►
From YouTube: Planning and Development Committee Meeting 3-11-2019
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
B
A
Questions
or
discussion,
then,
all
in
favor,
please
say
aye
aye
opposed
no.
Okay.
We
have
our
minutes
and
items
for
consideration.
The
first
item
item
p1
is
ordnance
21-0
19,
granting
a
special
use
to
expand
a
craft
alcohol
production
facility,
SketchBook
Brewing
Company
at
821,
823,
Chicago
Avenue.
The
applicant
has
complied
with
all
zoning
requirements
and
meets
all
of
the
standards
for
a
special
use
for
this
district
and
alderman.
When
do
you
want
to
make
the
motion
and
request.
C
Yes,
I
move
both
introduction
and
I'd
like
to
move
also
to
first
suspension
of
the
rules.
There
were
no.
There
was
no
opposition
to
this
expansion.
This
is
an
expansion
of
of
their
tap
room
and
not
of
their
expansion
of
their
production.
That's
happening
that
happens
there,
but
also
elsewhere.
So
this
is
an
indication
of
success
for
our
for
our
little
small
brewery
there,
which
is
now
very,
very
successful,
great
okay.
So
the.
B
D
D
B
A
Okay,
so
any
any
discussion
or
questions,
then
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
to
introduce
introduction
in
action
of
the
site
and
police
say
aye
aye
opposed
no.
Okay.
Thank
you
item
p2
ordinance,
22,
0
19
is
a
special
use
permit
for
a
planned
development
at
9:10,
938,
Custer
Avenue,
and
an
amendment
to
the
zoning
map
plan.
A
Commission
and
staff
recommend
adoption
of
the
ordinance
for
approval
of
the
map
amendment
to
rezone
from
an
mue
transitional
manufacturing
employment
district
to
a
mixed
use
in
employment
district,
with
a
special
use
for
plan
development
for
40
single-family
attached
townhomes
in
five
standalone
buildings
that
feature
interior
courtyards,
two-car
attached
garages,
/
dwelling
unit
and
building
height
of
four
storeys.
The
proposal
includes
six
site
development
allowances.
Do
I,
have
a
motion.
F
Thank
you.
My
name
is
bill
rotolo
and
I'm
with
TWM.
Consulting
and
I
represent
crescent
development
partners,
which
is
the
applicant
and
the
owner,
is
also
here
and
that's
the
cusp
Evanston
Custer
LLC.
His
name
is
Kevin
Lee
and
our
entire
team
is
here
I,
believe
you
have
a
very
detailed
package
that
staff
prepared,
so
we're
not
going
to
summarize
that
it
would
be
just
too
much
time
so
I
know
your
time
is
tight.
I
did
want
to
mention
that
we
had
initially
contemplated
applying
for
tax
increment
financing.
F
A
D
A
Thank
you
great.
Any
other
comments,
all
right.
We
are
a
quiet
group
tonight.
So
then,
all
in
favor
of
this,
the
motion
to
introduce
this
item
to
council,
please
say
aye.
Aye
opposed
no.
Okay.
Thank
you
all
right
now
we
have
item
for
discussion.
This
is
a
discussion
of
planned
benefits
for
planned
of
public
benefits
for
planned
developments.
A
The
plan
Commission
and
staff
recommend
amending
zoning
ordinance,
section
6,
3,
6
3
public
benefits
to
revise
the
regulations
relating
to
public
benefits
of
planned
developments,
and
we
have
quite
an
extensive
memo
in
our
packet
that
talks
about
some
alternative
ways
of
looking
at
public
benefits
and
staff.
We
have
a
bit
of
a
presentation.
Do
we.
G
So
Scott
will
Scott
and
I
will
do
this
presentation
together.
We
took
back
the
comments
that
we
received
in
January,
and
this
started
with
the
quite
a
while
ago
a
discussion
of
what
to
do
about
the
public
benefits
that
are
currently
listed
in
the
ordinance.
There's
been
some
concern
and
and
thought
expressed
that
some
of
these
may
need
to
be
updated
and
clarified
as
we've
seen
additional
public
benefits.
So
these
are
the
the
current
public
benefits
and
that
this
was
outlined
in
the
memo
and.
