►
From YouTube: Land Use Commission Meeting 10-26-2022
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
Good
evening
and
welcome
this
is
the
October
26
2022
public
hearing
of
the
land
use
commission.
The
city
code
directs
this
body
to
hear
applications
for
map
and
text
amendments
special
uses,
including
plan
developments,
zoning
relief
and
appeals
from
decisions
of
the
zoning
administrator,
as
well
as
to
make
recommendations
regarding
the
city's
long-term
planning
goals
and
objectives.
Depending
on
the
type
of
matter,
the
commission
will
either
make
a
final
determination
or
send
its
recommendation
to
city
council
Ms
Ashby.
Would
you
please
call
the
roll.
C
A
So,
with
eight
members
present,
we
do
have
a
quorum
also
present
tonight
from
City
staff,
our
planner
Katie
ashbaugh,
zoning
administrator
Melissa,
klotz
and
interim
community
development
director
Sarah
flax.
We
also
have
Brian
George,
representing
the
assistant
City
attorney
Brian
George,
representing
the
Law
Department.
This
is
a
formal
hearing
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
commission
on
any
matter
on
tonight's
agenda
will
have
the
opportunity
to
do
so
at
the
appropriate
time.
A
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
at
any
time.
Our
procedure
is
to
hear
from
staff
on
the
documents
on
file
and
then
receive
testimony
and
other
evidence
from
the
applicant
or
repellent
after
that
person's
wishing
to
make
a
statement
regarding
the
matter
we'll
have
a
chance
to
do
so.
Any
person
with
a
legal
interest
in
property
located
within
the
Define
notification
requirements
of
the
subject.
A
Property
may
present
evidence
reasonably
questioned,
Witnesses
or
seek
a
continuance
of
the
hearing
when
all
supporting
and
opposing
testimony
and
statements
have
been
heard,
the
applicant
or
repellent
will
be
given
the
opportunity
for
rebuttal
or
a
closing
statement.
Then
the
commission
will
close
the
record
and
begin
deliberations
to
consider
the
standards.
The
commission
will
make
formal
findings
a
fact,
based
on
the
testimony
and
evidence
presented
Guided
by
the
standards
and
commissioner's
knowledge
of
the
community
and
the
recommendations
of
staff.
All
testimony
is
taken
under
oath,
although
we
do
not
apply
the
strict
rules
of
evidence.
A
Please
limit
your
testimony
to
the
to
the
proposal
as
it
relates
to
the
standards
contained
in
the
zoning
ordinance
and
the
corresponding
staff
memorandum.
When
testifying,
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
sign
in
on
the
public
comment
sheet,
our
meetings
are
audio
and
video
recorded.
Please
make
sure
that
you're
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
We
do
have
several
items
on
the
agenda
this
evening.
Is
the
I'm
just
going
to
take
a
roll
call
for
who's?
Here?
Is
the
applicant
for
2125
Madison
Place
present?
Thank
you.
A
3101
Central
Street
I
seem
to
have
a
wrong
page.
What's
the
next
one.
B
It
is
major
adjustment
to
a
plan
development
for
10
12
through
10
16
Church
North,
light
theater
present.
A
A
Thank
you
with
that
we
will
enter
into
our
agenda.
The
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
minutes
for
the
October
12th
meeting.
Has
everyone
had
an
opportunity
to
read
those
and
are
there
any
edits?
E
A
Opposed
anybody
who
is
not
here,
commission,
commissioner
Westerberg
of
stains,
because
she
was
not
present
at
that
meeting
with
that
we
will
move
into
the
new
business
for
tonight's
hearing.
The
first
matter
on
our
agenda
is
2125
Madison,
Place,
22,
zmjv,
0081
and
I
will
ask
that
that
please
be
read
into
the
record.
B
Theodore
and
Nicole
Fancher
Property
Owners
request
a
major
variation
from
section
6-8-3-7
A2
of
the
Evanston
zoning
code
to
allow
a
street
side
yard
of
six
feet.
Six
inches,
where
a
street
side
yard
at
15
feet
for
an
is
required
for
an
addition
to
an
existing
single-family
home
and
the
R2
single-family
residential
district.
The
land
use
commission
is
the
determining
body
for
this
case,
in
accordance
with
section
6-3-8-10
of
the
Evanston
zoning
code
and
ordinance
92-0-21.
A
Thank
you,
I,
don't
know,
is
it
Fancher?
Is
that
the
correct
Prince?
Yes,
please
come
up
to
the
to
the
lectern
and
tell
us
about
your
project.
F
Hi
we're
requesting.
