►
From YouTube: Planning & Development Committee Meeting 2-28-2022
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
In
progress
we
have
a
quorum,
so
I
call
us
to
order,
and
I
guess
we
have
a
roll
call,
do
we.
We
don't
need
that.
Okay,
excellent.
Could
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes
of
our
regular
february
14th
meeting.
A
Does
that
need
to
vote
voice
vote
then?
Please,
all
in
favor,
please
say:
aye
aye
aye.
C
A
No
okay,
the
minutes
have
been
approved
and
now
we're
ready
for
some.
We
have
public
comment,
sherry
fisher.
E
Thank
you
so
much
for
hearing
my
comment.
I'm
sheree
fisher.
I
live
in
the
first
ward
and
I
am
co-chair
of
the
evanston
environment
board.
E
I
also
work
for
the
us
forest
service,
but
I'm
not
allowed
to
speak
to
you
in
that
capacity.
So
I'm
just
talking
to
you
as
a
20-year
resident
of
evanston
and
co-chair
of
the
environment
board.
I
would
like
to
speak
strongly
in
support
of
a
tree
preservation
ordinance
at
the
environment
board.
I've
seen
some
of
the
behind
the
scenes,
development
of
the
ordinance
that's
being
proposed,
and
I
would
just
urge
your
support.
Thank
you
for
listening.
B
Yes,
hello:
I
live
within
a
thousand
feet
of
the
proposed
development
of
the
burger
king
site.
That's
1740,
orington,
I'm
speaking
against
this
plan
development,
because
the
requested
change,
d3
zoning
is
not
appropriate
for
this
area
and
the
requested
building
height
is
out
of
scale
for
this
location.
B
Accepting
the
orington
hotel,
which
is
nowhere
near
as
tall
and
all
other
directions.
There
are
no
other
buildings
nearby
zone
d3
immediately
across
our
university
buildings.
A
few
stories
stories
tall
and
all
around
on
all
other
sides
are
zones
r6
or
d2.
B
How
is
this
even
safe
to
build
such
a
large
building
immediately
next
to
what
looks
to
be
a
vintage
four-story
building
with
little
space
in
between?
As
we
know,
the
public
benefits
of
the
planned
development
must
significantly
outweigh
the
negative
impact
of
the
development
on
the
surrounding
area.
B
The
neighbors
here
enjoy
walking
past
the
pedestrian
friendly
scale
that
this
lot
the
blocks
around.
It
now
have,
and
I'm
very
worried
that
we're
going
to
jeopardize
that
with
this
monstrous
office
building
and
the
domino
effect
it's
sure
to
have
on
the
density,
height
and
scale
of
the
buildings
on
that
block
and
the
blocks
around
it.
B
A
F
Yes,
I
would
just
like
to:
is
it
okay
to
speak
now.
F
Okay,
well,
I
just
like
to
agree
with
the
comment
that
cecile
mchugh
made
because
okay
planning
development
hasn't
did
a
survey
or
a
impact
study
about
this.
The
height
of
this
development.
F
That's
proposed
to
be
five
stories,
which
my
property
is
only
two
stories
and
it
will
be
the
same
abstract
or
the
same
monstrosity
next
door
to
me
blocking
out
all
the
green
space
and
the
sunlight
which
hindman
and
south
boulevard
as
the
property
line
and
the
landscape
is
all
lower
level
housing
going
from
west
to
east
to
lakeshore
drive
until
you
reach
michigan
avenue
we're
going
north
on
handman.
F
You
have
several
blocks
of
higher
development,
which
is,
I
believe,
c3
which
is
appropriate
for
handmade,
but
not
appropriate
for
south
boulevard.
So
I
think
the
developer
needs
the
city
needs
to
reconsider
the
zoning
to
read
for
the
redevelopment
of
this
parking
lot.
Thank
you.
A
G
Yeah,
but
I
can,
I
can
withhold
until
the
city
council.
G
A
little
feedback,
it's
it's
really
kind
of
confusing.
Knowing
when
to
sign
up
for
for
a
comment
sure
but
yeah
I
will.
I
will
love
with
all
for
now.
A
Great
okay,
thank
you
we'll
see
you
later
then.
So
now
we're
ready
to
consider
item
p1.
Would
someone
like
to
make
a
motion
so
we
can
begin
our
discussion.
C
Madam
chair
I'll
move
item
p1
now,
which
is
ordinance
15-0-22
amending
the
zoning
map
to
re-zone
1732
34
and
40
orintin
avenue
from
the
d2
downtown
retail
core
district
to
the
d3
downtown
core
development
district
and
granting
a
special
use
for
a
new
10
story.
Mixed
use
plan
development
avenue
at
those
addresses.
H
Thank
you.
My
name
is
johnny
carlson
with
trammell
crow
company,
I'm
the
applicant
you'll
hear
from
myself
and
matt
blue
at
esg
architects
throughout
this
presentation.
Thank
you
for
your
time
this
evening.
We're
excited
to
be
back
in
front
of
you
I'll,
be
at
a
different
development.
We
delivered,
and
at
least
a
building
called
avador
evanston
that
we're
excited
to
be
back
in
front
of
our
second
project.
So
if
you
look
at
this
slide
deck
here,
I
just
want
to
outline
the
building
on
the
left
is
the
building.
H
We
recently
delivered
a
55
plus
age,
restricted,
169
unit
development
with
all
affordable
units
on
site,
the
middle
image
and
the
right
image
are
also
two
projects:
they're,
not
in
your
community
they're,
actually
in
downtown
chicago.
But
we
wanted
to
point
them
out,
as
they
are
life
science
office
buildings,
and
that
is
the
research
lab
building
that
we're
here
to
talk
about
from
a
use
perspective,
so
just
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
trends.
What
we're
seeing
where
the
economy
is
going,
there's
a
large
amount
of
capital
and
venture
capital
going
into
life.
H
Science,
material,
science,
ai
therapeutics
and
that's
really
driven
by
science
meeting
technology.
So
historically
you
see
these
buildings
in
and
around
cambridge,
a
number
of
the
large
institutions
such
as
northwestern
in
a
private
and
public
sector.
But
this
is
a
hundred
percent
private
development,
no
subsidy
requested
and
it's
a
100
percent
non-affiliated
project
with
northwestern
university,
so
just
to
set
the
stage
on
that
we're
following
trends.
H
We
are
the
first
developer
to
deliver
class,
a
life
science
space
in
and
around
chicagoland,
and
we
view
that
ecosystem
of
where
the
universities
are
with
the
university
chicago
northwestern
all
the
big
ten
universities
who
are
really
spinning
out
companies
and
talent
and
ideas,
and
where
do
they
put
it?
They
put
on
the
coast
because
there's
no
laboratory
space
here
locally.
So
we
have
had
success
in
the
city.
H
So
that
is
the
project
that
is,
the
use
office
will
come
with
the
labs
and
labs
will
come
with
the
office,
and
we
think
that
this
is
a
great
driver
to
keep
jobs
in
evanston
just
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
location.
This
is
the
corner.
The
former
burger
king
I'll
use
that
quickly,
because
I
know
everyone's
very
familiar
with
that
site.
It's
a
very
unique
site,
it's
entry
point
to
evanston
and
it's
right
adjacent
to
the
university,
and
we
think
it's
a
prime
corner
for
redevelopment.
H
It
is
vacated
it's
dilapidated.
There
is
no
use
there
other
than
a
few
cars
that
parked
there
illegally
from
time
to
time.
So
we're
excited
to
hopefully
bring
life
to
that
corner
and
do
it
in
a
way
that's
adherent
to
the
stakeholders
of
the
community,
like
we've
developed
and
usually
zooming
in
close
on
the
site.
This
is
approximately
21
500
square
feet,
as
outlined
it's
being
requested
by
our
team
to
deliver
a
d3
versus
d2.
H
The
orient
in
the
hotel
just
to
the
south
of
the
alley
is
d3
and
we
think
in
context
height
and
scale.
Our
height
request
is
within
the
plan
development,
it's
actually
below
the
allocable
allowances
that
we
could
ask
for.
When
determining
the
exact
size,
we
looked
at
the
scale
context
and
really
trying
to
design
a
building
that
fit
within
that
for
years
to
come.
H
Moving
in
from
a
bird's
eye
perspective,
this
is
the
bird's
eye
looking
southwest,
so
you
can
see
before
the
building
is
delivered
and
then
you
can
see
it
after
so
in
the
upper
image
you
can
spin
around
from
the
aerial
northwest
the
southwest
view
and
the
southeast
view
and
matt
blewett
is
going
to
walk
you
through
a
large
amount
of
the
design
slides
as
we
go
through,
but
I
wanted
to
really
end
on
this
slide.
Here
we
heard
importance
of
safety.
H
We
are
importance
of
activating
the
street
importance
of
height
and
scale,
so
we
elected
to
bury
the
parking,
spend
those
dollars
to
put
it
below
grade.
So
none
of
the
parking
is
actually
above
grade
so
you'll
hear
about
that
here
in
the
next
slide.
The
blue
area
is
about
5
000
square
feet
of
restaurant
space,
to
really
activate
that
in
a
24
7
impact
there
and
then
really
surrounding
it
on
all
active
uses.
H
In
addition
to
the
active
uses,
we
also
looked
at
safety
from
a
curb
cut
perspective.
There
are
more
curb
cuts
than
what
we're
going
to
propose
here
that
you'll
see
tonight.
We
actually
have
no
curb
cuts
in
addition
to
the
alley,
so
all
of
our
loading,
all
of
our
ingress
egress
from
a
public
safety,
and
you
you've
probably
seen
the
notes
from
dapper
and
other
we
have
their
support
because
we
are
ingress
egress,
all
off
that
public
alley.
H
In
addition,
you'll
hear
we're
improving
some
of
the
streetscape
we're
improving
the
alley,
we're
repaving
the
entire
alley,
beyond
our
sight
lines
that
we'll
work
through
so
really
just
to
show
you
that
that
yellow
areas
for
all
the
office
patrons
coming
and
going
from
the
laboratory
or
the
office
space,
the
blue
is
active,
retail
and
then
really
back
of
house
for
science
innovation.
A
lot
of
back
of
house
use
is
required
so
really
putting
that
on
the
alley
side
of
the
building.
H
So
with
that,
I'm
going
to
invite
matt
blewett
up
here
with
esg
architects,
and
if
there
are
any
questions,
I'm
joined
by
morgan
bear
blast
at
tramwell,
crow
company,
louis
abuna,
kl,
away
from
a
traffic
impact
and
parking.
If
you
have
any
questions
on
that
topic
and
the
rich
cloudwater
dla
piper
is
our
zoning
attorney.
So,
thank
you
again
really
excited
to
be
in
front
of
you
tonight
and
I'll
invite
matt
blew
it
up.
I
Thanks
johnny
and
thanks
council
again,
matt
blewett,
esg,
architects,
we'll
start
here
at
the
lower
level,
as
johnny
mentioned,
our
low
we've
buried
all
the
parking,
so
35
parking
spaces.
In
addition,
eight
motorcycle
stalls
included.
It's
also
where
our
stormwater
detention
would
be
as
well
as
some
back
of
house
and
ancillary
spaces
just
to
touch
a
little
bit.
On
the
first
floor,
which
johnny
gave
a
pretty
apt
description
of
working
from
the
top
left
or
northwest
around
clockwise,
we
have
our
entry
main
office
entry
lobby
in
the
yellow
there.
I
Just
to
the
right
of
that.
The
purple
space
is
actually
our
on-site
bike
parking,
so
40
inch
spaces
inside
the
building
for
office
users
as
well
as
it's
not
showing
up
in
this
plan.
I
But
there's
about
three
bike:
racks
on
the
northwest
corner
of
the
exterior
building
large
active
use
that
wraps
all
the
way
from
the
clark
frontage
down
the
orington
side,
to
give
us
as
much
active
use
as
we
can
get
on
the
site
and
then
again,
as
johnny
mentioned
access
for
parking
and
for
loading
off
of
the
south
alley
space,
as
well
as
to
the
west.
Just
kind
of
burying
as
much
of
the
electrical
and
mechanical
requirements
that
we
can
fit
on
the
on
the
grade
level
of
the
building.
I
One
thing
we
didn't
really
touch
on
was
where
you
can
see
the
planters
along
orington,
the
two
that
are
to
the
farthest
northeast
or
the
upper
right,
are
pulled
back
to
to
allow
a
larger
sidewalk
area
for
potential
sidewalk
seating
for
a
future
cafe
or
a
restaurant
user.
For
that
active
use,
it's
the
second
floor.
It's
kind
of
a
unique
floor.
