►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 11/1/2016
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
Good
evening
and
welcome
this
is
a
public
hearing
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
of
the
city
of
Evanston.
The
zoning
ordinance
directs
this
body
to
your
applications
for
major
variations,
special
uses
and
appeals
from
decisions
of
the
Zoning
Administrator,
depending
on
the
type
of
matter.
This
board
will
either
make
a
final
determination
or
send
its
recommendation
to
City
Council.
Please
call
the
roll.
C
A
And
with
five
members
present
we
do
have
quorum
tonight.
Also
present
tonight
is
zoning
planner
Melissa
clots.
This
is
a
formal
meeting
and
there
are
rules
that
govern
our
proceedings.
Most
importantly,
only
one
person
speaks
at
a
time,
so
all
testimony
may
be
accurately
recorded.
Anyone
who
wishes
to
address
the
board
regarding
any
matter
on
the
agenda
will
have
the
opportunity
to
do
so
at
the
appropriate
time.
Our
procedure
is
to
hear
from
staff
on
the
documents
on
file
and
then
receive
testimony
and
other
evidence
from
the
applicant
or
appellant
next.
A
Persons
who
wish
to
make
a
statement
regarding
the
matter
may
do
so
at
that
time,
any
person
with
a
legal
interest
in
property
located
within
500
feet
of
the
subject.
Property
may
present
evidence
reasonably
question
witnesses
or
seek
a
continuance
of
the
earring.
When
all
supporting
and
opposing
testimony
and
statements
have
been
heard,
the
applicant
or
appellant
will
be
given
the
opportunity
for
rebuttal
or
a
closing
statement.
Then
the
board
will
close
the
record
and
begin
deliberations.
A
All
testimony
will
be
under
oath
and
although
we
do
not
apply
the
strict
rules
of
evidence,
please
limit
your
testimony
or
statement
to
your
personal
knowledge.
When
you
address
the
board,
please
state
your
name
and
address
and
sign
in
on
the
provided
sheet.
Our
meetings
are
audio
and
video
recorded.
Please
make
sure
that
you
are
at
a
microphone
when
asking
questions
or
making
statements
so
that
you
can
be
properly
recorded.
All
proceedings
are
subject
to
broadcast
at
a
later
date.
Any
matter
not
concluded
at
tonight's
hearing
will
be
continued
to
our
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
A
D
I
have
a
comment
on
the
meeting
minutes
on
page
two,
where
it
states
mystique
and
requested
the
applicant
submit
letters
of
support
from
neighbors.
That
is
true
and
then
the
paragraph
goes
on
to
say
if
the
open
motion
fails,
etc,
etc.
At
the
next
scheduled
hearing
mystique
and
we'll
ask
the
rest
of
that
paragraph
I,
don't
think,
should
be
attributed
to
me.
I
think
that
was
Melissa,
describing
perhaps
how
that
process
could
go,
but
I
didn't
state
that
process
and
it
should
not
be
attributed
to
me.
Okay,.
E
F
B
C
According
to
the
minutes
standard
one
was
I
believe
that
there
was
a
word,
be
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
neighboring
properties,
or
would
that
it
would
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
based
on
having
watched
the
video
and
the
fact
that
there
were
no
witnesses
at
all
that
came
and
against
the
project.
I
don't
feel
there
was
any
evidence
submitted
that
there
would
be
any
adverse
impact
on
the
neighboring
properties,
much
less
a
substantial
one
and
therefore
I
believe
that
standard
is
met.
C
The
only
comment
that
there
might
be
some
impact
came
from
the
chair,
who,
admittedly
lives
within
500
feet
of
the
property,
and
if
she
feels
that
there
would
be
a
substantial
impact
in
her
eyes,
then
she
I
believe
she
should
have
been
a
witness
in
the
case
and
not
an
arbiter
of
the
case.
But
I
don't
think
there
was
any
factual
evidence
submitted
by
anyone
that
there
would
be
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
any
adjoining
neighbor.
C
The
4th
standard
has
to
do
with
whether
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
where
practical
difficulty
is
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
In
this
case,
the
hardship
comes
from
the
fact
that
the
the
property
the
house
sits
on
the
property
where
it
was
built
in
the
1920s
and
in
the
style
of
the
1920s.
The
project
is
I
believe
a
modest
extension
of
that
existing
footprint
and
the
hardship
is
unique
to
the
property
in
that
respect
and
I.