C
F
Variation
to
our
to
our
six
and
we're
requesting
a
six
and
a
half
feet
set
back
on
the
west
side
of
our
home
following
the
existing
setback.
The
proposed
Edition
is
approx
approximately
6.8
feet
in
length
we're
just
looking
to
add
more
living
space
to
our
home
edition
to
add
in
additional
space
for
our
living
room.
G
F
H
E
C
E
G
C
I
I
just
had
one
observation,
which
is
that
the
the
address
is
is
Madison
and
yet
the
door
is
on
hard
Dre.
So.
I
A
Hearing
nothing
else,
I'll
ask
if
there's
anything
you
would
like
to
say
in
summation.
Obviously
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
questions,
which
I
mean
some
cases
are
pretty
straightforward
yeah,
so
anything
you'd
like
to
say
is
as
we
wrap
up.
Okay
was
there
anybody
else
who
showed
up
tonight
to
speak
on
this
matter?
A
A
We
will
go
ahead
and
close
the
record
then
and
begin
our
deliberation
based
on
the
fact
that
there
really
weren't
any
questions,
I
think
everyone's
kind
of
in
agreement,
that
this
is
one
of
those
cases
where
it's
kind
of
a
logical
makes
sense
situation.
Since
the
the
side
yard
setback
has
already
been
infringed
upon
to
follow
that
line.
With
the
new
edition
of
the
house,
we
do
have
seven
standards
that
we
must
find
are
met
before
we
can
grant
any
sort
of
a
a
variance.
A
A
This
is
basically
an
addition
that
will
continue
a
property
line.
We've
heard
nothing
from
any
of
the
neighbors
who
have
come
to
speak
for
or
against.
This,
therefore,
I
believe
that
this
standard
has
been
met,
since
no
one
has
come
to
say
that
this
will
drastically
affect
them.
The
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
Often
we
find
that
the
side
there
are
setbacks
and
properties
that
are
on
Street
side
yards
often
are
already
violated,
and
so
this
is
the
problem
you
have
when
you
apply
a
code
to
existing
properties
that
don't
necessarily
always
conform,
and
it
has
always
been
the
policy
of
of
the
city
through
this
body
to
allow
people
to
to
make
those
improvements
as
necessary,
and
in
this
particular
case
again,
since
the
violation
already
occurs
continuing
it,
it
will
not
have
a
drastic
impact
on
the
property
and
it
is
unique
to
this
particular
property
number.
Four.
A
The
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
and
convenience
at
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out
again
with
these
properties.
If
we
have,
if
we
enforce
the
full
size,
Street
side
yard,
we
often
find
that
houses
become
shotgun
houses
where
one
room
is
literally
stacked
behind
the
other
again,
since
this
already
is
a
property
where
the
that
15
foot
has
been
infringed
upon,
and
we
don't
seem
to
have
any
issue
with
people
complaining
about
the
way
that
it's
already
been
infringed
upon.
A
I
believe
that
this
standard
is
met
number
five.
The
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property.
We've
heard,
no
testimony
from
the
applicant
in
this
particular
case
that
they
intend
to
rent
out
any
area
here
that
they
intend
to
sell
the
property
or
do
anything
that
would
generate
additional
income
from
them.
It
makes
an
existing
house
that
is
fairly
small,
more
usable
for
today's
families,
so
that
standard
is
met.
A
Number
six,
the
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property.
The
condition
of
this
property
has
existed
for
some
time.
I
did
not
ask
the
homeowners
when
they
purchased
the
property,
but
based
on
how
old
I
am
guessing
them
to
be.
This
condition
create
existed
long
before
they
were
probably
born.
So
I
would
say
that
that
standard
is
met
and
number
seven.
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
zoning
board.
A
I'm
sorry
before
the
land
use
commission
and
again,
if
we
were
to
enforce
the
strict
letter
of
the
of
the
rules
here,
it
would
create
less
usable
space
for
this
particular
home,
and
this
is
not
an
egregious
addition
that
they
are
seeking.
So
I
believe
that
standard
is
met.
Is
everyone
in
agreement
with
my
findings
on
standards
with
that
I
will
ask
if
I
don't
think
there
there's
any
conditions
to
place
on
this?
So
I'll
ask
if
there
is
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
requested
zoning
relief
at
2125,
Madison
Place.
D
Okay,
I'll
make
I'll
make
a
motion.
I
moved
that
the
Landers
commission
Grant
the
requested
major
variation
to
allow
a
street
side
yard
of
six
feet.