H
H
This
has
been
before
the
Planning
Development
Committee
for
over
a
year
or
so
in
various
iterations
discussion,
but
planning
development
did
refer
a
text
amendment
to
the
plan
commission,
so
Planning
Commission
looked
at
this
item
in
November
and
December
of
last
year
and
essentially
looked
at
kind
of
revising
the
the
current
system
that
we
have
providing
some
more
guidance
as
far
as
what
is
a
public
benefit.
What
is
not
a
public
benefit
and
some
examples
regarding
those
based
on
that.
H
H
So
that's
another
alternative
that
there
was
some
discussion
about
it
at
previous
meetings
and
finally
to
establish
a
public
benefits
metric
that
one
of
the
comments
we
heard
from
playing
development
committee
last
time
was
that
this
is
beneficial
to
provide
more
guidance
of
ours.
What
is
a
public
benefit
and
what
is
not,
however,
have
still
a
little
nebulous
as
far
as
how
to
weigh
those
public
benefits.
H
So
an
example
of
providing
metrics
is
shown
here.
That
would
be
a
certain
amount
of
points
allotted
for
a
public
benefit.
That's
provided
we
haven't
gone
through
and
decided
points
because
that
would
be
a
direction
would
be
seeking
from
the
City
Council
or
for
playing
development
first
to
go
in
this
in
this
direction.
G
I'll,
just
jump
in
the
I
think
a
question
that
came
up
last
time
when
we
discussed
this
was
the
degree
to
which
that
was
the
the
desire
to
get
more
clarity.
If
we
were
going
to
go
down
this
route,
so
I
think
that
these
two
tables
are
trying
to
address
that
the
degree
to
which
X
is
done
over
and
above
whatever
is
required
or
from
a
public
benefit,
and
then
how
do
you
translate
that
into
additional
height
additional
units?
Any
of
any
of
those
those
things
that
are
listed
here,
which
are
site
development
allowances.
H
This
correct
that
would
be
a
numerical
system.
Montgomery
County
Maryland
has
something
somewhat
similar
that
they've
done
to
assign
points
to
benefits.
Some
other
localities
have
looked
at
this
system
and
it
may
not
have
implemented
them
and
then
still
others
have
a
straight
incentive
based
system
where
for
X
amount
of
FA
are
you
would
do
Y
amount
of
benefit?
E
Yes,
I'm
I'm
familiar
with
the
Chicago
idea
of
buying
if
they
are
paying
for
it,
but
I'm
not
familiar
with
what
comes
next.
Can
that
be?
Is
that
buy
right
so
to
speak?
In
other
words,
can
the
council
or
the
aldermen
in
Chicago,
say
no,
you
can't
buy
it
or
if
that's
an
opportunity,
given
the
project,
is
that
absolutely
by
right
or
can
it
be
rejected?
You
know
what
I'm
saying
I'm
I'm,
not
explaining
myself,
maybe,
but
if
it's,
if
it's
an
opportunity
available
to
the
developer,
is
it
is
it
my
right.
A
E
H
Some
extent
alderman
rainy,
so
as
I
mentioned,
that
the
system
is
Chicago's
is
very
different
in
in
several
ways,
but
one
of
those
FA
are
is
absolute
in
Chicago.
So
within
a
zoning
district
dx5
zoning
district
allowed
5.0
F
AR,
and
you
cannot
go
above
that
can't
see
good
site
development
allowance
for
it,
so
creating
the
neighborhood
Opportunity
Fund
allowed
a
designated
amount
of
fer
that
could
be
purchased
in
those
areas.
A
And
I
did
look
at
the
website
for
this,
because
it's
a
very
intriguing
idea
and
it
talks
about
there
that
there
would
be
additional
public
scrutiny.
A
review
process
for
new
projects
will
also
be
further
refined
to
foster
excellence
in
design
and
the
inclusion
of
public
amenities.
So
it
sounds
as
though
there
would
be
conversation
for
additional
kinds
of
benefits
possibility,
but
but
it's
an
interesting
way
to
get
the
conversation
going.
Alderman,
Fiske,
Scott.
B
H
H
B
H
B
We've
had
conversations
up
here
recently
about
planned
developments
and
what
I've
heard
from
the
public
part
of
what
they're
concerned
about
are
the
uncertainties
regarding
planned
developments.
