►
From YouTube: Planning & Development Housing Sub-Committee 11-10-2022
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).
B
Yeah,
please
do
so
it's!
Oh
you
see
attending
SketchUp,
okay,
great,
okay,
terrific,
okay,
so
I
guess
we
can
get
started.
I
just
want
to.
We.
There
were
some,
maybe
I'll,
let
Sarah!
If
you
want
to
explain
it.
Oh
technological
snap,
Foods
we
ran
into.
A
Actually
we
we
had
some
problems
with
our
setup
because
there
was
work
being
done
on
the
website,
so
we
had
a
bunch
of
our
committees
disconnected
which
made
it
rather
difficult
and
as
they
were
reconnected,
some
of
our
information
wasn't
always
quite
right,
and
so
we've
had
a
little
confusion
as
to
how
tonight's
meeting
is
going
to
be
so
we're
trying
to
do
a
sort
of
creative
hybrid,
because
council
member
Kelly,
our
chair,
is
down
in
room
g300
and
some
people
have
shown
up
there
and
we
also
are
online.
A
So
it's
a
kind
of
mixed
meetings,
we're
still
waiting
for
two
of
our
committee
members
to
appear.
We
need
at
least
one
more
to
have
a
quorum
and
I
realized.
Okay,
thank.
B
You
yeah
so
so
we
thought
we'd
do
we'll,
follow
the
agenda,
but
we'll
this
will
be
a
discussion
and
we'll
repeat
it
again
because
of
some
of
the
confusion.
So
I
have
right
now
we
have
four
attendees
here
in
g300
because
it
was
posted
g300
on
the
calendar.
There
was
just
some
they're
they're
doing
some
because
some
sort
of
modifying
of
the
webs
of
the
city's
site
website,
so
it
didn't
get
make
the
translation
to
the
calendar
that
it
was
an
online
session.
B
So
so,
for
that
reason,
we'll
we'll
do
both
we'll
we'll
have
the
discussion
tonight,
we'll
repeat
the
same
agenda
again
in
December,
so
that
everybody
who
wants
to
be
with
the
full
group
can
be
there
so
okay,
so
we
now
have
a
quorum
right.
B
So
I
guess
you
can
go
ahead
and
get
started
with
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
subcommittee
on
housing.
It's
November
10th,
five,
ten
and
okay.
So
we
have
I'll,
just
I'll
call
roll
Devon,
Reed
councilmember,
read.
B
Here
great
councilmember
Ravel
here
great
and
council
member
Burns.
B
C
B
Not
yet
okay
and
I'm
here
councilmember
Kelly
and
we
can
go
ahead
and
I
don't
know
if
we
would
so
we
would
approve
minutes
at
the
next
meeting.
Right
Sarah
is
that
okay
so
approved
minutes,
but
we'll
go
ahead
then
now
with
I
guess
we
can
go
ahead
and
start
with
public
comment
right.
That's!
B
Know,
but
there
is
divine
you
miss.
The
issue
is
that
there
was
postings
in
two
different
places:
okay,
okay!
So
that's
why.
B
Trying
to
hook
up
here
down
here
staff
is
going
to
try
to
project
this
in
g300
also,
so
hopefully
that
will
happen
but
I
think
in
the
time
being,
we
can
go
ahead
and
start
with
public
comment
and
we'll
keep
it
to
I'll
run
my
timer
to
three
minutes.
If
that's
is
that
sound
about
right,
councilmember,
Reed,.
D
It's
usually
two
minutes
for
committee,
but
I
mean
if
you
view
the
chair,
so
three
minutes,
I.
C
B
So
we'll
keep
comments,
two
three
minutes
and,
let's
see
Megan,
do
we
have
sign
in
for
comments.
Were
there
people
who
signed
up
to
speak?
That's
okay,
you
can
you
don't
have
to
you.
Can
since
you're
here
in
person.
E
F
G
G
B
H
B
Person
first
and
I
will
Miss
McHugh,
okay,
so
Ms
McHugh
would
like
to
speak
and
I'm
going
to
do
this.
I
J
I
Comments
aren't
prepared,
but
I
had
an
update
to
something.
I
spoke
about
last
at
the
last
meeting,
I
was
describable
situation,
in
which
a
house
was
were
rubbed
on
my
block,
with
six
plus
bedrooms
rented
to
six
plus
students
for
7
000
plus
dollars
a
month,
and
when
that
person
was
called
out
for
over
occupancy
the
landlord
advertised
it
or
read
for
forty
eight
hundred
dollars
and
then
lowered
it
to
three
thousand
dollars
and
what
happened
when
the
rent
was
lowered
to
three
thousand
dollars.
I
Basically,
the
assumption
is
that
if
you
could,
he
was
making
as
if
he
could
rent
to
three
people.
He
would
rent
it
for
three
thousand
dollars
three
times
a
thousand
dollars,
the
going
rate
generally
in
the
area.
I
I
I
also
had
a
discussion
with
the
Northwestern
representative
and
Claire
about
the
idea
of
a
family,
renting
a
bedroom
or
two
to
students
to
make
it
even
more
affordable,
and
it
also
could
make
it
more.
Apartments,
more
or
lodging
I
should
say
more
affordable
for
students,
in
that,
maybe
they
don't
need
to
pay
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
and
so
I
calculated
that
also,
if
at
three
thousand
dollars.
I
If
that
couple
rented
two
bedrooms
to
Northwestern
students,
five
hundred
dollars
a
room
per
month,
it
would
now
be
affordable
for
a
family
making
eighty
thousand
dollars
a
year
and
that
that
does
seem
to
be
a
little
bit
under
market
rate.
For
for
that
building,
I
think
the
four
thousand
dollars
a
month
is
a
fair
market
rent
and
so
at
that
rent.
If
two
bedrooms
are
rented,
the
family
would
have
to
pay
three
thousand
a
month
and
a
family
making
a
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
dollars
a
month
could
afford
that.
I
So
I
think
that's
all
very
encouraging.
We
want
to
encourage
families,
we
want
students
to
have
a
place
to
live.
Students
living
in
family
environments
would
be
ideal,
for
some
students
is
what
the
Northwestern
representative
said
and
I
have
heard,
and
I
actually
had
a
student
living
with
my
family
once
and
I
know
that's
been
done
over
the
years
and
it
sounds
like
a
win-win
situation
for
everybody.
Really,
that's
all
great.
G
B
F
The
one
and
the
main
ones
sure
I'll
try
it
try
and
speak
loudly
given
the
laptop
situation,
so
yeah
I'm
here
as
the
my
name
is
Dominic
goz
I'm,
the
assistant
director
of
open
communities
for
a
career,
Housing
Organization.
Here
in
Evanston,
we
provide
services
all
throughout
the
north
suburbs.
F
Our
position
is
is
is
is
very
much
not
in
favor
of
the
three
unrelated
rule
that
currently
stands
in
the
zoning
code,
and
there
are
several
reasons
for
that.
Several
of
them
are
really
oriented
around.
So
what
our
day-to-day
work
is
in
Fair
Housing
so
and
some
of
them
I
think
are
just
intuitive
and
I'll
kind
of
just
briefly
run
through
them.
So
the
first
concern
is
one
of
of
exclusivity
that
you
know
having
this
kind
of
all
Hero
to.
F
A
definition
of
of
family
as
it
currently
stands
in
the
city,
especially
you
know,
is
certainly
just
not
inclusive.
You
see,
families
of
you
know,
unwant
unwed
parents
adopted
and
fostered
children,
and
even
if
you
made
the
definition
more
inclusive,
as
I've
heard,
some
Advocates
say
that
we
could
do
I
still
think
you're,
never
going
to
capture
sort
of
you
know
extended
kinship
networks.
These
are
a
lot
more
common
and
you
know
black
and
latinx
communities
where
folks
are
not
related
but
living.