Six
inches,
whereas
Street
side
yard
of
15
feet
is
required
for
an
addition
to
an
existing
single-family
home
and
they
are
two
single-family
residential
district.
A
It's
moved
by
commissioner
Linville
and
seconded
by
commissioner
Westerberg.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
hearing?
None
do
I
have
to
do
roll
call
votes
anymore,
or
can
we
just
do
technically.
B
Thank
you
all
right,
commissioner
Hallock,
commissioner
Hugo.
Yes,.
A
So,
with
the
vote
to
eight
to
zero,
the
zoning
request
is
approved,
good
luck
with
your
project
and
just
know
that
we
aren't
always
this
quick
on
a
case.
So
we
will
move
on
then
to
the
second
case
that
we
have
this
evening,
which
is
3101
Central,
Street,
22,
zmjv,
0076
and
I
will
ask
that
that
be
read
into
the
record.
Please.
K
87-3359274
that
requires
termination
of
use
upon
transfer
of
ownership
of
the
property.
The
site
contains
a
legally
non-conforming
use
of
an
automobile
repair,
service,
establishment
and
auto
body.
Repair
establishment,
where
said
uses
are
not
eligible,
permitted
or
special
uses
in
the
R4
General
residential
district,
section,
6852
and
6853,
or
an
eligible
active
ground
floor
use
in
the
ocsc
Central
Street
overlay,
District,
section
615-147.
The
land
use
commission
makes
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council,
the
determining
body
for
this
case,
in
accordance
with
section
63810
of
the
Evanston
zoning
code
and
ordinance
92021.
A
Thank
you,
so
just
a
little
bit
of
clarification
here,
so
this
is
a
a
property
that
has
operated
under
certain
special
use.
A
Okay,
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
where
we
were
coming
at
exactly
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
if
the
applicant
of
police
come
up
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
good.
L
Evening,
chair
Rogers
and
members
of
the
commission,
my
name
is
Christopher
canning
My
office
address
is
1000.
Skokie
Boulevard
in
Wilmette
I
represent
Lakeside
Auto
Rebuilders
with
me
as
the
owner
circus
tokot,
who
is
a
50-year
resident
of
the
neighborhood
and
in
his
son,
Armand
tokat,
an
eths
grad,
who
also
works
at
Lakeside
Mr.
A
Canning
I'm
going
to
stop
you
just
for
a
moment,
so
I
can
disclose
that
we
do
know
each
other
professionally.
We
do,
but
we
are.
We
have
not
worked
on
any
projects
recently,
but
we
have
talked
advice
to
one
another
over
the
year.
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
so
it's
out
there
in
the
public
record.
So
someone
is,
everyone
is
aware
of
that.
So
please
proceed.
L
I
know
you
all
have
had
a
chance
to
read
the
staff
report
in
my
letter
to
the
commission,
so
I'm
not
going
to
go
over
that,
but
I
will
take
a
moment
to
say
that
when
I
got
here
tonight,
I
went
up
to
Melissa
and
I
want
to
know
who
wrote
the
staff
report,
because
in
my
line
of
work,
I
see
a
lot
of
Staff
reports,
and
this
one
tonight
was
excellent,
really
really
excellent
and
Melissa
said
she
did
it.
So
I
just
want
you
to
know
that
other
communities
do
a
very
nice
job.
L
The
one
tonight
really
is
excellent,
and
so
I'd
like
to
thank
Melissa
for
that,
as
well
as
bringing
this
matter
before
you
as
Melissa
was
saying.
This
is
an
amendment
to
an
existing
variation
condition
and
though
it's
a
very
long
description,
it's
a
very
straightforward
request.
Lakeside
has
operated
in
this
location
since
1975.
L
as
Melissa
said
the
last
time
they
appeared
before
any
public
body
was
in
2019
to
make
an
addition
to
the
building
which
was
approved.
The
city
council
approved
it,
the
building
was
built
and
then
the
pandemic
hit
and
during
the
pandemic,
Lakeside
continued
to
work
continue
to
work,
and
today
they
are
averaging
over
800
cars.
They
are
working
on
because,
as
you
may
have
read,
during
the
pandemic,
more
people
drove
drove
fast,
more
accidents,
more
work
and
of
the
800
and
so
or
so
cars.
L
They
work
on
an
a
given
year
over
60
to
70
percent
are
Evanston
residents,
so
they
really
perform
a
valuable
public
service
for
the
neighborhood,
as
well
as
for
the
City
of
Evanston.
What
Melissa
had
said
is
what's
driving
this
request
is
this?
Is
a
non-conforming
use?
It's
a
business
use
in
a
residential
district
now
granted
this
business
has
been
a
business
like.