We
hear
at
least
I
hear
at
my
Ward
meetings
as
well
that
the
public
would
like
to
have
a
document
that
they
can
open
and
they
can
be
assured
of
what
can
go
on
a
particular
site
rather
than
waiting
to
be
surprised
when
a
development
application
is
received.
So
that
brings
into
the
question
and
I'm
supportive
of
plan
developments
and
going
down
that
road.
A
And
maybe
partly
in
response
alderman,
Fisk,
I
guess
I
would
ask
a
question
of
us,
which
is
how
difficult
or
how
easy
do
we
want
to
make
it
for
a
developer,
to
obtain
the
site
allowance
allowances
that
are
in
the
zoning
ordinance
and
even
exceed
those
maximum
site
allowances?
Are
we
because
I
think
the
public
public
looks
at
to
the
extent
that
they
read
our
zoning
code?
They
look
at
what's
from
what
the
basic
standard
is,
and
they
expect
us
to.
B
Yeah
and
I
would
just
add
that,
as
part
of
the
process,
we're
used
to
hearing
applications
and
sort
of
having
conversations
with
why
developers
have
made
choices
to
ask
for
various
variances
and
allowances
and
I
think
we.
We
understand
that
kind
of
case-by-case
basis,
but
I
think
that
doesn't
always
get
translated
on
I
mean.
B
This
shoe
size,
no
matter
what
but
I,
don't
think
we're
explaining
that
very
well
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
sometimes
we
don't
feel
that
that's
a
little
bit
out
of
control
as
well.
So
it
puts
us
in
the
position
of
yes,
yes
or
no
vote
or
where
I
think
the
conversation
needs
to
needs
to
be
there.
I'm
may
not
be
explaining
that
well,
but
I
know.
You
understand
me.
C
Those
I
think
I
agree
with
ottoman
fest.
Those
are
very
good
points
and
I
also
mean
I
I've,
never
I,
don't
know
that
I've
ever
raised
this
on
the
councilor
we've
ever
talked
about
on
the
council,
but
I'm
an
advocate
for
I
know
we
have
the
what
this,
what
the
zoning
permits
and
then
we
have
the
site,
development
allowances
and
I'm
an
advocate
for
making
the
top
of
that
of
the
site
development
allowances,
a
hard
ceiling
that
nobody
ever
gets
to
go
through,
because
no
one
ever
expects
when
you
read
through
those.
C
No
one
ever
expects
you
know
the
regular
citizen.
No
one
ever
expects
anyone
to
go
through
that,
but
lately
we've
had
developers
come
in
who
exceed
the
development
allowance,
and
so
I
mean
that
would
be
for
me
sort
of
a
threshold
issue
of
what
if
we
made
that
a
hard
ceiling.
So
then
everybody
has
to
work
within
that.
But
when
I
look
at
the,
so
that's
one
point:
I'm
gonna
put
that
aside.
Let
let
that
rumble
along,
but
so
when
I
look
at
the
public
benefits.
Metrics
I
think.
C
Obviously
this
needs
more
fleshing
out
because
we'd
have
to
decide.
Well
what
would
be
you
know,
infrastructure
improvements,
you
know,
you
know
an
alley
might
be
certain
number
of
points
if
you're
gonna
repay
the
entire
street,
that's
a
whole
other
set
of
points
or
sustainability
measures.
What
are
their
points
that
we
would
assign
for
various
things?
If
someone
got
to
Net
Zero,
you
know
that
would
obviously
award
more
points,
so
I.
Think
of
that,
but
I
also,
then
think
should
we
have
then
comes
the
balancing
like
in
terms
of
should.
C
We
have
a
certain
number
of
points
that
every
PUD
must
have
I
mean
we
say
that
there
must
be
some
public
development,
a
public
benefit
if
you're
asking
for
something.
So
we
have
to
figure
out
okay,
so
they're
asking
for
this
much
and
how
many
points
should
should
they
earn
in
order
to
public
benefit
points?
Should
they
earn
in
order
to
get
that
development
that
that
variance
and
then
the
other
point
I
would
I
was
thinking
of?