I
I
This
is
the
third
floor,
so
this
is
where
you'll
see
the
building
mass
steps
back
from
the
street
from
the
property
lines,
so
the
green
area
is
a
green
roof
area
that
would
be
above
the
second
floor
and
then
this
third
floor
starts
kind
of
the
typical
tower
we'll
zoom
in
on
this
one.
This
is
our
typical
floor.
Plate
levels,
four
through
nine.
I
So
what
you're,
seeing
here
with
the
offset
core
to
the
left
area
in
gray,
shows
all
of
our
elevatoring
toilets
stairs
pushed
to
the
far
west
of
the
site
in
order
to
give
us
the
largest
most
open
floor
plate
for
laboratory
planning.
What
we've
learned
with
these
users
is
that
flexibility
is
key.
We
model
on
a
the
building
itself
is
built
on
a
11
foot
module
to
accommodate
the
lab
spacing
for
their
case
work
requirements,
so
the
building's
really
purpose-built
another
feature
of
the
building
or
the
far
northeast
corner.
I
This
provides
the
extra
ceiling
space
for
mechanicals
and
the
increased
air
and
electrical
loads
that
these
these
users
need.
So
what
we're
showing
is
just
it's
just
kind
of
a
typical
potential
layout.
We
have
labs
kind
of
wrapping,
the
east
and
south
facade
and
then
showing
open
office
kind
of
on
the
north
elevation
our
top
floor
or
top
occupiable
floor
level.
10
is
the
amenity
space.
I
So
a
few
program
elements
we're
considering,
including
here
we've
got
a
large
board
room
in
the
upper
left
or
the
northwest
a
large
lounge
area
that
would
open
onto
a
parked
terra
roof.
Terrace
area.
Excuse
me
that's
shown
in
gray
and
green
to
the
right
of
the
screen
and
then
to
the
south
of
the
screen
in
the
red,
and
then
the
darker
red
is
a
fitness
program
as
well
as
lockers.
That
would
be
used
both
for
fitness,
as
well
as
the
bike
commuters.
I
Our
highest
level
is
a
full
floor.
Penthouse.
These
buildings
that
I
think
I've
already
alluded
to
use,
have
a
much
higher
mechanical
electrical
demand
than
the
traditional
office
building.
So
a
full
floor
is
appropriate
to
get
all
the
equipment
housed
and
enclosed
space,
so
it's
not
as
visible
to
the
users
or
to
the
to
the
community
quickly.
I
I
In
this
proposal
we
are
refacing
the
or
re
replacing
the
entire
alley
from
orington
to
sherman
running
east-west
a
landscape
plan.
We've
been
working
with
forestry
and
landscape
to
address
species
of
planting,
we're
going
to
include
both
perennial
and
evergreen
plantings
so
that
the
planted
environment
will
be
vibrant
both
in
winter
and
then
the
summer
months.
I
The
view
from
the
north
north
east,
looking
back
towards
the
building,
I
think
a
couple
of
elements
to
point
out
here:
we've
softened
the
corner
at
orington
and
clark
both
at
the
podium
level
and
the
tower
level
as
a
way
to
kind
of
break
down
the
bulk
of
the
building
and
ease
that
edge
to
make
it
a
smoother
transition.
At
that
acute
angle,
in
addition
to
that,
both
the
north
and
the
east
facade
has
a
gentle
arc
to
again
try
and
soften
the
building's
mass,
as
well
as
give
visual
interest
along
its
facade.
I
I
It's
a
pedestrian
level
experience.
This
would
be
the
cafe
sidewalk
seating
area
on
orrington,
so
proposing
a
lot
of
kind
of
nice
articulation
to
this
facade,
as
well
as
recesses
that
could
be
used
in
at
times
in
inclement
weather,
proposed
sidewalk
seating
down
lighting
just
try
to
give
a
nice
pedestrian
experience
using
a
warm
natural
tone
materials.
I
So
the
north
elevation
was
really
quickly
to
highlight
here.
You
can
see
kind
of
the
shadow
lines
on
the
tower.
We're
showing
a
a
window
extension
on
the
curtain
wall,
so
that
gives
you
that
kind
of
visual
interest
and
tactility.
As
you
look
at
that
north
facade
and
then,
as
you
work
to
the
right
of
the
screen,
you
can
kind
of
see
the
key
corner
as
we
call
the
gateway
corner
as
you're
coming
in
on
elgin
or
clark
really
presenting
the
building
to
the
neighborhood.
I
Here
you
can
see
the
west
facade.
You
can
see
how
the
building
is
kind
of
is
made
up
of
two
masses,
essentially
a
larger
taller
mass,
it's
slender
where
the
mechanical
penthouse
is,
and
then
the
more
champagne
or
bronze
colored
mask
to
the
left
side
of
the
screen.
On
the
west
side,
we
are
doing
our
best
to
articulate
that
facade.
It
is
arcing
gently
as
well
as
the
metal
panels.
You
see,
have
dimension
to
themselves.
So
we'll
get
a
closer
detail
of
that.
I
In
addition,
in
working
with
consonant
council
member
kelly
and
on
a
call,
we
looked
at
trying
to
put
deeper
and
wider
recesses
into
the
floor
plate
near
where
the
elevator
lobbies
are,
as
well
as
into
the
restrooms,
so
trying
to
really
articulate
that
facade
as
much
as
possible.
I
Here's
a
straight
on
elevation
of
that
west
facade
and
then
an
upper
inset
on
the
left.
It
kind
of
shows
you
how
those
panels
undulate
and
give
you
kind
of
a
waveform
feeling
as
they
try
the
kind
of
triangles
to
each
other.
So
you
get
the
light
of
play
or
light
and
shadow
a
lot
of
play
on
that
facade.
Where
you
see
those
wider
window
openings,
those
are
actually
pushed
into
the
building.
So
they're
pushed
off
the
facade
ever
so
slightly.
I
To
give
some
depth,
we've
introduced
a
new
metal
paneled
material
in
the
far
right
to
break
up
the
long
expanse
of
that
kind
of
champagne
metal
panel
just
to
make
that
feel
like
a
little
shorter
entry
rendering
of
the
entry
condition.
So
you
can
see
the
double
height
space
here,
proposing
some
kind
of
an
art
installation
in
that
ceiling.
I
Space
to
make
it
very
inviting
for
both
guests
and
passers-by,
you
can
see
our
bike
kind
of
parking
out
in
the
front
of
that
planter
as
well
and
we'll
just
roll
around
from
the
pedestrian
level
and
views
of
the
building's
pedestrian
experience
kind
of
I'll
go
through
the
elevations.
We
can
stop
here.
We
can
see
again
we're
changing
the
material
on
the
far
right
on
the
southwest
corner
of
the
stair
and
providing
those
deeper
recesses
into
the
window
system.
I
Here
we
can
see
this
is
the
north
looking
south,
so
to
speak
to
our
ziggurat.
The
area
in
blue
shows
our
property
line,
so
everything
in
blue
is
where
we're
set
off
of
the
property
line.
The
podium
level
is
essentially
on
the
property
line,
and
then
the
tower
itself
sets
back
twice.
I
Material
palette
that
we're
working
with
trying
to
keep
it
very
natural,
muted
tones.
We
think
that
that's
the
best
we'll
fit
in
best
with
the
neighborhood
context,
a
lot
of
limestone
and
and
brick
materials
around
so
trying
to
stay
within
that
kind
of
warmer
more
naturalistic
tones
on
the
bottom
left.
You
can
see
some
real
world
examples
of
how
we
think
those
dimensional
panels
and
those
kind
of
shingled
panels
might
come
together
just
some
of
the
features
at
the
pedestrian
level.
Again.
I
Looking
at
downcast
lighting
seed,
cafe
seating,
just
really
proud
materials
opportunities
for
signage
to
make
it
very
neighborhood
feeling
and
again
likewise,
at
the
entry,
some
of
our
lighting
solutions
on
site
trying
to
do
as
many
down
light
and
bird
friendly
lighting
as
we
can.
I
Just
where
we
anticipate
more
main
signage
would
be
a
monument
sign
on
the
clock,
elevation
near
the
main
entrance
and
then
a
signage
for
our
parking
and
loading
off
of
the
alley.
So
keeping
that
discreet
comparison
with
some
of
the
surrounding
buildings
in
terms
of
height
a
little
floor
area
and
as
mentioned,
we
are
seeking
a
7.0
far
for
this
project,
some
of
our
bird
friendly
strategies,
we've
worked
with
berkeley,
evanston
and
we'll
continue
to
work
with
them
as
we
progress
our
design.
I
I
think
our
main
takeaways
is
that,
where
possible
and
will
be
most
of
the
building,
that
will
have
programmable
dimmable
lights
so
after
hours,
there
will
not
be
lights
shining
throughout
the
building,
where
they're,
not
where
there's
not
an
open.
I
I
H
All
right,
we
tried
to
keep
it
to
ten
minutes,
so
I'll
move
here
pretty
swiftly.
We
really
just
wanted
to
outline
some
of
the
public
benefits.
We've
had
a
number
of
community
meetings
had
council
member
kelly
and
myself
on
a
few
zoom
calls
through
the
covet
environment.
We've
also
conducted.
Obviously
dapper
addressed
some
of
the
bird
friendly
items
that
we've
heard
and,
and
I
know
that
plan
and
land
use.
I
guess
I
should
say
land
use,
leslie
saad
who's
here
and
a
few
others.
H
I
think
we
feel
like
we
have
a
good
design
to
address
some
of
those
concerns
here
within
that
so
working
our
way
top
to
bottom.
This
is
not
a
housing
project,
obviously,
but
we
are
stewards
of
affordable
housing.
We
delivered
our
past
project
with
all
of
the
units
on
site,
so
we
want
to
contribute
250
000.
We
know
that
our
employees
will
want
to
live
in
the
area.
We
hope
they
want
to
live
in
the
area
and
shop
at
the
retail
establishments
etc.
H
So
we
do
want
to
contribute,
hopefully
put
dollars
towards
building
more
affordability
in
the
community.
Also,
we
heard
throughout
the
process
that
you're
delivering
35
parking
stalls
on
on-site,
but
we're
also
leasing
off-site
stalls
to
contribute
to
that
revenue
source
for
the
city.
In
addition,
we
want
to
make
sure,
there's
other
modes
of
transportation,
so
we're
paying
for
that
divi
station.
It's
about
65,
000,
commitment,
we're
also
knowing
that
our
our
patrons
are
going
to
come
to
and
from
work
and
public
transportation.
H
So
we
wanted
to
commit
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
the
public
transit
improvement
fund
and
then
again,
I
mentioned
the
elimination
of
two
curb
cuts:
adding
on
street
parking
stalls
by
closing
those
curb
cuts
for
the
public
to
park,
which
comes
at
approximately
ten
thousand
dollars,
increment
installation
of
a
transit
tracker
board
to
make
sure
people
know
how
to
get
to
and
from
in
hours
of
not
waiting
outside
and
clogging
up
any
congestion
areas,
which
is
a
public
benefit,
but
approximately
twenty
five
thousand
dollars.
Looking
at
the
alley,
that
was
a
big
one.
H
H
In
addition,
we're
agreeing
to
bury
all
the
utility
lines
as
a
public
benefit
along
this
south
alley
there
that
is
looked
upon
by
not
only
the
hotel,
but
some
of
the
housing
area,
which
is
about
a
hundred
thousand
dollars.
In
addition,
on
the
last
meeting,
we
committed
to
fifty
thousand
dollars
to
improve
furniture,
other
areas
of
outdoor
seating
activities,
aesthetic
improvements
to
downtown
evanston,
which
is
a
total
approximate
public
benefit
about
835
000
in
total
other
benefits
lower
case
public
benefits
not
to
be
counted
as
as
property
owners,
pay,
taxes
etc.
H
But
I
just
want
to
walk
through,
obviously
an
area
that
needs
some
improvement
from
the
existing
conditions
with
the
burger
king
implementing
bird
friendly
features
beyond
that,
we've
committed
to
retail
we're
committed
to
putting
that
hard
corner
as
an
active
restaurant,
which
we
think
is
a
big
improvement.
Also,
safety
and
24
7.
H
construction
jobs
we're
committing
to
having
job
fairs,
trying
to
hire
local
power
construction
as
one
of
the
vendors
that
we've
used
in
and
around
the
area
downtown,
and
they
are
stewards
of
making
sure
we're
reaching
out
and
running
that
process
to
put
evansonians
at
at
work.
So
we're
committed
to
that
and
we
will
do
that
job
creation.
H
We
think
that
not
only
are
we
going
to
have
a
few
hundred
people,
probably
six
hundred
thousand
people
visiting
this
building
throughout
the
day
if
at
full
capacity,
but
those
people
are
gonna,
need
to
eat
and
shop
and
dine
and
hopefully
buy
homes
and
and
really
support
evanston
from
from
the
ground.