C
Don't
believe
that
it's
a
hardship
that
was
either
created
by
this
applicant,
which
the
board
agreed
by
voting
that
number
C
had
been
and
I.
Don't
believe
that
it's
just
an
inconvenience.
The
property
line
is
where
it
is
and
whether
it
be
aesthetic
or
some
other
reason.
It
makes
sense
to
extend
that
further
and
doesn't
further
encroach
in
any
way
on
that
property
line
to
extend
it
so
I
believe
that
standard
is
also
met
and
then,
with
respect
to
number
seven,
is
limited
to
the
minimum
change
necessary
to
alleviate
the
hardship
again.
C
I
believe
that
has
been
met.
It's
a
modest
request
and
it's
an
extension
of
the
existing
property
footprint
which
we
routinely
grant
variances
on
with
respect
to
these
same
standards,
I
believe
that
the
standard
is
met,
and
that
nominally
saying
you
could
do
this
one
or
two
inches
lower
is
not
a
feasible
alternative
and
therefore
I
believe
it
is
the
minimum
change
necessary.
I
also
wanted
to
comment
on
the
discussion
that
was
add
over.
C
Whether
there
were
letters
of
support
or
letters
against
from
the
neighbors
again,
the
Zoning
Board
puts
out
a
notice
to
everybody
that
lives
within
500
feet
of
the
property
and
gives
them
an
opportunity
to
come
and
be
heard
in
front
of
us
when
they
feel
there
will
be
some
negative
impact
on
them
or
whether
they
feel
the
project
is
not
in
the
neighborhoods
interests.
Again,
not
one
single
person
came
out
and
spoke
against
that
project
and
I
think
the
default
assumption
should
be.
C
Then
the
neighborhood
who
was
on
notice
and
chose
not
to
come
in,
doesn't
have
a
problem
with
that
project
and
we
routinely
don't
make
issue
of
the
fact
that
people
don't
do
or
don't
come
in
with
letters
of
support
or
letters
against
if
they
don't
have
that,
it's
not
a
requirement
for
our
consideration.
So
all
of
that
having
been
said,
I
believe
all
the
standards
are
met
and
that
we
should
grant
the
variance
on
the
motion
made.
A
Yet
sorry,
so
the
issue
at
hand
right
is
whether
we
want
to
rescind
the
motion
and
open
either
a
just
rescind
daily
motion.
If
anyone
who
voted
no
feels
compelled
to
change
their
vote
and
or
we
send
the
vote,
rescind
the
motion
and
open
the
record
to
allow
for
more
testimony,
those
are
the
two
things
here
that
are
or
we
leave
it
as
is,
and
we
wait,
we
continue
the
case
until
they
another
board.
Member
has
the
opportunity
to
review
the
case
and
vote
on
it.
C
D
Without
additional
additional
documentation
from
the
neighbors
talking
about
how
they
perceive
this
project
and
whether
that
would
impact
on
their
enjoyment
and
use
of
their
properties,
I
won't
be
changing.
My
vote
this
evening
either.
I
do
think
that
I
do
think
that
letters
of
support
or
against
are
an
important
way
for
us
to
understand
how
the
immediate
neighbors
would
be
impacted
are
not
impacted,
and
while
we
notify
neighbors
I,
don't
take
that
as
the
fact
that
nobody's
standing
before
us
yelling
that
they
object
as
sort
of
de
facto
support.
A
I
do
think
I
do
think
the
the
conversation
about
neighborhood
neighbor
letters
is
an
important
one
that
we
should
perhaps
have
a
conversation
after
cases
have
been
heard,
because
I
know
that
there
are
some
differences
of
opinion
here
and
I
think
we
should
probably
work
through
those
as
a
board
I'm,
not
sure
that
they
are
necessarily
pertinent
to
this
particular
case.
Why.
C
Do
I
have
a
follow-up
question
for
remember
Deacon,
which
is
which
of
the
standards
that
you
thought
was
not
met?
Do
you
think
would
be
met
by
letters
of
support
from
the
neighbors
that
might
change
your
vote,
because
perhaps
the
applicant
can
tailor
that
concern
when
they
speak
to
the
neighbors
I
would.
C
D
A
So
it
sounds
like
the
nut
of
it
is.
