►
From YouTube: Planning & Development Committee Meeting 11/12/2018
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
Revisions
or
comments
all
those
in
favor
of
approving
the
minutes,
aye
any
opposed
the
minutes
are
approved.
The
way
we
do.
The
public
comment
for
the
planning
development
committee
meeting
is
we
will
have
the
public
comments
speak
when
we're
calling
the
respective
items,
as
opposed
to
just
having
a
bunch
of
comments
at
the
front
end.
So
the
first
item
we
have
on
the
agenda
for
consideration
is
a
vacation
rental
license
for
1918
Jackson
Avenue
city
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
a
vacation
rental
license
for
the
property
located
to
that
address.
A
B
A
B
A
C
A
So
that
would
be
one
two
six
two
one
all
right.
So
thank
you
office.
Okay.
Next
item
is
p2
vacation
rental
license
for
one
zero
zero
five
do
we
Avenue
City
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
a
vacation
rental
license
for
the
property
located
to
this
address.
The
rental
meets
all
of
the
standards
and
procedures
for
license
approval,
and
this
is
also
for
action.
Is
there
a
motion.
A
D
A
Okay,
it
is
Ono
owners
here
and
verify
that
its
owner
occupied.
Thank
you
for
that.
Okay,
all
in
favor
aye
any
opposed.
Okay
that
will
go
to
the
council.
This
evening
item
three
is
resolution.
99
r18
authorizing
the
city
manager
to
purchase
two
vacant,
lots
located
at
2122,
Darrow,
Avenue
and
2113
Dewey
Avenue.
A
The
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
resolution
authorizing
the
city
manager
to
preserve
to
purchase
the
two
Lots
for
the
sum
of
$2
and
that
would
be
$1
apiece
as
I
understand
it:
21
22,
Darrow
and
21
13,
Dewey,
Avenue
or
vacant
land
acquired
as
for
closed
housing
with
the
Neighborhood
Stabilization
program,
also
known
as
NSP
funds.
The
properties
are
being
transferred
to
the
city
so
that
the
city
may
close
out
as
NSP
to
grant
with
a
HUD
I
do
so
by
December
31st
2018.
This
is
for
action.
Is
there
a
motion?
A
A
A
3
foot,
side,
interior
side
yard
setback
where
5
feet
is
required
for
the
principal
structure,
a
3.5,
a
side
street
3.5,
foot
sites,
side,
yard
setback
where
15
feet
is
required
for
the
principal
structure
and
8.5
foot
street
side
yard
setback
where
15
feet
is
required
for
a
deck
and
a
10
foot
street
side
yard
setback
where
15
feet
is
required
for
a
detached
garage.
Also
a
one
side.
One
foot
sites
it's
hard
to
say
that
one
foot
street
side
yard
setback
where
15
feet
is
required
for
open
parking.
A
This
is
in
the
r1
single-family
residential
district,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals,
determined
that
the
proposal
did
not
meet
all
standards
for
resident
for
major
variation
and
specifically
that
the
proposal
would
result
in
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
the
adjoining
properties,
and
that
the
requested
variations
are
not
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulations
among
the
feasible
options
identified
as
I
mentioned.
This
is
Freud
introduction
move
introduction.
Is
there
a
second.
A
E
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Joseph
Paradis
I
reside
at
2,
9:07
Hartzell
Street
across
the
alley
corner
from
26:26
Reis.
In
my
statement
tonight
were
first
item.
P
4
on
the
agenda.
I
have
personally
reviewed
every
Planning
and
Development
Committee
agenda
from
2018
and
I
find
it
remarkable
that
not
a
single
item
coming
before
this
committee
has
had
the
staff
recommending
approval
when
zba
has
recommended
denial
in
this
case.
This
is
the
second
time
that
CBA
has
unanimously
denied
a
request
from
this
speculator
to
build
an
inappropriate
dwelling
on
this
property.
E
Given
the
expertise
of
the
members
on
the
CBA
and
their
explicit
Charter
to
adjudicate
on
these
types
of
applications,
it
is
extremely
rare
for
this
type
of
case
to
be
brought
before
this
committee.
It
is
clear
that
the
applicant
structured
the
current
proposal
to
feature
an
open
parking
space
which
allows
him
to
appeal
a
case
that
he
could
not
win
in
front
of
the
body
that
has
the
most
experience
and
skill
in
this
area.
E
He
appears
to
be
attempting
to
leverage
his
political
connections
with
members
of
City
Council,
including
ones
on
this
committee,
to
reach
his
desired
outcome.
As
the
cba
cited
in
their
most
recent
denial
of
the
request
for
a
major
variance,
this
proposal
does
not
meet
the
legally
required
standards
for
a
major
variation
city
code.
6
dash
3
dash
8
in
multiple
ways,
including
adverse
impact
on
the
adjoining
properties
and
requesting
relief.
That
is
not
the
minimum
necessary
relief,
as
has
been
mentioned
multiple
times
in
both
CBA
hearings.
E
The
applicant
was
fully
aware
of
the
condition
of
the
property
when
it
was
purchased
and
the
restrictions
that
this
plot
of
land
had
under
the
existing
zoning
law.
He
is
a
speculator
that
is
making
a
bet
that
he
can
break
the
city
of
Evanston
law
in
order
to
make
a
healthy
profit
for
himself
and
his
investors,
I
would
put
to
you
the
members
of
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
of
the
City
Council.
E
That
Evanston
is
not
a
city
where
we
have
a
tradition
of
putting
the
interests
of
speculators
above
the
interests
of
the
citizens
of
Evanston.
Nor
do
I
believe
that
you
or
we
want
to
start
that
tradition
tonight.
I,
therefore
urge
you
to
deny
the
proposal
for
ordinance,
1,
1,
2,
Oh
team
regarding
2626
Reis.
Happy
thank
you
and.
A
F
Hello,
I'm
Nancy,
Nancy,
crane
I
live
at
2821,
Hartzell
Street
I'm
kitty-corner
from
this
property.
So
it's
right
in
my
line
of
sight,
I'd
like
to
say
that
other
three
houses
on
the
corner
meet
the
setbacks,
which
makes
a
mockery
of
this
zoning
ordinance,
setting
a
precedent
for
other
properties
that
could
be
built
in
the
area
and
the
new
submission
after
4:00
p.m.
we
did
not
even
have
a
chance
to
really
even
look
at
this,
so
really
no
thoughtful
consideration.
So
we
have
to
go
back
on
what
we
already
knew
from
the
past
meetings.
F
I
want
to
say
that
we
love
neighbors.
We
want
to
have
people
in
our
neighborhood
I.
Just
don't
believe
that
this
speculators
should
be
allowed
to
break
so
many
major
variations.
In
fact,
I.
Don't
think
you
should
be
able
be
allowed
to
break
any
major
variations.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
and.
G
My
name
is
George
Kirkpatrick
I
live
at
2904,
Hartzell
Street,
which
is
the
property
adjacent
to
the
property
in
question
across
the
alley.
I'd
like
to
just
start
with
by
saying
that
I
support
everything
that
Joseph
said
I
think
he
said
it
quite
eloquently
so
in
the
in
the
idea
of
brevity.
I
won't
repeat
some
of
the
same
points
again,
but
I
think
it
was
a
thoughtful
approach
to
it.