F
You
know
I'm
30
what
am
I
about
to
be
35
throughout
my
life,
throughout
the
majority
of
my
adult
life,
I've
lived
in
housing
with
four
plus
friends
or,
or
you
know,
colleagues
fellow
students,
things
like
that
because
of
affordability,
concerns,
we're
all
concerned
about
affordability
and
Evanston,
so
I
think
that's
a
little
bit
of
a
no-brainer
there.
F
Enforceability
I
mean
everybody
knows
that
that
the
current
unrelated
rule
is
not
no
one's
going
to
come
in
and
take
a
blood
sample
and
do
a
blood
Quantum
on
folks
to
figure
out
who's
related
and
who's.
Not
so
we
don't
think
that
that's
you
know
the
fact
that
it's
on
a
totally
unenforceable,
I
think
sort
of
undercuts
the
the
reason
for
it
existing
as
well
and
yeah.
I
think
those
are
our
three
primary
reasons.
F
I've
heard
I've
heard
the
argument
that
there's
concern
about
group
homes
regulating
group
homes
for
health
and
safety
and
spacing
in
the
community
and
the
city's
ability
to
do
that.
I.
Just
can't
imagine
that
the
only
way
and
the
only
mechanism
that
we
might
have
to
to
make
sure
that
group
poems
are
healthy
and
safe
and
integrated
well
in
the
community
is
to
have
this
family
definition
in
the
zoning
code.
It
seems
like
a
tool.
That's
that's
a
that's
a
that's
a
you
know.
F
It
just
seems
like
an
ill-fitting
tool
for
that
particular
purpose.
So
yeah,
the
the
issues
of
inclusivity
versus
exclusivity,
the
affordability
enforceability,
are
the
are
the
primary
concerns
that
we
have
in
a
way.
We
we
don't
support
the
rule
great.
B
K
Good
evening,
so
in
contrast
to
what
the
last
speaker
said,
that
is
very
important
for
having
the
three
unrelated
rules.
As
the
previous
speaker
here,
Miss
McHugh
said
that
people
at
around
the
Northwestern
area.
This
has
been
known
for
many
many
years
that
landlords
are
buying
single-family
homes,
cutting
them
up
and
renting
them
out
for
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
for
nine
or
ten
people.
K
K
So
if
you
eliminate
the
three
unrelated,
then
you're,
given
a
free
pass
for
the
landlords
that
are
continuing
to
break
the
law
now
you're
continuing
to
let
them
do
it.
Enforcement
is
the
problem
here.
No
one
is
going
around
just
well.
She
gave
an
example:
the
the
advertisements
are
out
there
that
says
a
house
for
rent
nine
thousand
dollars,
so
don't
say
an
inspection
department.
We
cannot
identify
these
landlords
if
you
have
a
permit
for
nine
thousand
dollars
a
month.
You
know
that's,
not
a
single
family
resident.
K
This
is
not
a
family
that
can
afford
that
you
might
as
well
buy
a
house
and
you'll
have
a
cheaper
note.
So
we
need
to
be
enforcing
the
rules
here
and
not
just
for
some
groups
of
people
you're
enforcing
and
not
with
others.
Family
is
very
important
and,
with
the
new
rule
that
you're
trying
to
say
is
you're
trying
to
say,
oh
eight
people
can
live
together
and
that's
fine.
K
L
Thank
you,
I
would
just
like
to
say:
I
do
think
it's
worthwhile
for
us
to
entertain
how
we
Define
family
and
really
be
sensitive
to
situations
that
could
bring
us.
You
know
a
living
situation
where
there
are
a
lot
of
people
in
a
facility,
and
it
has
to
do
also
with
you
know.
I
think
this
is
where
the
struggle
with
the
connections
building
is
at
the
margarita
is
how
are
people
being
cared
for?
L
B
L
That's
okay:
we
do
a
lot
of
polarizing,
around
nimbyism
and
and
so
forth,
but
I
think
at
the
end
of
the
day,
if
we're
keeping
our
eye
on
residents
and
their
needs
and
making
sure
that
their
needs
are
being
met,
we
can
actually
create
some
focus
on
what
needs
to
be
in
place
in
order
for
that
to
happen.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
B
Okay,
so
I'm
sure
we
have
some
speakers
in
online
and
I'll
I'll
put
this
out
and
where
staff
is
thank
you
so.
J
J
G
B
B
G
H
Okay,
can
you
hear
me
now?
Yes,
you
can
hear
me,
you
can't
see
me
right.
Correct,
okay,
I'm,
Bonnie,
Wilson
spoken
on
this
many
times,
so
I
feel
there's
no
reason
to
have
the
definition
of
family
anywhere
in
Evanston
in
the
Evanston
ordinance
on
the
way
people
on
the
way
people
should
live
together.
This
is
not.
H
This
is
not
the
city
of
evanston's
concern,
or
is
it
appropriate
or
even
have
the
word
family
in
our
ordinance,
as
I
said
many
times
as
a
real
estate
agent
in
Evanston,
my
client
could
not
buy
a
house
or
rent
a
house
together
with
her
four
other
friends,
because
they
are
not
related.
They
just
wanted
to
share
the
cost
of
living
expenses.
H
I
also
want
to
mention
why
why
would
Evanston
not
use
the
same
metric
to
regulate
occupancy
of
all
drilling
units
of
all
types
across
the
city?
Why
attempt
to
cover
all
eventualities
with
different
language
and
Crescent
questionable
determinants
to
regulate
how
many
people
can
live
in
a
unit?
Why
a
he?
Why
adhere
to
the
outdated
and
narrow-minded
and
moralistic
definition
of
family
to
determine
the
safe
level
of
occupancy
for
dwelling
units,
and
why
are
renters
relationships
to
one
another?
H
The
city
of
evanston's
business
on
August,
9
2021,
the
Planning
and
Development
Committee
began
review
of
ordinance
83021
a
proposed
amendment
to
the
zoning
code
related
to
occupancy
of
dwelling
units
and
the
definition
of
family.
Specifically,
the
ordinance
proposed
removing
the
definition
of
family
from
the
zoning
court
code
as
it
currently
stands,
and
determining
a
maximum
occupation,
occupation,
occupancy
of
both
rental
and
owner
occupied
dwellings
using
the
property
maintenance
code.
So
this
was
proposed
a
year
ago.
H
Why
did
we
not
take
that
that
their
review
of
the
ordinance
that
the
staff
worked
hard
on
a
year
ago
and
used
that,
instead
of
taking
out
the
word
family
all
together?
Thank
you.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Miss
Wilson,.
M
Can
hear
me?
Okay,
great
so
yeah
thanks
I'm
I'm
in
favor
of
keeping
the
three
unrelated
rule
for
a
number
of
reasons.
M
The
first
Speaker
caught
captured
one
of
the
reasons
which
is
it
actually
encourages
affordable
housing
around
Northwestern,
because
when
you,
you
essentially
stop
the
price
gouging
of
students
and
allow
it
to
actually
have
the
fair
market
or
the
market
rate
set
by
people
that
can
actually
afford
to
live
there,
that
aren't
being
crowded
in
there
as
students,
you
see
what
happens
to
the
rate,
so
that
rate
fell
more
than
half,
but
I
wanted
to
talk
about
something
else
that
hasn't
gotten
any
attention
here
and
we
may
sit
around
and
say
you
know
no
we're
it's
not
being
enforced,
which
I
by
the
way,
you
know
all
the
people
that
are
saying
we,
you
know
nobody
can
live
together
and
share
expenses,
I'd
love
to
know
how
many
people
actually
have
been
evicted
from
their
homes.
M
Non-Students
have
been
evicted
from
their
homes
for
the
three
unrelated
rules
so
again
like
we
can
make
up.
We
can
make
up
these
these
straw
man
arguments,
but
here's
the
reality
of
it
back
in
August
Blackstone,
the
largest
private
Equity
Firm
in
the
United
States
bought
a
student
housing
company
called.
