►
From YouTube: Preservation Commission Meeting 12-6-2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
I
can
introduce
this
and
we've
had
many
kind
of
conversations.
B
I
think
this
is
the
fourth
or
fifth
time
it's
probably
come
back,
and
then
it
was
in
subcommittee
for
like
six
months,
but
we
do
recommend
adoption
of
it
and
I
only
received
some
minor
comments
from
commissioner
Sullivan
and
then
also
from
commissioner
Zim,
but
The
Preserve
2040
long
range
work
plan
acts
as
the
commission's
principal
policy
document
regarding
the
identification,
documentation
and
stewardship
of
evanston's,
significant
Heritage
resources
and
as
a
guide
for
the
oversight
and
administration
of
the
community's
historic
preservation
program,
which
is
principally
facilitated
through
the
city's
Planning
and
Zoning
division,
with
support
from
the
commission,
as
well
as
other
partner
organizations.
B
C
I
just
had
a
couple
questions
because
I
wasn't
sorry,
I
wasn't
here
last
last
time,
so
I
just
want
to
close
the
loop,
but
there
was
something
about
saving
landscape
in
here
that
was
or
trees,
and
things
like
that
is
I
just
was
unclear.
Is
that
something
that
this
commission
will
make
like
binding
with
part
of
a
COA
approv
approval
process?
Or
is
that
like
a
different
part
of
the
city
that
will
look
like
regulate
that
I?.
B
Think
there
was
two
kind
of
options
or
two
separate
initiatives
for
that
I
mean
that
came
up
once
before,
where
we
were
asked
and-
or
you
know,
pleated
to
to
deny
a
project
because
they
were
taking
down
multiple
kind
of
Heritage
trees
and
I.
Think
that
we
somewhat
determined
that
that
it
just
isn't
applicable.
It's
not
in
the
ordinance
to
allow
to
give
us
that
power.
B
C
Okay
and
then
I
know
there
one
other
thing
that
was
interesting
or
there
are
many
interesting
things,
but
one
of
the
things
that
caught
my
eye
was
education
for,
like
homeowners
and
things
like
that,
one,
some
feedback
I
got
from
another
like
in
like
resident
that
lives
in
a
historic
district.
C
So
I
didn't
know
if,
like
I,
think
it
kind
of
alludes
to
it,
but
this
plan
I'd
love
to
have
more
education
around,
like
you
know,
an
individual
homeowner
coming
in
front
of
this
commission
like
to
give
them
tools
to
feel
like
it's
possible
to
get
a
COA
without
hiring
an
architect
and
paying
architectural
money.
If
it's
like,
of
course,
a
relatively
small
change.
B
Yeah
I
think
there's
there's
multiple
that
that's
true
I
think
that's
something
that
is
a
common
theme
and
I
think
that
there's
also
often
the
standards
for
review
can
flick,
sometimes
with
more
vernacular
landmarks
that
we
have
and
they're.
You
know
it's
kind
of
the
percentage
of
the
cost
of
what's
appropriate
compared
to
the
you
know,
the
the
overall
value
of
the
home
is
sometimes
very
difficult
to
justify.
B
You
know
someone
has
a
400
000
house
with
a
clay
tile
roof,
and
how
do
you
justify
a
quarter
of
the
value
of
the
house
going
back
and
it's
very
difficult,
so
I
think
there's
two
aspects
to
that.
There
are
many
initiatives
in
here
that
talk
about
incentive,
Frameworks
and
creating
a
pool
of
money
that
could
be
used
specifically
for
some
of
these
homeowners
that
have
more
vernacular
homes,
modest
homes,
because
they
are
a
really
important
part
of
our
build
Heritage.
B
You
know
these
are
these
homes,
even
though
they're
not
high
style,
they
really
symbolize
and
are
part
of
this
kind
of
collective
memory
of
what
used
to
be
very
common
and
prevalent
in
Evanston,
and
that's
why
they're
landmark
and
then
the
other
side
is
just
yes
offering
more
technical
assistance,
whether
that
be
you
know,
one-on-one
technical
assistance.
