
alley
behind
the
Luc
received
detailed
written
comments
opposed
to
the
building
from
50
Evanston
residents
for
the
March
8th
meeting.
There
were
only
two
written
comments
in
support.
V
Please
move
to
page
five
continuing
our
reasons
for
denial.
We've
already
discussed
the
building's
failure
to
meet
plans,
guidelines
and
standards
of
approval.
There
really
are
significant
congestion
and
safety
issues
created
here.
Chicago,
Ave
and
Church
Street
is
among
the
most
congested
intersections
in
the
city.
V
The
traffic
study
on
the
building
by
kloa
has
no
analysis
on
the
impact
of
Rideshare
food
delivery
package
delivery
services
on
traffic
and
their
crazy
driving
patterns,
as
they
drive
around
looking
for
parking,
which
is
often
found
illegally
to
allow
drop-offs
and
Pickups
the
alley
and
back
is
already
very
dangerous
and
overwhelmed
and
serves
many
neighbors
you'll
hear
from
one
in
a
moment.
The
existing
congestion
and
danger
will
be
greatly
exacerbated
by
the
addition
of
140
units
and
215
plus
residents
hrg's
newly
proposed
Communications
plan
with
other
alley.
V
V
Even
if
we
were
able
to
do
coordination
and
coordination,
it
doesn't
change
the
fact
that
the
existing
alley
is
overwhelmed
and
dangerous
and
adding
215
residents
to
retail
establishments
will
make
that
much
much
worse,
remember.
There
is
also
a
total
child
day
care
facility
back
there,
which
will
relies
on
that
alley
for
emergency
access
to
the
playground.
V
Finally,
approval
of
this
building
would
set
a
table
terrible
and
dangerous
precedent
for
this
special
D4
transition.
District.
It
would
gut
the
standards
of
approval.
It
would
ignore
the
luc's
written
findings
of
fact
in
opposition,
and
it
would
ignore
the
luc's
recommendation
to
deny
approval
to
the
city
council.
Every
developer
going
forward
would
point
to
this
building
as
precedent
for
another
building
that
is
taller
and
denser
just
by
a
few
stories
I'd
like
to
just
conclude
with.
If
they
want
to
change
the
zoning
change.
W
W
Therefore,
I
urge
you
not
to
let
a
modest,
incremental
Financial
benefit
for
the
city
outweigh
the
importance
of
the
Integrity
of
this
historic
neighborhood
adjacent
to
this
project
site,
including
the
venerable
First
United
Methodist
Church,
one
of
the
founders
of
the
city.
Please
vote!
No,
as
did
the
Luc
in
their
meeting
on
March,
8th.
A
A
If
anybody
would
like
to
be
recognized,
we'll
go
with
council
member
Kelly,
followed
by
council
member,
thank.
S
You
and
thank
you,
everybody
for
the
presentations,
so
I
just
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
importance
of
a
transitional
or
a
transition
District
or
Zone
in
itself.
This
is
in
a
D4
District.
What
we
call
transition
zone
or
District,
which
is
established
in
order
to
provide
a
suitable
transition
from
downtown
districts
and
those
districts
adjacent
to
the
downtown
in
this
particular
transition
district
is
just
three
blocks
from
Lake
Michigan,
so
I
imagine
from
here
on
into
the
future.
This
is
going
to
remain
a
transition
zone.
S
It's
hard
to
imagine
expanding
any
closer.
You
know
it's
three
blocks
from
the
lake
directly
behind
evanston's
iconic
and
historic
First,
United
Methodist
Church,
a
local
Landmark,
designed
by
Talmadge
with
over
700
members,
so
huge.
You
know
community
right
next
to
it
in
in
the
transitional
areas,
the
size
and
the
height
of
the
buildings,
you
know
get
smaller
as
you
move
outside
of
downtown
into
neighborhood
residential
areas.
A
transition
zone
is
so
important
to
bring
a
sense
of
organization
and
planning
to
a
city.
It
isn't
random.
S
I
S
Again,
as
Ari
pointed
out,
it's
not
about
this
development
or
no
development,
you
know
eight
to
ten
story.
Development
is
allowed
here,
but
it's
about
half
of
what's
roughly
half
of
what's
being
proposed
and
that's
just
really
over
the
top
and
and
really
going
to
I
think
undermine
the
Integrity,
the
congestion,
the
transitional
zone
of
this
District.