C
Is
that
usually
we
want
people
to
provide
sort
of
an
assortment,
not
just
a
single
public
benefit,
although
I
think
so
it's
you
wouldn't
necessarily
want
someone
to
come,
get
all
of
their
public
benefits
from
a
single
program
or
a
single
item.
We
really
want
people
to
to
think
of
an
array
I
would
think
of
so
you
must
have
four
of
you
know.
You
must
choose
from
four
among
this
list
or
something
like
that.
This
is
just
off
the
top
of
my
head.
C
B
Preservation,
I
guess
would
be
the
most
obvious,
but
I
I
think
this
is
also
a
conversation
we
need
to
have
with
a
development
community
as
well.
We
we
come.
We
come
right
up
to
the
lines,
sometimes
with
what
a
particular
site
can
accommodate
and
still
make
be
cost-effective
to
the
developer.
I
mean
I,
don't
want
to
go
so
far
that
we're
discouraging
developers
from
coming
and
presenting
their
ideas,
not
that
we're
going
to
accept
them
or
reject
them
or
whatever,
but
I'd
like
to
encourage
ideas.
B
I'd
like
to
encourage
thoughtfulness
in
InDesign
I,
just
don't
want
to
scare
anyone
away.
So
I
think
we.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
now
that
our
community
development
staff
is
expanding,
that
we
get
that
the
economic
side
of
it
as
well.
What
does
the
development
community
think
about
public
benefits?
How
does
that
affect?
Basically
what
they're
going
to
design
do
they
decide
to
use
a
lesser
quality
of
material?
B
A
Think
it's
sounding
as
though
we
would
like
staff
to
try
to
flesh
out
this
a
little
bit
more.
So
we
have
something
more
tangible
to
react
to
and
so
I
guess
what
I
would
say
is
the
the
more
the
project
is
seeking
allowances
or
to
exceed
the
basic
standards
in
the
in
the
in
the
zoning
code
that
it
would
really
sort
of
step
up.
A
So,
let's
say
if
we're
talking
about
as
an
example
for
height,
if
the,
if
the
Delvaux
developer
wants
a
40,
40
foot
height
increase
over
the
basic
85
feet,
let's
say
that
would
be
I'll
say:
I'll
just
start
with
one
public
benefit
point,
but
obviously
probably
want
more
than
that,
but
if
they
wanted
40
feet
on
top
of
that,
they'd
have
to
put
in
more
than
just
another
one
public
benefit.
They
have
to
put
two
or
three
and,
and
so
the
more
the
more
they
go
up
the
scale
of
asking
for
more
allowances.
A
We
would,
the
price
would
get
bigger,
come
there's
a
good
word
compounds
okay
autumn
and
rainy
I.
E
Think
it
would
be
interesting
to
look
at
the
project
that
we
have
before
us
tonight
which
I
I
really
like,
but
it's
not
it's
not
a
tall
project
where
we
get
very
nervous
about
it's
a
very
nice
compact
project
that
is
asking
for
some
serious
site
development
and
allowances
that
are
pretty
understandable.
You
don't
have
to
be
an
architect
or
an
engineer
to
understand
what
these
development
allowances
are
and
then
look
at
the
public
benefits
that
are
being
asked
for
I,
think
it
it.
E
It
makes
a
very
good
case
study
when
we
think
about
what
we're
talking
about
now.
It's
an
interesting
model
to
work
from
and
I
I
mean
when,
when
you're
talking
about
adding
40
storey
40
feet
to
a
building,
I
mean
it's
interesting.
A
40
single-family
attached
townhouse
dwelling
units
where
32
are
allowed
I
mean
that's
that's
kind
of
significant
and
we're
very
there's.
Some
really
serious
site
allowances
being
asked
for
here
and
I.
Think
the
public
benefits
are
I,
think
they're
probably
acceptable,
but
you
know
I.
A
lot
of
the
public
benefits
are
really
benefiting.
E
The
project
and
I've
always
thought
that
it
would
be
that
it's
important
that
public
benefits
and
I
know
about
the
court
cases
that
public
benefits
should
really
benefit
some
of
the
public
around
the
project,
and
you
know
like
they're,
going
to
they're
going
to
be
required
to
plow
the
alley
behind
their
building
when
it
snows
I
mean
well,
that's
that's
very
nice
for
them,
but
what
about
everybody?