We
are
at
a
three
to
two
so
there
it
seems
as
though
there's
no
point
in
rescinding
the
motion
and
or
reopening
the
record,
and
that
we,
the
case,
will
be
continued
to
the
next
meeting
when
we
can
get
another
board
member
here
to
hear
the
case
and
to
weigh
in
and.
A
So
do
we
need
a
motion
to
continue,
or
it
just
naturally
continues,
because
we're
in
a
deadlock
naturally
continues.
So
thank
you
for
coming
out.
Sorry
I
wish
we
had
more
members
here
so
that
we
could
get
this
resolved
for
you,
but
I
do
appreciate
your
time
and
effort.
So
thank
you
all
right
with
that.
We
will
move
on
to
new
business,
which
is
1026,
elmwood
avenue
and
melissa.
Will
you
read
that
into
the
record?
Please?
Oh,
when
do
I
swear
people
and
again
I
forget
before
after
okay.
D
Listen
before
you
read
it
at
that
record,
I
should
just
say
in
the
matter
of
1026
elmwood
street
that
one
of
the
architects
kindom
mills
has
done
work
at
my
house
in
the
past
and
is
also
a
friend
I.
Do
not
believe
this
will
impact
on
my
ability
to
hear
the
case
in
partially,
and
we've
had
no
conversations
about
this
matter
before
the
hearing.
Thank
you.
B
Kendon,
mills
and
john
hulbert
architects
apply
for
major
zoning
relief
to
construct
a
third-story
addition
to
a
single
family
residence
in
the
r1
single-family
district.
The
applicants
proposed
to
construct
an
addition
above
the
first
two
stories
that
features
a
third
story
with
a
9.1
foot
exterior
knee
wall
where
a
maximum
two
and
a
half
stories
is
permitted.
Zoning
code
section
six,
eight
to
nine
and
where
a
maximum
three
foot
exterior
new
wall
is
permitted
above
two
stories:
zoning
code,
section
6,
18,
3.
B
The
applicants
also
proposed
a
2.3
foot,
north
interior
side
yard
setback
where
five
feet
is
required.
Zoning
code
section
68,
2
8
a-3,
to
raise
the
existing
roof
line.
The
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
is
the
determining
body
for
this
case
on
October
17
2016.
The
applicant
submitted
revised
plans
that
feature
a
compliant
two
and
a
half
storey
addition
on
the
south
side
of
the
property
that
does
not
require
zoning
relief.
B
The
revised
plan
still
includes
a
request
for
zoning
relief
for
a
2.3
foot,
north
interior
side
yard
setback
where
5
feet
is
required,
sown,
in
code,
section
68
to
8
a-3
to
raise
the
existing
roof
line.
Documents
included
as
part
of
the
record
include
variation
application
submitted,
August
ninth
2016
standards,
form
zoning
analysis,
plat
of
survey,
site
plan,
floorplans
elevations,
revised
October,
17
2016
and
including
other
roof
options
renderings,
including
other
roof
options;
letters
of
support,
image
of
property,
aerial
view
of
property,
zoning
map
of
property
and
Deborah
meeting
minutes
of
September
21st
2016.
A
G
G
Clients
a
family
moved
into
the
house
at
ten
26l
mode
two
years
ago,
with
the
intention
of
converting
the
existing
two
flat
into
a
single
family
residence.
The
property
as
it
exists,
is
a
two-story
I.
Don't
think
anyone
would
call
the
roof
a
half
storey,
because
there
is
a
ridge
line
at
six
feet.
Four
inches
the
pitch
is
at
four
and
twelve.
The
first
floor
of
the
project
is
20
inches
below
grade,
so
not
a
first
floor,
but
not
a
basement.
G
So
the
first
floor,
which
is
under
1,100
square
feet,
is
kitchen
dining
room
living
room
bathroom
and
the
bump-out
on
the
south
side
is
the
staircase.
The
second
floor
would
be
the
bedroom
floor
and
then
the
third
floor.
We
proposed
to
change
the
foreign
12
pitch
to
a
12
and
12
pitch,
so
that
we
are
able
to
provide
adequate
Headroom
for
living
space.
H
A
A
E
A
A
A
Gonna
go
further
and
say:
I
really.
I
know
we
gave
you
lemons
by
not
noticing
it
correctly,
but
I
think
you
guys
have
really
made
lemonade
out
of
it
by
being
able
to
reduce
getting
rid
of
those
variances
from
the
south
side.