S
That's
a
narrow
alley
that
abuts
the
church-
and
so
you
know,
and
I
also
want
to
just
emphasize
again
what's
been
emphasized-
that
the
standards
according
to
the
land,
use
commission
and
chair
Rogers,
four
standards
aren't
meant
they're
significant
standards,
and
we
are
supposed
to
prove
this
only
if
the
standards
are
met
but
multiple
art
again,
not
just
one
or
two
but
four
significant
standards.
I
won't
go
through
those.
So
again,
I
want
to
emphasize
it's
not
about
this
development
or
node
development,
but
it's
about
a
development.
S
That's
within
reason,
within
the
Zone
within
our
zoning
code.
Respecting
this
transitional
district
and
again,
I
also
agree
that
if
we
did
allow
such
you
know
huge
variances
here
to
their
zoning,
we
are
going
to
set
that
dangerous
precedent
whereby
this
transitional,
Eastern
Zone
along
Chicago
Avenue,
will
be
permanently
undermined,
likely
provoking
future
proposals
for
similar
high-rises
again
just
sort
of
shattering
that
transitional,
Zone
and
I
know.
Councilmember
Winn
is
also
deeply
concerned
about
this,
and
and
also
not
supportive,
not
here,
but
also
very
concerned
about
the
ramifications
further
down
along
Chicago,
Avenue
I.
C
C
I
first
want
to
start
with,
while
in
Evanston
we
do
not
engage
in
the
Chicago
style,
aldermanic
prerogative.
I
certainly
give
deference
to
my
colleague
whose
Ward
this
is
in
and
certainly
have
want
to
be
careful
about
hearing
and
addressing
those
concerns
of
you
and
your
residents.
C
I
am
generally
supportive
of
this
project,
but
but
I
want
to
be
clear
on
a
few
items,
so
I'll
start
with
because
councilmember
Kelly,
you
mentioned
the
transition
zone,
and
that
was
mentioned
by
the
applicant
as
well
as
the
objectors
I'm
going
to
ask
this
question
to
a
few
people.
But
first
I'll
start
with
the
council
member.
What
is
a
suitable
transition.
S
So
it's
already
been
designated
the
height
there.
We
have
you
know
a
height
of
105
is
what's
designated
dwelling
units
of
54
versus
the
140.
right
now.
I
I
think
that
we,
it
has
been
planned
as
a
transition
zone
to
gradually
go
down
to
you
know
to
residential
zoning,
so
I'm
standing
by
our
zoning
so.
C
S
And
again,
all
the
variances
or
allowances
we
made
Grant
those
I'm
not
arguing
that
but
I'm
arguing
the
height
is
the
height
an
affordable
unit
or
a
parking
unit
does
not
reduce
the
height.
It
still
is
getting
higher
and
and
we're
at
zone
right
now
that
would
stand
far
and
above
all,
other
buildings
along
Chicago,
Avenue,
again
obliterating
that
that
transitional
Zone.
C
Thank
you
and
to
the
objectors,
does
your
opinion
differ
with
councilmember
Kelly
or
do
you.
O
V
My
personal
view
does
not
differ
materially.
If
you
look
at
the
standards,
don't
get
wrapped
up
in
hand
waving
and
the
numbers
of
stuff
that
was
jammed
in
on
a
one-off
basis.
If
you
look
at
the
standards
of
approval,
it
needs
to
comply
with
the
2009,
Nine
downtown
plan
and
I.
Have
we
have
a
table
in
here
that
describes
what
those
ranges
are
for
both
base
and
even
with
all
the
bonuses
and
with
all
the
bonuses,
it
says,
110
feet,
so
I
don't
differ
materially
personally
with.
C
V
V
V
C
For
the
back,
I
appreciate
that
and
then
to
the
applicant
to
their
highly
credentialed
attorney.
E
E
Q
A
X
Good
evening
committee
members,
Megan
Jones,
neighborhood,
Landis,
planner
and
interim
planning
manager,
the
downtown
plan
was
adopted
in
2009.
As
a
part
of
that
plan.
There
was
proposed
zoning
to
essentially
help
enforce
that
plan,
but
that
zoning
that
was
suggested
was
not
adopted.
So
the
plan
was
adopted.