Up
looking
at
the
the
new
street
trees
are
adding
those
to
some
of
the
facade
and
then
storm
water
detention
existing
right.
Now,
it's
just
all
on
surface
and
it's
running
off.
H
H
So
we
think
that's
big
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
and
I
will
wrap
up
a
presentation
and
thank
you
again
and
we're
here
for
questions.
J
Yes,
thank
you
further
one.
This
is
a
very
thoughtful
building.
The
design
I
think
is
is
is
a
good
design.
It's
a
beautiful
design.
I
think-
and
I
think
we'll
be
an
addition
to
our
downtown,
I'm
curious.
So
the
public
benefits
that
you
listed
there.
The
835
000
in
public
benefits,
is
that
for
bonuses.
Essentially,
yes,.
H
Yeah,
sorry,
so
the
we're
asking
for,
as
a
plan
development
to
go
within
that
there's
four
areas.
It's
far,
it's
a
ziggurat
setback,
it's
height
and
parking.
I
believe.
J
Is
is
the
floor
if
I
capture
that
so,
and
also
I
mean
I'm
perfectly
happy
with
the
parking
reduction,
that's
for
folks
who
that's
a
big
thing,
and
I
appreciate
that
you're
having
the
the
bike
stations,
I
think
that's
almost
something
we
should
require
by
code
for
new
developments
and
for
particularly
housing
developments.
J
What
I
am
I
will
say
to
the
committee
what
chicago
does-
and
I
think
this
is
chicago's
model-
is
pretty
good
and
I
think
you
guys
probably
developed
in
chicago,
and
so
you
know
that
chicago
doesn't
allow
you
to
give
money,
for
you
know,
bonuses
and
that
you
just
pay
the
money
that
you
would
pay
and
the
city
uses
it
out
of
the
way,
instead
of
providing
public
benefits
that
honestly
make
your
development
more
attractive
and
it
makes
it
more
attractive
to
your
tenants.
J
It's
you
know
you
just
give
the
city
the
money
in
the
city
does
what
they
need
to
do
in
order
to
make
the
area
better.
I
will
say
with
that
in
mind,
I
do
like
most
of
the
public
benefits
that
you're
offering
the
one
that
I
have
a
question
about.
Is
the
65
dollars
for
divi
station
that
I
don't
know
how
necessary
and
how
much
of
a
public
benefit
that
is,
there's
a
number
of
divvy
stations,
downtown
and
divi?
J
Isn't
at
this
point
priced
in
a
manner
that
allows
for
folks
to
it.
It
almost
feels
more
like
a
kind
of
leisure
luxury
thing,
rather
than
actual
an
actual
mode
of
transportation,
and
I
say
that
as
someone
who
does
not
own
a
car-
and
you
know,
uses
divi
from
time
to
time
so
but
other
than
that,
I
think
this
is
a
good
project.
J
I
think
I've
I
haven't
talked
to
councilmember
kelly,
a
ton
about
this,
but
certainly
interested
to
hear
some
of
her
thoughts,
but
this
seems
like
a
good
project.
So
thank
you.
H
Thank
you
very
much,
and
just
so
everyone
knows
we
were
at
one
of
the
community
meetings
or
dapper.
It
was
suggested
to
provide
debbie
parking.
So
that's
when
we
added
that,
so
it
was
really
based
on
feedback.
We
totally
agree,
there's
multi
modes
of
transportation,
so
we
try
to
adhere
to
what
we
heard
from
the
community,
but
that's
great
comments.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
D
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
I
I
do
like
this
project
as
well.
I
think
we're
accomplishing
a
number
of
things
here,
one
when
the
burger
king
closed.
I
don't
think
there
was
a
single
person
in
evanston
who
cried
to
tear
about
it.
D
It
was
so
we're
removing
a
problematic
property
that,
unfortunately,
our
police
department
had
to
visit
24
hours
a
day
and
we're
bringing
in
a
type
of
business,
a
type
of
building
that
I
will
say
that
the
city
has
been
trying
to
get
for
at
least
eight
or
nine
years
when
we
were
trying,
we
were
building
a
property
at
the
corner
of
maine
and
chicago.
D
We
requested
john
o'donnell,
who
was
the
developer
there
to
go
and
talk
to
the
university
and
suggest
a
lab
building.
Just
like
this.
Unfortunately,
the
professors
at
northwestern
thought
it
was
a
little
too
far
away,
but
they
did
say
they
needed
it,
and
so
here
is
this
building
within
a
stone's
throw
and
even
seven
eight
years
ago,
we
knew
that
the
value
of
having
this
type
of
building
available
right,
as
you
said,
right
off
the
university
property.
D
These
are
being
built
all
over
the
country
and
at
these
large
universities
that
are
spinning
off
businesses
all
the
time,
and
this
is
our
way
of
capturing
that
the
value
and
additional
value
of
northwestern
is
capturing
these
types
of
businesses.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
forward.
It's
something
that
we
have
been
trying
to.
We
recognize
we
have
a
need
for
and
now
here
it
is
so
I
like
that,
you're
opening
up
the
sidewalk,
especially
given
what
we've
experienced
during
cobid.
D
We
recognize
that
people
like
to
spend
more
time
out
outdoors,
and
so
I
think,
having
a
restaurant.
There
would
really
make
that
corner
much
much
more
user-friendly
and
providing
a
seating
space.
It's
like
a
plaza.
D
I
really
like
how
you're
breaking
up
the
facade
of
the
building
once
again:
referencing
maine
and
chicago
another
building.
That
has
that's
contemporary,
very
glassy,
but
is,
if
you
look
at
it,
has
the
facade
there
is
no
flat
space
on
the
facade
at
all,
and-
and
it
really,
I
have
never
heard
a
complaint
about
that
building
and
the
third
word
is
really
opinionated.
D
So
I
I
think
that
the
attention
to
detail
on
this
and
the
recognition
that
it
is
in
a
prominent
spot
and
so
you're
paying
attention
to
good
materials
is
really
important.
D
I
think
making
sure
that
that's
followed
through
really
will
make
the
difference
and
in
whether
the
build
how
the
building
looks
and
how
it
lasts
in
our
downtown
once
again,
maine
in
chicago
is
going
to
last
for
a
long
time.
Looking
really
interesting
for
decades,
the
building
directly
across
the
street
from
it
already
looks
tired
and
old.
D
So
I
really
appreciate
that.
I
appreciate
that
you're
working
with
bird
friendly
they're,
our
bird
friendly
group
and
the
affordable
housing
contribution
is
significant
and
most
critically
in
some
ways,
hundred
to
a
thousand
people
in
our
downtown
which
we,
you
know
we
have,
they
haven't
been
there,
and
this
is
a
way
of
pulling
them
there
and
helping
all
of
our
the
the
economic
health
of
all
of
our
downtown.
D
So
I
think
no-
and
I
am
someone
who
has
a
reputation
for
not
supporting
some
buildings
in
our
downtown,
but
I
think,
looking
over
the
zoning
analysis,
I
don't
think
that
you're
exceeding
any
of
the
site,
development
allowances,
you've
softened
the
corner.
The
design
is,
is
very
good
for
the
site
and
we're
going
to
hold
you
to
those
very
nice
building
materials.
Because
that's
what's
going
to
make
the
difference.
D
H
Thank
you
councilmember.
I
think
kudos
to
staff
and
kudos
to
councilmember
kelly
we've
had
a
number
of
meetings
on
those
design
items
of
softening
the
edges
and
trying
to
really
articulate
that
on
a
unique
site.
So
I
think
you
said
it
well
and
I
won't
rehash
it.
But
thank
you
very
much
for
your
comments.
C
A
H
Correct
I'll
use
the
word
fancier
just
with
just
from
an
infrastructure
standpoint
for
more
power,
more
air,
more
heavy
loads
to
be
administered
on
the
floors
higher
clear
heights
for
equipment.
So
it's
not
like
you
can
do
this
in
any
other
building
around
this
area.
This
is
purpose
built
for
that
and
we're
doing
it
in
the
city
and
we're
doing
it
all
over
the
coast,
and
we
want
to
do
it
in
in.
C
You
mentioned
600
to
a
thousand
people
is
that
you
know
full-time
jobs
working
at
that
facility
once
it's
up
and
running,
or
is
that
just
people
coming
in
and
out
like
how
many
of
those
people
will
be
there
all
day
every
day?
That's.
L
H
Financing
is
in
place
to
be
able
to
get
this
building
out
of
the
ground,
and
so
I
use
the
range
depending
on
the
level
of
science.
I
would
say:
science
buildings
are
less
dense
than
traditional
office.
So
that's
why
the
range
there,
depending
on
how
much
lab
or
how
much
office
is
within
that
and
those
would
typically
be
full-time
employees.
The
reason
I
use
the
upper
end
is
there's
events
on
the
roof
and
building
in
stem
town
and
really
job
fairs,
etc.
C
H
There's
a
lot
of
demand
for
this
we're
getting
calls
since
we've
administered
this.
We
don't
respond
to
those,
because
until
we
go
through
the
the
process
of
the
due
course
with
you
all
to
get
to
that
point,
but
we
feel
that
this
building
there's
zero
vacancy
in
evanston
and
there's
very
little
space,
even
in
this
in
the
illinois
itself,
and
look
at
the
universities
that
are
are
here
and
look
at
the
talent.
That's
here,
there's
no
reason
that
evanson
shouldn't
be
just
like
cambridge
in
in
20
years,
so
you're.
H
C
Question
about
the
environmental
aspects
of
the
building.
I
appreciate
you
working
with
the
bird
friendly
folks.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
agreements
that
you've
you've
come
to
with
with
bird
friendly
evanston
actually
come
to
pass
and,
as
I
understand
it,
they're
written
into
the
ordinance.
Yes.
H
And-
and
we
we
should
clarify-
we've
mentioned
we've
had,
I
think
three
three
calls
or
three
zooms
at
a
minimum.
This
is
we're
adhering
to
the
items
that
we've
discussed,
we're
footing
the
the
balconies
or
metal
on
those
balconies
of
zone,
one
which
are
the
top
and
the
lower
section
of
the
building.
The
middle
building
is
not
as
critical
we've
committed
to
that.
We've
also
committed
to
working
on
landscaping
and
a
number
of
little
up
down
lighting
to
adhere
to
that.
We
are
not
going
to
achieve
the
lead
credit
itself.
H
I
think,
right
now
the
ordinance
is
written,
a
little
bit
gray
on,
are
we
but
to
achieve
that
your
whole
building
and
a
number
of
things
that
you
can't
even
quantify
or
even
know
you
can
achieve
until
you
build
it
and
look
back
so
we
do
want
to
clarify.
We
are
satisfying
all
the
comments
we've
heard.
We've
landed
on
an
area
that
they're
comfortable
we're
comfortable
and
everything
in
that
exhibit
in
the
packet
from
a
bird
friendly
perspective
is
going
to
be
committed
to
on
our.
C
H
C
As
long
as
we're
talking
about
environmental
issues,
did
you
give
any
thought
to
making
this
building
all
electric?
We.
H
Did
it's
a
unique
use,
given
it's
a
lab,
so
there
are
some
things
that
you
can't
achieve
doing
laboratory
with
on
all
electric,
but
we
are
looking
at
ways
to
create
efficiencies,
we're
committing
to
lead
silver,
obviously
per
the
ordinance,
for
instance,
the
two
buildings
in
downtown
chicago
we
committed
to
leed
silver
and
we're
achieving
one
of
them
has
been
gold,
and
one
of
them
is
any
day
now
to
hear
that
we
are
going
to
achieve
gold.
H
So
we
look
at
best
practices,
part
of
being
a
part
of
a
national
developer,
we're
the
most
active
developer
in
the
country,
and
we
look
at
trends
and
how
to
do
things.
The
right
way
and
we're
forward
thinking
so
from
the
ground
up
from
material
sourcing,
to
exhausting
the
right,
vendors
and
really
delivering
on
a
sustainable
building
for
years
to
come
is
really
what
we
like
to
set
precedent,
but.
C
If
I
could
ask
the
representative
from
the
kloa
to
address
this,
you
did
a
traffic
study,
but
traffic
volume
was
decrea
was
increased
due
to
covet,
which
struck
me
as
odd.
So
I
just
wanted
to
see
what
was
behind
that.
M
No
problem,
thank
you.
My
name
is
louis
abun,
I'm
with
kloa.
M
So
when
we
conducted
the
accounts,
obviously
was
you
know
during
the
the
last
few
weeks
or
last
few
months
when
covey
is
still
going
on,
so
what
we
did
is
we
compared
those
counts
with
data
that
we
have
from
previous
studies
that
we
have
conducted
in
the
area
and
to
make
sure
that
they
represent
kind
of
pre-pandemic
normal
traffic
conditions.