You
know
you
could
create
subcommittees
that
look
at
certain
things
for
homeowners
and
also
just
like
written
resources,
and
that
would
be
available
for
them.
But
usually
it's
more
of
like
a
monetary
issue.
B
I
think
so
trying
to
address
that,
because
we
don't
have
any
Financial
incentives
right
now
at
all
yeah.
C
I
think
that
the
issue
this
particular
person
brought
up
was
more
about
the
expense
of
hiring
an
architect
like
the
feeling
the
need
to
have
an
architect,
because
most
of
the
people
here
are
architect.
So
it's
like
Architects
be
like
the
language
like
the
homeowner
feeling
that
like
like,
if
they
went
before
this
commission,
they
would
not
be
able
to
get
it
passed
because
they
can't
like
speak
the
language
of
of
this
panel
and
they
they're.
It's
overwhelming.
C
D
Yeah
there
are
guidelines
that
are
will
come
out
that
will
address
some
of
that.
The
other
thing
is
that
over
the
past
year,
plus
more
and
more
of
the
very
small
changes
that
are
still
required
to
come
before
us,
Cade
and
Carlos
have
been
handling
administratively
and
I.
Think
that,
whereas
right
now
they're
making
the
determination
of
what
should
come
before
this
group
and
what
should
be
handled
administratively
I
think
it
might
be
nice
to
codify
that
and
say
these
kinds
of
this
kind
of
work.
D
You
know
if
you're,
making
routine
repairs,
but
changing
material,
for
instance,
going
to
Hardie
board
siding,
that's
something
that
can
certainly
be
done
administratively
and
Kate
and
Carlos
always
then
would
have
the
option
to
say
no,
we
think
the
whole
console
or
all
the
Commissioners
should
weigh
in
on
this,
but
I
think
it
might
be
useful
and
I.
I
know
it's
not
in
the
guidelines
now,
but
maybe
some
clarification
of
when
work
can
be
reviewed
administratively,
and
there
really
is
no
need
to
come
before.
This
commission
would
be
very
helpful.
E
Just
want
to
remind
the
commission
that
the
rules
and
procedures
have
a
table
where
we
list
what
projects
should
go
to
the
commission
and
what
projects
can
go
to
the
staff
or
administrator
review.
That's
one
thing,
the
other
thing
about
requiring
our
architectural
drawings
or
done
by
architects
in
this
case,
one
of
the
things
that
people
are
not
aware
of.
Maybe
that's
part
of
the
education
that
we
need
to
impart
that
zoning
is
the
first
step
for
a
project.
E
So
right
at
that
point,
if
you
have
a
an
addition
where
there
is
a
structural
work,
you're
going
to
need
a
either
an
architect
or
engineer
to
provide
those
drawings
and
also
for
the
permit,
because
when
you
submit
a
permit,
they
go
through
the
building
code,
which
will
require
a
certified
engineer
architect.
So
it's
not
necessarily
the
commission
that
is
or
the
preservation
audience.
That
is
triggering
the
review
of
the
commission
only
done
by
architects,
so
I'm
concerned
that
people
will
think
that,
because
preservation,
they
would
not
apply
for
a
permit.
E
I,
don't
think
that's
accurate
I,
don't
think.
That's
necessarily
reflected
what
really
should
happen.
But
again
we
can
improve
with
education
programs
and
and
show
people
how
they
can
apply
and
submit
information
through
this
COA
application.
E
I
think
that
the
plan
has
that
objective
and,
as
Stuart
mentioned,
we're
working
on
a
guidelines
also
that
for
the
user,
not
the
commission,
it's
not
necessarily
something
that
the
commission
is
going
to
administer
is
more
something
that
the
applicant,
the
architect,
the
contractor
or
anybody's
interested
can
look
at
and
kind
of
learn
how
to
be
successful
when
they
apply
for
a
COA.