The
suggested
zoning
was
not
so
we're
dealing
with
the
zoning
code
as
we
have
it
now.
C
E
E
E
The
recommendation
of
the
land
use
commission
is
exactly
that.
It
is
a
recommendation.
The
opponents
would
would
make
it
appear
that
you
have
no
choice
but
to
do
what
the
land
use
recommendation
with
the
land
use
commission
recommends.
If
that
were
the
case,
we
wouldn't
even
be
here,
because
the
vote
at
the
land
use
commission
was
four
votes
in
favor
and
five
votes
against.
E
So
by
virtue
of
the
fact
that
it's
here,
even
though
it
lost
by
one
vote,
suggests
that
it's
advisory
to
you
only
it
is
advisory
to
you.
85
percent
of
the
standards
were
satisfied.
85
percent
of
the
standards
were
satisfied.
Seven
out
of
nine
special
use
standards
were
satisfied.
Three
out
of
five
of
the
special
use
in
a
planned
development
standards
were
satisfied.
Five
of
five
plan
development
in
the
D4
District
standards
were
satisfied
and
seven
or
seven
site
control
standards
were
satisfied
again.
C
C
X
X
This
is
it
it
can
make
I
want
to
say
enforcement
implementing
the
plan
more
difficult
to
do.
We
also
can
have
instances
where
the
plan
may
not
completely
match
with
what
our
existing
zoning
is,
since
the
zoning
does
not
really
enforce
or
support
what
the
plan
says.
So
we
do
have
times
where
you're
looking
at
documents
that
don't
quite
Jive
essentially
thank.
C
X
A
Sheriff
I
can
ask
for
yeah
we're
going
to
limit
this
conversation
to
questions
asked
by
members
of
this
committee
and
answers
will
come
from
folks
that
the
chair
recognizes,
and
the
chair
recognizes
Mr
Sterling.
Y
C
So
within
the
plan,
it
does
specify
that
there's
110
feet
that
correct
yeah
yeah.
If
I'm,
if
I
may,
ask
the
the
other
folks
responding.
That's
pretty
clear
that
our
our
downtown
plan
does
specify
a
110
foot
transition.
Q
Q
A
Information
councilmember.
Q
Burns,
it's
your
record.
A
Q
Mean
I
guess
the
the
more
direct
question
is:
is
this
table
that
we
have?
Was
this
part
of
the
plan
Pat
passed
through
in
2009?
Is
this?
Was
this
codified,
and
this
is
the
this-
is
what
it
says:
East
Edge,
it
says
66
base
with
bonuses
110.
again
a
few
moments
ago.
It
was
said
that
part
part
of
this
plan
which
I'm
unclear,
which
part
was
adopted
and
which
wasn't,
but
is
this
the
part
that
was
or
wasn't
adopted
right
and.
Q
This
is
page
number,
six
presentation,
opposition
or
objectors
presentation.
C
Q
Can't
answer
all
that:
oh
10.
I'm,
sorry,
my
my
thumb
was
I'm.
Sorry,
let's
it's
number
10
I
think
is
that.
A
Let's
have
council
member
Burns's
question
answered
and.
T
Mr
Michael
asks
directly
a
direct
question,
a
direct
answer
for
you:
where
are
the
terms
suitable
transition
is
used.
It's
used
once
in
your
zoning
code.
I.
Have
it
right
here.
There
is
no
definition,
but
it's
a
suitable
transition.
That's
the
only
time
it's
used
in
your
zoning
code.
Q
X
Are
recommended
heists
to
provide
for
suitable
transition
or
suitable
Heights
within
the
various
sub
areas
of
the
downtown?
There
was
no
adoption
of
the
recommended
zoning
that
came
along
with
that
plan,
so
it's
just
the
plan
itself
that
provides
recommendations
for
how
future
development
should
occur.
C
C
I
with
that,
if,
if
you
so
it
is
clear
that
our
downtown
plan,
which
in
our
code
is
one
of
the
factors
that
has
to
be
considered,
is
that
correct.
X
Throughout
the
the
standards
we
do
reference
at
meeting
the
intent
of
our
plan,
so
comprehensive
plan,
downtown
plan,
other
plans
that
might
be
developed
before
other
sub
areas
within
the
city
so,
and
that
is
actually
listed
here.
So
six
eleven
one
ten.