So
what
we
found
is
some
of
those
numbers
were
lower,
so
we
adjusted
them
up
to
kind
of
reflect
the
normal
traffic
conditions.
M
So
that's
what
we
did
as
far
as
base
traffic
conditions
to
again
to
reflect
normal
traffic
conditions.
A
I'm
done
okay.
So
before
I
go
back
to
council
member
reed,
does
anyone
who
hasn't
had
a
question
yet
want
to
say
anything
council,
member
reed.
J
Yeah,
I
do
quickly
wanna
wanna,
say
speaking
of
the
65
000
I
mentioned
with
divi,
and
my
memory
was
jogged
by
a
statement
that
council
member
win
made
about.
No
one
being
you
know
said
that
this
building
that
the
burger
king
is
gone.
J
I
I
I'm
not
particularly
sad
that
the
burger
king
is
gone
either,
but
what
I
do
recall
is
anyone
who
had
the
misfortune
of
needing
to
go
or
wanting
to
go
to
that
burger
king
anytime,
late
at
night
would
know
that
that
was
a
spot
where
homeless,
folks
congregated
to
stay
warm
at
night,
and
also
that
burger
king
employed
folks
with
see
with
with
disabilities
as
well,
and
so
that
was
a
spot,
albeit
not
the
inappropriate
spot,
but
because
there's
open
24
hours,
it's
a
place
that
folks
went
to
stay
warm
to
get
food.
J
The
staff
there
seemed
extremely
welcoming
to
those
folks-
and
you
know
I
saw
folks
cleaning
up
and
getting
food,
and
so
I
would
rather
than
a
divi
station.
I
would
love
to
see.
I
know
that
there's
potentially
some
new
developments
going
on
in
the
fourth
ward,
that
would
help
house
homeless.
Folks,
I'd
love
to
see
that
sixty
five
thousand
dollars
or
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
go
to
supporting
homelessness
to
address.
J
We
have
a
major
loss
with
this
burger
king
for
folks
and
I'd
love
to
see
efforts
made
to
address
that
as
someone
who
personally
was
formerly
homeless
and
understands
the
need
for
places
for
folks
who
are
homeless
to
to
go
when
they
have
no
other
resources.
N
Good
evening
I'm
looking
at
assistant
city
attorney
ruggy,
we
can
work
with
the
developer.
If
that
is
the
direction.
However,
I
just
want
to
point
out.
We
have
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
nexus
of
public
benefit
with
this
specific
property,
so
we
have
to
make
sure
that
the
public
benefit,
so
we've
done
the
affordable
housing.
That's
fun!
N
That's
that's
something
different
than
directing
money
towards
a
different
development
in
a
different
area,
so
we
just
have
to
make
sure
that
we're
directing
it
to
a
specific
city
fund
that,
to
your
point,
addresses
a
concern,
that's
downtown,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
sure
you're
not
suggesting
we
send
it
to
another
development.
I
think
you're,
suggesting
we
address
issues
of
homelessness
in
the
downtown.
Is
that.
J
Correct
correct
and
yeah
that
we
can
use
the
money
there's
a
developer,
another
one
in
the
first
ward.
I
think
right
or
very
close
by
who
their
proposal
at
least
what
they've
presented
to
me
is
that
they
want
to
build
affordable
housing
in
the
eighth
ward,
to
support
the
building
to
to
relieve
their
affordable
housing
requirements
downtown,
and
they
seem
quite
convinced
that
they
could
do
that.
N
No,
no,
they
cannot.
That's
still
also
a
nexus
of
public
benefit
issue,
so
I
would
just
say:
either
we.
J
And
I
will
say
understanding
chicago's
ordinance.
So
are
you
saying
this
is
a
self-imposed
nexus
of
public
benefit
because
understanding
chicago's
ordinance
where
you
don't
pay
for
public
benefit?
You
know
for
bonuses,
you
just
pay
a
fee
and
then
the
city
there's.
I
think
two
separate
funds
that
the
money
goes
to.
One
is
a
fund
that
can
be
spent.
You
know
one
in
the
area
and
then
another
fund
that
can
be
spent
outside
of
the
area.
So
is
this
a
self-imposed
rule
or
is
this
some
state.
N
Well,
this
is
slightly
confusing
chicago
is
my
understanding
is
a
little
bit
more
prescribed
public
benefits,
so
they
say
if
you
do
x,
you
have
to
do
y.
So
we
have.
We
have
like
the
green
building.
Ordinance
is
something
that
we
require
by
ordinance,
so
the
development
before
us.
They
knew
when
they
did
their
due
diligence.
They
knew
they
would
have
to
comply
with
our
green
building,
ordinance
that
that
helps
move
forward,
the
city
council's
policies
of
green
building
and
sustainability.
N
It
is
codified.
They
know
they
have
to
do
it
that
that's
expected.
We've
had
discussions
before
the
council
about
what
to
do
with
public
benefits
in
terms
of
being
a
little
bit
more
prescribed
in
that
we
have
not
made
any
inroads
into
making
those
those
decisions.
It
probably
would
be
a
clearer
and
easier
process
to
understand
for
everybody,
but
we
haven't
gotten
there
yet.
N
So
in
terms
of
of
what
you
the
issue
before
not
saying
you
can
put
things
in
other
places,
it's
then
you
would
potentially
have
the
situation
where
you'd
have
nine
council
members.
Who
would
each
say
here's
what
I
want
in
my
my
ward
and
I
I
realize
that
could
seem
very
reasonable,
but
at
the
same
time
the
idea
is
to
offset
the
impact
of
the
development
in
this
specific
adjacent
area.
N
J
So,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
that
and
I
won't
belabor
the
point,
but
also
I
I
wonder,
are
we
mixing
public
benefits
and
impact
fees
because
I
definitely
know
impact
fees
definitely
would
have
to
be
in
the
area.
Public
benefit
seems
a
bit
looser
to
me,
but
that's
the
conversation
we
can
have
offline.
I
hear
I
hear
you're.
J
Certainly,
if
there
is
agreement
with
the
committee,
I
personally
would
prefer
to
see
rather
than
a
divvy
station.
That
doesn't
really
seem
yet
to
be
meeting
the
goals
of
providing
mobility
for
folks
that
that
money
would
go
to
addressing
homelessness,
which
was
definitely
something,
albeit
burger.
King
was
not
a
proper
shelter
for
folks,
but
it
served
as
a
place
where
folks
were
sheltered
and
got
food.
So
if
we
can,
you
know
offset
that
impact.
J
H
O
And
thank
you
for
the
accommodations
I've
been
trying
to
take
on
sort
of
the
overbearing
feel
of
this
building,
particularly
on
the
west
side.
So
I
appreciate
mr
blewett
your
efforts
there
is
that
those
are
that
setback
or
popped
out
in
order
to
create
that
extra
dimensionality
there
that
on
the
west
side
right
next
to
the
because
there's
a
huge
drop.
O
Initially,
I
asked
that
the
elevator
that
west
side,
where
the
elevator
shaft
is
if
we
could
put
that
against
the
orington
building
to
me
that
would
have
been
much
more
appropriate,
but
for
structural
reasons
that
couldn't
happen
because
you
entered
this
is
the
entrance
way
to
to
evanston
from
the
north
side.
O
So
it's
so
important
when
coming
in
that
we
don't
just
you
know,
hit
a
big
wall,
so
so
I
you
know,
you've
been
working
with
me
to
try
and
reduce
that
sort
of
imposing
feel
we
have
little
beck's
books
store
there
and
then
this
so
adding
some
dimension
there.
So
thank
you.
I
see
that
you
did.
I
It
it
is
an
inset
just
to
clarify
so
right
here.
You
can
see
we
carved
away
here
and
then
at
the
stair
and
at
the
elevator
lobby.
It's
it's
kind
of
hard
to
see
in
this
drawing.
So
I
apologize
it's
very
zoomed
out,
but
it's
it's
a
middle,
it's
kind
of
a
small
move,
but
I
think
it
does
a
lot.
It
gives
you
those
shadow
lines.
I
You
get
return
material
which
just
gives
you
more
depth
to
the
feeling
of
that
facade
doesn't
have
the
flatness,
maybe,
as
you
might
have
seen
before
so
incorporating
as
many
windows
as
we
think
we
can.
We
can
have
per
code
as
well
as
getting
some
more
of
that
depth
where
we
don't
have
those
structural
limitations
that
you
mentioned.
I
O
Thank
you
and
I
think
johanna,
it's
important
that
you
really
go
over
all
the
variances
here,
so
everybody
understands
I
still
would
very
much
I'm
waiting
for
our
city
to
conduct
independent
parking
and
traffic
studies.
I
just
feel
that's
so
important
for
residents
and
for
everybody
to
know
that
we're
also
conducting
ours
also
just
on
some
of
these
images,
I
think
you're
citing
it
to
be
because
it
and
just
everybody
understands
this-
really
is
the
going
to
be
the
tallest
building
for
about.
O
D
O
Citing
the
height
in
your
draw
in
your
the
images
you're,
not
citing
that
height,
which
I
think
is
170
correct,.
H
O
Okay,
but
I
just
think
when
we're
comparing
like
an
orange
and
you
go
and
you
sight
that
little
what's,
it
called
a
cupola
at
the
end
there,
which
is
really
tiny
compared
to
the
mechanical
amenities
space
on
this
building.
So
really
we
really
shouldn't
be
comparing
that
lower
side.
So
it's
really
about.
I
think
I
figured
it
was
you
know
it's
a
difference
between
106
feet
really
in
170.
O
H
It
is
we're
just
following
the
staff
on
how
to
use
one
number
from
a
height
perspective,
but
it
it's
also
why
we
also
step
back
that
area
and
kind
of
plan
for
the
mechanical
versus
putting
the
mechanical
spread
out
over
the
entire
building.
So
you
have
a
step
back
on
level
three,
and
then
you
have
a
step
back
here.
H
I
P
I
Penthouse,
there
rises
currently
it's
an
18-foot
florida
floor
to
that
to
that
the
slab
for
the
high
roof
and
then
there's
probably
about
a
two-foot
parapet.
So
you
can
stay
on
the
order
of
about
20
feet
above
so
170
is.
O
Yeah
so
yeah,
so
that's
yeah
again.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
your
working
to
try
and
make
this
as
pedestrian
friendly
and
again
I'd
love
to
see
a
true
ziggurat,
and
we
discussed
that
this
really.
You
know
that
the
floor
right
above
it
actually
bumps
back
out
I'd
love
to
see
that
continue
all
the
way
up.
But
I
agree
with
everything
that's
been
said.
I
do
think
this.
Will
this
is
I'm
a
lovely
decided
appreciate
the
curvature?
I
know
that's
a
big
deal
to
put
that
on
there
that
really
that
absolutely
helps.
N
They're,
not
variances
they're,
site
development
allowances,
so
an
far
of
7,
where
4.5
is
permitted
and
up
to
8
can
be
requested.
O
Thank
you,
so
I
I
think,
probably
the
one
that
jumps
out
the
most
is
the
parking.
So
I
think
there
are
there's
some
concerns
with
neighbors
about
the
parking
and
and
how
that
will
play
out
and
again
could
you
address
when
we
will
be
conducting
our
own
independent
parking
and
so.
N
We've
done
a
request
for
proposals
and
we've
we've
received
responses,
the
direction.
If
you
recall
we
had
a
discussion
item
last
fall
or
late
summer.
I
can't
remember
when
we
were
in
person
so
to
look
at
an
independent
option,
meaning
the
city
would
obtain
their
do
their
own
traffic
analysis.
N
We
do
not
in
the
city
of
evanston,
have
the
staff
capacity
ignore
the
technical
data
sets
and
other
other
equipment
that
would
be
able
to
do
that
so
generally
developers
or
or
any
applicant
where
we
would
require
a
traffic
study
would
do
that
work
and
then
we
review
it.
Our
staff
reviews
it
so
we've
gone
out.
They
came
back
quite
expensive
for
us
based
on
it's
because
we
asked
for
something
more
than
just
a
traffic
study.
We
did
multimodal
so
parking
ride,
share
all
other
modes
of
transportation
bike
traffic.
N
So
it's
a
little
bit
more
expensive.
So
we're
going
to
come
back
on
the
14th
and
ask
what
what
direction
you'd
like
to
do.
I
think
that
I'm
going
to
you
know
kind
of
blow
the
lead
here,
but
I
think
that
we'd
like
to
see
some
code
changes
in
terms
of
what
we
would
require
from
a
traffic
study
base,
because
right
now,
just
as
a
traffic
study,
so
it's
up
to
whoever
is
required
to
do
it
to
interpret
what
a
traffic
study
is
so
codify
a
few
more
requirements
and
then
get
some
direction
of.