So
I
I
just
think
it's
it's
interesting
to
to
take
a
look
at
this
project.
As
we
talk
about
these
changes.
B
I
just
wanted
to
add
something
to
what
we
were
talking
about
there.
There
are
some
things
that
we've
discussed
over
the
years
of
council
that
are
that
are
on
our
wish
list,
and
they
have
ranged
from
Trader
Joe's
to
a
bowling
alley
to
Northlight,
to
I
mean
you
can
think
of
other
ones,
I'm
sure
I'm
sure
I'm
not
sure
that
they
belong
in
the
public
benefit
category,
but
they
might
and
I,
don't
know
how
you
make
room
for
them
in
here.
B
But
you
know
it's
it's
it's
interesting,
because
in
the
north
light
project
I
mean
we
had
a
developer
coming
in,
who
was
willing
to
build
a
vanilla
box
for
Northlight
in
exchange
for
I,
believe
it
was
a
30-some
storey
building
on
a
block
that,
in
my
ward,
so
I
was
I
paid
a
lot
of
attention
to
that.
But
it
does.
It
does
mean
that
one
of
the
challenges
we
have
is
that
if
we
want
to
attract
these
these
things,
these
uses
that
we've
paid
so
much
attention
to
over
the
years.
B
C
So
I
was
thinking
a
little
bit
more
about
my
matrix
idea
and
and
I
think
talking
autumn
and
rainy
sort
of
her
comment
was
sort
of
crystallized
it
in
the
sense
of
having
a
balance
between
both
external
benefits.
So
I'd
say
things
that
benefit
more
than
just
the
site,
which
might
be
you
know,
paving
a
street
which
benefits
I.
You
know
everyone
or
a
streetscape
improvement
or
a
traffic
light
which
both
helps
the
the
impact
of
whatever
the
development
is,
but
also
improves,
helps
the
the
community
at
large.
C
The
sustainability
measures
or
education
and
employment
action
that
could
go
either
way,
but
preservation
issues
so
and
having
a
balance
of
of
some
sort
of
those
two
types
of
public
benefits,
so
something
that
both
benefits
the
larger
community,
as
well
as
something
that
helps
the
project
work
better
on
that
site
or
is
something
that
we
value.
You
know
whether
it's
a
more
open
space
on
a
site
or
sustainability
or
alternative
modes
of
transportation.
Something
like
that.
B
Really
like
this
so
I'm
the
Siena
site
years
ago
before
I,
was
on
the
council.
I.
Remember
the
discussion
that
don't
remember
the
name
of
the
developer.
It's
probably
a
good
thing.
Okay,
that
one
of
the
public
benefits
was
that
he
was
going
to
pave
Oak
Avenue
and
that
never
happened,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
when
we
have
public
benefits
like
this
I'm.
Yes,
then
he's
not
ever
been
given
to
setting
aside
of
funds
so
that
the
public
benefit
park.
H
Are
some
examples
of
that
for
provoked
improvements
or
conditions
and
ordinances?
There'll
be
one-time
payment
of
X
dollar
amount
for
future
improvement
of
a
traffic
signal.
I
think
I
see
two
may
be
contributed
to
some
traffic
signal
improvements
that
are
they're
going
to
be
made
in
the
near
future.
G
So
in
the
example
of
the
more
recent
developments,
the
developer
makes
the
payment
and
then
that's
how
they
received
their
final
certificate
of
occupancy.
So
there's
they
have
to
they
stay
in
a
temporary
certificate
of
occupancy,
or
maybe
you
don't
even
get
to
that
if
they
haven't
fulfilled
the
requirements
of
the
ordinance
right.
I
B
I
hear
you,
but
the
Kendall
development
has
is
what
three
years
old.
Now
they
still
have
temporary
occupancy
permits,
and
they
haven't
done
the
approved
and
I
just
I'm,
trying
to
think
of
something
to
do
in
advance
to
make
sure
that
those
improvements
get
done,
because
now
some
of
those
houses
are
actually
even
changing
hands
and
it
still
still
is
pretty
problematic.
G
Let
me
try
to
summarize
a
little
bit
of
what
I
think
I
think
we
want
the
direction
is
to
continue
down
the
other.