Thank
you
specifically
list
that.
Q
Yeah
I
just
still
want
to
understand
the
distinction
between
the
I
guess.
What
were
the?
What
were
some
of
the
zoning
change
changes
that
could
have
been
adopted
that
came
out
of,
or
were
recommended
by
the
downs
and
Evanston
plan,
especially
any
that
apply
to
what
we're
discussing
today.
That's
the
piece
I'm
still
not
understanding.
Q
X
P
Council,
member
Burns,
if
I
may,
Alex,
Reggie,
Deputy,
City
attorney
I,
believe
the
purpose
behind
this
is
if
the
downtown
plan
that
was
adopted
by
city
council.
If
the
plan
then
was
reflected
in
the
zoning
code,
your
height
in
this
transition
zone
would
have
a
specific
number
in
the
zoning
code
as
it
stands,
those
recommendations
were
not
implemented
into
the
zoning
code,
so
the
zoning
code
does
allow
for
a
certain
height
and
then
the
parking
garages
don't
count
towards
that
height
and
then
with
the
inclusionary
housing
that
provides
for
additional.
P
So
there's
nothing
in
the
code
that
prevents
that
it's
site
allowances
that
can
be
asked
torn
granted
by
the
council.
But
if
the
council,
back
in
2009,
had
adopted
zoning
changes
that
mirrored
the
exact
downtown
plan,
it
would
have
limited
it.
Similarly,
so
I
think
that's
why
we're
in
the
conundrum
that
we
are
tonight,
so
it's
still
up
to
the
council
to
determine
their
how
they
interpret
the
legislation,
how
they
interpret
the
zoning
code
as
it
stands.
A
Q
I'm
still
so,
but
all
we
have
now
is
a
land
use.
Commission
that
is
has
been
told
that,
as
part
of
the
standard
they're
supposed
to
interpret
what
they
believe
is
the
intent
of
the
downtown
Evanston
plan.
Is
that
correct,
correct,
which
one
could
interpret
to
mean
the
six
to
seven
stories
or
whatever
it
says
correct,
but
but
that
that
could
differ
between
each
commissioner?
X
Q
Others
there's
some
things
that
are
conflicting
right:
okay
and
then
in
terms
of
the
the
185
that
whole
breakdown
can
I
think
attorney.
Roger
you
mentioned
it
before,
but
can
you
talk
just
explain
again
how
they
got,
how
you
get
from
the
100
and
whatever
it
is
to
185.
P
U
Council
member
Burns
I'm
happy
to
answer
that
question.
I
agree
with
the
city.
Attorney's
interpretation
I
think
it's
important
to
realize
here
how
legislative
how
legislation
works?
You
have
the
the
zoning
code
that
was
codified.
You
have
the
city
plan.
The
relevant
provisions
of
the
zoning
code
were
not
codified.
That
is
not
part
of
the
relevant
law.
Then
you
have
the
affordable
housing
ordinance
that
was
codified
and
it
contradicts
the
part
of
this.
The
plan
that
was
not
codified.
U
All
of
the
law
here
is
on
our
side
and
that
law
that
you
just
asked
about
is
this
61158
Building
height
gives
you
105
foot
105
foot
limit
in
this
District
it.
The
second
part
of
that
provision
says
that
you
can
get
another
40
feet
for
parking
levels,
so
that
brings
you
up
to
145
feet
essentially
and
then
six
eleven
one,
ten
C1
D,
that's
a
lot.
I
know.
Q
U
X
If
they
have
a
building
that
is
105
feet
and
they
have
40
feet
additional
that
is
primarily
for
parking.
Then
you
get
to
that
145
feet
and
that
would
be
allowed
buy
right
for
our
zoning
code.
Okay
up
to
that
amount,
okay,
if
they're
only
if
they
only
have
20
feet
of
parking,
then
they
get
that
125
feet.
Okay,.
Q
Last
question
is
just
it
the
an
issue
about
Al
the
alley
widening
the
alley
somebody
broke
out,
I
think
some
measuring
tape
and
determined
that
it
was
15
feet,
not
20.
Just
trying
to
understand
the
relevance
of
that
if,
if
at
all
relevant.
E
Thank
you
again:
Graham
Brady
ultimate
council
member
Burns.
There
was
never
a
plan
to
widen
the
alley.