N
If
we
want
to
require
people
to
take
one
of
our
pre-qualified
applicants
for
traffic
study,
or
we
would
do
our
own,
we
would
we
would
employ
somebody
to
do
this.
Do
the
study,
however,
that
would
require
some
budget
considerations
because
they're
not
inexpensive.
I
think
the
number
was
somewhere
around
35
000
per
per
study.
So
if
we
have
a
few
of
these
developments
per
year,
that's
that.
H
O
So
I
do
think
it's
important
that
we
resolve
that
soon,
as
developments
are
going
up,
because
it's
absolutely
a
very
big
concern.
I
mean
I
just
like
to
say
also
here
and
now
like
I
would
like.
I
don't
know
whether
it's
a
proviso
or
what
it
is
that
in
the
future,
this
privilege
of
you
know
changing
the
zone
from
d2
to
d3
here
that
that
is
really
limited
to
this
building.
You
know
going
west
on
on
on
clark
there,
like
all
the
way
to
benson.
O
I
really
don't
want
to
see
that
any
more
buildings
changing
zone
there
from
d2
to
d3.
I
want
to
be
able
to
really
respect
and
preserve
the
historic
and
architectural
scale
of
existing
buildings
in
the
atmosphere,
as
you
go
around
onto
sherman
of
our
sort
of
traditional
downtown
evanston.
So
I
just
I'm
going
to
state
that
over
and
over
again
I
want
this.
This
would
be
limited
really
to
this
building
going
west
there
on
benson.
O
J
I
had
very
quick
questions
yeah
and
then
we
can,
I
I'll
be
done
so
one
just
a
quick
question,
for
I
guess
staff
do
my
recollection
of
the
code.
Doesn't
isn't
informing
me
as
to
whether
do
tod
parking
reductions,
transit,
oriented
development,
parking
reductions
apply
to
this
kind
of
use,
or
does
it
only
apply
to
housing?
So
do
you
get
the
tod
parking
reductions
if
you're
building
an
office
building
like
this,
or
do
you
only
get
it
if
you're
building
housing.
N
I
believe
it's
just
for
housing,
katie
ashbas
on
the
line
katie.
Can
you
confirm.
K
Hi,
I'm
katie
ashbal,
I'm
a
planner
and
work
with
johanna,
so
the
downtown
parking
reduction
is
it
takes
away
the
first
3000
square
feet,
that's
of
the
least
generating
use,
and
so
you
would
so
for
the
total
number
of
part
of
square
footage
for
the
parking
requirement
for
the
office
use.
We
took
3
000
from
that
and
then
applied
the
required
parking
ratio
to
the
office
use
and
then,
after
that
you
then
only
do
80
percent
of
the
total
number
of
required
stalls.
K
So,
to
your
point,
councilmember
reed,
we
do
have
the
tod
parking
reduction
for
residential
units
based
on
the
number
of
bedrooms.
K
For
example,
we
require
just
over
half
of
the
stall
for
studio
units,
but
they
require
one
stall,
I
believe
for
when
they're,
not
in
a
tod,
but
those
are
the
two
it's
a
parking
deduction
and
then
a
parking
reduction
a
little
confusing,
but
I
hope.
J
No,
no,
no,
that
that
makes
perfect
sense.
So
what
I'm
hearing
is
that
downtown
for
offices
there's
a
completely
separate
formula
that
is
used
that
isn't
our
transit
orange
development
formula
for
housing?
It's
a
separate
formula!
So
that's
something
new!
So
thank
you
for
that.
So
there
is
some
kind
of
parking
reduction.
I
wonder
if
we
should
take
a
look
at
that.
J
I
know
that
we
put
some
specific
effort
into
a
few
years
ago
at
this
point,
almost
five
six
years
ago
to
creating
you
know,
requirements
for
affordable
housing-
it's
probably
council
member
one
can
maybe
know
this
better
than
I
do,
but
it's
probably
been
a
while,
since
we've
revisited
our
parking
requirements
for
office
buildings
or
for
other
developments
downtown
and
seeing
as
the
where
we're
trending
toward
which
is
reducing
car
usage,
ride
sharing
biking
and
all
that
all
of
those
alternative
modes
of
transportation.
J
I
wonder
if
it's
time
to
look
at
to
revisit
that,
so
it's
not
tod,
but
it's
some
other
section
of
code
which
offline
I'll
figure
out
what
that
is,
and
then
secondly,
and
then
one
more
thing
after
that
is
for
parking
and
traffic
studies.
Johanna
is
it
standard
for
do
we
do
we
do
a
parking
study
or
traffic
study
with
every?
Does
the
city
itself
conduct
for
every
yeah,
and
I.
J
You
know
I
understand
councilmember
kelly's
concerns
and
I
I
totally
get
it,
but
I
do
wonder
if
that's
an
expense
that
the
city
shouldn't
necessarily
take
on.
To
I
mean
if
we
have
developers
going
to
a
trusted
traffic
engineer
or
whatever
firm,
does
this
kind
of
work?
I
think
we
should,
unless
there's
something
that
really
seems
wacky
to
us.
You
know
work
on
that.
J
I
don't
know
if
the
city
again
with
my
beliefs,
I
don't
know
if
the
city
should
really
be
in
the
business
of
determining
the
number
of
parking
spots
that
a
business
should
have
and
then,
lastly,
for
the
developer,
have
you
all
it
sounds
like
you
have,
but
have
you
all
done
developments
or
constructed
buildings
in
chicago?
J
H
It's
a
great
question,
I
think
it
depends,
is
the
short
answer
I
I
would
say
that
we're
we've
had
great
success
in
both
municipalities
and
I
think
that's
all
I'll
leave
it,
but.
A
You,
of
course,
he's
gonna,
say:
okay,
so
I
see
no
more
lights,
so
I
believe
we
are
going
to
be
ready
for
a
vote.
Whoopsie.
Oh
council
member
burns,.
L
This
would
be
quick,
though,
because
I
don't
really
know
how
to
do
it
for
these
type
of
projects.
I
need
to
put
some
more
thought
into
it,
but
I
would
like
to
see
developments,
especially
when
they're,
when
they're
requesting
things
of
the
city
to
put
as
much
planning
into
workforce
development
as
they
do.
You
know
parking
and
some
of
the
other
things
we
heard
about
today,
so
I
would
love.
L
I
don't
know
where
this
is
in
the
approval
process,
but
you
know
we
put,
for
example,
there's
a
light
manufacturing
proposal
development,
that's
proposed
for
one
of
our
neighborhoods
and
we've
had
some
really
good
conversations
with
oakton
community
college,
which
has
some
programming
and
so,
instead
of
her
the
next
time
she
comes
here
instead
of
her
saying
oh
yeah,
we're
committed
to
work
for
his
development
right
she'll
have
a
plan
that
has
been
worked
on
by
their
development
in
in
oakton,
and
so
I
would
love,
I
believe,
the
person
for
us
would
be
nathan,
norman
who's,
our
workforce
development
manager.
L
If
you
could
reach
out
to
him
and
kind
of
start
that
process
early
on
of
identifying.
Not
just
you
know
who
we
have
in
evanston
who
could
help
in
terms
of
providing
the
trade
help
we
need,
but
to
see
who's
available
too,
because
some
of
this
stuff
is
all
about.
You
know,
scheduling
it,
and
people
may
have
different
jobs
that
they're
working
on.
So
I
I
just
would
love
to
see.
You
start
that
process
early.
H
And
we'll
we'll
that's
a
great
comment:
councilmember
burns,
I
I
would
say
the
way
we
drafted
the
construction,
jobs
and
and
job
fairs.
I
think
we're
aligned
there
and
you
have
our
commitment
to
make
sure
we
reach
out
to
the
right
folks
and
try
to
get
that
in
place,
because
that's
we
do
that
a
lot
in
the
city
of
chicago,
depending
on
aldermatic
award.
H
We
try
to
really
administer
the
goals
of
that
specific
ward,
but
we'll
work
with
whoever
you
want
to
put
we'll,
follow
up
with
johanna
and
come
back
and
make
sure
we're
we're
aligned
there,
but
we
totally
get
it.
Thank
you.
O
Kelly
for
the
last
word,
okay-
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
one
of
the
most
important
features
of
this-
that
I
think
we
haven't
really
discussed-
is
a
and
that
tremolo
crow
has
agreed
to
is
that
this
will
stay
on
the
tax
rolls
that
it
will
have.
There
will
be
a
covenant
tied
to
the
tied
to
the
deed,
the
the
title,
the
deep
that
would
prevent
this
from
ever
coming
off
the
tax
rolls,
even
if
it
were
used
for
non-profit
purposes,
the
entire
building
will
remain
on
the
tax
rolls.
A
Right,
okay,
I
will
just
close
this
discussion
briefly
by
saying
I
too
agree
with
my
colleagues
who
have
been
saying
how
you
know
what
a
really
beautiful
building
this
is
going
to
be,
and
it's
bringing
a
wonderful
use
to
the
downtown
that
we
don't
have
anywhere
in
evanston.
I
think
we're
all
really
looking
forward
to
the
vitality
it's
going
to
bring
to
that
particular
location.
A
I
I
think
your
public
benefits
are,
are
you
know
really
really
public
benefits,
and
I
appreciate
that
and
so
we're
go
council
members
suffered
and
is
apparently
online
with
us.
So
we
are
going
to
do
a
roll
call
vote
on
ordinance,
15-0-22
amending
the
zoning
map
to
rezone
1732
3440
orrington
avenue
from
the
d2
downtown
retail,
core
district
to
the
d3
downtown
core
development
district
and
granting
a
special
use
for
a
new
10-story
mixed-use
plan
development.
A
You
appreciate
it:
okay,
okay,
so
we
have.
We
have
one
more
item
now
for
discussion
and
this
is
a
discussion
of
our
proposed
tree
preservation,
ordinance
where
we
want
to
discuss
how
we're
going
to
protect
trees
on
private
property,
and
we
have
a
presentation
or
an
introduction
to
the
topic.
Yes,
please
go
ahead.
Q
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
committee,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
emily
ogilow,
I'm
public
services
coordinator
for
the
public
works
agency,
and
I'm
here
tonight
to
discuss
our
recommendation
that
the
committee
provide
direction
for
developing
a
tree
preservation
ordinance
for
trees
on
private
property.
Q
So
I'm
here
to
entertain
your
questions,
to
answer
your
questions
and
provide
whatever
information
I
can.
A
So
I'll
open
it
up
to
committee
members
for
comments,
suggestions,
thoughts,
council,
member
reed,.
J
I'll
just
say
thank
you,
you
attended
my
award
meeting
the
eighth
ward
meeting.
This
is
at
this
point
a
couple
months
ago
and.
H
J
A
presentation
on
this
that
was
very
helpful
to
myself
and
eighth
ward
residents.
Q
Yeah,
absolutely
so
we
you
know,
we
want
to
protect
trees,
we
want
to
provide
that
protection
and
we
specifically
want
to
protect
the
benefits
that
trees
provide
to
the
community.
You
know,
trees
are
a
resource
and
they
have
a
value
in
some
cases
that
can
be
monetized,
but
overall
they
contribute
to.
You
know
the
quality
of
life
of
the
community,
but
we
also
recognize
that
you
know
in
asking
the
community
to
participate
in
protecting
their
trees.
Q
So
in
essence,
a
lot
of
tree
preservation
ordinances
require
some
sort
of
replanting
or
they
might
require
fees
or
whatever.
It
is
to
replace
the
value
of
the
benefits
that
are
lost,
but
that
could
be
an
undue
burden
to.
You
know
a
certain
to
the
more
vulnerable
property
owners
in
the
community
and
that's
not
a
direction
that
we
want
to
go
in.
A
P
Chair,
I
I
guess,
like
my
question
and
I
I'll
go
comment.
First,
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
protect
the
rights
of
property
owners
as
we
make
this
policy.
I
understand
the
collective
benefit
of
trees,
but
there
are
people
who
have
purchased
property
who
pay
taxes
on
it,
which
these
trees
said.
P
How
are
we
going
to
balance
those
interests,
the
interests
of
the
community
at
large
in
having
a
vibrant
tree
canopy
and
the
interests
of
property
owners
in
removing
trees,
trimming
trees,
making
modifications
of
property
that
may
require
the
removal
of
trees.
Q
Yeah,
thank
you
for
that,
and
that's
exactly
why
I'm
here
tonight
to
seek
direction,
because
that
is
you
know,
that's
we
feel
that
we
need
more
direction
in
order
to
apply
this
in
a
way
that
would
be
equitable.
There
are
formulas
that
exist.
There
are
tree
preservation,
ordinances
that
exist.