Three
paths
continue
down
this
one
a
little
bit
further
and
in
return
with
some
some
sense
of
I
think
the
compounding
concept,
the
some
of
the
other
items,
in
terms
of
where
do
you
incorporate
external
internal
to
the
site,
some
of
the
hurdle?
If
I
said
that
the
piece
of
design
and
and
desirable
uses?
How
does
that
get
incorporated
into
these
that
aren't
necessarily
defined
within
these
categories?
G
Almost
a
prioritization
of
these
public
benefits
I
think
maybe
we'll
circulate
a
spreadsheet
that
can
we
can
get
some
feedback
on
what
are
the
priorities
and
and
as
we
were
going
through
this
example
I
think
the
the
most
recent
process
we
went
to
was
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
and
to
glean
out
what
our
priorities
we
learned
over
the
course
of
time
that
on-site
units
were
preferable,
so
I
think
if
we
can
get
to
from
a
public
benefit
category.
What
are
the
priorities
there?
G
We
can
better
scale
and
do
the
math
around
this
and
then
at
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
subcommittee
staff
went
through
a
few
of
the
developments
and
looked
at
site
to
vomit
allowances.
So
we
could
kind
of
check
our
math
on
run
it
through
a
process
of
whether
this
would
what
would
what
would
be
required
here
and
what
might
that
cost,
and
we
can
maybe
cross-check
with
some
of
the
developers
and
that
operate
in
the
community
and.
I
A
G
So
I
think
our
first
step
will
be
to
circulate
a
matrix
to
the
council
to
get
a
sense
of
the
priority
of
different
public
benefits.
I
recall
when
we
did
the
downtown
plan.
There
was
quite
a
bit
of
discussion
around
how
that
was
a
completely
different
set
of
codes,
but
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
over
what
was
priority
and
how
to
how
to
accomplish
the
things
that
were
the
goals
at
the
time.
How
do
you
accomplish
those
two
public
benefits?
So
we
can
work
through
that
a
little
bit
and
then
and
then
the.
D
G
G
A
So
we
have
one
other
item
for
discussion
and
I'm,
not
exactly
sure,
what's
envisioned
in
this
discussion,
so
maybe
we
just
sort
of
get
a
little
bit
of
a
start
on
it,
and
this
is
a
request
from
Alderman
Fisk
that
we
discuss
the
dabber,
Committee
and
I,
don't
call
them
and
fist.
You
want
to
sure
sure.
B
So
this
is
a
reference
from
me
to
take
a
look
at
the
dapper
committee.
I.
Think
there
really
is
some
confusion
out
in
the
community
about
what
it
is.
Not
only
that
deafer
does,
but
their
role
in
the
process
and
I
want
to
start
out
by
saying
that
I
absolutely
support
depper.
It's
a
committee
of
staff.
It
is
entirely
appropriate
and
important
for
us
to
hear
from
staff
as
they
look
at
a
new
application
and
review
it.
B
Where
I
have
a
little
bit
of
a
problem
is
I'm,
not
sure
all
of
the
relevant
staff
is
present
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
it
doesn't
send
the
wrong
message
when
staff
takes
a
vote
up
or
down
on
a
particular
project.
So
what
I'm?
What
I'm,
hoping
and
what
I
would
like
to
get
presented
not
only
to
the
public,
but
also
the
applicant
in
front
of
Napper,
is
that
the
committee
is
there
to
work
with
them
and
that
there
is
going
to
be
a
list
of
findings
of
recommendations.
B
That
dapper
makes
that
follows
that
project
through
to
the
plan.
Commission
I've
attended
a
lot
of
meetings
recently
planned,
Commission
and,
and
it
seems
to
me
that
they
look
first
at
the
recommendation
from
dapper
and
then
have
a
very
cursory
discussion
of
a
project
and
that's
bothered
me
because
some
of
these
projects
are
very
complicated
and,
and
it
would
I
think
help
all
of
us
to
better
understand
that
it's
not
only
the
decision
process,
but
also
the
nuances
of
developments.
B
If
we
dug
down
a
little
bit
deeper
by
using
a
the
list
of
recommendations
or
the
list
of
finding
is
rather
than
just
the
upper
down
voted
dapper.