M
What's
it
called
sorry,
American
campus
communities
for
12.8
billion
dollars,
and
we
may
not
like
the
definition.
People
in
Evanston
may
not
want
the
definition
of
family
to
stay
in
place
because
of
inclusiveness
and
all
that
stuff.
M
But
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you
know
who
cares
about
not
buying
properties
in
markets
that
have
these
unrelated
rules
guys
like
Blackstone,
because
they
cannot
break
the
law
when
they're
purchasing
properties
and
renting
them
out,
and
so
they
have
to
avoid
communities
like
Evanston
in
order
to
not
run
a
file
of
the
SEC
or
their
investors.
Okay,
you
guys
take
off
this.
M
This
limit,
the
three
unrelated
around
Northwestern
and
the
whole
neighborhood's
gonna
get
blown
out
of
their
name
out
of
the
house,
and
it's
going
to
come
from
institutional
Capital
around
the
world
and
you're
going
to
have
private
Equity
come
in
and
buy
blocks
of
Housing,
and
you
know
why
they
like
student
housing
because
they
can
charge
whatever
the
heck
they
want
and
so
the
whole.
If
you
look
at
their
perspectives
on
this
business,
the
whole
thing
is
it's
price
inelastic.
M
They
can
buy
these
properties,
they
can
raise
rents
Forever
on
students,
because
the
students
have
inelastic
demand.
So
you
guys
want
to
open
it
up
to
foreign
money.
You
want
to
open
it
up
to
institutional
money
and
private
Equity
coming
into
Evanston
and
owning
housing.
Go
look
at
South,
Bend
Indiana.
Go
look
at
some
of
the
other
big
college
communities
around
here
that
don't
have
that
or
have
gotten
rid
of
it
and
see
what's
happening
thanks.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
licensure,
okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
one.
G
N
Oh
I,
thank
you,
I
I,
send
it
a
statement
in
I
would
like
to
to
ask
you
to
drop
the
word
family
from
any
city
code
is
I,
do
not
believe
blood
relationships,
as
the
family
implies,
is
required
in
this
day
and
age.
I
would
like
to
see
people
to
be
able
to
afford
Cooperative
households
for
any
variety
of
reasons.
N
Single
parents
who
want
to
create
support
for
their
children
and
themselves
essential
workers
who
may
work
temporarily
at
the
hospital
older
adults
seeking
to
provide
social
relations,
ships
and
save
costs
all
can
benefit
from
pooling
resources
to
create
a
Cooperative
household.
The
number
of
people
in
unit
should
be
based
on
the
amount
of
square
feet
to
provide
a
healthy
and
safe
environment.
N
I
I
have
to
say,
I,
don't
like
Blackstone
and
and
I
I
wouldn't
want
institutional
investors
in
there
and
I
I
just
hope.
We
can
find
a
way
to
to
to
work
around
that
and
and
to
make
make
Cooperative
housing
a
possibility.
Thank
you.
E
Hi,
this
is
Jacob
Swanson,
first
and
foremost,
and
in
in
response
to
direct
the
director
for
open
communities,
as
well
as
for
the
other
people
that
are
indicating
that
they're
looking
for
different
types
of
of
living
arrangements
and
our
current,
at
least
for
the
r4a
area,
permits
increased
density
for
dwellings.
You
just
have
to
go
through
special
use,
so
what
that
does
is
it
allows
the
city
to
be
able
to
control
the
spacing
and
the
arrangements,
but
you
can
have
at
least
an
r4a.
E
The
allowed
usage
permits
increased
density,
so
that
does
give
the
ability
for
more
people
to
be
in
a
in
a
home
for
some
of
the
other
changes.
I
think
Claire
is
also
going
to
present
some
changes
to
the
the
wording
today
of
the
of
of
the
rule,
but
the
other
thing
that's
very
important.
I
know
that
was
brought
up
also
from
open
communities
about
the
concern
that
Daniel
lober
has
brought
forward
about
group
homes
and
and
the
and
the
impact
on
invulnerable
communities.
E
Sorry
I
have
a
train
going
by
so
one
of
the
things
that
and
it
has
been
tested
in
in
law.
If
we
open
up
spacing
to
just
square
footage,
they
can
be
filled
with
handicapped
people,
it
can
be
turned
into
a
sober
home
in
Naperville.
There
turned
out
to
be
seven
sober
homes
in
one
block,
because
if
the
number
that's
required
in
housing
is
less
is
meets
the
square
footage,
the
community
cannot
apply
other
monitoring
that
would
be
required
for
group
homes
and
sober
homes
and
I.
E
Think
those
are
the
concerns
that
we've
got
here
a
you
can
do
it
right
now.
You
just
have
to
ask
permission
and
B.
There
are
people
that
could
be
impacted
and
I
think
the
point
that
was
made
earlier
too
about
making
it
affordable
for
families.
We
have
seen
in
the
Fireman's
Park
area,
a
total
decimation
of
of
the
number
of
families
that
have
been
around.
There
are
no
backpacks
on
the
Block.
E
We
have
a
handful
of
kids.
Thankfully,
there
were
two
families
that
just
bought
houses
that
were
priced
too
high
for
the
predatory
landlords
to
get,
but
so
it
looks
like
we
may
have
a
couple
of
kids
coming
up,
but
my
daughter
went
through
20
years
with
no
Kids
on
the
Block
and
I'm
in
the
house.
That
I
was
that
my
grandfather
built
here
so
I
know
what
this
neighborhood
was.
I
know
how
it
could
be.
I
know
how
Evanston
can
be,
and-
and
it's
just
a
shame-
so
that's
my
my
stuff.
B
O
James
expressed
a
lot
of
what
I
was
going
to
say.
The
problem
with
not
r4a
was
meant
to
have
a
mixture
of
homeowners
and
rental
properties
home
and
it's
way
over.
It's
unbalanced
in
favor
of
rentals
and
that's
fine,
except
the
rentals,
have
been
rented
by
have
been
taken
by
landlords
and
ran
into
students
and
we'd
love
it
if
they'd
rent
to
families,
but
they
don't
and
they
charge
more
for
a
house
than
a
family
would
be
able
to
pay
some.
O
Some
houses
are
charging
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
per
student,
and
so
you
have
six
students
and
there's
there
are
that
six
thousand
dollars
a
year
and
we've
discussed
this
three
unrelated
thing
forever
and
I
would
really
like
to
find
another
solution
because
of
course
that's
not
the
way
to
to
do
it,
and
that's
about
all
I
have
to
say
after
living
here
for
50
years.
B
Okay,
all
right
Mr,
lober,
great.
J
J
You
can
refine
the
definition
along
the
lines
that
I've
suggested
to
the
committee
back
in
August,
the,
in
addition
to
losing
your
ability
to
regulate,
Community
residences
of
any
kind
for
people
with
disabilities,
which
would
result
in
clustering
and
concentrations
developing
and
de
facto
social
service
districts
developing,
as
has
happened
in
Naperville,
where
they
get
you
know,
allow
no
have
no
restrictions
on
community
residences.
J
It's
particularly
known
from
research
that
did
years
ago
that
they
will
cluster
like
crazy
in
college
towns
because
of
the
greater
receptability
to
them,
but
also
you're,
going
to
run
into
the
problem,
and
we've
seen
it
that
students
are
going
to
be
out
bidding
Evanston
residents
long
time,
term
Evanston
residence
for
the
housing.
J
If
there's
no
restriction
with
a
definition
of
family
and
you're
going
to
have
neighborhoods
change
over
from
being
family
oriented
into
basically
being
student
type,
neighborhoods
filled
with
students
and
having
lived
with
seven
other
planning
students
for
one
semester
down
in
Champaign
when
in
graduate
school
I
can
tell
you
from
personal
experience.
J
It
disrupts
a
neighborhood,
but
the
key
thing
is
it's
going
to
result
in
less
affordable
housing
for
long-term
evidence
and
residents
and
I
would
wager
almost
anything
that
it
will
lead
to
further
displacement
of
black
residents
from
the
second
and
fifth
wards.