E
C
G
F
H
F
About
it
and
I,
remember
thinking
that,
like
we
didn't
want
to
say
exactly
what
it
was
that
we
were
going
to
educate
people
about,
because
this
was
meant
to
be
kind
of
an
open,
flexible
plan.
But
that's
certainly
one
of
the
things
that
was,
on
my
mind
was
to
make
sure
that
people
understand
that
there's
minor
and
major
and
the
only
things
that
that
we're
going
to
see
are
the
major
ones
and-
and
in
that
case,
by
definition,
they
need
drawings
and
stuff
right.
Does
that
I'm
pretty
sure?
No.
B
That
yeah,
that's
right,
so
just
it's
a
little
unique
the
program
in
that
the
commission
is
empowered
by
the
ordinance
to
essentially
control
everything
and
we
are
empowered
as
staff,
as
only
as
much
as
the
commission
agrees
and
that's
delegated
in
what
are
called
rules
of
circumstance
and
that's
that
Matrix
of
major
minor
work
and
that
should
probably
be
reviewed
annually.
I,
don't
know
when
it
was
reviewed
last,
not
not
too
long
ago.
B
I
think
it
was
maybe
2018
or
something
where
I
think
it
was
changed
pretty
substantially,
and
that's
actually
I
think
that
change
is
where
more
of
the
shift
actually
occurred
than
just.
You
know
us
deciding
kind
of
ad
hoc
that
things
would
be
done
administratively,
but
it's
certainly
worth
looking
at
again
revisiting.
Adding
more
specific
projects.
B
I
think
the
intimidation
factor
is
real.
I
think
it's
intimidating
to
come
in
front
of
any.
You
know
any
panel,
this
large,
that's
sitting
up
at
the
diocese
and
I
mean
that's
just
an
intent
dating
process,
but
I
do
think
that
we
do
a
very
good
job
as
a
commission
of
being
more
accessible
and
understanding
and
allowing
back
and
forth
debate
and
deliberation.
B
You
know
because
a
lot
of
them
you
just
you
close
the
record
and
that's
that
and
you
sit
down
and
please
don't
talk
again
and
we
deliberate
and
make
take
action,
and
that's
it's
not
really.
It
is
more
of
a
back
and
forth
here
and
I
think
that
that
kind
of
serves
the
maybe
the
heritage
of
this
commission
when
it
was
not
binding
design
review
and
it
was
more
focused
on
technical
assistance
and
making
persuasive
arguments
and
I
think
that
that
tradition
is
kind
of
continued,
which
is
a
good
thing.
May.
G
I
just
add
something:
I
mean
occasionally
we
may
run
into
a
major
application
where
someone
may
need
assistance
and
what
I
was
thinking
of
is
when
they
were
talking
about
the
Pilsen
Landmark
district.
There
were
several
architectural
firms
that
were
going
to
like
essentially
partner
with
the
community
and
offer
some
kind
of
assistance
with
you
know,
guiding
them
through
the
process.
You
know
if
it
was
a
major
project
and
so
I
wonder
if
that
was
something
we
could
possibly
explore.
G
C
My
one
concern
around
it
was
when
materials
are
maybe
not
safe
to
reuse
like
things
that
have
lead-based
paint.
Things
like
that,
just
I'm,
not
sure
how
or
if
or
that's
later
on,
maybe
that
we
think
about
that.
But
I
mean
I,
live
in
an
old
house
over
100
years
old
and
we're
going
through
this
abatement
process
with
Windows.
It's
really
extensive
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
people
aren't
reusing
materials
that
aren't
safe
to
reuse,
especially
with
kids
and
things
like
that.
B
Yeah
I
think
I.
Think
it's
a
great
point.
I
don't
have
the
answer.