I
appreciate
the
effort
involved
in
that
and
appreciate
how
that
how
you
guys
have
worked
to
do
that
so
I'm
grateful
for
all
of
that,
and
so
with
that
we
will
go
through
the
seven
standards
for
major
variations.
Anybody
else
want
to
do
these
know
some
day.
A
You
guys
will
take
me
up
on
that.
I
feel
confident
standard
number
one.
The
requested
variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
So
this
is
really
just
changing.
The
extent
of
the
massing
changes
to
change
the
roof
pitch
on
the
roof
of
the
house
from
a
412
to
a
12
12,
which
is
about
20
degrees,
so
that
doesn't
substantially
change,
light
and
vents
to
neighborhood,
to
neighboring
houses
and
to
the
amount
of
sunlight
that
gets
into
backyards
and
those
sorts
of
things.
A
Two,
the
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinances
to
allow
people
to
modify
their
homes
to
keep
up
with
their
families
and
the
needs
of
their
families
and
the
changing
times
and
the
ways
with
that
we
live
so
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three
of
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
A
This
is
a
very
unique
property
there
about
eight
of
these,
these
houses
without
the
basements
are
called
Luxembourg
houses
and
there's
about
eight
of
them
in
all
of
Evanston,
and
they
are
a
very
unique
problem.
They're
a
difficult
house
to
deal
with,
and
so
by
being
able
to
change
the
roof
pitch
and
get
everything
to
work
within
the
footprint
of
the
house
is,
is
particularly
challenging,
but
they've
managed
to
do
that,
and
so
I
do
believe
that
this
standard
has
been
met.
I
agree.
C
A
C
A
5,
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property.
The
homeowners
have
lived
there
for
several
years
and
are
interested
in
making
this
their
family
home
they're.
Their
intention
is
not
to
put
the
house
back
on
the
market,
but
in
an
event,
I
do
believe
that
that
it
standard
has
been
met.
I
agree.
C
A
A
The
extent
of
the
variances
is
now
to
changing
the
roof
pitch
for
about
three
feet
along
the
North
property
line,
and
that
is
indeed
the
minimum
change
necessary
to
achieve
their
goals
and
to
make
this
property
more
usable
for
the
homeowners.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
I
agree.
C
E
A
C
Also
comment
and
I'd
actually,
if
it
helps
Mario
prepare
my
interpretation
is:
we
have
to
find
for
the
standard
to
be
met.
We
have
to
find
that
there
would
be
a
substantial
adverse
impact,
which
means
some
some.
There
has
to
be
some
testimony
or
evidence
that
something
negative
is
going
to
happen
to
the
adjoining
properties.
The
default,
then
ought
to
be
that
no
such
adverse
impact
is
existing
unless
there's
evidence
introduced.
That
establishes
that
that's
my
view
on
how
that
standard
ought
to
be
read.
I.
H
A
Disagree
with
any
of
you
I,
quite
frankly,
find
the
letters
of
support
troubling
because
it
really
puts
the
onus
on
the
neighbor
on
the
on
the
applicant
to
strong-arm
or
their
neighbor
into
getting
an
approval,
and
if
somebody
is
uncomfortable
giving
that
approval,
it
can
create
an
untenable
situation
in
the
neighborhood
right
and
I'm.
Not
a
fan
of
that.
It's
just.
It
seems
that
in
everything
we're
reading
and
looking
at
in
dapper
and
through
everything,
it's
it
started
to
come
up
that.
C
C
It's
a
letter
written
by
the
applicant
right
presented
with
a
signature
block
for
their
neighbor
to
sign,
doesn't
mean
the
neighbor
understands
it,
and
these
neighbors
in
this
case
in
particular
the
Elmwood
case,
didn't
even
put
their
addresses,
so
I,
don't
even
know
if
they're,
if
they're,
if
they're
joining
neighbors
all
right.
So
right
in
my
you
know,
in
my
view,
that
type
of
evidence
doesn't
have
any
value
to
our
cases.
Okay,.
A
A
E
A
A
Just
to
be
clear
what
I
had
expressed
him
Melissa
earlier
in
the
day
is
that
by
by
putting
such
a
high
weight
on
the
two
adjacent
neighbors,
it
seems
as
those
people,
those
/
certain
properties,
have
more
rights
than
anybody
else
within
500
feet.