Q
You
know
we
have
one
for
public
trees,
but
we
certainly
want
to
be
cautious
of
the
impact
that
that
would
have,
and
so
we've
proposed
that
we
would
integrate
this
process
into
an
iterative
process
similar
to
the
building.
You
know
the
the
building
permits
that
community
development
works
on,
and
so
we've
proposed
that
to
create
a
conversation,
to
create
a
discussion,
a
way
that
community
members
can
provide
feedback,
but
beyond
that,
as
far
as
actually
replacing
the
value
of
trees.
That's
why
we're
here
asking
for
direction
right.
Thank.
P
You
so
I
mean
what
is
an
example:
I'm
not
trying
to
put
you
on
the
spot,
but
can
you
give
an
example
of
a
situation
that
this
proposal
ordinance?
I
don't
understand
their
proposal
at
this
point.
This
idea
would
seek
to
prevent.
I
mean
we
have.
We
had
issues
with
people
clear-cutting
their
property
or
the
more
people
remove
trees,
because
they
want
to
add
an
addition
that
is
prevented
by
a
tree.
I
mean:
can
you
just
help
me
understand
the
problem
that
we're
seeking
to
solve?
Q
Yeah,
thank
you,
so
I
think
that
there
I
think
that
one
of
the
there's
a
few
things,
so
we
know
that
trees
become
exponentially
more
valuable
as
they
become
larger,
and
we
also
know
that
trees
provide
benefits
to
the
community
at
large,
so
not
just
the
owner
of
that
property.
They
provide
benefits
to
really
the
entire
community,
but
you
know
more
specifically.
Q
It
could
be
that
that's
the
only
tree
that
provides
shade
for
children
walking
to
school
on
that
block,
and
so
we
also
recognize
that
there
are
examples,
and
this
is
actually
something
I've
encountered
recently
of
community
members
having
goals
for
their
properties
and
in
some
ways
they
think
that
the
goals
are
one
thing,
but
in
talking
to
them
you
know
their
goals
might
be
different.
Q
You
know
good-looking
landscaping
on
her
private
property,
which
she
was
not
going
to
get
even
if
we
did
prune
the
public
tree
because
of
the
placement
of
the
tree
and
the
shade
it
was
providing
and
the
way
the
sun
was
coming
in
and
so
in
speaking
to
her,
I
was
able
to
you
know,
find
out
what
those
goals
were
find
out
exactly
what
her
goal
was
and
come
to
an
agreement
with
her
about
what
would
be
the
best
way
to
achieve
that
goal.
That
didn't
require
impacting
a
really
large
elm.
P
Okay,
I
don't
want
to
monopolize
everyone's
time,
so
I
and
since
you
are
seeking
direction,
I'm
a
member
of
the
committee,
I
would
say
that
my
direction
would
be
really
balance.
P
Property
owner
rights
with
the
rights
of
the
collective
on
these
trees
find
a
way
that
there's
not
a
structure
that
is
financially
punitive
to
people
who
remove
trees
and
really
nail
down
how
much
increased
staffing
costs,
whatever
whatever
proposal
will
will
incur,
because
I
think
that's
something
that
residents
even
wherever
they
fall
on
the
spectrum
of
property
rights
versus
tree
conservation.
I
think
you
know
being
very
straightforward
about
what
this
is
going
to
cost
if
it
is
going
to
cost.
P
Anything
is
also
something
that
is
important
when
we,
when
we
come
here
with
a
finished
product,
and
thank
you
for
your
efforts,
emily.
I
appreciate
it.
Thank.
A
Okay,
council,
member
newsman.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
will
kind
of
pick
up
on
council
members,
hufferson's
line
of
questioning
and
first
of
all,
say
thank
you
for
speaking
up
for
the
trees.
You
know,
I
think
they
are
an
important
part
of
our
natural
resource
here
in
evanston
and
we've
all
committed
to
implementing
our
carp
plan.
So
what
we're
talking
about
here
is
very
much
part
of
that
plan.
So
it's
not
a
question
of
if
we're
going
to
do
it,
but
how
and
you're
seeking
that
guidance.
C
It
would
help
me
to
provide
that
guidance
if
I
had
a
a
real
better,
if
I
had
a
better
understanding
of
what
the
problem
is
and
how
many
trees
are
being
cut
down
on
private
property
around
the
city
and
if
it's
just
a
few
here
and
there
that
might
dictate
one
response,
if
we
have
a
whole,
you
know
a
whole
bunch
of
mr
t's
cutting
down.
You
know
a
forest
on
their
property.
That's
another
response!
So
where
do
where?
Are
we
in
that
continuum?.
Q
So
we
have
not
had
a
tree
preservation
ordinance,
so
I
don't
know
that
we
can
know
how
many
trees
are
being
cut
down
on
private
property.
Q
But
you
know
we
have
seen
that
especially
larger
developments
that
come
in,
including
a
very
recent
one,
that
those
trees
do
get
cut
down
and
in
some
ways,
especially
with
the
larger
developments,
we
are
seeing
that
those
benefits
are
being
taken
away
from
the
community.
Q
C
Since
we
don't
currently
have
a
tree
preservation,
ordinance
that
that
looks
at
private
property,
that
means
that
any
private
pro
any
owner
can
cut
down
a
tree
on
their
property
without
any
kind
of
repercussions
with.
C
Q
It
would
be
anecdotal
or
potentially
remote
sensing,
but
that's
a
little
bit
more.
It's
a
lot
more
complicated,
so.
Q
We
could
we
could
do
that.
The
you
know
the
staff
that
I've
spoken
to
in
communities
sort
of
surrounding
evanston
have
told
me
that
that
has
not
prevented
any
type
of
removal,
and
so
the
question
becomes,
you
know:
do
we
want
to
prevent
removal,
or
do
we
want
to
understand
what
that
removal
is
or
have
you
know,
track
it
or
whatever
it.
C
Q
Q
So
in
the
example
that
I
gave
in
the
memo
you
know,
removing
an
11
inch
tree
would
be
a
cost
under
the.
So
under
the
current
ordinance
that
we
have
the
tree
preservation
ordinance,
it
would
cost
approximately
3
500
in
remediation
costs
to
remove
an
11
inch
tree
with
a
caveat
that
that
plenty
could
happen
that
property
owner
could
plant
trees
on
their
own,
potentially
at
a
reduced
cost.
Q
A
K
D
So
I
actually
have
had
examples
of
two
residents
in
my
ward,
who
cut
down
trees
very
large
trees
that
their
neighbors
actually
protested
about,
because
one
instance
was
a
part
of
the
award
where
the
backyards
are
very.
They
were
only
35
feet
wide,
and
this
was
a
large
tree
that
shaded
several
several
neighbors
and
because
we
didn't
have
anything
that
prevented
that.
That
tree
came
down
and
it's
stark-
I
mean
it's
it
had
to
have
been.
It
was
easily
40
or
50
feet
tall.
D
Then
I
have
had
the
instance
of
another
example
where
someone
wanted
to
build
a
garage
and
it
required
the
removal
of
a
fairly
significant
chinese
elm.
You
know
fairly,
very
large
and
our
zoning
department
to
their
great
credit,
came
up
with
several
other
designs
that
the
property
owner
could
have
done
and
preserved
the
tree
at
not
a
significantly
different
cost,
but
the
property
owner
there
shrugged
and
they
had
been
requested
by
neighbors
on
both
sides.
D
D
And
I
I'd
I'd
like
to
be
at
a
six
on
on
jonathan
scale
to
better
understand
what
it
is
that
how
to
balance
this,
because
in
our
in
in
the
second
instance,
our
staff
really
went
the
extra
two
three
four
five
miles
to
to
come
up
with
another
plan
for
them
and
I
think
actually,
if
we
had
had
some
prohibition,
that
tree
would
still
be
there
and
the
neighbors
would
have
achieved
the
garage
that
they
that
they
maybe
wasn't
their
ideal.
D
But
they
really,
they
would
still
have
had
what
they
wanted
and
the,
and
we
would
still
have
the
benefits
of
that
that
elm.
So
I
would
like
to
see
if
you
could
send
us
some
examples
of
ordinances
that
you
think
actually
work
where
we
are
properly
balancing
and
then
a
way
to
implement
this,
so
that
someone
doesn't
buy,
like
mr
t,
buy
his
property
and
then
suddenly
decide
or
whatever.
D
D
So
I,
if
that's
helpful,
I
hope
that,
and
I
can
talk
to
you
more
about
it,
but
I
do
think
having
had
those
two
instances
in
the
last
four
years
and
seeing
the
impact
that
that
had,
I
would
like
to
have
something
where
no,
we
may
not
have
very
many
people,
do
it,
but
the
impact
of
a
couple
of
people
doing
it,
I
would
say
affected
12
at
least
12
households,
12
15
households,.
Q
I
think
you
know
coming
back
to
council.
Member
news
must
comment
about.
You
know
zero
to
ten
or
you
know
whatever
numbers
I'd
like
to
reiterate
that,
for
us,
the
goal
is
not
money,
it's
not
cost.
It's
not
coming
up
with.
You
know
these
exorbitant
fees
when
trees
are
removed.
It's
more
about
making
the
process
difficult
to
remove,
especially
the
larger
trees
of
the
trees
that
have
more
significant
impact,
positive
impact
on
the
ecosystem.
D
Q
So
lake
forest
actually
has
language
in
their
ordinance.
That
says
that
you
know,
I
don't
know
property
owners
or
whoever
cannot
be
denied
reasonable
and
enjoyable
use
of
their
property,
or
so
there's
language
that
sort
of
protects
against.
You
know
I
mean,
of
course
we
would
not
want
to
tell
you
know,
property
owner
that
they
can't
build
a
garage,
but
maybe
there's
a
better
way
to
do
it.
That
would
not
significantly
impact
the
trees.
C
Q
O
Council
member
kelly,
thank
you
so
two
points
or
questions
one.
I
really
I'd
really
love
to
see,
as
I
think
councilmember
wynn
said,
some
ordinances
from
other
cities
and
even
here,
maybe
from
folks
with
ordinances
in
other
cities,
to
see
how
it's
working
so
that
we
could
compare
and
see
if
those
would
fit
fit
our
needs,
but
also,
I
wonder
tom
also
if
this
would
be
controversial,
just
to
stop
the
bleeding.
As
I'm
sure
many
of
you
have
already
heard
about
the
incident
at
kendall
college.
O
This
was
incredibly
upsetting
to
many
neighbors,
an
old,
a
historic
old
oak
grove.
There
were
first
one
tree
came
down
that
residents
had
it
had
gone
through
the
preservation,
commission,
everything
and
one
came
down
that
they
were
hoping
wouldn't,
and
then
there
was
assurance
that
no
more
would
come.
And
then
I
last
week
my
during
work,
my
phone
and
text
was
blowing
up
with
neighbors.
Nobody
knew,
including
myself.
The
developer
was
there
taking
down
more
of
these
old
historic
oak
trees,
and
this
was
incredible.
O
O
O
Development
as
in
as
in
you
know,
even
if
you're
raising
an
old
house
and
building
new
one,
that
would
be
new
development,
okay,
but
I'm
thinking
more
in
terms
of
large
developments.
But
yes,
I
think
you
know
like
a
tear
down
correct,
but
again,
I'm
thinking
more
like
a
candle
lot
or
whole
large
developments.
But,
yes,
the
tear
down
same
idea,
yeah.
N
So
just
some
clarification
I
would
say
if
it's
a
tear
down
like
a
tear
down
house
to
new
replacement,
we,
I
don't
know
how
many
of
those
types
of
permits
I
could.
I
don't
have
that
number
in
front
of
me,
but
I
would
say
anecdotally.
I
think
we've
pulled
some
information
that
these
trees
are
often
torn
down
taken
out
when
people
do
additions
or
especially
garages.
N
So
I
think
we've
the
instances
in
council
member
wins
ward
that
she
spoke
of
were,
I
think,
both
garages,
because
often
smaller
garages,
a
one
car
thing,
and
now
people
all
of
a
sudden
want
a
three
car
or
something,
and
so
I
just
want
to
get
clarification.
We
may
you
may
not
capture
what
you're
trying
to
get
by
just
the
new,
a
new
construction
house.
It
we'd
have
to
maybe
put
a
quantification
on
a
an
addition
or
a
garage,
just
a
thought.
O
Well,
I
think
if
we
could,
if
staff
could
maybe
develop
language
around
that
I
mean
I
remember
even
back
when
that
the
how
development
went
up
on
pittner
there
were
a
couple
of
trees
on
that
property.
That
came
down
that
I
know
residents
didn't
you
know,
want
to
see
come
down,
but
it
was
within
right,
and
so
I
think
that
would
be
helpful.