G
One
thing
I
will
say
is
that
I
did
get
the
document
that
was
submitted
late
this
afternoon
and
in
it
the
petitioner
says
that
the
zba
commentary
and
denying
this
petition
failed
to
form
any
consensus
about
a
house
designed
for
a
lot
that
could
be
configured
in
a
way
that
would
gain
their
approval.
Some
I
understand
the
CBA
is
in
the
design
business.
G
He
further
goes
on
to
allude
that
the
CBA
was
not
open
to
recommending
something
in
the
future,
in
other
words,
an
a
more
appropriate
house
on
that
lot
and
if
you
actually
read
the
minutes
and
I
can
have
them
and
I
can
cite
them.
There
was
at
least
three
zba
members
who
said
this
was
he
was
getting
close,
but
he's
not
there.
Yet
not.
There
yet
implies
that
they
can
see
a
house
on
the
property,
and
it's
just
not
the
one
he's
proposing
tonight.
G
H
Wife
of
Scott
Kirkpatrick
to
9:04
Hartzell
street
adjacent
to
the
property.
This
owner
is
not
an
occupant
he's,
a
speculator.
His
applications
based
exclusively
upon
the
desire
to
extract
income
from
the
property
we
should
not.
This
is
a
self-inflicted
hardship
on
the
size
of
the
house
that
he
wants
to
build
when
he
proposed
we've
been
here
three
times
in
front
of
zba
with
various
people.
The
proposal
he'd
put
out
last
last
time
was
11
square
feet
smaller
than
the
one
before
so
did
not
take
into
consideration.
I
I
In
my
view,
there
are
three
ways
that
mr.
James
can
build
on
that
property.
The
first
would
be
if
he
acquires
mr.
horse
teams
property
and
then
has
a
50-foot
lot.
The
second
would
be
for
the
CBA
to
agree
with
his
request
for
variances,
and
then
the
CBA
would
come
before
you
with
their
recommendation
to
allow
him
to
build,
and
the
last
way
would
be
for
the
appropriate
government
bodies
in
Evanston
to
rewrite
or
change
the
existing
zoning
laws.
I
J
First
I'd
like
to
thank
all
of
my
neighbors.
If
you
talk
about
the
city
of
Evanston,
that
really
isn't
made
up
of
the
people
that
I'm
sitting
infront
of
here,
it's
made
up
of
my
neighbors
that
have
stood
against
this
proposal
to
be
built.
That's
what
a
neighborhood
has
were
different
in
every
type,
but
we
all
seem
to
really
get
along
in
this.
So
I've
lived
a
norm
to
property
at
2624,
risa
Avenue
for
nearly
32
years.
My
maternal
grandmother
and
grandfather
lived
in
a
home
from
1944
until
1983
my
grandmother
sisters,
husband
mr.
J
John
Mohr
built
the
house
in
1925.
I
did
not
inherit
the
house,
as
most
people
believe
I
paid
for
it
after
I
got
divorced
in
1986,
I
had
to
sell
my
home
in
our
in
Oak
Park
and
my
family
begged
me
to
come
up
and
take
care
of
the
home,
so
my
grandmother
could
sell
it.
I
planned
on
being
there
for
a
year
and
I
was
gonna
move
to
California
for
a
new
career.
When
my
grandmother
found
out
I
was
living
in
her
house.
She
begged
me
to
stay
there
one
more
year
before
she
died.
J
I've
been
there
ever
since
it's
my
home
in
a
neighborhood
where
families
have
lived
for
decades
raise
their
families,
pay
their
taxes,
taking
care
of
their
homes
and
neighbors,
unlike
mr.
James
who's.
Very
rarely
ever
cut
the
property
and
put
put
such
a
disfiguration
on
my
house
anybody's
home
here.
It
would
not
sell
because
of
the
conditions
of
this
lot
that
this
man
is
created
tonight.
This
fact
couldn't
be
more
self-evident.
The
last
three
times
this
housing
plan
has
come
before
the
city's
ABA
CBA.
J
It's
been
shot
down
in
a
mentally
by
the
neighbors
in
the
CBA.
In
fact,
the
first
owner
paid
for
the
property
after
one
in
a
tax
foreclosure
came
to
my
house
back
in
2016
and
threatened
me.
He
said
I
just
bought
this
property
in
a
tax,
foreclosure
and
I
want
to
let
you
know
you
don't
know
who
you're
dealing
with
I
need
to
talk
to
you
at
nine
o'clock
at
night.
I.
Don't
let
anybody
in
nine
o'clock
at
night,
so
that
started
that
he
sold
it
to
a
family
that
were
so
concerned.
J
They
didn't
even
go
to
the
CBA
because
they
knew
they
wouldn't
win.
In
other
words,
all
my
neighbors
came
to
vote
against
this
plan.
The
city
of
Evanston,
like
I,
said
it's
neighborhoods
that
extend
from
Howard
to
Isabella
from
Lake
to
Crawford.
They
contain
thousands
of
homes
and
families
to
make
the
city
their
home.
These
people
live
in.
My
neighborhood
should
be
able
to
determine
what
goes
on
in
her
neighborhood,
especially
when
deceptive
and
fraudulent
building
plans
are
put
in
front
of
them,
like
the
one
mr.
James
is
proposing.
J
This
proposed
plans
breaking
ever
major
variance
in
all
nine
sides
and
dimensions.
If
the
rule,
the
long
variance
are
held
accountable,
the
house
could
only
be
five
feet
wide
40
feet
long
and
when
I
talk
about
nine
sides,
I'm
talking
about
the
side
of
the
house
on
both
sides,
front
of
the
house,
the
back
of
the
house,
all
four
sides
of
the
garage
and
mr.
James
wants
to
have
a
foundation
dug
down
to
both
feet.
There
is
an
abatement
in
Wilmette
or
in
Evanston,
Northwest
Evanston,
that's
below
five
or
six
feet
below
grade
every
neighbor.
J
So,
as
I
said,
they're,
currently,
five
houses
on
this
block.
This
would
make
it
six.
Every
neighbor
Block
in
my
neighborhood
has
four
houses.
So
it's
already
condensed
enough.
The
house
next
to
B
was
built
in
1940
and
they
weren't
allowed
to
build
a
basement
due
to
the
structural
problems
and
the
integrity
that
affected
both
the
house
at
26:20
in
my
house
at
26
before
this
creates
not
only
a
parking
inconvenience,
a
fire
safety
hazard,
water
and
sewer
Asuza,
most
important
to
me.
J
It
causes
a
severe
and
personal
enjoyment
of
my
property
from
the
close
proximity
in
the
structural
issues
of
a
basement,
excavation
of
12
feet
less
than
five
feet
from
my
house,
not
the
property
line,
but
the
physical
structure
due
to
the
fact
that
it's
a
grandfathered
non-conforming
property,
it's
only
three
feet
from
the
property
line.
On
the
north
side,
mr.
James
has
owned
this
property
for
nearly
two
years.
At
the
last
CBA
meeting,
he
didn't
even
even
know
the
actual
square
footage
of
the
house.
J
They
kind
of
laughed
at
me
because
I
brought
up
Wade,
Clark
structural
engineering
report.
Talking
about
how
dangerous
it
was.
This
would
be
to
build
that
close
to
a
house
nearly
100
years
old.
No
one
took
it
seriously.
Mr.