So
this
was
really
a
reference
that
to
staff
to
take
a
look
at
how
dapper
might
be
more
effectively
used,
because
my
understanding
is
that
an
application
comes
in
and
then,
as
a
zoning
analysis.
The
Arizona
staff
sends
back
a
letter
to
the
applicant
saying
how
it
does
or
does
not
meet
zoning
and
then
goes
to
dapper
for
further
comments.
B
One
of
the
issues
that
I
have
felt
was
missing
in
that
discussion
was
the
economic,
economic
benefit
or
lack
of
benefits
for
particular
projects
and
I.
Think
that's
an
important
part
of
the
discussion
I'd
like
to
see
it
included
in
in
the
dapper
conversation,
but,
most
importantly,
I
think
that
I
think
voting
on
something
sends
the
message
of
we
like
it.
We
don't
like
it
without
really
a
a
complete,
a
complete
discussion
and
I.
Think
that
does
everybody
a
disservice,
I
think
it
does
us
a
disservice.
B
B
I
mean
you
know,
you've
got
plan,
commission
minutes
and
hear
of
various
various
developments,
and
you
know,
given
the
amount
of
time
that
that
we
spend
and
that
the
public
spends
and
developers
spend
and
staff
spends
I
think
it's
worth
a
better
discussion
that
I'm
I'm
council
liaison
to
the
staff
committee
I'm,
not
sure
what
I'm
supposed
to
do
with
that,
but
but
when
I
sit
there
right
now
and
I'm
thinking,
this
is
not
a.
This
is
not
a
complete
discussion.
That's
going
on
I
whether
I
agree
with
them
or
not.
That's
not
the
point.
B
The
point
is
that
there's
sort
of
a
whole
staff,
a
staff,
recommends
denial
and
that-
and
so
it
goes
forward
like
that-
it's
not
you
have
not
a
very
good
sense
of
the
information
that's
been
transmitted
to
the
applicant
or
the
applicants
responses
you
have
to
really
search
for
that.
I
just
think
we
need
to.
We
need
to
have
a
better
conversation
than
we're
having
okay.
D
D
They
have
permission
to
do
you
know
the
nine
elements
that
are
set
forth
in
the
code,
so
you've
got
these
nine
things
that
they're
good,
that
they're
doing
and
they
are
really
focused
on
for
the
most
part,
the
design
aspect
of
the
structure
so
to
get
into
things
like
the
economic
development
and
the
benefits.
Those
are
all
certainly
they're,
very,
very
relevant
to
any
given
project,
but
the
design
part
when
I
look
at
the
DAP
or
I'm.
D
Looking
for
those
features,
the
design
features
I,
don't
really
want
to
look
at
the
app
or
stuff
and
say:
okay,
what
about
the
economic
benefits
I
want
to
see
you
know
is
the
engineering
well
designed
is
the
pedestrian
functionality
there.
Those
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
I'm
looking
for
from
from
that
particular
committee
and
hopefully,
and
if
the
Planning
Commission's
not
doing
that
effectively,
we
can
take
that
up
with
them.
C
Well,
I
I
do
think
almond,
Fisk,
I,
think
and
occasionally
I
have
felt
that
the
plant
Commission
doesn't
dig
deeply
enough
either
and
so
I
think.
Actually,
the
issue
is
more
with
the
planned
Commission,
because
I
find
dapper
when
I
review
the
the
minutes
and
the
actions
that
they've
taken
place
and
when
I'm
there
occasionally
I
really
appreciate
their
expertise
and
the
way
that
they're
looking
at
things
and
and
I'm,
relying
on
them
for
the
expertise
and
that
each
member
of
the
staff
brings
to
that
expertise
that
I,
don't
necessarily
have
and
so
I
think.
C
C
You
know,
and
we
need
them
to
be
a
stronger
voice,
one
way
or
another
or
provide
us
with
more
detail
or
understanding
of
their
thinking
in
the
process,
because
they
are
part
of
this
process
of
review
and
refinement
before
it
comes
to
us,
and
we
need
them
to
be
to
be
more
active
in
the
process,
but
I,
don't
necessarily
see
it
as
a
dapper
issue.
I
see
it
more
of
as
a
Plan
Commission
issue
and
we.
E
You
explained
that
very
well,
alderman
Winn,
I.