Maybe
to
consider,
because
I
have
a
feeling
we
could
pass
that
so.
A
D
Q
I
will
say
that
I
have
yet
to
find
one
that
actually
is
able
to
balance.
You
know
what
I
can
call
equity
and
and
protecting
trees
that
the
this
is
sort
of
an
industry
standard.
This
idea
of
charging
replacement
fees
either
having
a
flat
fee
or
charging
replacements
is
sort
of.
I
mean
those
are
those.
D
These
small,
I'm
sorry,
I'm
jumping
in,
but
just
having
a
replacement
tree.
You
know
a
little
two
inch.
Caliper
three
inch
caliper
really
is,
is
not
equivalent,
even
if
you
planted
a
hundred
of
them
not
equivalent
to
a
fifty
foot
or
fifty
year
old,
alum.
Q
A
And
for
for
information
about
what
our
neighboring
communities
do,
there's
been
a
lot
of
recent
coverage
about
the
well-met,
what's
happening
in
women,
because
they're
poised
to
adopt
an
ordinance
to
protect
private
trees,
and
so
the.
If,
if
you
read
the
village
minutes,
which
I
looked
at,
there's
a
chart
in
there,
that
shows
the
replacement
fees
that
are
charged
by
our
neighboring
communities
and,
and
they
range
from
you
know
from
like
a
hundred
dollars
up
to
well
kenilworth.
A
A
So
wilmette
is
going
to
be
approving
its
ordinance
next
mark
on
march,
8th,
so
we'll
see
what
they
come
up
with
and
they're
they're
they're
trying
to
decide
between
basically
a
top
rate
of
125
dollars
per
inch
versus
175
dollars
per
inch.
You
know,
if
you
had
a
40
40
inch
diameter
tree,
would
you
charge
175
dollars
per
inch
or
125,
so
there
that
that's
one
of
the
things.
A
In
the
discussion
in
the
in
the
minutes,
they
did
say
that
the
feedback
from
talking
to
some
of
these
other
communities
is
that
you
know
for
some
homeowners,
they'll
pay,
whatever
it
is,
and
the
tree
is
gone
and
then
yet
there
are
other
homeowners
for
him.
That's
a
real
financial
burden.
So
I
think
the
challenge
for
us
is
coming
up
with
a
way
to
protect
trees
that
isn't
a
huge
financial
burden
on
on
some
of
our
residents,
who
can't
really
afford.
K
L
Just
a
good
question,
so
we're
saying
residents
who
have
the
money
to
pay
to
take
down
the
tree,
but
don't
have
money
to
pay
for
the
fine.
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
this.
What
what
where's
the
equity.
Q
Yeah,
absolutely
not
no,
you
know
I,
it
depends
on
the
size
of
the
tree.
You
know
for
thinking
about
the
very
large
oak
tree
that
came
down
at
kendall
college.
That
would
probably
cost
three
four
thousand
dollars
out
of
pocket,
maybe
more,
depending
on
a
number
of
things,
how
easy
access
it
is,
and
you
know
the
you
know
what
condition
the
tree
is
in
or
whatever
else
it
also
depends
on
the
company
it
depends
on.
It
just
depends
on
so
much
right.
Q
A
L
Right,
I'm
worried
less
about
that
individual.
Let
me
be
honest,
I
think
if
you
have
the
money
to
to
pay
3
500
to
take
down
the
tree,
you
probably
could
handle
the
fee
associated
with
it,
the
fine
associated
with
it,
I'm
I'm
definitely
leaning
more
towards
you
know.
We
either
want
to
protect
the
trees
or
we
don't.
We
have
a
long
list
of
things
that
you
know
our
trees
contribute
to
our
community.
L
I
see
property
value,
storm
water,
co2,
air
quality,
so
I
think
we
just
need
to
make
a
decision,
but
but
I'm
not
as
concerned,
if
someone
has
four
thousand
dollars
to
to
take
down
the
tree,
I
think
they
can
handle
whatever
the
fee
is,
but
again
I'm
leaning
more
towards
just
you
don't
cut
it
down
unless
you
provide
a
reasoning
as
to
why
you're
cutting
it
down
right-
and
you
know
we
should
come
up
with
that
list
and
figure
out
what
that
looks
like,
but
it's
either
we're
gonna.
L
L
What
I,
what
I'm
more
concerned
about,
though,
is
because
it's
not
a
lot
of
people,
whether
they
have
it
or
not,
that
want
to
spend
4
000
to
take
down
the
treat
that
has
I've
not
heard
anybody
that
has
done
that
at
least
so
far
on
my
term,
what
I
hear
more
so
of
is
people
who
have
an
unhealthy
tree
right
who
need
help.
L
You
know
to
prune
it
and
to
even
inspect
it
to
know
whether
or
not
it
needs
to
come
down,
and
then
some
financial
assistance
to
deal
to
to
take
it
down
if
need
be,
or
to
prune
it,
etc,
and
so
do
we
have
any
so
first
question
is:
with
this
arborist
we're
going
to
hire,
would
it
will
it
improve
our
ability
to
inspect
trees
on
private
property?
Is
the
first
question.
L
R
Good
evening
committee
agricano
public
services,
bureau,
chief
chief
and
again
public
works
agency
director.
Yes,
the
hiring
of
another
certified
arborist
would
give
us
more
personnel
to
be
able
to
go
and
evaluate
the
trees.
While
the
forestry
department
that
we
currently
have
at
the
staffing
levels
are
able
to
focus
on
their
jobs
that
which
we
we
are
very
much
behind
on.
L
That
that
came
to
me
was
concerned
about
a
tree,
a
tree's
health.
They
were
in
a
dispute
trying
to
determine
whether
or
not
it
was
on
the
church's
property
or
the
or
the
property
owner's
property
and
where
they
live,
and
during
all
it
and
then
I
had
michael
callahan
come
out.
He
said
that
he
felt
like
the
tree
would
need
to
come
down.
He
said
if
it
was
in
my
if
it
was
on
my
property,
I
would
take
it
down,
but
during
all
of
this
we
had
the
big
storms.
L
The
resident
who's
renting
at
this
home
was
concerned
about
the
tree
falling
into
the
home,
and
it
did
after
the
big
storms
right.
So
I'm
more
so
concerned
about
that.
Like
someone
who
identifies
who's
income
eligible
right
that
identifies
a
an
unhealthy
tree
on
their
property,
how
can
we
help
them?
That's
really
where
what
I'm
concerned
about
and
then
to
the
other
issue
again,
I
think
we
should
just
provide
very
clear
direction
when
you
can
do
it
and
when
you
can't
that
that's
my
opinion.
R
And
right
now,
without
this
ordinance,
we
really
can't
give
our
you
know
we
can
give
our
opinion,
but
there's
nothing
stopping
them,
for
if
we
say
hey,
this
tree
does
need
to
come
down
or
there's
some
dangers
associated
with
it
again,
it's
it's
their
property
and
they
get
to
do
what
they
want.
As
of
right
now,.
J
Members
suffered
in
yeah
to
to
the
point
there
so
edgar
you
may
want
to
stay
there.
That
is
my
concern
too.
I.
I
will
also
agree
that
you
know,
while
right
now
we're
actually
discussing
the
preservation
of
trees.
I
do
agree
that
that
is
an
issue
and
I've
had
a
similar
concern,
but
did
I
understand
correctly
did
in
response
to
council
member
burns's
question?
Did
you
say
that
this
new
position,
if
added,
would
be
inspecting
trees
on
private
property.
J
Okay,
but
it
wouldn't
be
someone
couldn't
just
because
this
ordinance
wouldn't
cover
someone
calling
in
and
saying
hey,
there's
a
treatment
backyard
that
I
think
might
not
be
healthy.
Can
you
come
inspect
it
for
me
and
let
me
know
if
it's
healthy
or
not,
that
doesn't
seem
like
they'd,
be
covered
by
the
ordinance.
R
No
and
I'm
sorry,
if
I
misunderstood,
we
wouldn't
just
arbitrarily
go
respond
to
a
phone
call
saying
you
know.
Can
you
come
there's
a
dispute
between
two
neighbors
or
things
of
that
again,
that's
a
civil
matter
that
we
would.
N
What
are
you
saying,
I'm
going
to
jump
in
there?
That's
where
property
standards
will
come
in
and
property
standards
could
work
with
public
works.
To
cite-
and
there
have
been
other
properties
in
in
this
in
the
seventh
ward
that
have
had
tree
issues
on
that.
I
can
think
of
that
where
we
had
to
manage
that
issue.
It
was
on
tree
and
private
property.
We
have
to
go
on.
N
It
sounds
like
that
might
have
gone
gotten
to
that
level
to
property
standards,
but
then
the
storm
happened
and
the
tree
came
down
and
it
became
a
different
matter.
I.
L
I'm
saying
I'm
I
own
the
home
and
the
land,
it
is
the
tree
on
the
land.
I
have
a
tree
on
the
land.
I
want
to
call
the
city
to
ask
if
you
can
come
inspect
the
tree
so
that
I
know
whether
or
not
it
needs
to
come
down.
There's
no
dispute.
I
know
it's
my
tree.
It's
on
my
land,
I'm
not
running,
I'm
the
homeowner.
J
I'm
sorry
if
I,
if
I
can
hold
on
if
I
can
reclaim
my
time
so
the
answer
is
no
from
what
was
just
said
here
and
I
want
to
continue
my
flow
because.
L
J
Okay,
that's
what
I
want
to
clarify.
So
my
now
you
messed
up
my
train
of
thought,
I'll
move
on
to
someone
else.
A
Okay,
councilmember
sufferden.
P
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
it.
Listen
to
the
discussion,
I
wonder,
is
there
maybe
would
it
be
better
to
compensate
people
for
hosting
these
trees?
I
mean
listening
to
the
examples
that
council
member
lynn
gave
you
know
where
you
have
and
it's
not
unique
to
the
situation
she
described,
but
where
you
have
a
tree
located
in
one
yard
that
provides
shade
for
other
properties.
It
seems
like
it's
unfair
to
tell
that
person
hey.
P
You
can't
do
anything
with
this
tree,
but
your
neighbors
can
all
have
three
car
garages
because
you're
the
one
providing
shade
for
them
and
you
know
we're
talking
about
replacement
trees.
It
sounds
like
that's
they're
inferior
trees
that
will
need
a
long
time
to
grow.
Is
there
any
consideration
been
given,
or
I
guess
before
at
the
beginning
stages,
is
it
possible
to
give
some
consideration
to
compensating
owners
whose
property
has
these
hard
these
trees?
Because
I
know
you
know
there
are
people
who
have
to
rob
their
sewers
on
a
regular
basis.
P
The
trees
don't
come
without
costs
and
we're
saying
that
it's
in
the
interest
of
the
community
for
these
trees
to
continue
to
exist,
and
we
will
come
at
you
with
something
punitive.
If
you
choose
to
cut
it
down,
is
there
room
to
explore
some
sort
of
compensation
structure
for
for
properties
that
that
host
these
trees.
R
In
my
opinion,
in
my
opinion,
I
don't
think
that
it
would
be
the
best
way
to
go
again.
I
can
understand,
compensating-
and
you
know
whatever
that
nominal
amount
would
be,
but
I
feel
that
they,
the
property
owner,
would
feel
that
the
addition
of
a
garage
or
addition
to
their
house
would
be
of
a
greater
benefit,
and
you
know
a
better
financial
situation
for
them
to
actually
take
down
the
tree
and
build
that
garage
than
to
get
any
kind
of
financial
support.
Financial
from
the
city
to
keep
it.
R
P
Like
a
quick
example
of
what
maybe
I'm
talking
about
it's,
it's
not
going
to
solve
the
problem,
but
you
know
we
have
people,
it's
a
common
complaint
that
you
know
I
have
to
pay
to
water
parkway
treats
you
know.
I
pay
the
city
for
the
water
that
I
put
into
the
parkway
to
nourish
the
city's
tree.
Maybe
we
can
give
people
a
credit.
You
know
for
sewer
rotting
or
some
you
know
whatever,
like
things
are
caused
by
trees.
You
know
a
lot
of
times
when
a
tree's
cut
down,
it's
not
diseased.
P
It's
just
that.
It's
an
annoying
thing
to
have
on
your
property
and
it's
your
property.
Maybe
we
can
compensate
people
for
some
of
that
inconvenience
and
that
would
help
solve
some
of
the
problems.
P
It
sounds
like
we're
trying
to
solve,
although
I'm
not
totally
convinced
that
we've
established
that
it's
a
real,
widespread
problem,
but
I
I
get
why
we're
here,
and
so
I
just
want
to
throw
that
out
there
that
you
know
maybe
approaching
residents
with
some
sort
of
incentive,
rather
than
threatening
a
punishment,
could
get
us
to
a
better
place.