We
can
look
up
how
other
people
deal
with
that,
whether
it's
just
that
they
don't
have
to
disclose
that
when
you're
purchasing
these
donated
materials,
because
certainly
those
it
is
possible
to
encapsulate
and
do
various
remediation
on
these
features,
but
I
think
that
the
actual
deconstruction
itself
is
more,
maybe
where
the
issue
is
than
someone
picking
it
up
at
a
salvage
yard
and
repurposing
it
and
repainting
it
I,
don't
know
how
they
handle
the
removal
of
these
features.
B
If
we're
talking
about
like
wholesale
instead
of
demolition,
it's
deconstruction
of
a
house
and
we
could
research
that,
but
certainly
that
would
be
part
of
if
the
deconstruction
ordinance
were
to
you
know,
move
forward.
Those
would
be
the
types
of
conversations
that
you
know.
We
could
have
and
figure
out.
I
You
know
it's
it's
a
really
kind
of
nascent
idea
that
I
know
we
were
there's
a
a
kind
of
not-for-profit
in
New
York.
That's
really
developing
the
kind
of
organizational
skills
and
Technology
to
do
this
at
a
at
a
somewhat
large
scale
and
there's
nothing
like
that
in
Chicago,
I
mean
it's
just
it's
something.
That's
more
I
mean
it's
several
years
away
and
clearly
part
of
the
technology
that's
being
developed
is
how
you
can
safely
and
efficiently
use
the
materials.
But
it's
more
of
an
idea.
I
The
plan
was
an
amazing
collection
of
you
know
just
of
ideas,
and
you
know
some
of
them
more,
like
you
know,
for
the
future
or
or
aspirational
I
I
liked
the
Matrix,
showing
things
that
might
be
done
soon,
but
but
it's
still
it's
it's
very
imposing
and
one
one
thought
I
had
is
that
the
maybe
the
the
new
officers
of
the
commission
each
year
should
get
together
at
the
beginning
of
the
year
and
pick
out,
you
know,
select
a
few.
I
Maybe
you
know
two
or
three
four
specific
items
that
it's
realistic
to
work
on,
because
otherwise
I'm
afraid
that
all
the
the
great
ideas
will
you
know
get
lost.
But
but
I
was
really
impressed
with
the
work
product
itself.
B
I
think
I
think
that's
a
really
good
point.
We
were
kind
of
talking
about
that
off
the
cuff
earlier,
but
I
think
that
if
you
look
at
this,
this
is
like
a
almost
a
40-year.
I
mean
a
20
some
year
work
plan,
so
I
think
it
does
make
a
lot
of
sense
that
each
year
there
would
be
like
annual
work
plans
that
are
created
where
you're
picking
and
choosing
things
that
you
think
are
actually
achievable
or
some
of
these
things
are.
B
You
know
the
political
will
isn't
there
yet
where
it
might
be
in
the
future.
The
circumstances,
the
environment
that
we
live
in
doesn't
necessitate
some
of
these
things
immediately,
where
it
might
in
the
future,
so
I
mean
that
that
Matrix
of
when
things
might
happen,
that's
really
just
kind
of
a
a
best
guess.
I
think
at
this
point
it's
a
nice
guide,
but
yeah
I
agree
with
you.
J
Really
teeny
comment
going
back
to
the
deconstruction
initiative
3.6
and
because
this
is
a
20-year
some
plan,
I,
don't
know
if
this
had
I
didn't
notice
it
elsewhere,
but
when
we
and
with
considered
Partnerships
with
the
Evanston
rebuilding
exchange,
I
think
we
should
say
like
or
similar
organizations,
because
you
know
you
don't
know
who
in
10
years
is
going
to
be
there.
So
we
have
to
be
careful
about
limiting
you
know
just
the
language
around
that
and
all
of
it.
J
I
also
think
that
you
know,
like
the
guidelines
that
are
coming
out
and
different
things
that
we
can
do
as
far
as
education
and
Services.
We
provide
I,
guess
I
that
I'm
excited
or
I'd
like
to
see
more
people
who
don't
live
in
historic
districts
or
whatever,
but
live
in
a
home
that
things
can
be
applied
to
in
Evanston.