And
if
you
want,
you
know,
if
it's
the
goal
of
the
city
to
reduce
the
the
diversity
of
the
the
population
and
I've
been
sending
by
all
means,
get
rid
of
the
definition
of
family.
These
are
unintended
consequences.
J
No
one
I'm
sure
wishes
to
do
this,
but
these
are
the
things
that
will
certainly
happen
if
the
city
gets
rid
of
the
definition
of
family
and
I
think
that
you
would
be
extraordinarily
prudent
to
retain
a
expansive
definition
of
family
that
allows
people
of
any
domestic
relationship
as
a
single
functioning
household
to
be
a
family.
But
you
want
a
domestic
sort
of
relationship.
J
You
can't
have
everything,
but
you
you
I,
I,
think
your
aim,
as
you
know,
have
you
lived
in
Evanston
for
17
years,
have
been
quite
active
in
the
community.
The
aim
of
the
government
is
to
serve
the
permanent
residents
of
the
community.
That's
first
and
foremost,
and
getting
rid
of
the
definition
of
family
will
not
do
that.
Okay,.
B
Thank
you,
okay,
great
comments.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
lober
for
being
on
this
evening.
Is
there
and
everybody
else
any
other
comments?
I,
don't
see
any
hands
raised,
but.
B
Okay-
and
you
wanted
to
say
something
this
cute
yeah,
just
if
you
keep
it
short
like
you,
can
keep
it
to
30.
I
Someone
I
wanted
to
respond
to
two
things.
Someone
said:
that's
okay,
I
I
am
hearing
about
these
women
who
six
women
who
want
to
live
together
for
the
last
couple
of
years
and
I
would
just
wanted
to
point
out
that
if
they
built
an
Adu
in
a
single
family,
home
Six
Women
could
live
together
and,
in
you
know,
the
combination
of
the
main
unit
and
the
accessory
dwelling
unit.
I
So
that's
something
for
them
to
consider
and
groups
to
consider
is
able
to
be
done
in
every
Zone
in
Evanston,
so
in
every
Zone
in
Evanston
you
can
have
at
least
six
people
living
on
a
person.
In
addition,
I
Wanted
Someone
said
why
haven't
we
adopted
the
property
maintenance
code,
as
proposed
by
staff?
I
The
property
maintenance
code
would
allow
four
people
in
the
bedroom
that
is
200
square
feet,
which
is
perhaps
a
low
average
for
a
dorm
room.
It's
just
I
just
do
not
believe
that
it
was
intended
to
be
a
basis
for
planning
a
Destiny
for
a
community
more
like
a
stop
Gap
measure,
so
that
so
the
density
never
goes
beyond
that,
and
it
only
seems
appropriate,
perhaps
for
a
homeless
shelter
or
for
a
family,
and
we
allow
we
have
separate
Zoning
for
homeless,
shelters
and
and
families
already.
B
Okay,
let's
see
sorry,
it's
a
little
tricky.
The
maneuvering
here
between
virtual
and
in
person,
okay
Bobby
needs
to
be
is
Bobby
on
okay,
great,
oh
there
I'm,
sorry,
okay,
so
the
first
on
the
agenda
for
this
evening,
the
first
thing
I,
you
know.
Obviously
it's
three
person
Rule
and
looking
at
our
current
definition,
if
everybody
has
access
to
that,
I
can
share
it
with
you
all
here.
B
So
the
current
definition
and
looking
at
you
know
the
issues
with
the
current
definition
and
looking
at
considering
modifying
that
definition.
So
I'd
like
to
open
up
discussion
to
that
first
item
about
revising
eliminating
replacing
the
definition
of
family
in
the
agenda
and
I'll
pass
this
around
for
everybody
here
soon
and
the
agenda
is
the
the
current
definition
and
then
a
proposed
definition
that
would
expand,
make
it
more
expansive
so
that
you
know
any
domestic
relationship
would
fit
into
that.
You
know
take
a
look
at
that,
so.
P
Like
to
either
staff
or
you,
councilmember,
Kelly
walk
us
through
us,
the
committee,
but
also
those
in
attendance
through
the
current
definition
and
how
the
amended
language
would
which
would
change
the
definition.
B
And
is
it
possible,
Sarah
Megan
to
put
the
agenda
in
the
chat
box?
Is
that
if
that's
possible
or
the
packet
I
guess
if
that's
possible
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
read
it
out
loud?
If
you
could
pass
that
back
to
me?
Oh
thank
you.
I'll
read
the
current
definition
out
loud
and
then
I'll
read
some
proposed
language
to
expand
the
definition.
B
Okay.
So
currently,
as
it
reads,
evanston's
current
definition,
there's
several
types
type
a
family
is
one
or
more
persons
related
by
blood,
marriage
or
adoption
living
together
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit
in
a
dwelling
unit
or
B
B
type
family,
two
unrelated
persons
and
their
children
living
together
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit
in
a
dwelling
unit,
C
type
family,
a
group
of
not
more
than
three
unrelated
persons
living
together
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit
in
a
dwelling
unit
and
type
D,
is
a
group
of
two
and
I
believe
this
one.
B
As
provided
herein,
provided
that
in
no
case
shall
the
total
occupancy
of
the
dwelling
unit
exceed
two
persons
per
bedroom.
Nor
shall
the
premises
be
utilized
for
religious
public
assembly.
This
type
D
family
may
occupy
a
dwelling
unit,
bullying
accordance
with
the
procedures.
In
section
641-14
of
this
title,
so
Sarah
Megan
right,
that's
really
kind
of
built
around
the
Reba
I
believe.
A
I
discussed
that
at
some
length,
with
this
particular
definition
with
David
Jansen,
and
he
also
checked
with
any
of
the
other
people
who
were
still
around.
Who
were
there
at
the
time
when
that,
and
they
have
absolutely
no
interest
in
having
that
definition
of
family
retained.
They
would
much
rather
have
a
very
open
definition
based
on
square
footage,
and
things
like
that,
so
nobody
had
to
try
to
deal
with
any
of
this
stuff.
That
was
a
compromise
that
was
I,
remember
David,
chuckled
and
he
said
well.
A
The
thing
back
then
was
communes.
That
was
what
everybody
was
afraid
of.
It
was
communes
and
that
this
was
a
way
of
addressing
that,
and
so
Reebok
Fellowship
has
no
interest
in
having
this
maintained.
They
would
much
rather
have
people
able
to
make
their
living
arrangements
based
on
their
own
choices
of
who
they
want
to
share.
B
So
and
then
I'll
just
read
some
proposed
language
for
family,
the
first
type
and
again
this
is
in
the
pack
and
we'll
bring
this
back
again
in
December,
since
some
of
the
confusion
with
location
in
the
meeting
tonight
type
one,
a
household
cons,
we're
changing
the
word
from
family
to
household,
so
it
doesn't
have
that
that
sort
of
notion
of
you
know
related
by
blood
or
other
sort
of.
In
some
cases.
You
know
not
not
modern
concepts
of
what
coming
to
family.
B
And
I
think
that
the
the
second
type
two
was
again
without
going
into
rewriting
the
Reba
definition.
B
That's
pretty
much
just
the
same
as
the
reborn,
so
so
that's
and
so
type
one
really
is
the
one
that
would
give
it
a
much
broader,
broader
understanding
of
family,
a
much
more
expansive
definition
having
it
be
a
household
of
two
unrelated
of
two
unrelated
individuals
in
a
domestic
partnership
living
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit
along
with
children,
including
step
children
adopted
children,
children
under
guardianship
or
any
person
living
alone
or
any
number
of
people
also.
B
They
could
also
be
married
or
related
by
blood
adoption,
guardianship
of
up
to
three
unrelated
or
up
to
three
completely
unrelated
individuals,
not
living
in
a
domestic
partnership
as
a
single
housekeeping
unit.