And
so,
if
that's
the
case,
then
we
should
be
noticing
only
the
five
adjacent
houses
and
not
people
within
500
feet,
because
I
think
that
the
the
opinion
of
somebody
who's
500
feet
away
is
equally
as
valuable
as
the
opinion
of
the
person
next
door.
D
C
And
I'll
explain
why
yeah
I
mean
first
of
all,
I
generally
think
letter.
If
I
generally
think
if
somebody
has
a
problem
with
the
project,
they
ought
to
take
the
time
and
come
in
and
explain
why.
However,
a
letter
of
a
piece
of
paper
on
which
someone
says
I'm
against
this.
To
the
extent
it
doesn't
explain
that
reasoning
to
me
it
has
almost
the
same
lack
of
value
as
a
letter
that
says
amorphouse
sign
it.
C
That
said,
be
in
my
mind,
because
the
standard
is
that
we
have
to
find
it
won't,
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
adjoining
properties
that
at
least
a
letter
against
ways
on
that
factor.
It
says
this
person
is
of
the
opinion
whether
we
agree
with
it
or
not
as
a
board,
that
it
will
have
an
adverse
impact
on
the
value
or
enjoyment
of
their
property
absent
a
letter
like
that,
there's
literally
no
evidence-
that's
been
submitted
that
weighs
on
that
factor.
So
there
is
no
evidence
of
a
adverse
impact.
No.
D
A
Not
sure
I'm
wholly
on
board
with
that,
because
there's
a
reason
we
go
out
to
the
sites
and
take
a
look
at
the
property
and
see
its
surroundings,
because
we
have
to
become
familiar
with
the
property
and
it's
our
opinion
as
to
what
that
may
or
may
not
do
so.
I
think,
in
addition
to
those
people
who
are
within
the
500
feet,
it
is
the
is
the
opinion
of
the
people
on
this
board
to
say
whether
that
there
is
an
adverse
impact.
A
So,
for
example,
that's
why
I
respectfully
disagree
with
your
your
contention
on
number
one
that
no
evidence
was
provided.
I
happen
to
live
within
500
feet
of
that
particular
property
and
I
explained
the
reasoning
for
why
I
found
that
to
be
an
adverse
impact
so
and
I
think
that
that,
but
that's
anybody
on
the
board
has
the
ability
to
do
that.
That's
a
good
question
for
Mario,
though,
but.
A
C
My
view
is
our
job
is
to
collect
evidence.
That's
why
we
have
packet.
That's
why
we
have
testimony
we
collect
evidence.
Some
of
the
evidence
may
be
visiting
the
site
right.
You
collect
your
own
evidence
right.
Our
job
is
then
to
take
the
evidence
and
apply
it
to
the
standards,
that's
where
our
judgment
comes
in,
applying
it
to
the
standards.
So,
in
my
view,
if
there's
not
evidence
of
an
adverse
impact,
then
there's
not
evidence
of
it
and.
A
Case
on
lawndale
right,
we
were
in
a
pickle.
There
was
no
quorum
if
I
was
not
on
the
on
the
board
that
day.
So
it's
not
like
I
had
the
ability
to
recuse
myself
to
stand
out
there
and
say
to
give
testimony
so
I
guess
that's
where
my
testimony
as
being
on
the
board.
For
me,
that's
my
professional
opinion
being
both
on
the
board
and
as
a
member,
but
we
don't
have
to
just
argue
that
point
in.
D
Would
just
disagree
that
we,
you
know
somehow,
if
people
aren't
here
physically
in
person
that
we
somehow
discount
their
views,
whether
they're
conveying
their
views
through
email
or
letters.
Those
should
weigh
just
as
much
as
if
people
are
standing
here
in
person.
Those
are
conventionally
accepted
ways
of
communicating
right.
It
should
be
it's.
A
D
Are
we
to
second
guess
if
a
neighbor
signs
a
letter
of
support,
saying
you
know
I
support
this?
You
know
support
this
project.
We
have
to
assume
that
they
are
understanding
the
proposal.
I
mean
they
are
signing
it.
So
my
assumption
is
is
that
they
are
understanding
the
proposals
presented
and
therefore
are
supporting
the
prod
back,
because
you
said
earlier,
you
know
they're
signing
their
name,
but
they
don't
even
know
what
you
know
they're,
not
even
knowing
that
the
project
is
proposed.