The
applicant's
Proposal
is
to
pay
for
the
resurfacing
of
the
alley,
the
entire
block
from
church
to
Davis
to
pay
for
the
resurfacing
portion
of
the
alley.
There
was
never
a
plan
to
widen
me
out.
Okay,.
Q
H
X
D
H
X
S
I
think
I
believe
it's
special
use,
the
first
one
that
it
undermines
the
transition
intent
with
D4
District
special
use.
So
it's
it
has
to
adhere
to
special
use
standards
and
also
plan
development
standards.
S
The
other
special
use
standards
that
it
causes
a
negative
cumulative
effect
on
the
neighborhood,
including
the
height,
the
congestion
parking
traffic
and
then
the
plan
development
standards
that
the
scale
the
proposed
project
is
not
compatible
with
the
overall
character
of
existing
developments
in
the
immediate
vicinity
and
I
believe
the
second
plan
development
standard
about
the
adverse
impact
on
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
surrounding
properties,
as
well
as
the
pro
adjoining
property
values.
A
S
Sure
this
is
from
this
is
from
the
one
moment
and
I'll
pull
out
for
you.
This
is
from
the
standards
for
special
use
for
plant
for
plan
development
and
standards
for
Planning
Development
from
the
municode
I'll,
pull
that
out
for
you
just
to
give
me.
X
A
So
staff
you
can
you
you're
verified
that
what
council,
member
councilmember
Kelly
said
is
correct.
Q
Correct:
okay:
yeah!
If
that
answers
council
member
well,
this
was
that
was
really
for
the
public
to
to
hear
now.
What
I
want
to
know
from
staff
too
is:
do
you
think
those
standards
are
left
open
to
a
lot
of
interpretation,
whereas
there
was
one
if
you're,
if
you're,
using
the
the
downtown
Evanston
plan,
you
have
some
guidance
there
right,
the
six
to
seven
six
to
ten
stories
or
whatever
it
is
that
helps
to
guide
how
I'm
supposed
to
understand
what
I'm
being
asked
to
to
wait?
Q
Those
other
three
unless
I'm
missing
something
sounds
like
this
body
and
the
land
use
commission
or
the
individuals
on
those
bodies
could
interpret
that
in
differently.
They
don't
sound
like
hard
and
fast.
Is
it
six
to
ten
stories
or
not?
Is
that
am
I
understanding
that
correctly
or
am
I
missing?
Something.
Q
Yeah
and
I
and
I
I
think
that's
important
because,
as
I
think
councilman
Reed
said
earlier,
you
know
we
understand
that
this
body,
that
body
is
an
advisory
body.
This
body
makes
the
final
decision,
and
so
I
think
that's
important
to
note
it's
one
thing
and
I
think
a
lot
of
the
some
of
the
information
we
got
is
like.
Q
Oh
they,
you
know
they
didn't
meet
the
standards,
but
you
got
to
look
a
little
deeper
than
that
and
you
can
still
agree
that
they
didn't
meet
the
standard,
but
those
standards
are
left
open
to
a
lot
of
interpretation,
there's
only
one
of
them
that
again,
if
you're
using
the
Evanston,
you
know
downtown
plan
that
guides.
You
allows
you
to
actually
say
you
know
what
yep
six
to
ten
stories.
How
tall
is
the
building
it's
over
that
amount?
Q
Everything
else
is
it's
kind
of
up
in
here
and
I,
regardless
of
how
you
feel
about
this
this
this
this
particular
issue,
I
just
I,
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
known
and-
and
hopefully
we
can
clean
some
of
this
up
during
our
comp
plan
and
make
it
a
little
bit
easier
to
not
only
for
us,
but
our
land
use
commission
and
our
staff
to
guide
people
through
this
process.
Q
But
it's
not
a
good
one
right
now
and
I
think
that's
probably
the
biggest
failure
just
on
this
institution
as
a
whole,
but
we're
working
on
it.
That's
all
chair.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Councilmember
Burns,
nobody
is
seeking
to
be
recognized,
who
hasn't
already
spoken.
I
have
reserved
my
personal
comments.
Until
the
End
councilmember
Reed
councilmember
Kelly
are
both
seeking
recognition.