So
so
Claire
is
that
in
our
packet,
that
is
in
the
packet
which.
A
And
I
download
it
I
get
a
12
pages
and
it
starts
on
the
fourth
page
that
type
one
starts
on
the
fourth
page,
so
I'm
not
yeah.
P
I
see
it
as
well,
you
just
have
to
click
on
the
packet,
but
on
the
city's
website,
I,
don't
know
what
what
link
you
used,
but
it
should
be
there
under
November
10th
packet.
B
Can
everybody
see
this
I
know
it's
helpful?
If
you
have
access
to
the
to
the
words,
are
you
able
to
see
it
on
your
phone
or.
C
B
P
Just
to
continue
the
discussion
if
I
may
share
yeah
I
mean
I,
you
know
I
guess
if
you
know
if
people
are
satisfied,
if
people
that
were
concerned
about
the
definition
of
family
are
satisfied
with
this
amendment,
I'd
like
to
hear
from
them
I
would
imagine
they
would
not
be
because
then
the
concern
would
no
longer
be
the
definition
of
family,
but
the
definition
of
households.
P
So
I,
don't
I,
don't
I'm,
not
sure
this
really
addresses
the
fundamental
concern,
which
is
whether
or
not
four
people
unrelated
should
be
allowed
to
to
live
together.
So
you
know
I'll
throw
that
out
there.
You
know
to
the
to
the
group
and
to
everyone
else
who
was
concerned
about
the
definition
of
family
to
see
if
I'm,
correct
but
I,
don't
think
we've
managed
to
do
anything
by
just
changing
it
from
definite
definition
of
family.
The
definition
of
household.
B
B
B
That
also
then
allows
us.
You
know
we
can
improve
special
use.
We
do
it
all
the
time,
and
that
also
gives
us
the
ability
to
to
really
consider
all
those
unintended
consequences
of
lifting
I
would
say
the
definition
of
family
that
we
heard
from
so
eloquently
from
some
of
the
members
tonight,
including
you
know,
the
sort
of
the
increasing
of
the
pricing
pricing,
price,
gouging
and.
P
Chair
because
I,
just
because
we've
heard
the
arguments
on
both
sides
many
times
so
I
just
want
to
zoom
in
on
this
on
the
special
use
part.
So
we
talking
about
would
that
be
a
special
use
for
a
rooming
house,
or
is
there
a
different
type
of
special
use
that
a
group
of
four
people
unrelated
could
apply
for,
or
you
know,
the
landlord
or
the
owner
or
I,
don't
know
who
would
apply
if
it
would
be
the
four
individuals
or
the
landlord
of
the
property
but
or
the
property
owner?
P
But
are
we
talking
a
rooming
House
special
use
permit
or
or
is
there
some
other
special
use
Department
that
that
they
could
apply
for
and
I
guess
that
question
cut.
D
Through
this
a
bit,
I
think
what
Claire
is
saying
is
that
each
family,
or
each
group
of
people
that
want
to
live
in
a
house
or
an
apartment,
with
more
than
four
or
with
more
than
three
unrelated
folks,
would
have
to
apply
for
a
special
use
to
live
in
a
house
here
in
Evanston.
P
A
Rooming
houses
are
already
a
special
use
and
they
are
also
restricted.
I
believe
to
are
for
and
higher
I
would
have
to
double
check
that
I'd
gone
through
that
a
number
of
times
before.
But
we
do
not
allow
in
I'll
check
zoning,
but
I,
don't
believe
that
it
is
allowable
as
a
special
use
in.
G
G
Services
or
something
like
that,
would
have
to
be
a
specific
type
of
housing.
It
wouldn't
be
a
special
use
per
se
to
allow
a
fourth
unrelated
person
into
this
single
family
home
that
there
is
a
that
type
of
process
does
not
existed,
they
would
have
to
meet
the
the
occupancy
requirement.
G
Now,
if,
like
Miss
McHugh
mentioned,
there
is
an
Adu
on
that
property,
you
can
have
three
unrelated
for
each
unit
that
happens
to
be
on
that
property,
so
the
primary
unit
and
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
could
could
each
have
up
to
three
unrelated,
but
but
again,
there's
no
like
special
use
per
se,
to
have
to
request
a
specific
number
of
people
for
a
particular
type
of
housing
unless
it
is
a
very
specific
type
of
housing
like
a
rooming
house
or
a
residential
care
home,
or
something
like
that
which
gets
into
additional
licensing
right.
G
A
Clearly,
it's
possible
to
create
that
sort
of
thing.
The
question
is
how
much
time
and
how
many
of
them
would
you
have
to
actually
deal
with
the
applications
and
regulations,
and
it
I
think
it
could
be
very
complicated
if
people
were
trying
to
say
rent
a
for
unrelated
people,
we're
trying
to
rent
a
four
bedroom
apartment,
for
example,
and
would
have
to
go
get
a
special
use
approved
before
they
could
do
so.
B
But
I
think
it
is
important
that
we
look
to
really
create
a
program
that
is
tailored
to
the
needs
of
Evanston
and
so
I
think
what
council
member
Revell
is
proposing
is
something
we
should
explore
and
I
think
I.
Think
absolutely
because
what
we
want
to
do.
We
don't
want
to
see
price
gouging.
We
want
families
like
the
example
that
Ms
McHugh
gave
of
a
house
now,
because
a
particular
property
owner
was
restricted.
B
Enforcement
didn't
take
place,
and
so
this
house
is
no
longer
being
rented
at
exorbitant
rates
monthly,
but
now
it's
being
rented
at
a
rate
that
a
family
can
afford
I
think
we
really
need
to
be
thoughtful
about
this
and
really
consider
unintended
consequences
that
Mr
lober
spoke
to,
and
others
spoke
to
as
well
as
John,
licinger
and
I.
Pardon
me
if
I'm
pronouncing
your
name
wrong,
I
think
we
have
to
take
that
into
account
and
figure
out
how
we
can
do
this
so
that
we
meet
evanston's
needs
of
affordability
and
of
neighborhood.
E
Hi
just
for
clarification,
because
I
did
look
through
the
allowed,
the
allowable
for
the
zoning.
If
you
look
in
there,
there
is
separate
and
distinct
from
roaming
houses.
There
is
special
use
for
over
density,
so
that
can
be
an
individual
building
that
can
be
somebody
that
is,
that
wants
to
be
able
to
rent
it
out
for
more
people.
E
They
could
come
and
do
special
use
for
that
they
could
come
before
they
start
the
process
so
that
the
city
can
actually
control
how
many
people
are
are
doing
that
in
the
area.
What
you're
talking
about
too
about
the
adus,
the
adus,
is
what
the
predatory
landlords
are
currently
using
right
now
to
create
additional
spaces,
so
they
can
get
above
the
number.
Let's
not
rip
houses
apart
by
putting
adus
in
it.
E
Let's
go
to
special
Youth
and
let
people
use
it
what
it's
intended
for,
and
when
that
person
chooses
to
sell
the
house
or
stop
going
into
that
special
use,
then
it
can
revert
back
and
it
can
still
be
a
single
family
or
it
can
still
be
a
a
two
flat.
I
mean
it
can
stay
without
having
it
bastardized
and
ripped
up
and
chopped
up
so
that
we
can
get
get
beyond
the
Adu
and,
let's
accept
rooming
houses.
E
P
And
Megan
I
mean
because
before
we
go
out
because
I
know
everybody
has
their,
you
know
positions
on
this
issue,
which
is
understandable
but
I
when
someone
says
something
like
that,
I
want
to
stop
and
you
know,
use
it
as
an
opportunity
to
clarify,
because
this
is
these
are
important
details
that
that
we
need
to
to
have
a
constructive
discussion
today.
So
I
mean
confirm
whether
or
not
that
is
true,
and
if
so,
can
we
find
pull
that
up
now.
So
we
can
talk
about
it.