No.
C
E
C
Know
what
to
me,
but
to
me
that's
a
question
of
weighing
that
evidence.
So
I
mean
like
you
can
give
it.
You
can
get
you
as
a
board
member
can
give
all
the
evidence
or
any
piece
of
evidence.
Whatever
weight
you
think
is
appropriate.
So
in
this
case,
but
I
think
what
we're
talking
about
is
the
absence
of
letters
right
yeah.
A
Because
because
again,
you
go
back
to
your
opinion
right.
My
my
professional
opinion
of
going
out
to
the
job
site
becomes
testimony,
and
so
based
on
that.
Based
on
my
seeing
that
and
my
explaining
my
decision,
I
believe
that
gives
me
the
right
to
say
that
I
disagree
with
that
standard
being
that,
because
if
somebody
else
isn't
going
up,
I
can't
be
expected
to
follow
just
what
the
people
come
up
with.
That's
not
the
role
here.
A
The
role
here
is
to
bring
each
of
our
own
individual
experiences
and
expertise
to
bear
on
these
standards
and
help
keep
our
city
what
it
is,
and
we
all
have
different
interpretations
of
that,
which
is
absolutely
what
it
should
be,
but
I
think
it's
I
think
you
might
be
stretching
to
say
that
if
somebody
else
doesn't
present
it
that
it
doesn't
exist,
if
one
of
us
presents
it
I
think
we've
now
put
it
into
the
record.
I.
D
C
Properties
I'm
expecting
that
if
a
adjoining
property
believes
that
they
will
have
some
sort
of
adverse
impact
against
them,
they
have
ample
notice
and
opportunity
to
come
in
and
voice
that
and
or
can
simply,
as
we
see
many
times
just
submit
that
email
or
whatever
to
Melissa.
It
is
to
zoning
to
the
administrator.
So.
A
C
Some
neighbors
that
have
come
in
against
the
project
that
have
hired
like
economists
to
come
in
and
say
this
is
going
to
kill
the
value
of
my
property
yeah
right,
not
that
everybody
should
have
to
pay
that
right.
It's
a
way
of
the
evidence,
not
that
anyone
should
have
to
pay
an
economist.
But
if
someone
cares
to
mariners
point,
if
someone
cares
their
next
door,
neighbor
has
a
flyer
sitting
on
their
front
door.
Saying
this
case
is
going
to
be
heard
and
you
have
an
opportunity
to
voice
your
dissatisfaction
with
it.
A
D
D
C
The
professional
is
the
professional
expertise
that
I
bring
to
bear
on.
This
is
how
are
we
supposed
to
as
arbiters
of
a
set
of
rules
supposed
to
do
that,
and,
in
my
experience,
whether
it's
in
front
of
arbitrators,
courts,
mediators
and
whomever
else
you're
provided
with
the
set
of
rule,
and
you
are
to
weigh
the
evidence
that
is
submitted.
So
she.
C
A
E
Like
we
said
we're
all
bringing
our
professional
expertise,
so
this
is
a
legal
proceeding
and
Scott
as
the
lawyers
bringing
his
professional
expertise.
I
would
bring
mine
as
a
city
planner.
You
would
bring
yours
as
architects
and
so
what
ends
up
happening
with
that
is
that,
if
we're
looking
at
this
cut
and
dried
like
the
law,
if
you
didn't
present
evidence,
it's
not
there
I
mean
it's
pretty
much
like
that
right,
but.
A
C
Because
you
can
ask
questions
of
that
applicant,
like
you
frequently
do
I'd
say
well,
could
you
do
this
a
foot
shorter
and
they
say
yes
and
then
you
then
site
that
back
to
them
as
the
evidence
they
presented.
When
you
say
you
admitted
you
could
have
done
it
less
so
you're
collecting
evidence
in
the
form
of
testimony.
In
that
case,.
D
C
D
H
D
D
B
A
B
D
C
Think
you
need
to
defend
your
position
at
all,
but
it
sounds
like
two
different
things
could
happen
at
that
meeting.
One
is
the
applicant
could
bring
letters
in
which
case
you
may
want
to
have
reviewed
the
record
to
be
prepared
to
at
least
consider
what
new
evidence
comes,
and,
secondly,
Mary
may
vote
and
obviate
the
need
for
it
entirely.
So,
yes,.