If
I
could
ask
you
to
be
very
succinct
and
mindful
of
the
time
that
we
do
have
another
discussion
on
our
agenda
for
this
committee
before
we
get
to
council,
so
I
hope
we
can
wrap
this
discussion
up
fairly
quickly,
so
councilmember
Reed,
Griffin,
councilman
Ravel,
just
she
did
just
flip
her
light
on
so
we'll
go
around.
O
So
we've
had
a
lot
of
discussion
about
height
and-
and
that
is
a
big
concern-
you
know.
Is
it
too
tall
for
a
transition?
District
and
I
agree
with
my
colleague,
council
member
Kelly
that
it
is
Too
Tall
but
I
I?
Guess
I'd
like
to
focus
on
the
density,
the
the
number
of
units
and
then
particularly
what
that
implies,
then,
for
the
congestion
around
the
building.
O
I
appreciate
that
this
iteration
of
The
Proposal
no
longer
has
access
to
the
building
across
the
bike
lane
and
across
the
sidewalk,
and
instead
it
comes
in
from
the
alley.
But
that
has
its
own
problems
because
it
is
a
very
narrow
alley.
It's
a
heavily
used
alley
of
the
Horizon
alley
management
plan
act
says
the
alley
is
highly
highly
trafficked.
Corridor
So
and
I've
I
spent
some
quite
a
bit
of
time,
walking
around
the
alley
one
day
and
the
whole
time
I
was
there.
It
was
blocked
entirely
blocked
by
a
big
moving
moving
van.
O
So
there's
the
congestion
in
the
alley
which
I'm
concerned
about
and
then
the
really
congested
on,
Chicago
Avenue
in
front
of
the
building
and
we'd
be
adding
a
lot
of
the
delivery
trucks.
The
the
Ubers,
the
all
that
new
kind
of
traffic
that
we
don't
really
haven't
traditionally
accounted
for,
accounted
for
and
I
think
we
need
to
ask
the
the
people.
The
firms
that
do
the
traffic
analysis
for
any
of
our
applicants
need
to
really
need
to
start.
Taking
that
into
account
as
well.
O
So
I
I
am
I,
am
concerned
about
what
it
would
do
in
terms
of
the
congestion
on
Chicago,
Avenue
and
the
and
the
difficult
difficulty
that
would
be
caused
for
the
in
the
alley
for
the
other,
the
other
users
of
the
alley
which
who
are
plenty
so
so
that
that's
really
my
main
concerns.
C
C
Yes,
so
I
I'm,
gonna,
vote
Yes
for
for
this
project,
I
think
is,
is
was
made
clear.
There
are
a
number
of
places
where
our
code
conflicts.
There
is
a
downtown
plan
that
was
made
in
2009
that
sets
a
a
certain
transition
height.
There's
our
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
that
gives
the
applicant
certain
rights.
C
There
is
an
allowance
for
parking
that
gives
the
applicant
certain
rights
and,
while
I
value
the
downtown
plan
and
I
value,
a
public
process
such
as
the
downtown
plan,
I
I,
think
it's
important
one
for
us
to
maybe
look
back
at
the
context
of
of
when
that
plan
was
created
and
who
traditionally
is
able
to
participate
in
plans
like
that
and
think
about
the
time.
I,
don't
know
if
the
plan
at
the
time
was
really
Equity
focused.
If
there
was
a
sense
of
a
focus
on
Equity
at
that
time
it
was
it
wasn't.
C
C
C
Well,
then,
where
are
we
going
to
allow
density
in
our
city
because
I
can't
think
of
too
many
areas
in
our
city
that
are
as
connected
to
trans
public
transportation?
As
is
this
area
is
our
downtown?
C
It
seems
as
though
our
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
would
allow
the
occupants
to
have
40
additional
units
by
right
and
staff.
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
disagreement
with
that
point,
and,
and
so
again,
I
thought
it
was
really
compelling.
What
message
are
we
sending
to
our
residents
who
are
struggling
to
afford
housing
in
Evanston
to
gain
housing
in
Evanston,
when
we
aren't
living
up
to
the
an
ordinance
that
was
adopted,
not
a
plan
in
2009,
but
an
ordinance
that
was
adopted
by
this
Council?
That
gave
an
incentive
to
build
affordable
units?