E
So
yeah,
if,
if
you
go
to,
let
me
can
I
is
there
a
way
for
me
to
send
somebody
the
the
hyperlink,
so
it's
in
City
of
Evanston
under
home?
Okay,
if
I
can
send
this,
that
would
be
helpful.
Could
I.
P
Yeah
send
it
to
send
it
to
us,
because
who
is
this
S
Flex
when.
P
J
Thank
you.
Can
you
hear
me
now?
Yep,
okay.
First,
with
the
proposed
definition
of
family
revision,
I
would
increase
the
number
of
unrelated
people
from
three
to
four
I.
Think
that's
a
fairer
number
plus
it's
related
to
committee
residences,
particularly
sober
homes.
You
want
to
have
an
even
number,
so
people
can
be
sure
to
have
a
roommate
same
thing
with
group
homes
for
people
with
mental
illness.
Second
I
want
to
emphasize
the
definition
is
more
expansive.
J
J
J
But
the
key
thing
is
that
it's
a
relatively
permanent
living
Arrangement,
one
thing:
the
courts
noted
when
they
distinguished
group
home
coverage
from
traditional
families
after
the
Supreme
Court
sanctions,
only
definitions
of
family
that
limited
you
to
as
little
as
two
unrelated
people,
an
opinion
by
Justice,
William,
O
Douglas.
J
One
of
the
most
liberal
justices
ever
to
serve
on
the
Supreme
Court
was
that
the
group
homes
are
very
different
than
college
students,
where
the
tenancy
composition
of
the
group
living
in
an
apartment
or
a
house
changes
each
year
and
rarely
extends
Beyond
four
years.
It's
a
very
transitory
thing,
it's
very
different
than
a
group
home,
which
is
a
relatively
permanent
living
arrangement
generally
and
very
different
than
you
know.
A
group
of
you
know
three
or
four
roommates
that
are
long-term
roommates
after
college,
but
you
got
to
keep
in
mind.
J
It
affects
neighborhood
stability
and
that
is
preserving
and
achieving
stable.
Neighbors
is
a
legitimate
government
interest.
Finally,
with
adus
you
can
prevent
abuse
of
adu's.
Extraordinarily
simply
just
amend
the
ordinance
to
require
owner
occupancy
of
one
of
the
adus,
and
it's
perfectly
legal
cities.
Do
it
all
over
the
country.
J
You
can
curtail
the
this
abuse
of
the
adus
by
these
absentee
landlords,
who
are
basically
using
them
to
raise
the
cost
of
housing
in
Evanston,
so
you've
got
various
options
and
I
think
it
really
helps
to
talk
it
out
like
you're
doing
right
now
and
then
consider
these
options
don't
rush
into
anything
but
think
about
them
very
carefully
and
then
again
always
keep
your
eyes
open
for
unintended
consequences.
J
I
hope,
that's
that's
helpful,
and
for
any
member
of
the
committee
who
hasn't
watch
the
video
of
the
August
8th
presentation,
I
really
encourage
you
to
watch
it.
It
is
very,
very
thorough,
clear,
explains.
J
The
concerns
that
I
raised
firsthand-
you
don't
want
to
get
it
second
hand.
I
have
been
misrepresent
the
things
I've
written
instead
have
been
misrepresented
time
and
again,
including
in
public
hearings.
I'm
tired
of
it
get
it
straight
from
the
horse's
mouth.
Please
also.
The
zoning
that
I
recommended
and
suggested
is
usable
and
appropriate
regarding
Community
residences
was
upheld
by
the
11th
circuit
federal
court
of
appeals
in
August.
And
finally,
with
this
definition
that's
been
proposed.
Reva
plays
continues
to
exist.
J
It
is
a
legal,
it
would
be
a
legal
non-conforming
use,
and
you
know,
certainly
the
Reba
play
should
not
be
dictating
to
the
City
of
Evanston.
What
definition
of
family
it
uses.
It's
just
one
voice,
but
their
existence
isn't
at
all
threatened
by
having
this
kind
of
a
definition
of
family.
They
would
be
a
legal
non-conforming
use,
they
could
exist
for
another
thousand
years
if
they
wish.
Thank
you.
B
So,
in
other
words,
we
will
need
that.
Second,
that
type
too
like
within
the
a
broad
definition
of
a
household
and
I
it
looks
like
broader.
You
would
recommend
moving
it
from
three
to
four,
and
would
you
also
recommend
them
language
that
makes
reference
to
civil
unions
and
unmarried
or
married
or
unmarried
couple
of
any
gender
should
all
that
be
does?
Does
all
that
need
to
be
should
be
added
into
the
definition
I.
J
Think
I
don't
think
you
have
to
if
you
do
a
report
on
this,
what
is
proposed
to
if
it
gets
proposed
to
the
city
council,
you
would
put
that
in
the
report
and
that
would
be
part
of
the
legislative
history
which
any
Court
would
use
to
define
domestic
partnership.
H
A
I'm
I've
got
this
chart
open
and
I'm,
trying
to
figure
out
exactly
what
line
it's.
It's.
It's
our
allowed
uses
by
zoning
district
and
I'm,
not
finding
the
definition.
Sir.
E
E
But
but
a
solution
could
be
to
expand
that
across
all
zoning
units.
A
Well,
that
that
certainly
could
be
a
consideration
but
and
I
think
that
that's
actually
a
valuable
one
of
the
things
that
we
had
talked
about
internally
is
that
there
may
be
situations
where,
even
if
you
just
use
a
square
footage
and
a
the
you
know,
the
the
property
standards
definition,
there
are
certain
people
from
different
cultures
who
are
very
used
to
living
in
much
tighter
quarters
and
things
like
that,
really
find
it
it.
A
You
know
it
is
it
it
could
have
a
discriminatory
effect
on
people
from
different
cultures,
and
one
of
the
there
was
I
think
it
was
Philadelphia
that
had
a
very
interesting
way
of
addressing
that
which
was
to
have
a
official
like
the
Fire
official
look
at
the
way
people
were
living
and
just
say
hey.
This
is
perfectly
fine
they're,
you
know,
because,
because
what
you're
looking
at
then
is
do
people
have
the
ability
to
get
out
of
the
property
in
a
case
of
a
fire
and
are
they?
A
You
know,
because
that
that
is
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
that
has
been
a
topic
of
discussion
using
almost
any
kind
of
very
specific,
this
many
square
feet
for
this
many
people.
P
Real
quick,
sir,
can
you
so?
What
could
you
just
quickly
say
what
part
of
the
code?
That
is
just
so
we
can
review
it
between
meetings,
because
this
is
one
one
option.
P
No
I'm
saying
the
one
that
Jim
that
Jim
brought.
A
Up
I
will
certainly
try
to
because
I
have
the
chart
and
I
will
figure
out
where
it
is
in
the
code,
because
it.
B
A
G
G
But
I
think
I've
I've
got
the
the
zoning
code,
the
meaning
code,
open
okay
and
for
the
the
body
of
the
code
that
speaks
to
special
uses
for
the
r4a
district
is
section
six.
Eight
six
three.
A
This
is
called
dwelling
above
density
allowance.
Is
there
anything
that
you
are
literally
finding
in
the
code
that
says
that.
G
I
the
only
thing
that
I
am
seeing
under
special
use
related
to
dwellings.
This
is
any
increase
in
the
number
of
dwellings
on
a
single
zoning
lot
above
the
number
of
Legally
existing
on
the
effective
date
hereof
or
any
dwelling
other
than
a
single
family
dwelling
on
a
zoning.
A
lot
created
after
the
effective
date
hereof,
so
I
would
probably
want
to
double
check
to
see
when
that
chart
was
last
updated
because
it
it
might
be
possible
that
that
chart
did
not
get
updated
with
other
updates
to
the
code.
Yeah.
A
This
says
November
20,
2009
so
allowed
and.
P
B
Think
so
I
mean
I
again.