Wade
Clark,
his
former
neighbor
mine
lives
out
in
Oregon,
as
one
of
the
premier
structural
engineers
in
a
world
flies.
J
All
around
the
world
doing
structural
evaluations,
the
side
yard
setback
would
not
only
had
adversely
affect
my
home's
foundation
will
also
affect
my
security
safety,
noise,
water
runoff
and
will
contribute
to
corner
sidewalk
and
garage
blackhat
sight
lines
for
the
children
and
families
who
live
on
reefs
and
in
Lincoln
wood
and,
most
importantly,
my
privacy.
When
a
house
extends
15
behind
15
feet.
Behind
the
rear
of
my
house
covers
over
50%
of
my
backyards.
28
feet:
high
half
of
my
backyard,
all
I'm
looking
at
is
a
house
three
feet
three
feet
from
my
property
line.
J
J
Please
don't
try
and
disrupt
the
neighborhood
with
an
investment
speculator
that
only
wants
to
build
a
non-conforming
house
on
a
piece
of
land
that
only
allows
a
5-foot
wide
house
to
be
built.
If
it
fails
current
code,
don't
try
and
grandfather
in
a
home.
Now
we're
non-conforming
grandfather's
home,
such
as
mine,
has
existed
for
nearly
a
hundred
years.
I
can't
help.
My
house
is
a
small,
the
smallest
one
in
the
neighborhood.
It
was
built
within
four
to
five
years
of
almost
every
home
in
the
neighborhood.
J
K
Good
evening
committee
members
I'm
not
speaking
today
on
p4,
because
I
will
be
directly
impacted
by
this
proposed
zoning
relief
on
Reese,
in
fact
I'm
here,
because
our
property
has
been
impacted
by
a
similar
earlier
decision
to
allow
an
incredible
addition
of
impermeable
surfaces
on
our
neighbor's
property.
Not
only
do
these
variances
that
happen
here
in
Evanston
allow
increasing
amounts
of
impermeable
surfaces,
but
they
cause
increased
flooding
on
neighbors
properties
like
mine.
K
Untreated
water
to
be
released
into
into
Lake
Michigan,
as
we
experience
some
more
severe
storms
with
more
frequency,
I
think
this
is
a
sustainable
issue
as
well
as
a
neighborhood
issue,
so
I'm
I'm
on
the
sustainable
part
but
I've
also
been
impacted
by
these
decisions.
So
I
would
really
recommend
that
you
turn
down
the
proposal
of
the
city.
Folks
who
have
said
that
you
should
approve
this
and
go
with
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeal.
Does
that
say
you
should
do
not
yet
thank.
L
Evening,
hi
I'm,
mark
Newman
I
live
right
across
the
street
from
where
the
house
is
supposed
to
be,
as
you
can
see
from
the
people
that
have
talked
here.
This
is
a
pretty
controversial
issue
and
I
hope
you're,
not
taking
any
umbrage
is
what
they're
saying
is
very
emotional
in
many
ways
deals
with
a
lot
of
issues
of
runoff.
It
deals
with
a
lot
of
other
things
that
we've
talked
about
to
safety,
it's
set
for,
etc.
Mr.
James
wants
to
build
a
two-story
house.
L
Funny
thing
is:
there's
two
other
houses
that
provide
a
model
for
him.
They
are
not
two
storeys.
They
would
be
very
easily
to
adapt
the
other
two
that
are
on
the
other
two
corners
so
that
he
could
get
his
house
and
build
it
initially.
Everyone
opposed
this
I
think
a
lot
of
people
still
oppose
it.
We
recognized
that
something
might
be
built,
but
we'd
rather
have
something
built.
That's
scalable,
to
give
you
an
idea
of
what
it
would
be
for
me.
L
M
You
Kathy
Miller
2031
Hartzell
across
the
street,
from
this
proposed
development.
I've
worked
very
closely
with
the
neighbors
and
I
want
you
to
know
that
we
have
28
families.
Who've
been
opposed
to
this.
It's
been
a
growing
group
because
they
can't
actually
believe
that
this
is
a
buildable
lot,
so
Aldermen
suffered
and
has
had
to
kind
of
suffer
through
hearing
this
from
all
of
his
constituents.
M
A
M
The
chairman
of
the
GBA
stated
particularly
that
her
interests
and
her
concern
to
the
hardship
to
the
neighbors
was
one
of
mine
is
that,
besides
being
potentially
very
potentially
destructive
to
Mister
horse
Tings
property,
three
feet
from
the
sidewalk
is
probably
the
distance
in
the
back
of
your
chair
to
the
front
of
your
desk
about
this
bar
is
way
we
want
to.
He
wants
to
build
a
two-story,
50
foot
long
wall
along
our
street,
with
no
visible
sight
line
at
the
corner
of
Hartzell
and
Reese.
M
M
She
mentioned
that
Scott
Gingold,
one
of
your
members
of
the
CBA
cited
that
the
he
feels
that
is
the
matin,
that
the
water
runoff
is
a
major
hardship
for
the
neighborhood,
and
that
was
one
of
the
reasons
why
they
said
this
Carol
Corinne
chef,
who
is
an
architect
on
the
CBA,
also
said
that
this
house
has,
rather,
in
his
opinion,
a
luxurious
staircase
that
it
really
could
be
narrowed.
But
the
applicant
comes
back
with
a
three
point:
four
percent
change
and
zba
gives
total
consideration
to
this.
M
They
have
gone
out
of
their
way
to
give
this
builder
an
opportunity
to
make
his
points.
They've
been
bent
over
backwards
to
be
fair,
the
staff
has
done
the
same
but
again,
and
they
oppose
this
I
urge
you
to
do
the
same.
Otherwise,
as
the
point
Nancy
made,
it
makes
a
mockery
of
the
committees
that
you,
the
citizens
with
volunteer
time.
M
A
Those
sales
next
and
then
we
have
Robert
Riza
and
Colleen
Barkley
and
if
the
rest
of
the
speakers
just
be
mindful
of
what
those
before
you
said,
so
kind
of
focus
on
you
know
you
can
say
you
agree
with
them,
but
maybe
I'm
sure
you
want
to
hear
our
conversation
about
it
as
well
before
it's.
You
know
too
late
in
the
evening.
Okay,
go
ahead,
actually
I.
N
Just
wanted
to
comment
on
this
petitioners
case
for
approval
that
I
saw
for
the
first
time
as
I
walked
in
here
this
evening,
and
specifically
the
fourth
paragraph
where
he
identifies
this
central
issue
and
within
that
paragraph
the
second
sentence
which
says
the
petitioner
has
submitted
two
reasonable
proposals
to
the
Zoning
Board,
both
of
which
were
rejected.
I.
Think
the
centrality
of
the
central
issue
is
in
that
sentence,
but
I
would
move
to
strike
the
word
reasonable,
I
think
the
facts
are
that
two
proposals
were
presented
and
both
of
them
were
rejected.
N
Reasonableness
is
what
we
debated
twice.
Reasonableness
is
what
the
CBA
considered
very
carefully
twice,
and
reasonableness
is
what
the
CBA
rejected
twice.
That
is
the
process
that
we
participated
in
as
citizens.
Those
are
the
outcomes
and
now
to
come
back
and
say
we
went
through
this
process
now,
let's
throw
that
out
and
decide
something
else,
I
think
invalidates
what
we
took
at
face
value
as
citizens
coming
here
to
participate
in
this
thing
and
reasonable
is
what
was
on
the
table.