J
You
know,
there's
a
huge
swaths
of
Evanston
of
people
in
homes
that
could
gain
knowledge
from
all
the
stuff
that
we
produce
and
all
the
knowledge
that
we
have
and
I
really
excited
about,
making
that
more
accessible
to
homeowners
in
the
city.
J
You
know
at
a
very
ground
level,
not
talking
about
Architects
and
everything
else,
but
like
what
can
you
do
or
what
should
you
be
aware
of
when
you're
living
in
this
wonderful
resource
in
Evanston,
even
though
you're
not
in
a
historic
district,
you
know,
because
you
know,
I,
we've
technically
only
have
purview
over
certain
districts
in
Evanston
and
there's
so
much
more
here.
That
I'd,
like
I'd,
like
to
see
some
of
this
applied
to.
A
F
B
The
next
item,
the
only
remaining
actionable
item-
is
approval
of
the
2023
meeting
schedule.
I
think
every
date
fell
on
the
regular
schedule.
Second,
Tuesday
I
didn't
see
any
conflicts,
and
then
we
are
proposing
another
August
recess
which
seemed
to
work
relatively
well.
This
last
year.
A
K
A
Sarah
seconds
all
in
favor
aye,
it's
unanimous
to
zero
okay
meeting
minutes.
B
Approval
of
the
minutes
of
November
8th
Carlos
did
you
receive
any
comments?
I.
K
Have
no
I
did
not
either
I
have
one
it's
in
the
body
of
the
commentary
on
the
project
with
the
horizontal
window
and
the
canopy
there's
a
line
in
there.
That
says.
K
K
I
move
that
we
approve
the
meeting
minutes
of
November
8th
2022,
with
the
exception
of
removing
the
word
eyebrow
in
front
of
canopy.
A
Is
there
a
second
second
by
Stuart,
all
in
favor
I
and
any
opposed
and
abstentions,
Jamie
and
Amanda
abstain.
E
B
Yes,
a
very
quick
update
we
received-
which
maybe
we
updated
you
last
time,
but
we
received
12
responses
to
the
RFP
we've
now
selected,
three
out
of
those
12
and
we'll
be
conducting
interviews
the
second
or
third
week
of
December
to
select
someone
to
move
forward.
I
think
they
all
had
very
similar
timetables
for
kind
of
launch
of
the
program
being
sometime
in
the
early
spring,
whether
it
be
April
or
May,
and
then
these
respondents
they
are
responding
to
both
building
and
launching
the
like
web
platform.
B
F
B
Yeah
sure,
so
the
way
that
the
city
is
kind
of
it's
purchasing,
division
works
and
the
guidelines
that
we
have
is
that
we
receive
the
initial
responses.
Initial
rfps
and
then
City
staff
is
the
one
that
has
to
so
make
the
selection
on
narrowing
that
down
whether
it
be
three
or
four
or
five.
So
that
was
myself
and
two
members
of
The
Economic,
Development,
Division
and
then
a
member
of
of
purchasing
that
made
those
decisions.
B
Yes,
I'll
provide
an
update
on
that.
I
think
this.
This
will
probably
get
to
you
by
January.
It's
a
little
bit
just
backlogged,
based
on
some
other
things
that
came
up.
I
did
want
to
give
some
general
kind
of
Statistics
from
it.
That
I
think
are
interesting,
so
I
think
everyone
knows.
We
employed
three
survey
teams,
each
one
had
three
Commissioners
and
two
staff
members
that
was
conducted
in
the
late
summer
and
fall.
B
B
That
brings
the
total
of
eligible
resources
in
the
downtown
to
31
between
the
2007
and
2002
surveys,
and
the
downtown
already
has
29
registered
landmarks
of
those
40
that
we
surveyed
three
were
identified
as
not
contributing
to
the
character
of
the
downtown.
That's
about
seven
percent
of
the
total
surveyed.