Think
dapper
is
the
best
advice,
money
can
buy
for
the
applicant,
and
that
is
that
is
where
dapper
is
most
effective.
Dapper
is
giving
advice
not
to
the
plan.
Commission
dapper
is
giving
advice
to
the
applicant
and
if
the
applicant
doesn't
take
that
advice
and
run
with
it,
then
shame
on
them
and
I.
E
You
know,
I
I
would
hope
and
I
I'm
sure
you
know
some
of
us
don't
always
do
our
homework
and
maybe
they're
not
always
doing
their
homework,
but
I
agree
also
with
You
alderman
Fiske
in
that
I.
Don't
think.
Dapper
should
send
a
recommendation
to
the
plan.
Commission
I
think
they
should
send
a
recommendation
to
the
applicant,
which
is
what
they're
doing
but
I
think
the
plan
Commission
is
taking
it
as
their
recommendation
and
perhaps
they
could
they
could
do
it
more
segmented.
E
Director
Leonard
is
at
every
one
of
those
meetings
now
and
maybe
maybe
it
could
be
done.
Maybe
the
fun
in
the
final
analysis
it
could
be
presented
to
the
plan
can
when
it
gets
to
the
planned
commission
that
could
look
a
little
differently
than
the
way
that
it
comes
out,
because
it
is
a
recommend
it
as
a
recommendation
and
I
think
you're
right,
because
people
are
saying
in
the
community
the
plan
Commission
doesn't
deny
that
dappered
denied
it.
E
B
Well-Taken
well,
thank
you
all
Rainey.
That
makes
me
feel
better
just
to
emphasize
my
point,
which
is
something
that
alderman
Rainey
mentioned,
is
that
I
believe
dapper
provides
a
absolutely
necessary
service.
I
mean
we
could
not
do
without
them,
and
I
agree
that
if
a
developer
is
smart,
they
will
pay
attention
to
those
recommendations
and
they
will
do
everything
they
can
to
adhere
to
them,
regardless
of
how
many
trips
back
to
dapper
that
it
takes
my
my
my
discomfort
is
in
what
happened
between
and
that's.
Why?
I
would
like
to
see
those
recommendations.
B
As
I
know,
they're
spelled
out
because
I
just
got
a
letter
from
Scott
there.
We
work
on
the
Chicago
Avenue
legacy
project,
so
I
know
that
that
those
are
put
on
the
website,
but
I
think
they
get
lost
in
the
translation,
so
that
for
the
process,
then,
is
then
defined
by
an
up
or
down
vote
here
are
they're
not
what
staff
is
really
saying
and
if
our
staff
is
as
wonderful
as
they
are
and
I
absolutely
believe
that
they
are.
B
Did
you
make
Deborah's
recommendations
if
the
Planning
Commission
decides
to
do
that
or
not
at
least
we
will
know
about
that,
rather
than
being
being
faced
with
an
up
or
down
vote
because
again,
I
have
sat
through
the
Planning
Commission
meetings,
where
I'm
not
actually
in
the
room
I'm
watching
on
television,
because
I
think
that's
my
job
as
council
liaison
to
watch
it
and
I've
been
concerned.
Now
the
plan
commission
that
director
Leonard
served
on
was
amazing,
I
mean
they
were
Wow
I
mean
very,
very
impressive
and
I
mean
it
was
wonderful.
B
That's
not
always
the
plan
Commission
that
we
have
and
when
so
I'm
struggling
with.
How
do
we
get
a
more
consistent
recommendation
throughout
the
process
from
dapper
all
the
way
on
up
to
us,
with
the
public
invested
in
understanding
what
it
is
that
we're
working
with
and
I
think
that's
what
the
goal
should
be:
I'm
just
trying
to
I'm
just
trying
to
help,
because
I
don't
think
the
way
things
are
traveling
now
reflects
well
on
the
process.
B
So
that's
why
I
made
the
reference
and
appreciate
everybody's
comments
and
then
director
Leonard,
I
guess
what
I
would
ask
is
that
we
think
about
that
and
maybe
figure
out
if
there
is
something
that
can
be
adjusted,
don't
need
you
to
come
in
now,
but
something
that
can
be
adjusted.
If
you
think
that's
that
would
be
helpful.