It
cannot
be
just
stated,
as
that
was
the
truth
reasonable,
as
prison.
N
O
I'm
Robert
Ryan
28:31
Hartzell
across
the
street
from
the
proposed
development.
The
applicants
claim
that
the
difficulty
or
hardship
is
due
to
the
size
and
narrowness
of
a
lot
25
feet
wide
and
location
on
the
corner,
and
that
this
is
not
a
self
created.
Hardship
is
incorrect.
The
difficulty
or
hardship
are
self-imposed
as
the
size
of
the
lot
and
the
location
of
the
lot
were
well
known
at
the
time
of
purchase.
O
A
P
To
just
make
this
brief
I.
Second,
all
my
neighbor's
comments
here
and
I
would
also
like
to
just
address
two
other
issues:
one
as
a
practicing
Landscape
Architect
licenses
in
the
state
of
Illinois
I
have
a
deep
respect
for
heritage
trees
around
surrounding
the
slot.
There's
one
on
my
neighbor's
property
to
the
south.
That
is
a
heritage,
beautiful
oak
and
secondly,
there
is
another
larger
elm
tree
on
the
Parkway.
P
Both
of
these
trees
are
in
the
Heritage
category,
because
the
size
of
the
caliper
of
the
DBH
of
the
tree
and
the
radius
of
that
tree,
the
critical
root
zone,
extends
upon
the
center
of
the
r8
the
center
of
the
tree
every
inch
per
foot.
It
extends
so
some
of
these
trees,
their
critical
root
zone,
is
2030
feet
which
overlaps
this
entire
property
there's
no
way
to
preserve,
which
is
in
the
ordinance
of
the
zoning
of
the
landscape,
ordinance
of
the
zoning
of
Evanston
to
preserve
these
trees
that
we
have
in
our
community.
P
Secondly,
as
many
have
already
addressed
the
drainage,
there
is
one
that
I've
have
to
cross
myself
with
Evanston
in
the
past
and
that's
the
code
where
all
the
downspouts
have
to
be
ten
feet
back
from
the
sidewalks.
This
is
not
possible
on
this
corner
lot
with
what's
been
proposed
and
all
that
water
would
either
have
to
flow
to
the
alley
or
directly
to
the
south,
to
my
neighbor
and
then
again
to
my
neighbor,
which
we
already
received.
P
Many
flooding
and
I
don't
think
it's
safe
to
push
it
to
the
alley,
because
we
have
as
we're
experiencing
cold
temperatures
right
now,
freeze
and
thaw
cycles
that
is
just
not
safe,
so
health
and
the
safety
of
the
welfare
and
the
drainage
of
the
land
I
asked
you
to
think
about
this
and
oppose
it.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
You
I
do
have
a
number
of
other
people's
people
signed
up,
but
you
didn't
mark
what
you're
here
to
talk
about.
Is
there
anybody
else?
You
wanted
to
speak
to
this
item.
Who'd
sign
up:
okay,
I'm,
just
gonna
incase
you
signed
up
on
this
sheet
and
I
read
a
few
names
if
you
meant
to
sign
up
on
the
council
sheet,
you'll
want
to
do
that.
Instead
of
this
sheet,
so
Belinda
McKinley,
Angela,
Branca,
Robin,
Robinson,
Margaret,
Ruth
ki,
sir
Letta
Hilton
and
the
penmanship
rivals
mine
in
some
of
these
instances.
A
D
R
The
evening
was
chairman
members,
the
committee.
This
is
a
legally
created
lot,
so
it
is
something
that
can
be
built
upon.
However,
as
noted
based
on
the
dimensions
that
a
lot
variations
would
likely
be
required
for
pretty
much
anything
there.
A
number
of
non-conforming
Lots
in
the
city
that
were
created
often
before
the
zoning
code
was
created.
D
Well,
we
and
Scott
we've
had
others
of
those
come
up
before
us
over
the
years,
but
never
one
that
I
can.
Think
of
that.
Is
this
extreme,
so
I
think
that
that's
really
a
conundrum
here
that
the
question
is
then
what
is
considered
buildable
here
without
major
variations
that
would
fit
on
law
on
the
a
lot.
Did
the
CPA
discuss
that
I?
Don't
see
that
in
their
discussion,
I
think.
S
A
L
S
So
you've
heard
a
lot
of
public
comment
and
you
know
I
never
realized
what
a
horrible
person
it
was
until
I
came
here.
Well,
I
actually
hit
her
twice
before
when
I
went
to
zba,
but
I.
Think
I
should
really
start
by
explaining.
Why
I'm
here
why
this
case
is
here,
you
know
I
built
22
houses
in
Evanston.
S
You
know
as
a
side,
business,
so
I'm.
Actually
an
urban
planner,
neighborhood
planner
community
planner
by
profession
and
I.
Do
this
as
kind
of
a
hobby
on
the
side.
You
know
I,
never
really
thought
of
myself
as
a
speculator,
but
I
I
came
into
this
lot
because
the
prior
owner
had
her
broker
contact
people
that
she
knew
built
houses
in
Evanston
and
offered
it
for
sale
because
of
frankly,
the
kind
of
reception
that
you
see
here
tonight,
very
significant
neighbor
opposition
and
I
was
told
that
that
owner
wouldn't
want
to
live
in
the
neighborhood.
S
S
Is
that
a
buildable
lot,
or
does
the
city
intend
that
this
never
be
built
on
and
I
was
told
that
the
city
city
policies
that
this
is
a
buildable
lot,
that
a
house
should
be
built
on
this
and
in
saying
so
there's
a
recognition
that
variances
must
be
granted?
Yes,
the
degree
of
variation
is
I.
Think
at
issue
here
should
be
what's
at
issue
here,
but
given
the
fact
that
it's
a
20
foot
wide
lot
corner
20
foot
wide
corner
lot,
the
corner
side
yard
requirement
is
15
feet.
S
The
interior
side,
yard
requirement
is
5
feet,
does
leave
only
five
feet
of
buildable
width,
so
if
it
is
buildable,
then
there
has
to
be
some
significant
relief
granted
in
these
in
these
zoning
standards.
So
I
looked
at
the
prior
application,
which
was
the
prior
owners
application.
It
was
a
much
bigger
house
and
what
I
thought
should
be
built
there.
I
thought
I
could
build
a
smaller,
reasonably
sized
house.
That
would
meet
the
standards
and
so
based
and
I
also
asked
city
staff.
I
said
well.
S
The
neighbors
are
opposed
to
the
prior
owners,
petition
kind
of
a
drove
her
out
of
the
process.
Will
that
be
how
the
case
is
decided
that
by
the
strength
of
the
neighbor
opposition
and
I
was
told?
No,
it
wouldn't
be
that
if
the
neighbors
objections
have
technical
merit,
they
would
be
considered
if
they
don't,
then
they
won't
be.
But
in
my
opinion
the
CBA
I'm
really
cited
with
the
neighbors
and
did
not
really
follow
the
standards
of
the
ordinance.
The
standards
do
not
say
anything
about
neighbor
opposition,
actually
so
they're,
all
technical
and
I
believe.
S
Frankly,
the
first
petition
that
I
presented
met
the
standards
and
actually
the
damper
Commission.