B
The
majority
of
the
properties
surveyed
were
identified
as
being
in
good
condition.
That
number
is
21..
Nine
were
identified
as
being
in
excellent
condition:
10
in
fair
condition
and
zero
in
poor
condition.
The
majority
of
properties
surveyed
were
identified
as
having
good
Integrity
18
in
total
10
were
identified
as
having
excellent
Integrity
nine
had
Fair
integrity
and
three
had
poor
Integrity.
The
next
steps
will
really
it'll
just
be
continuing
background
research,
so
that's
where
it
kind
of
gets
backlogged
is
researching
all
the
former
permits
finding
construction
dates
for
each
one
of
these.
B
Most
of
them
have
been
moved
from
this
kind
of
manual
platform
into
a
digital
survey
sheet
and
then
we'll
also
prepare
a
survey
report
as
well
as
identification
of
the
I.
Think
there's
three
traditional
zoning
districts
in
the
downtown
we'll
apply
some
character
profiles
to
those
and
have
some
Associated
recommendations
that
the
commission
will
review
and
those
are
obviously
non-binding.
Recommendations
and
I
did
just
want
to
give
an
update
that
the
information
already,
even
though
it's
not
finalized,
it
is
being
used.
B
A
Okay,
I
have
a
question:
how
how
is
this
data
going
to
be
accessible
to
the
community,
and
how
does
that
relate
is?
Is
it
primarily
accessible
to
just
City
and
City
staff,
or
is
it
going
to
be
something
that
Community
like
if
somebody
wants
to
learn
more
about
these
buildings
or
understand
more
about
these
properties?
Is
that
going
to
be
something
that
yeah.
B
So
one
of
the
things
one
of
the
very
first
or
it's
it's
in
the
top
five
at
least
powers
and
duties
for
the
commission-
is
to
prepare
lists
of
eligible
properties.
So
this
kind
of
fulfills
that
need
it'll
be
posted
on
the
historic
preservation
webpage.
Individuals
can
use
it
for
kind
of
general
interest.
B
It
will
be
a
copy
of
the
report
will
be
sent,
I
think
the
entire
report,
not
just
the
individual
survey
sheets,
but
we'll.
Let
them
know
okay,
so.
B
Yeah
because
and
I
think
we
saw
that
during
our
survey
I
think
in
every
single
group
I
had
owners
came
out
and
were
very
interested.
You
know
very
skeptical,
I
think
at
first,
but
then
very
eager
to
kind
of
have
those
conversations
about.
You
know
what's
significant
about
their
property,
what
they
know
about
it.
A
lot
of
them
know
a
lot
more
about
the
history
than
we
would
just
walking
on
the
sidewalk,
so
I
think
there's
general
just
genuine
interest
as
well
and.
A
B
Be
yeah,
it
can
be
used
as
justification
for
you
know,
for
making
referrals
or
something
to
this
Commission.
In
that
kind
of
instance,
I
don't
know
how
at.
B
Yeah
I
think
it's
more
valuable
for
making
decisions
for
like
major
variations
or
alterations
or
plan
development
applications
where
they
don't
know
the
significance
of
some
of
these
buildings,
because
they're
not
registered
as
landmarks
currently.
E
Sure,
basically,
last
time,
I
sent
the
latest
version
of
the
manual
to
Cade
and
Stuart
Julie
and
Jamie
I
got
feedback
from
other
one.
Everyone
Jamie
still
hasn't
had
been
able
to,
but
I
think
that's,
not
necessarily
a
bad
thing,
because
what
I
like
to
do
is
put
together.
The
comments
I
received
from
the
other
three
send
the
last.
The
latest
version
to
all
the
members
and
I
think
Jamie
has
a
very
good
eye
to
kind
of
make
it
even
better.