If
we
have
this
for
phone
4A,
it
might
be
something
we
want
to
look
at
to
expand
that
you
know
increased
density
as
especially
maybe
in
other
areas,
just
just
something
to
think
about.
I
think
that
we
should
consider
as.
G
The
the
chart
has
it
listed
that
way,
but
in
the
within
the
body
of
the
code,
it's
not
so
that
we
would
need
to
double
check
with
ordinances
or
any
updates.
That
may
have
occurred
to
the
body
of
the
the
ordinance
to
make
sure
that
the
two
Jive
since
it
looks
like
the
the
chart,
may
not
be
up
to
date.
P
D
J
D
P
A
That
was
not
intended
to
be
for
more
than
three
unrelated.
That
would
be
if
a
household
wanted
to
have
more
people
living
there
than
the
square
footage
than
the.
K
A
To
try
and
accommodate
cultural
differences,
which
there
are
some
very
substantial
ones
in
the
amount
of
living
space
that
people
think
they
need
and
how
they
live.
So
yeah.
D
Yeah,
okay,
great
and
and
that's
what
I
wanted
to
I
I,
really
loved
Bonnie.
Well,
there
are
a
number
of
folks,
but
you
know,
Bonnie
Wilson
I
think
was
a
public
commenter
earlier
was
was
spot
on
where
I
think
we
need
to
to
be
and
I
think
we
really
need
to
focus
on.
D
P
Yeah
and
I
think
because
we've
been
there's
I,
think
enough.
There's
enough
support
here
to
toss
or
do
something
to
address.
P
You
know
what
happens
when
there's
I'm
related
I
guess
is
what
we're
saying
or
different
household
types,
people
I
guess
who
are
not
in
Intimate
Relationships,
because
that's
what
the
domestic
partnership
I
believe
is
and
and
I
hope
can
be
standing
still
correct
on
that.
But
I
think
that's
what
that
is.
P
So
we're
still
talking
about
people
who
are
not
an
intimate
relationship
if
we
amended
to
allow
four,
then
five
being
able
to
live
together
without
going
through
some
process
and
I'm
saying
if,
if
we
are
to
put
them
through
some
process,
what
is
that,
if
it's
not
a
rooming
house,
is
it
this
other
thing
that
we've
talked
about
so
I
would
just
like
to
get
that
in
front
of
me.
So
I
can
see
it.
I
know
what
the
requirements
are
for
a
roaming
house
that
is
in
our
code.
A
There
are
some
examples
that
can
be
pulled
from
other
communities
where
they
have
things
that
they
call
functional
families,
and
things
like
that
and
there's
I'll
have
to
hunt
it
up.
There
was
quite
a
long
paper
about
or.
B
Any
increase
in
the
under
special
uses
as
a
special
use
under
dwellings,
any
increase
in
the
number
of
dwellings
on
a
single
zoning
lot
above
the
number
legally
existing
on
the
effective
date
here
of
of
any
dwelling
other
than
a
single
family
dwelling
on
a
zoning
lot
created
after
the
effective
date.
Here
of
is
this
yeah.
I
B
C
To
go
to
Bobby's
comment,
I
think,
I.
Think
we're
in
my
mind.
We
would
be
talk
wanting
to
consider
a
new
type
of
special
use.
That
would
be,
you
know,
a
really
relatively
expeditious
process
compared
to
a
rooming,
House,
special
use
or
or
any
of
the
other
kinds
of
things
that
we
normally
think
of
for
special
use.
C
So
something
that
would
be
you
know
pretty
administrative
and
and
relatively
straightforward,
I,
don't
know
what
that
would
look
like
what
we'd
have
to
you
know
what
kind
of
Provisions
we'd
have
to
put
in
there
but
I,
but
I
I
don't
want
us
to
be
creating
something.
That's
really
cumbersome.
B
F
Dominic's
wanted
a
couple
things
yeah
for
comment
from
so
I
just
wanted
to
hold
up
with
what
councilmember
Reed
just
said
and
reflection
of
Bonnie
Wilson's
I
think
comments
that
I
also
really
thought
were
sort
of
getting
to
the
Crux
of
the
issue.
For
me
and
broken
communities
which
is
I.
Think,
fundamentally,
we
don't
believe
the
relationship
between
residents
is
just
something
that
should
be
legible
to
city
government.
You
know
I,
just
don't
and
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
talk
of
you
know
the
unattended
consequences
of
institutional
investors
and
skyrocketing
prices.
F
I
just
I
think
it's
a
little
naive
to
think
that,
what's
holding
that
back
is
this
definition
of
family
and
cap
on
unrelated
people
is
withholding
back
sort
of
more
speculative.
You
know
investment
and
price
gouging
so
just
to
address
those
kinds
of
the
two
things
again.
F
I,
just
don't
think
it's
the
right
tool
to
address
affordability,
that
we
have
a
whole
lot
of
tools
to
address
that
which
we
need
to
do
and
in
terms
of
just
the
the
fundamental,
more
moral
argument
you
know,
I
just
think,
like
New
Jersey
state
supreme
court
doesn't
even
allow
it
struck
down
as
unconstitutional
the
ability
to
do
this
in
New
Jersey,
there's
places
in
the
Pacific
Northwest,
for
example,
that
ban
the
use
of
family
definitions.
F
I
just
think
there's
you
know,
and
you
can
look
at
a
lot
of
places
across
the
country
that
use
the
agmc
that
use
square
footage
and,
like
the
sky,
is
not
as
not
falling
in
those
places.
I
think
the
fundamentally.
The
reason
for
these
kinds
of
occupancy
limits
are
about
health
and
safety
and
not
about
whether
people
are
blood
related
or
what
their
relationship
to
one
another
is.
It
should
be
about
health
safety,
and
so
that
we
can
have
based
on
square
footage,
a
sensible
code
that
you
know
yeah
like.
A
Washington
State
and
Oregon
have
do
not
allow
the
use
of
definition
of
family
and
Iowa.
Interestingly
enough
does
not
allow
it
either.
Yes,
okay,
familial
relationships,
I
mean.
K
I
have
a
comment
so
Evanston
a
lot
of
times.
People
compare
Evanston
to
other
places.
We
are
in
a
Northwestern
town.
C
K
Student
Town,
sometimes
you
compare
places
that
do
not
have
a
you,
may
top
10
University
I,
don't
know
how
many
of
you
attended
the
meeting
the
other
night,
but
Northwestern
I
asked
about
the
how
many
students
are
registered
at
Northwestern
and
the
answer
was
21
000
students
and
8
500
of
those
students
are
undergrads
and
half
of
them.
Half
of
that
number
would
be
a
freshman
and
sophomore
to
live
on
campus,
so
you're
talking
about
a
lot
of
people
off
campus
that
need
housing.
K
So
you
cannot
compare
Evanston
with
anybody,
that's
not
in
a
top
10
University
town.
K
So
let's
end
that
number
two
there's
a
lot
of
discussion
and
I
believe
if
you
are
not
a
landlord
or
a
landowner
of
a
house
or
anything,
and
that
then
you
have
limited
discussion,
because
your
interest
is
different
from
everybody
else's
interests
and
someone
that
has
a
4,
000
square
foot
home
could
chop
it
up
into
10
units
and
then
you're
talking
about
10
unrelated
people
in
a
house
and
you're
talking
about
possibly
a
teenager's
living,
not
next
to
miss
McHugh
here
or
myself
and
causing
a
problem.
B
I
I
was
going
to
say
this
thing.
P
D
D
I
I
think
we
want
to
again
focus
on
I
I
really
agree
with.
You
know
where
Dominic
re-centered,
which
I
I'm
not
looking
to
create
some
new
burden
for
staff
to
have
to
enforce
or
Implement
some
new
program
I'm
simply
looking
for
us
to.
If,
if
there's
anything,
we
need
to
look
at
and
anything,
we
need
to
review,
it
is
very
likely
our
occupancy
rules
and
we
can
take
a
look
at
that.