A
dapper
committee
thought
so
and
voted
in
favor
by
a
vote
of
7
to
1,
for
that
first
petition
that
first
petition
and
I
urge
you
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
records.
Look
at
the
the
prior
plans,
which
should
be
part
of
the
public
record
and
and
and
advance
this
to
a
full
full
council
vote
after
you've.
You've
done
your
research
I.
Do
think
some
of
the
neighbor
comments
mischaracterize
both
my
first
plan
and
this
plan
as
well.
S
S
Proposal
was
rejected
by
the
CBA
on
unanimous
vote
and
if
you
look
at
the
comments
that
were
made
both
by
the
CBA
and
by
the
and
by
the
neighbors,
there
were,
in
addition
to
the
comes
that
you've
heard
about
stormwater
and
the
neighbors
foundation
and
trees.
The
things
that
I
could
control
with
my
design
were
the
height
of
the
house.
Even
though
I
wasn't
asking
for
a
height
variance,
they
said
make
the
house
lower.
S
So
I
incorporated
all
those
changes
not
in
order
to
get
in
front
of
you,
because,
but
because
those
were
comments
that
I
could
respond
to
in
a
revised
proposal.
So
I
made
those
I
made
the
house
smaller.
Yes,
the
actual
first
floor
footprint
is
not
substantially
smaller.
I
had
to
widen
the
house
in
order
to
make
it
smaller
but
make
it
less
tall
so
that
the
second
floor
is
within
part
of
the
roof
structure.
S
So,
instead
of
the
16
foot,
white
house,
I
had
to
go
to
an
18
and
a
half
foot
white
house
instead
of
having
a
5
yard,
a
5
foot
interior
side
yard
I
now
have
a
3
foot
interior
side
yard,
which,
quite
frankly,
is
the
prevailing
side.
Interior
side
yard
in
that
neighborhood.
The
neighbor
to
the
south
has
an
interior
side
yard
of
less
than
3
feet
to
our
common
property
line.
And,
frankly,
it's
a
district
in
the
city
of
Chicago
people
build
with
3
foot
interior
side
doors
all
the
time
and
it's
it
is.
S
It
can
be
done
safely.
So
my
new
proposal
responds
to
the
calm
that
were
made
at
the
at
the
first
zba
meeting
with
the
first
proposal,
and
this
and
the
second
proposal
again
I
went
to
damper.
They
approved
it
I
believe
it
was
8
to
1
and
in
front
of
zba.
Yes,
there
were
comments
made
well
you're
getting
closer
yeah.
S
This
is
better
than
the
last
one,
but
with
their
winners,
never
at
a
a
yardstick
of
what
I
needed
to
do
to
get
to
something
that
they
would
approve
so
yeah
and
frankly,
given
the
tenor
of
the
meeting
of
the
CVA
comments,
which
clearly
favored
the
neighbors
I,
really
think
that
there
is
no
proposal.
I
could
make
on
this
lot,
given
a
proposition
that
would
pass
GBA.
S
Let
me
just
say
that
not
I
mean
the
neighbors
are
unified
in
opposition.
There
are
neighbors
who
believe
that
house
should
be
built
on
the
lot.
They
have
one
demand,
not
a
lot.
Ok,
but
you
always
find
these
kinds
of
things
bring
out
more
opposition
than
they
do.
People
who
support
what
you're
proposing
so
I
was
cutting
Eve
long
one
day
and
a
couple
came
by
with
their
dog
and
said
well
you're,
proposing
to
build
a
house
on
this
lot.
I
said
yes,
I
am
he
said.
Well,
we
support
this.
S
We
think
it's
better
to
have
a
house
on
this
lot.
Then
you
know
a
vacant
lot.
A
couple
people
emailed
me
said:
yeah
I
know
the
neighbors
are
really
extreme
and
you
know
you're
gonna
go
a
lot
of
pushback,
but
we
think
your
proposal
is
is
good
for
the
lot
good
for
the
neighborhood.
So
there
are
some
neighbors
who
actually
I.
Don't
you
know
they
don't
want
to
come
forward,
obviously
because
of
the
Opposition,
that's
pretty
extreme.
S
Let
me
also
say
that
the
zoning
of
this
area,
as
our
one,
creates
frankly
a
lot
of
nonconformity.
The
existing
conditions
here,
don't
even
meet
our
two
regulations
in
terms
of
lot
size
in
terms
of
lot
area,
the
yards
and
so
forth.
So
the
fact
that
this
is
our
one
creates
a
lot
of
nonconformity
within
the
area
and
this
house
would
not
be
out
of
character
with
other
homes
in
the
area.
S
What
can
I
do
to
to
create
a
house
that
would
be
approved
by
zba?
I
really
got
no
definitive
feedback.
Is
it
their
job?
Well,
it's
not
necessarily
a
job
in
a
way
it
is
their
job.
There
should
be
some
guidance
provided
not
just
well.
That's
not
quite,
if
that's
not
quite
it,
that's
not
quite
it.
So
if
you
look
at
the
proposal,
I
believe
you'll
see
that
it
is
a
modest
house
and
it
is
in
scale
and
character
with
the
other
homes
in
this
area.
It
is
a
story
and
a
half
hi.
S
It's
not
a
full
two-story
house,
even
though
the
house
immediately
to
the
west
on
Hartzell
is
a
full
Taurus,
full
Taurus,
full
two-story
house,
there
are
other
full
two-story
houses
on
this
block
of
of
reefs.
There
are
one-story
houses
and
there
are
homes
that
are
story
and
a
half
tall
I
believe
this
is
very
much
in
keeping
with
the
other
homes
in
the
neighborhood
I.
Invite
you
to
drive
by
and
to
look
at
it
and
to
all
and
to
look
at
the
other
homes
that
are
on
these
25-foot
wide
corner,
Lots
and
I.
S
T
Mr.
James
I
don't
think
that
you're
evil
I
think
that,
like
you're,
just
in
this
instance,
you're
trying
to
build
a
too
large
of
a
house
on
to
swallow
a
lot
and
I,
don't
know
when
staff
told
you
that
it
was
buildable,
they
gave
you
no
guidance
at
all
on
what
you
could
put
there.
This
is
2016
that
you're
talking
about
yes,
so.
S
T
Q
No,
not
necessarily
no.
The
answer
is
no
affirmative
ly.
There
are
not
different
standards
applied,
ZB,
dapper,
design
and
project
review
committee
is
comprised
of
myself.
Gary
Gerdt
is
the
building
officials
Scott
our
Zoning
Administrator
Laura
Biggs
City
Engineer,
a
couple
of
their
zoning
members,
a
member
of
representative
and
Fire
parking
and
our
water
utility
I
think
there's
one
more
that
I'm
missing
off
the
transportation
mobility.
So
it's
it's
a
panel
of
staff
from
different
fields,
so
we
review
it
similar
to
two
zba.
Q
We
review
the
zoning
code
in
relation
to
a
particular
proposal
and
have
a
discussion
and
then
make
a
recommendation.
It
isn't
we
have.
We
sometimes
have
members
of
the
public
president
and
they
they
can
provide
public
comment
and
sometimes,
if
we
feel
like,
we
need
to
see
the
project
again,
somebody
will
return.
We
meet
each
week,
but
no
they've
been
they
there's,
not
different
standards
and
it's
just
a
different
perspective
and
opinion
on
on
recommending
approval
for
a
project.