C
If
we're
not
honoring
that
we
are
sending
the
wrong
message,
so
you
know
there
are
folks
who
said
that
that
staff,
you
know
that
we
have
a
staff
full
of
Alchemists
who
were
were
in
the
lab
and
creating
standards
that
don't
exist
and
to
me
it
seems
that
those
standards
do
exist.
There
is
some
conflict,
but
these
standards
do
exist.
C
We
know
that
our
downtown
is
struggling,
I,
think
our
downtown
and
our
city
is
in
a
really
good
place,
but
there
there
are
some
challenges
and
we
know
that
folks
are
not
going
to.
It
seems
as
though
folks
are
not
going
to
be
returning
to
our
downtown
office.
Workers
aren't
going
to
be
returning
at
the
rates
that
they
were
pre-pandemic,
so
we
need
more
folks
living
downtown
to
make
sure
that
our
downtown
continues
to
be
vibrant
and
strong,
and
then
it
was
mentioned.
C
Many
of
us
have
heard
this
statistic
many
times
that
we
know
that
our
city,
that
the
North
Shore
is
97
occupied.
C
C
The
idea
that
you
know
adding
this
these
new
units
here
215
new
residents,
will
necessarily
make
the
area
more
dangerous
and
overwhelm
the
area
I,
don't
think
it's
an
axiom.
I
I
really
think
that
there
are.
We
should
look
at
this
and
and
final
question
here
for
staff
and
I.
Don't
know
who
can
answer
this,
but
it
was
set
during
public
comment
that
this
area
is
dangerous
and
overwhelmed
already
is
there?
Is
there
data
to
back
that
up?
Are
there
a
number?
C
Are
there
traffic
accidents
that
are
happening
here
that
that
we
know
about
at
a
higher
rate
than
in
other
areas?
Are
there
pedestrian
accidents
that
are
happening
here
at
higher
rates
than
other
areas,
or
even
you
know,
is
there?
Are
there
any
pedestrian
accidents
that
we
know
of
in
this
area?.
A
Because
we
do
have
more
agenda
this
evening
and
quite
a
full
Council
agenda
as
well.
So
if,
if
staff
could.
A
If
staff
could
address
councilmember
Reed's
question.
C
It
can
be
potentially
rhetorical
for
now,
but
I
would
encourage
us
to
vote
this
forward
to
council
and
you
know
give
some
time
for
staff
to
get
back
to
us
on
this
question
and
others
and
let's,
let's
move
this
forward
to
the
full
body
to
consider
this
this
evening.
I
think
that
is
fair.
If
you
want
to
vote
no
later
at
Council,
you
can.
But
let's
get
this
to
council
to
have
a
full
vote.
X
In
response
to
that
question,
we
would
need
some
time
to
gather
updated
data
on
any
kind
of
vehicle
accidents,
pedestrian
accidents,
accidents
with
bicyclists
Etc.
So
if
there's
something
that
we
can
gather
for
Council,
then
we
can
get
that
information
and
have
that,
for
you.
C
A
Okay,
councilmember
Kelly
is
the
last
to
be
recognized
before
I
will
weigh
in
and
then
I'll
call
for
a
vote.
S
Ugly,
clear
staff
and
the
zoning
when
the
when
it
was
requested,
this
development
staff
ruled
the
in
the
zoning
analysis
that
this
was
non-compliant
when
it's
non-compliant.
That
means
it
then
goes
to
a
body
of
experts,
the
land
use
commission
to
assess
it
and
and
to
decide
if
it
meets
standards
and
in
our
city
code
611-110.
It
very
clearly
states
that
Council
shall
not
approve
and
adopt
a
PD
in
the
downtown
district.
S
If
the
standards
all
of
them
are
not
met-
and
you
know
I-
think,
there's
no
debate
here
and
the
majority
of
our
land
use
commission,
that's
why
we
have
bodies,
because
we
want
them
to
weigh
in,
and
we
have
a
majority,
including
the
chair,
who
very
clearly
stated
that
this
does
not.
It
very
clearly
undermines
the
transitional
transition,
intent
of
a
D4
District.
That's
not
really
debatable
and
the
cumulative
effect
of
congestion.
Already
again,
you
know
nobody's
saying
no
to
a
an
eight
to
ten
story.
S
Building
that
will
have
a
huge
impact,
but
this
would
have
tremendous
impact
that
is
just
beyond
what
we
should
be
allowing
as
a
council
and
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear.