E
So
my
hope
is
that,
if
not
in
in
January
we're
going
to
have
a
new
version,
not
a
new
version,
a
revised
version
in
in
February
and-
and
that
is
the
document
that
I
spoke
earlier
about-
that
is
a
guideline
for
the
user-
is
not
the
commission,
so
the
language
was
on
purposely
less
complicated
or
you
know
technical,
and
so
the
comments
I
received
sort
of
a
mix
of
those
sort
of
had
to
sort
it
out.
What
looks
too
technical?
What
does
not,
because
the
purposes
make
it
easier
for
the
applicants
so
yeah.
E
We
we're
moving
forward
and
I
tried
to
pick
local
X
samples
like
photos
of
actual
buildings
in
Evanston,
although
you
have
to
be
very
delicate,
not
to
use
bad
examples
and
publication,
but
the
good
examples.
So
it's
a
little
bit
challenging,
especially
for
new
construction.
For
instance.
Not
we
don't
have
too
many
new
structures,
but
then
again,
they're
not
always
follow
the
the
standards
as
in
in
an
ideal
situation.
So
we
had
to
give
ourselves
a
little
bit
of
a
slack
on.
E
You
know
what
would
be
a
perfect
pressure
versus
what
is
what
the
objective
of
the
preservation
audience
is
to
meet
the
standards
again,
we're
not
reviewing
quality
or
excellence
and
design,
but
we're
looking
at
projects
that
should
meet
the
standards
in
in
the
best
best
possible
way.
So
I
will
continue
working
on
that
I
needed
to
take
a
little
break,
because
there
was
so
much
information
I
received
from
the
comments.
It
was
a
point
where
I
was
saturated
with
okay.
E
How
do
I
organize
all
this
information
in
a
way
that
makes
sense
without
necessarily
changing
the
document
too
much.
So
that's
where
we
are
at
this
point.
A
B
The
only
other
item
is
I,
just
want
to
remind
Commissioners
that
nomination
for
officers
is
still
open.
We
have
received
some.
You
can
just
basically
how
it
works
is.
If
you
nominate
somebody
I'll
reach
out
to
that
individual
I
won't
say
who
nominated
them,
but
I'll,
say
you've
been
nominated,
then
I
ask
if
they
would
accept
that
nomination
and
then,
if
there
are
two
members
that
are
nominated
for
the
same
position,
usually
I
disclose
that
information,
because
very
often
one
individual
is
amenable
to
somebody
taking
that
taking
that
role
over
them.
B
J
E
A
H
H
E
E
How
can
he
be
so
effective
and
I
learned
a
lot
from
him
in
terms
of
the
law,
how
the
ordinance
should
be
applied
and
how
the
commission
can
fulfill
its
role
without
being
afraid
of
making
decisions
and
their
sound
decisions
and
just
decisions
and
sympathetic
decisions
towards
the
applicant,
and
then
he
was
brave
enough
to
become
the
chair,
which
we
are
very
much
appreciative
that
took
in
another
level
where
we
enjoy
his
sense
of
kindness
again
with
towards
the
applicant
and
I
want
to.
Thank
you
for
your
six
years
of
service.
H
B
I
will
always
remember
you
mark
for
the
way
that
you
very
delicately
handle
extremely
contentious
situations
in
a
way
that
I
to
have
an
inability
to
sometimes
and
my
my
other
favorite
line
from
Mark,
and
it's
a
wonderful
reminder
for
everybody.
Every
time
is
just
that
this
body's
powers
are
limited
by
Design
and
as
much
as
we
would
like
to.
We
should
react
to
what's
proposed
instead
of
try
to
redesign
something
for
them
and
we
would
like
people
to
produce
3D
models
that
they're
about
their
plans,
but
I
I,
very
much
I.
B
You
know,
I
was
kind
of
thrown
into
working
with
you
under
very
unique
circumstances
and
I've
I've
really
I've
really
appreciated.
It.
I've
learned
a
lot
from
you
and
I'm
sad
to
see
you
go
and
if
we
ever
amend
the
ordinance-
and
you
want
to
come
back
for
a
third
or
fourth
term,
I
will
give
you
a
call.