Thank.
T
You
I'm
sympathetic
to
your
situation,
but
I
do
think
this
particular
project
that
you're
asking
us
to
allow
you
in
forward
with
is
too
big
I,
don't
know
what
the
goal
line
is,
though,
and
I
feel
bad
cuz.
It
sounds
like
that's
the
guidance
that
you're
looking
for,
but
I
just
want
to
urge
my
colleagues
to
vote
no
on
this.
Thank
you.
Yeah.
S
I
would
like
to
point
out
that,
and
I
was
recommended
to
mention
this-
that,
after
the
first
GBA
meeting
I
did
talk
to
staff,
I
talked
to
Melissa
class
was
a
zoning
planner
and
actually
asked
her
to
inquire
with
the
CBA.
You
know
what
kinds
of
changes
should
I
make
and
and
I
was
told
to
look
at
the
comments
that
were
made
by
CBA
and
by
and
by
the
neighbors
at
the
hearing,
and
that's
what
I've
attempted
to
do
here.
If
I
had
gotten
more
explicit
direction,
I
certainly
would
have
endeavored
to
follow
it.
S
You
know,
I'm
concerned
that
you
know
I
first
proposed
the
16
foot
wide
house,
for
whatever
reasons
that
didn't
pass.
I
have
been
flexible
when
I
did
meet
with
the
neighbors
actually
before
I
went
to
the
first,
with
the
first
footfalls
before
I
made
the
first
proposal,
and
you
know
frankly,
I
had
some
alternatives
and
tried
to
probe
which
of
these
would
be
preferable.
All
of
them
were
3-bedroom
2bath,
because
that's
what
I
was
looking
for.
S
Initially,
that's
what
I
thought
was
a
reasonable
kind
of
standard
house
to
build,
and
you
know
this
proposal
is
really
a
two-bedroom
house,
so
I've
scaled
that
back,
but
in
this
meeting
with
the
neighbors
there
were
suggestions
that
I
make
the
house
smaller
and
a
two-bedroom
house
and
I
asked
well,
if
I
do
make
it
two
bedroom
house
two
bedroom,
would
you
support
it
and
there
was
no
we're
not
supporting
it.
You
know
you
know
so.
S
I
do
I
really
do
think
that
no
house
is
is
the
desired
outcome
of
the
neighbors
I,
don't
think
it's
a
smaller
house
and
I
would
be
happy
if
you
were
to
recommend
the
score
for
councilman.
If
there
were
a
conditional
approval
subject
to
a
change
that
you
think
is
reasonable.
I'd
be
happy
to
to
entertain
that
I.
Just
don't
want
something
that
is
so
unworkable
that
nobody
would
want
to
live
in
the
house
and
I.
S
Couldn't
you
know,
sell
the
house,
so
that
is
like
I
said:
I'm
willing
to
be
reasonable,
I'm
willing
to
make
changes.
I
proposed
actually
done
about
four
or
five
or
six
different
plans
for
this
property,
and
I
am
willing
to
do
anything.
That
is
reasonable.
That
will
result
in
a
workable
livable
house.
C
S
U
U
J
Than
mine,
I'm
part
of
the
Wagner
farm
family,
all
four
of
my
grandparents
born
were
here
from
1860
on
I.
Have
the
original
plan
of
survey
in
my
file
here.
That
shows
the
three
corner:
lots,
including
a
lot
next
to
me
by
some
great
neighbors.
It
shows
all
325
Corner
foot,
Lots
I
will
bring
up
again
at
the
lot
at
26.
22
is
owned
by
chiral
building
material.
J
They
bought
it
in
1925
to
use
for
a
storage
area
for
all
types
of
soil
and
excavation
from
the
neighborhood's,
because
they
don't
have
the
construction
equipment
that
they
have
today.
I
have
the
original
1925
plant.
A
survey
in
my
briefcase.
There's
never
been
a
lot
built
there.
The
whelps
family
owned
this
property
for
probably
85
years.
They
begged
me
for
years
to
sell
my
half,
so
they
could
build
a
house
and
they
could
make
money.
I
asked
if
I
could
ever
get
my
money
back.
They
said.
J
No,
you
won't
make
the
money,
but
we
will
because
we
can't
build
on
it.
I
have
Tom
revoir
checks,
appraisal
from
the
house
in
1987,
a
well-known
realtor
stating
at
the
house.
He
did
thorough
research
stating
that
city
already
told
me
nobody
could
build
on
its
a
non
buildable
lot.
Nothing
has
been
built
there,
the
house
next
to
me
at
26
22,
was
built
in
1940.
J
They
couldn't
build
a
basement
and
due
to
the
World
War
two,
it's
a
beautiful
home
I'm,
not
even
gonna
tell
you
what
it
did
sell
for
because
it
deserves
to
be
sold
for
what
it
did,
but
it
shows
the
price
of
the
neighborhood
and,
to
be
honest
with
you,
mr.
James
is
trying
to
build
something.
That's
it's
impossible.
The
whelps
family
tried
for
70
years
to
build
on
their.
My
grandmother
was
in
tears.
J
All
the
time
telling
me
one
of
the
reasons
I
bought
the
house
is
because
she
was
in
fear
that
the
Welch
family
would
take
over
the
property
and
knock
hers
down
once
I
started,
getting
a
little
family
heritage
like
the
oak
tree
in
my
backyard
Colleen,
so
graciously
mentioned,
I
realized
it's
my
home
and
I've
talked
about
it
before
all
of
my
neighbors
live
in
homes.
This
guy's
trying
to
build
a
house.
He
doesn't
even
live
in
a
neighborhood.
So
if
you
want
to
see
the
plan,
a
survey
I'd
be
glad
for
to
touch
it.
C
C
Q
C
Okay,
I,
aside
from
the
neighbor
objections,
I
think
this
is
a
really
interesting
question,
because
in
Northwest
Evanston
there
are
a
lot
of
25-foot
lots
and
it's
owned
r1
and
that's
they're
inconsistent
with
one
another
and
I
think
I
think
it's
probably
a
good
idea
for
this
committee
at
some
point
or
the
plan
Commission
at
some
point
to
talk
about
what
what
we
do
with
non-conforming
r1
Lots.
When
it
comes
to
redevelopment
plans,
I
mean
to
me
this
would
be
a
perfect
lot
for
a
small
house
that
we
were
discussing
at
Council.
C
You
know
a
few
weeks
ago:
I,
don't
know
whether
that's
something
that's
interesting
to
mr.
James
or
not,
but
that
may
be
where
we're
going
with
some
of
these.
With
some
of
these
smaller
Lots
I
am
concerned
about
the
reaction
to
of
the
neighbors
I
understand,
the
change
is
really
difficult
and
especially
when
you're,
faced
with
having
a
structure
where
there
has
not
been
a
structure
before
and
I
know
how
devastating
that
can
be
to
to
neighbors
I'm
also
concerned
about
the
depth
of
the
basement.
S
Well,
I
obviously
would
work
with
the
building
department.
They
require
a
engineer's
letter
on
the
excavation
and
the
shoring.
If
there
is
a
problem
in
that
I
mean.
Let
me
worry
about
that
I.
If
I
can
get
the
zoning
approval
and
go
forward
to
prepare
actual
construction
plans,
that's
the
only
way
these
kinds
of
issues
can
be
addressed
and
I
will
obviously
do
that
at
my
own
risk.