Also
the
140
feet,
that's
not
by
right
by
right
is-
and
you
know,
I'll
ask
maybe
Mr
fretcher
if
you
I
know
you've
studied
this
a
lot,
but
by
writing.
That's
you
have
the
right
to
ask
for
it,
but
if
it
were
by
right,
you
wouldn't
be
here
today.
You
wouldn't
be
here
today
before
land
use.
Commissioner
before
us.
S
S
A
You
all
right,
I
will
weigh
in
as
the
council
member
representing
the
ward
across
the
street.
We
need
more
affordable
housing
in
Evanston.
We
need
more
housing,
we
need
more
people.
Downtown
I,
do
not
deny
those
three
statements,
and
the
developer
makes
a
strong
argument
for
this.
For
this
proposal,
I'm
not
opposed
to
density,
we
need
more
people
downtown
to
help
us
Revitalize.
You
know
post
covet
and
the
office
workers
that
aren't
coming
back
long
term
we're
going
to
see
more
residential
development
downtown.
A
This
is
not
a
question
of
of
if
it's
a
question
of
when
so
just
to
manage
expectations
going
forward
over
the
next.
Several
years.
Five
to
ten
years,
we
are
going
to
see
more
development,
downtown,
more
residential
development.
I,
don't
think
the
traffic
and
congestion
impacts
will
be
as
bad
as
some
people
are
afraid
of.
We
have
a
code
that
is
based
on
1950s,
era's
level
of
of
automobiles,
but
we're
seeing
a
lot
more
people
using
public
transportation.
A
A
lot
more
people
using
bicycles
and
downtown
density
is
really
in
compliance
with
our
carp
goals,
but
as
with
anything
we
do.
We
have
to
approach
this
thoughtfully
and
I
when
it
comes
to
Building
height.
My
perspective
is,
we
are
in
a
very
much
of
a
gray
area
here.
I
will
concede
that
the
applicant
is
allowed
to
request
exactly
what
they're
asking
for
they're
actually
allowed
to
request,
even
a
higher
building
than
what
they're
asking
for,
but
council
is
not
mandated.
We're
not
obligated
to
approve
this
request.
A
It
comes
to
council,
it's
our
judgment
call,
and
so
that's.
What
we're
doing
here
is
is
having
a
discussion
and
and
we're
going
to
render
our
judgment
and,
in
my
judgment
the
building
as
proposed
is
too
high.
Our
current
zoning
code
designates
the
east
side
of
this
block
as
a
transition
zone.
A
A
So
it
comes
to
us
to
make
the
Judgment
call
and
I'm
really
mindful
of
the
importance
of
of
thoughtful
urban
planning
in
maintaining
our
downtown
as
a
welcoming
and
aesthetically
pleasing
environment,
I
I
went
to
school
at
the
University
of
Illinois
graduated
a
long
time
ago
happened
to
be
down
on
campus
last
December
for
the
first
time
in
about
30
years
and
walking
down.
Green
Street,
which
is
the
main
Dragon
campus
town
I,
was
surprised
at
you
know
the
haphazard
nature
of
development
on
that
street
kind
of
randomly
placed
high-rises
in
parking
lot.
A
What
used
to
be
parking
lots
kind
of
squeezed
in
between
older
and
shorter
buildings,
no
kind
of
aesthetic
continuity?
It
did
not
look
nice.
It
was
not
pleasing
to
me
and
I.
Don't
want
that
to
happen
here
in
Evanston
we
we
can
expect
better.
We
can
do
better
in
Evanston
and
yeah.
You
know
so,
while
I
acknowledge
the
validity
of
the
request,
my
answer
in
this
case
is
going
to
be
no.
So
if
there's
no
further
discussion,
I
will
call
a
call
for
a
roll
call
vote.
A
No
so
buy
a
vote
of
one
in
favor
and
five
opposing
item.
P3
is
not
passed
and
will
not
continue
to
city
council.
A
You
for
that
clarification,
so
I
will
restate
this
will
move
forward
to
city
council
with
a
negative
recommendation
from
Planning
and
Development.
Thank
you
for
clarifying
okay,
that
moves
us
to
items
for
discussion
and
perhaps
a
very
much
related.
A
C
A
Okay,
roll
call
vote
on
item
D1
on
tabling
item.
Do
you
want
until
our
next
meeting
councilmember.