R
Again,
I'm
sorry
now
I
lost
my
train
of
thought
now
again.
The
main
goal
is
to
to
obviously
save
the
trees,
with
the
amount
of
trees
that
we
do
have
currently
in
evanston.
A
program
like
that
again
discussing
how
much
the
fee
structure
or
the
pay
structure
would
be
to
to
the
resident.
If
they
keep
it,
I
mean
that
could
be
just
an
exponential
amount
of
money
that
the
city
would
be
paying
out
for
somebody
to
just
maintain
a
tree
on
their
property.
R
So
and
again
this
we
don't
we're
not
trying
to
make
it
punitive.
We
don't
want.
You
know
to
cause
a
burden
to
anyone
we,
the
goal
of
it,
is
to
try
to
save
trees.
R
It's
part
of
our
carp
plan-
and
this
was
discussed
as
part
of
it
that
was
voted
on
and
agreed
upon
by
council,
we're
just
looking
at
ways
to
try
to
accomplish
this
so
again,
if
being
punitive
or
whether
it's
with
a
financial
burden
or
making
it
difficult
for
the
property
owner
or
the
developer,
to
obtain
a
proper
permit
to
remove
the
tree.
We're
just
trying
to
you
know,
seek
some
kind
of
direction.
Again.
All
all
ideas
are
welcome.
Council
member
suffered
in
you
know.
R
I
just
think
we
we
do
need
to
focus
on
one
path
so
that
we
can
devote
our
time
to
it.
You
know
we've
been
coming
here,
for
I
think
two
years
now
trying
to
get
some
direction
and
again
if
we
could
just
get
whether
it's
let's
get
a
fee
structure,
but
it's
not
too
much
money
or
let's
make
it
a
more
difficult
process
for
the
permit
where
they
have
to
show
excessive
burden.
I
mean
anything.
P
P
A
And,
and
even
though
we're
talking
tonight
about
protecting
trees,
our
carp
plan
talks
about
expanding
our
tree
canopy,
I
mean
we,
we
we
would
like
to
see
even
more
trees
than
we
have
right
now,
so
councilmember
reed,
then
council,
member
kelly,
then
council,
member
newsma.
J
Okay,
so
I
I
did
want
to
reiterate
another
point
based
on
what
council
member
ravel
was
saying
to
another
point
that
was
made.
You
know
if
we
do
an
institute
of
fine
and
we
were
to
follow
in
line
with
what
I'm
sorry
did.
You
say
well
matter,
waneka.
J
Okay,
that
in
line
with
what
will
met
is
doing
you
know,
for
you
know
at
that
low
end,
120
dollars
per
inch
for
a
20
inch
tree.
That's
a
2400
fine
for
40
inch
tree,
which
would
be
a
fairly
substantial
tree.
That's
a
forty
eight
hundred
dollar
fine
on
top
of
whatever
you
have
to
pay
so
that'd
make
you
know
the
total
cost,
like
eight
thousand
dollars
to
take
down
a
tree.
J
I
don't
know
if
I'm
opposed
to
that
necessarily
I
do
think
there
should
be,
as
councilmember
burns
was
later
in.
There
should
be
some
clear
paths
where
folks
are
able
to
take
down
a
tree
without
having
to
pay
that
fine.
So
if
certainly,
if
there's
a
danger
to
your
house,
obviously
you
should
take
it
down.
No,
no
cost!
No!
No!
But
if
you're-
and
I
think
the
way
that
we
can
ensure
that
someone
who's
just
building
a
garage
and
god
forbid
a
garage
is
the
worst
reason
to
take
down
a
tree.
J
You
know
more
car
infrastructure
to
take
down
a
tree,
but
if
someone
is
building
a
garage
and
they
want
to
take
down
a
tree,
then
I
definitely
think
they
should
pay
the
fee
and
also
I
you
know
we
during
the
garage
permitting
process.
I
think
we
would
be
able
to
determine
johanna
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
If
there's
a
tree
that
would
have
to
be
taken
down
as
a
part
of
that
process,
I
mean,
I
think
it
could
either
be
a
question
or
we
could
verify
that
somehow.
N
The
memo
outlines
that
we'd
have
some
kind
of
application,
so,
just
like,
we
perform
a
review
to
make
sure
that
you
can
follow
things
for
the
zoning
code.
We
would
do
something
similar
they'd
put
the
tree
down,
we'd
go,
but
that
that's
where
that
that
additional
position
would
really
have
to
come
into
play
you'd
have
to.
If
you,
I
think
when
we've
talked
about
this
for
the
past
couple
years,
we
wanted
to
have
a
very
long
lead
time
in
terms
of
when
we
would
be
not
too
long,
because
this
is
a
certainly
an
urgent.
N
I
think
we've
understood
this
to
be
urgent,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
we
get
that
person
in
place,
because
if
we
can't
start
collecting
and
requiring
an
application
without
the
staff
we
we
can
barely
keep
up
with
the
permit
activity
in
community
development,
and
I
I
know
our
colleagues
in
public
works
are
having
a
challenge
just
keeping
up
with
the
public.
True
canopy
issues,
yeah
and.
J
I
will
say
if
we're
going
to
start
putting
out
ideas
for
where
we're
drawing
lines.
Let's
say
you
know,
if
you're
making
a
garage
in
addition
to
your
house
and
it's
a
garage.
I
think
you
need
to
pay
this.
J
If
you're
expanding
your
house,
because
you
have
a
new
child
and
you
you
know,
need
another
room,
I
don't
know
if
that
should
be
something
that
you
know
we
find
you
for,
but
I
do
think
we
need
a
a
very
clear
list
of
of
what,
where
you'd
pay
the
fine
and
where
you
wouldn't
pay
the
fine.
J
So
I'm
I'm
in
line
with
that,
I
think
to
the
I
don't
know:
if
it's
still
a
question,
I
heard
it
brought
up
at
the
beginning,
but
to
the
you
know,
legality
of
this
I
mean
we
have
zoning
codes
and
design
codes
and
all
kinds
of
things
that
regulate
what
you
can
and
can't
do
on
your
property,
and
I
don't
think
a
tree
ordinance
would
be
much
different
than
deciding.
You
know
whether
the
materials
that
you
use
on
the
side
of
your
house
are
appropriate
or
not
for
neighborhoods.
J
So
I
think
this
is
perfectly
in
line
with
with
with
those
principles,
so
very
supportive
and
yeah
I'd
just
love
to
see
what
what
kind
of
list
given
the
feedback
here
you
all
come
back
with
with
kind
of
delineating.
What
you
think
appropriate
uses
are
for
not
having
the
fees
and
what
appropriate
uses
are
for
having
the
fees
and
then
I
don't
know
if
we
discussed.
I
I
think,
there's
some
consensus
up
here
on
the
fees
is
that
maybe.
Q
A
But
I
I
think
I'm
getting
except
for
council
member
suffered
and
the
feeling
that
that
we
are,
we
are
interested
in
having
a
replacement
fee,
that's
not
excessive
and
and
that
and
that
there's
a
real
process
that
the
home
that
the
property
owner
goes
through.
You
know
developing
a
plan
and
being
as
part
of
that
process,
sort
of
learning
more
about
why
the
tree
is
really
valuable
and
seeing
if
there
isn't
some
kind
of
compromise.
So
I
I
think
that's
where
we're
headed
most
of
us
on
this
committee.
Q
Councilmember
revell,
just
if
I
can
interject
very
quickly
in
response
to
councilmember
reed.
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
I
think
that's
precisely
what
we're
looking
for
is
you
know
direction
on
what
those
clear
guidelines
would
be.
It
sounds
like.
Maybe
fees
would
be
fees,
but
there
would
be
opportunity
for
relief
based
on
you
know.
The
specific
circumstances
of
those
households-
and
that's
actually
precisely
where
we
are
stuck
right-
is
defining
what
those
guidelines
would
be
and
where
you
know
where
that
relief
would
come,
which
types
of
households
or
projects.
A
Yeah
so
councilmember
kelly,
you
had
your
light.
J
Just
one
more
thing
on
guidance:
you
know
that
I
laid
out
some
things
that
I
thought
were
important.
I
think
again,
a
garage
pay,
the
fine
providing
affordable
housing.
You
know
if
you're,
building
an
affordable
housing,
I
think
maybe
development.
I
think,
maybe
that
we
can
cut
you
out
of
the
fee.
A
Okay,
so
council,
member
kelly,
did
you.
O
Yeah
just
quickly
again
just
to
sort
of
reiterate
what
I
said
before,
but
I
think
if
I
think
I
just
don't
want
to
see
this
drag
out
like
sort
of
the
leaf,
blower
ordinance
and
I
feel
like
we
could
move
right
away
on
large
new
developments
or
new
construction
that
are
multi-unit,
because
I
don't
think
anybody
would
object
here
to
that
and
we
could
get
that
done.
I
think
quickly.
O
So,
for
example,
I
know
I
mean
there's
like
there's
the
kendall
there's
the
1900
sherman.
I
have
people
at
sherman
gardens.
Ask
me:
please
save
the
large
evergreen.
I
think
you
know.
I
don't
think
anybody
here
would
object
to
having
an
ordinance
that
protected
trees
on
new
construct,
new
large
construction
developments.
C
Lost
mike
right,
I
haven't
lost
my
train
of
thought.
I
would
like
to
take
this
train
to
the
station
and
leave
it
there
for
the
evening
and
I'm
going
to
recommend
or
suggest
or
ask
about
the
possibility
of
that
station
being
the
environment
board.
I
assume
you've
spoken
with
the
environment
board
about
this
issue.
Would.
A
Q
Yeah,
I'd
be
more
than
happy
to
propose
that
to
them.
I
have
asked
them
for
their
recommendations,
and
you
know
that's
included
in
this
memo,
so
those
have
been
already
been
integrated,
but
I
could
certainly
ask
them
for
further
recommendations
and
ask
them
for
those
guidelines.
Q
C
L
My
thought
was
this:
we
have
a
lot
of
kind
of
working
groups
formed
just
to
do
deeper
exploration
on
these
type
of
questions.
This
needs
a
more
thorough
discussion
on
the
panel
that
isn't
this
panel,
so
I
would,
I
would
support.
J
That
I
will
just
say
that
I
don't
know
if
the
I
I
wonder,
if,
like
the
zoning
committee
or
some
other
committee,
that
deals
more
with
I
get,
there
certainly
is
there's
an
environmental
aspect
to
this,
but
this
also
is
very
heavily.
You
know
it's
planning
and
it
really
is
planning
and
development
very
much
kind
of
zoning
type
things
and
I'd
wonder
if
that
expertise.
I
mean
we're
very
clear:
we
understand
the
environmental
impact
of
trees.
J
I
don't
think
that's
really
a
question
that
really
the
question
I
think
we're
hearing
is
more
about
fee
fine
structure
and
you
know
other
things
that
have
very
little
to
do
with
the
environment.
So
I'll
just
note
that.
R
Well,
and
also
keep
in
mind,
it
has
to
do
with
equity.
So
yes,
it's
environmental
planning,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
whatever
is
proposed,
whether
it's
by
the
environment
border
by
staff,
that
council
is
on
board
feeling
that
it's
equitable
enough
and
that's
pretty
much
the
direction
you
know
the
base
we
wanted
to
start
at
if
it's
like
okay,
this
was
what
we
can
find
to
be
an
equitable
state
build
off
on
that.
So
I
mean
again,
we
can't
take
it
to
the
environment
board,
but
just
please
keep
in
mind.
C
We've
got
bright
people
on
the
environment
board
who
can
solicit
advice
where
they,
you
know
where
they
need
it.
So
I'd
feel
comfortable.
Referring
this.
N
I
was
just
going
to
add
to
your
point:
councilmember
reed.
I
think
the
bigger
issue
is
the:
what
are
we
trying?
What
is
the
goal
that
we're
trying
to
accomplish,
and
then
we
can
build
a
fee
structure
or
a
process
from
there?
I
don't
think
that
our
land
use
commission
they're
not
familiar
with
the
internal
workings
of
how
we
process
permits.
We
have
people
who
work
in
the
city
who
don't
even
know
how
we
process
permits.
N
So
that's,
okay,
but
we
will
we,
I
think,
give
us
the
problem
we're
trying
to
specifically
solve,
and
then
we
can
apply
the
the
process
once
we
have
it
and.
N
That's
right
and
that's
perfectly
appropriate,
and
then
we
can
work
together
as
staff
to
come
back
with
how
that
would
work
in
a
process
in
a
fee
structure
in
an
ordinance
right.
J
Yeah,
I
think
that
would
be
a
motion
to
refer
this.
I
mean
I
think
it
was
motioned
and
seconded
so.