C
My
final
comment
is:
is
you've
built
other
houses
in
Evanston,
Tom
I've
seen
some
of
them
they're
beautiful,
I,
think
you've
done
a
very
nice
job
on
this
house.
I
think
one
and
a
half
story
house
is
appropriate
I'm,
just
not
there
yet
to
being
able
to
approve
this
house
on
this
lot.
Given
the
lady
with
the
oak
tree,
wherever
you
are,
you
hit
my
button
with
the
oak
tree
so.
C
But
let
me
just
say
one
other
thing
though,
but
I
I
would
like
to
see
and
I'm
almost
thinking.
We
should
keep
this
in
committee
for
another
another
meeting,
but
I'd
like
to
see
a
list
from
staff
of
the
other
houses
that
have
built
on
been
built
on
25
foot
wide
Lots
that
are
on
corners
in
Northwest
Evanston
I
would
just
like
to
go
by
and
and
take
a
look
at
those
I
mean.
A
Right
yeah
I
had
I
guess
some
observations
and
comments,
and
then
I
have
a
couple
more
lights,
I
think
as
well,
but
one
of
the
things
that
does
striking
about
this
is
that
this
is
sort
of
the
opposite
of
a
trend
that
I
think
we've
been
trying
to
push
back
against,
which
the
trend
is
people
buying
small
Lots
into
your
point,
buying
a
couple
of
lots
of
jacent
to
each
other
and
building
great
big
homes.
So
this
is
the
other
direction
in
the
direction.
S
Know
expand
that
was
raised
at
some
point
in
various
conversations.
Well,
you
should
buy
the
house
next
door
and
you
know
if
that
were
to
be
done.
The
the
basis
and
the
land
would
be
such
that
you'd
have
to
max
out,
and
you
would
build
a
huge
house
that
would
create
all
the
impacts
that
the
neighbors
are
complaining
about
now,
but
to
a
much
greater
degree,
and
it
would
all
be
done
as
a
right.
You
wouldn't
have
any
control
over
it.
So
yeah.
A
And
and-
and
that
makes
it
makes
sense-
I've
seen
some
of
these
homes-
they're
spectacular,
they're,
very
beautiful,
but
we've
we've
had
a
lot
of
conversation
here
about
about
policy
as
opposed
to
subsidizing.
You
know,
policy
that
promotes
and
preserves
affordable
housing,
and
you
know
this
is
a
two
bedroom
home.
It's
not
a
massive
McMansion.
This
is
it's
fairly
modest
and
it's
it's
a
bit
of
a
step
down.
You
know
it.
It
doesn't
escape.
My
attention.
A
If
you
don't,
we
were
called
opportunities
opportunists
for
wanting
to
build
something,
I
build
ourselves,
a
nice
home
and
judgment
Jenna.
Mental
statements
were
made
about
us
by
people.
We
never
met
it
left
us
frustrated,
disheartened
and
dumbfounded
that
a
city
like
Evanston
with
all
its
diversity
and
acceptance,
could
have
Nader's
treat
neighbors
treat
yet
to
each
other,
so
poorly
so
I
just
want
to.
You
know
remind
everybody
that
what
gets
said
it
has
an
impact
on
other
people.
You
know
it's
it's!
A
Okay,
to
advocate
it's
okay,
to
make
your
points
and
I
respect
that
there
are
legitimate
concerns
that
have
been
voiced
here
today.
I
understand
those
points,
but
at
the
same
time,
this
gentleman
might
not
be
your
next-door
neighbor,
but
somebody
else
who
could
have
been
your
next-door
neighbor
left
our
town
with
that
feeling
and
that
that
doesn't
feel
good
to
me.
So
they
I
find
that
quite
disappointing,
alderman,
Ravel
and
then
alderman
Rainey
I.
V
Guess
I'd
like
to
second
a
lot
of
alderman
Fisk's
comments
and
questions.
I
think
this
is
a
really
difficult
lot.
I
did
go
over
there
today,
I
parked
I
walked
around
I
have
to
say
when
I
first
got
there
I
drove
past
because
I
couldn't
see
it
a
lot.
I
mean
the
calling
at
a
vacant.
Lot
is
not
doesn't
describe
it.
It's
like
it's
like
the
neighbor's
side
yard.
So
it's
it's
a
real
challenge
and
not
only
that
it's
only
25
feet
wide,
but
it's
because
it's
the
corner,
lot
and
I.
Think
alderman.
V
You've
made
a
lot
of
effort
to
try
to
come
up
with
something
that
would
meet
the
CBA
standards
and
meet
with
the
neighbors
approval
and
I
do
think.
You've
worked
in
good
faith
on
that,
but
I
have
to
agree
with
alderman
suffered
in
it.
I
think
the
house
is
still
it's
too
much
for
that
for
that
lot
and
I
can't
I
can't
approve
it.
W
Q
W
Would
seem
to
me
that
if
the
tree
roots
and
the
Heritage
trees
are
an
issue,
this
lot
can't
nothing
can
be
built
on
this
lot,
so
not
having
anything
to
do
with
variations.
But
if
the
concern
is
the
trees
are
the
two
heritage
trees,
nothing
can
be
built
here,
because
any
any
excavation
will
most
likely
damage
those
roots.
W
So
I'm
wondering
why
the
neighbors,
who
are
so
possessive
of
this
lot
and
and
that's
not
a
negative
thing-
why
you
haven't
gotten
together
and
purchased
this
lot
so
that
no
one
will
ever
be
able
to
build
they're.
Not
not.
You
know
necessarily,
so
you
can
share
the
the
two
people
who
are
next
to
increase
their
side
yard,
but
just
just
possess
the
lot
as
a
neighborhood
asset,
and
would
you
be
willing
to
solve
a
lot
to
the
neighbors
I
mean
I,
it
I,
understand
and
I'm
not
finished.
W
Late
I've
known
him,
I
think
30
years
as
a
planner,
mainly
as
a
planner
back
in
the
day
when
and
when
we
were
doing
Clinton
neighbourhood
planning
in
the
south
end
of
town
he's
a
neighbor
he's
a
very
well-liked
in
his
neighborhood.
He
is
nothing
like
the
person
you're,
describing
none
of
us.
Think
of
him
as
a
speculator
he's
built
houses
in
the
in
the
eighth
ward,
there
they're
very
nice
houses,
they're
very
small,
another
observation
I'm
making
tonight
is
here.
We
have
a
person
who's
going
to
build
a
small
house.
W
A
W
W
Q
Don't
have
a
answer
that
question
you
answer
the
one,
the
discussion
at
dapper,
so
there
were
some
questions
from
our
building
official
gary
curtis,
suggesting
that
there
be
a
soil
study
to
verify
that
a
basement
feasible
related
to
the
water
table.
So
we
just
practice
that
we
asked
for
that
soil
test
to
determine
where
the
water
table
is.
Q
Then
there
was
a
discussion
regarding
shoring
between
the
existing
residents
and
the
proposed
proposed
project,
so
the
applicant
stated
steel
would
be
used
and
that
the
required
shoring
way
be
done
and
the
only
comment
recorded
in
the
minutes
is
Ingrid,
stating
that
shoring
will
also
be
required
along
the
street
right
away
due
to
proximity.
So
though
she
had
no
major
concern
about
water
runoff.
It's
not
noted.