D
But
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
with
the
definition
of
family
or
household
or
whatever
term
folks
want
to
use
and
that
we
need
to
get
rid
of
it,
and
we
need
to
eliminate
this
section
from
our
code
and
we
need
to
you
know,
just
use
our
standard
occupancy
rules
for
this
and
and
maybe
take
a
look
at
those
also.
You
know
to
the
idea
of
about
you
know:
I
hear
what
you
know.
D
Some
of
the
you
know,
folks
who
are
in
the
room,
are
saying
Miss
Payton
and
in
others
in
the
room,
and
you
know
that
we
are
our
zoning,
our
occupancy
rules.
Our
zoning
codes
should
not
allow
for
someone
to
take
a
single-family
home
and
turn
it
into.
You
know.
You
know
15
bedrooms
or
10
bedrooms
or
whatever
you're
saying
there,
but
if
a
house
exist
already-
and
it
has
five
bedrooms,
why
wouldn't
we
want
those
bedrooms
occupied?
D
J
D
Think
the
simple
way
forward
is
just
you
know,
looking
at
our
occupancy
and
then
finally,
you
know
we
can
make
sure,
through
our
zoning
code,
that
folks
can't
you
know,
construct
too
many
internal
adus
and
thereby
stuff
10
or
more
people
up
right.
B
And
I
think
you
also
have
to
look
at
there.
There
is
a
possibility
of
establishing
like
some
sort
of
an
administrative
review
process
so
that
we're
a
living
Arrangement
where
there's
the
standard
is
permanent
arrangements
so
that
we
aren't
sort
of
undermining
you
know.
B
Neighborhood
stability,
I
think
there's
ways
we
do
this,
it's
not
just
simply
by
lifting
lifting
the
cap
or
lifting
the
definition
of
family
I
think
we
really
have
to
tread
carefully
if
we
really
care
about
affordability,
I'd
like
to
just
wrap
it
up
on
that
I'm,
because
I
I
am
concerned
that
we
just
start
I
know
even
before
I
ran
to
be
in
this
I
thought
how
crazy
that
we're
still
like
using
a
definition
of
family
and
the
more
I
learned
about
it.
B
The
more
I
understood
that,
in
order
to
encourage
and
protect
affordability,
as
well
as
neighborhood
stability
there
that
legally,
that
it's
really
important
that
we
do
that.
We
do
maintain
this,
but
that
we
broaden
the
definition
I
think
to
that
which
attorney
lobers
spoke
to.
So
I
would
like
to
ask
that
for
our
next,
that
we
look
at
other
cities
and
what
what
they've
done
and
but
I
did
want
to
ask,
since
we
do
have
an
attorney
with
us.
If
you
wanted
to
respond
to
the
comments
about
New,
Jersey
Mr,
lower.
P
P
Have
to
jump
so
because
I
have
three
minutes
left,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
get
in
the
things
that
I
would
need
at
the
next
meeting.
So
you
know
again,
I
think
very
clearly.
P
What
has
at
least
been
described
to
me
is
is
that
what
people
would
like
to
see,
and-
and
you
know
we
talk
about
it-
in
definitions
of
family
in
different
ways,
but
what
people
like
to
see
is
if
there
are,
if
there
are
people
who
especially
people,
are
related,
but
I
think
the
particular
people
that
that
are
looking
to
live
places
temporarily
are
not
looking
to
see
permanent
residency,
that
there
is
some
process
that
they
have
to
go
through,
and
then
there
are
consequences
to
them
going
through
some
type
of
special
use
for
process,
with
stricter
regulations
that
we
would
have
to
come
up
with
right
and
that's
the
case
with
rooming
houses.
P
It
would
likely
be
the
case
under
some
new
way
of
doing
it
and
if
there
was
a
way
I'm
sure
from
for
many
residents,
if
there
was
a
way
to
to
to
to
do
this
in
a
way
that
that
captured
as
many
of
the
most
more
rambunction
students
as
possible
I'm
sure
they
would
be
interested
in
that,
because
that
seems
to
be
really
the
Crux
of
the
main
concerns
that
I've
heard
from
residents
and
so
again
for
the
the
sake
of
this
exercise
that
we're
doing
which
this
is
does
not
reflect
on
kind
of
where
I'm
at
on
this
issue,
because
I'm
still
exploring
it
myself.
P
I
would
like
to
see.
Let's
play
that
out
too
it's
logical
end
and
let's
see
what
it
would
look
like
to
have
a
new
special
use
or
whatever
we
want
to
call
it.
That
would
create
a
process
for
households
or
whatever
we're
going
to
call
a
living
situations.
You
know
that
are
outside
of
you
know
what
we
would
consider
allowable
and
what
that
would
what
the
process
will
look
like
and
what
type
of
strict
or
regulations
will
be
put
on
on
on
on
those
living
arrangements.
P
P
D
Yeah
I
think
I
think
it.
It
would
make
sense
for
us
to
really
bring
occupancy
I
think
our
occupancy
code
is
likely
fine,
as
is
but
I,
think
it's
worth
reviewing
and
seeing
where
we
can
make
adjustments
if
necessary,
to
make
sure
that
we're
accounting
for
you
know,
concerns
but
I
think
the
real
policy
before
us
is
really
just
an
elimination
of
this
definition
of
family
or
household
entirely,
and
just
relying
on
that
occupancy
code.
I.
B
Think
we're
talking
about
a
couple
of
different
things
here.
What
I
heard
from
council
member
Burns
is
potentially
at
you
know:
expanding
our
definition
of
household
slash,
family
and
looking
into
the
possibility
of
creating
special
uses
that
could
accommodate
when
somebody
wants
to
move
into
a
permanent
living
situation
with
six
friends.
So
I
think
that's
what
we're
looking
at.
B
Also
for
next
for
our
next
meeting
and
I
think
it's
really
important
that
the
the
cons,
the
unintended
consequences,
there's
nothing
wrong
with
doing
this
thoughtfully
and
carefully,
as
opposed
to
just
reacting
like
I
said
before
I
ran
I
thought:
oh
family.
We
should
just
get
rid
of
that
that
sounded
Obsolete
and
backwards,
and
now
I
understand
that
no
there's
there.
You
know
it
has
far-reaching
consequences
and
there's
ways
to
do
this.
That
really
ways
to
move
forward
with
the
zoning
and
codes
that
can
really
make
improve
livability
in
our
city
and
I.
B
Think
we
just
have
to
be
careful
and
thoughtful.
So
I
think
this
was
a
great
discussion
this
evening
and
we'll
pick
up
in
December
with
this.
Thank
you,
everybody
and
I'm.
Sorry
about
the
the
location,
snafu.
P
A
That
also
with
you,
council,
member
Reed,
you
know
we'll
we'll
make
sure
and
council
member
Kelly.
If
there's
other
things
you
want
us
to
be
looking
at.
Obviously,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
get
everything
that
everyone
wants
us
to
try
to
get
information
on.
We
have
done
some
research
way.
Last
year,
I
gotta
dig
that
back
out
I.
G
Was
just
about
to
say,
it
would
probably
be
useful
to
at
least
link
to
the
most
recent
text,
Amendment
proposal
that
went
before
Planning
Development
Committee,
so
there's
a
a
baseline
for
what
was
proposed
and
what's
existing
yeah.
And
then
we
can
go
from
that.
A
I've
got
a
lot
of
extra
studies,
including
you
know
in
one
of
the
things
there's
a
lot
of
information
about
the
you
know,
there's
a
joint
statement
from
HUD
and
the
Department
of
Justice
about
regulation.
You
know
about
various
regulations
and
and
how
they,
which
ones
can
be
discriminated
so
a
lot
of
different
information
out
there
we'll
try
to
pull
together.
Thank.
B
B
Thank
you
all.
Thank
you
all
right.
All
the
wonderful
input
really
helpful
from
the
residents,
thank
you
and
from
our
landlords.
Thank
you
very
much
good.