A
Okay,
and
so
my
inclination
is
if
we
were
legitimately
going
to
entertain
a
way
to
make
this
work
I.
Would
you
know
it
wouldn't
be
a
bad
idea
to
come
back
again,
but
on
the
other
hand,
I
don't
want
to
make
you
spend
more
money.
I
want
to
have
you
don't
do
soil
samples,
if
everybody's
you
know
just
gonna,
say
no
in
a
few
weeks?
So
if
there's,
if
there's
an
inclination
or
an
interest
to
really
you
know
legitimate,
we
have
a
conversation
about
this,
but
you
know
to
the
neighbors
I
kind
of
posed.
A
Want
you
to
be
honest
with
yourselves
and
more
honest
with
us.
If
the
question
is
you
don't
want
a
house
there
ever
that's
a
legitimate
point
to
make
so
I
think
that's
really.
If
that's
really
the
issue,
you
know
you
don't
have
to
say
it
ii,
but
generally
speaking
going
forward,
you
know
say
that.
So,
if
that's
the
issue,
as
opposed
to
you
know,
come
back
with
this.
Other
thing
come
back
with
this
other
thing,
so
we
don't
want
people
to
keep
coming
back
and
coming
back
and
coming
back.
A
C
C
That
would
be
a
small,
affordable
house
on
this
property.
I
think
it's
worthwhile
for
you
to
talk
with
staff
about
what
our
previous
conversations
have
been.
It
counts,
but
also
to
meet
with
the
alderman
and
the
neighbors
as
well
just
kind
of
talk
again
about
what
that
might
possibly
be
I.
Don't
want
you
to
have
to
invent
the
wheel
here,
but
this
this
is
the
type
of
lot
I'm,
not
sure.
C
C
A
Me
put
this
way:
would
you
be
willing
to
it
to
me?
This
is
small
enough,
but
I
think
you
got
a
sense
that
amongst
the
people
at
the
table
here
that
it's
not
small
enough
for
some.
Would
you
be
willing
to
take
the
next
couple
few
weeks
and
to
have
further
conversations
with
the
staff
about
what
might
be
an
option
or
alternatives
to
you
know,
bring
it
into
a
range
that
might
be
acceptable?
Yes,.
S
A
Right
so
we'll
hold
us
over
the
next
meeting.
You
know
I
think
everybody
heard
you
know
what
everybody's
kind
of
thinking
so
collectively
give
it
all
some
thought
have
conversations
amongst
yourselves,
but
you
know
be
open
and
communicate
with
with
the
property
owner
and
see
if
there's
a
way
to
kind
of
close
the
gap
here
and
make
something
that's
that's
workable
and
that
everybody
can
be
content
with
I
think
you
know,
and
it's
evanston
there
should
be
a
way
to
do
it.
It's
not
a
place
where
we
only
complain
so
all
right.
A
A
Drive-Through
facility,
the
McDonald's
restaurant
at
1919,
Dempster,
Zoning,
Board
of
Appeals
and
city
staff,
are
recommending
adoption
of
the
ordinance
granting
the
special
used
to
the
type
2
restaurant
and
a
dual
lane.
Drive-Through
facility
for
the
McDonald's
restaurant
in
the
c2
district
applicant
has
complied
with
the
zoning
requirements
meets
all
the
standards
of
a
special
use
for
the
district.
It
is
it's
where
introduction
and
Alderman
Braithwaite,
although
not
designated
so
on
the
agenda,
are
going
to
Braithwaite,
is
requesting
suspension
of
the
rules
for
the
item
is
that
correct
I'll?
Remember
that
we,
okay,
okay!
A
B
A
Those
in
favor
aye
any
opposed
all
right.
Thank
you
very
much
item
p6
ordinance,
147,
OH
218
is
a
major
adjustment
to
a
plan
development
in
1571,
Maple,
Avenue,
Planning,
Commission
and
staff
for
recommending
adoption
in
the
ordinance
for
approval
of
a
major
adjustment
to
the
previous
plan
development
at
1571
maple.
A
In
order
to
modify
the
parking
lease
condition
of
approval,
it
says
e
approval,
Z
from
101
parking
spaces
to
70
parking
spaces
available
within
either
the
Maple
Avenue
or
Sherman
Avenue
garages,
as
well
as
to
modify
the
on-site,
affordable,
housing,
condition
of
approval
queue
to
provide
one
one-bedroom
on-site,
affordable
housing
units
to
households
with
income
at
or
below
50%
of
the
area.
Median
income
ami
instead
of
two
units
affordable
to
households
at
or
below
100%
ami.
The
period
of
affordability
of
the
unit
would
remain
at
ten
years
from
the
first
rent
up.
A
C
C
Thank
You
alderman,
bustling
I,
first
of
all,
I
just
want
to
start
out
with
a
comment
I'm.
We
we
had
I
think
tried
for
a
long
time
to
make
sure
that
any
request
to
suspend
the
rules
be
submitted,
the
staff
so
that
it
could
be
included
on
the
agenda
so
that
the
public
would
know
so.
I
hope
that
in
future
we'll
be
able
to
do
that.
C
U
Q
C
C
G
X
Good
evening,
chair
Wilson
and
members
of
the
committee,
we
actually
had
a
lot
of
discussion
with
the
developer
and
you're
right.
The
this
was
an
agreement
before
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance.
What
we
are,
the
incomes
we're
really
focusing
on
in
inclusionary
housing
is
80
percent
and
below
with
really
with
the
new
ordinance
at
60%.
A
X
My
understanding
and
I
haven't
been
involved
in,
although
they
have,
there
have
been
some
people,
who've
looked
at
it,
but
one
of
the
challenges
we
do
sometimes
find
is
when
you
have
things
that
are
renting
up
at
the
area.
Median
people
have
other
options
right
and
in
some
cases
they
simply
say
they
want
something
that
has
more
space
or
something
like
that.
Thank.
W
W
I've
argued
for
a
long
time
that
it
is
a
waste
of
our
time
to
fight
with
developers
to
force
them
to
put
units
in
their
building
in
downtown
high-rises
great
for
great
for
seniors,
because
and
people
who
have
physical
challenges
because
of
the
elevators.
That
is
a
very
valuable
commodity
in
this
town,
because
most
of
our
multi-family
housing
are
their
walk
ups
and
so
that's
a
challenge
for
elderly
people
and
people
with
physical
challenges.
W
The
financial
opportunities
the
Evanson,
affordable
housing
fund
has,
by
not
forcing
developers
to
put
these
units
in
their
buildings
and
instead
pay
to
get
out
of
that
requirement
and
and
do
do
the
proposal
of
where
the
city
finally
establishes
its
own
housing
subsidy
program
and
allow
people
to
choose
their
own
housing
wherever
in
the
city
they
want
to
live
and
I.
You
know
I.
This
is
not
going
to
be
the
first
time.
We're
gonna
see
this,
and
this
was
just
two
units.
W
We're
gonna,
see
this
over
and
over
again,
so
just
keep
in
mind
that
we
have
opportunities
of
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
flooding
into
the
affordable
housing
fund,
millions
of
dollars.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
if
we
don't
force
the
units
on
site,
if
the
developer
wants
to
find
that'll
be
great,
but
if
they
don't
want
to,
they
want
to
buy
out.
That's
where
we
ought
to
be
going.
Ok,.