This
has
been
on
this
site
for
almost
94
years.
L
The
the
first
time
any
permit
was
issued
was
in
July
1928
for
a
grease
trap
and
then
for
a
brick
fuel
oil
selling
station,
November,
1928.,
and
so
all
this
time
it's
been
here
and
the
first
time
Lakeside,
with
its
current
ownership,
was
before
your
predecessor,
board
and
city
council
was
in
1987
seeking
some
zoning
relief
and
at
that
time
one
of
the
conditions
to
granting
the
variations
was
that
the
use
would
terminate
upon
the
passing
of
four
individuals
Sarkis
his
wife
and
his
in-laws,
or
if
Sarkis
himself
ceased
operating.
L
L
That
condition
was
carried
over
by
the
approval
of
the
city
council,
and
so
what
that
means
is
a
practical
matter
is
today.
If
anything
happens
to
Sarkis,
and
he
can't
operate
the
business,
then
this
non-conforming
use
would
have
to
cease
and
Armin
and
the
12
employees
who
worked
there
would
be
out
of
a
job.
L
So
what
we're
really
here
today
is
to
talk
about
succession
planning.
Armin.
Excuse
me:
Sarkis
would
like
the
opportunity
to
no
longer
run
the
business,
let
Armin
run
to
business
and
Sarkis
and
Armin
would
like
the
opportunity
if
the
situation
arose,
to
sell
the
business
to
a
similar
either
owner
or
a
similar
body
that
would
carry
on
the
same
line
of
work
and
if,
as
you
read
in
Melissa's
memo,
often
when
there's
a
transfer
of
a
business
from
one
use
to
the
same
use,
that's
you
know
quite
common
right
now,
as
it
exists.
L
So
that's
the
request.
It's
not
going
to
change
the
footprint.
It's
not
going
to
change
any
setbacks.
It's
not
going
to
change
any
hours!
There's
going
to
be
no
other
change.
It's
just
Sarkis
and
his
family
would
like
some
certainty
going
forward
that
they
can
operate
the
business
they
choose
to
sell
the
business.
That's
another
situation,
and
certainly
if
they
chose
to
sell
it
to
some
something
that
is
outside
of
this
business,
then
it
would
come
right
back
before
somebody,
a
public
body
to
address
that
issue.
That's
the
request.
L
Sarkis
is
not
as
young
as
he
was
in
1987.,
and
so
it
literally
we're
talking
about
succession
planning,
because
if,
if
as
we
interpret
the
law,
if
God
forbid,
something
happened
to
Sarkis
tomorrow
and
he
could
not
operate
the
business
than
than
under
the
conditions
that
exist
today,
Lakeside
has
no
legal
right
to
operate
without
Sarkis
operating.
It.
I
So
I'm
I'm,
familiar
with
special
use,
is
where
we
reviewed
them,
where
ownership
triggers
the
new
owners
to
come
before
us,
even
though
the
use
is
staying,
the
same
and
I
understand.
That's
typical.
This
is
a
little
strange
because
it's
tied
to
an
individual.
I
Understand
and
I
understand
what
it
would
trigger
and
that's
the
unusual
part,
but
is
there
an
option?
Should
we
consider
an
option
where,
if,
if
the
property
is
sold,
it
still
has
to
come
before
us,
but
this
other
business
of
the
family
transferring
within
the
family
we
get
rid
of.
E
I
And
I
guess
my
question:
maybe
this
is
for
staff.
Is
that
are
there
any
other
special
use
properties
that
don't
have
the
provision
that
they
have
to
come
before
us
if
ownership
changes
are
all
other
special
uses
requiring
that
special.
I
K
E
K
What
you
could
do
is
add
conditions
about
how
the
current
operations
are,
for
instance,
I,
believe
it's
by
appointment.
Only
so
you
could
add
a
condition
saying
that
operations
must
continue
to
be
by
appointment.
Only,
and
in
that
case,
then,
if
and
when
there
is
a
new
owner
and
if
they
don't
want
to
follow
that
which
would
increase
the
impact
that
would
trigger
them
coming
back
here.
J
K
H
Hugo,
just
as
a
matter
of
historical
interest
back
in
87
and
2019,
a
deal
was
cut
variations
in
return
for
this
Commitment.
If,
in
the
event
that
the
owner
were
to
to
die
or
no
longer
continue
with
the
business,
what
was
the
thinking
back
then?
In
terms
of
you
know
at
some
point
one
would
want
to
sell
the
business
or
get
out
of
the
business,
and
you
know
deal
was
struck
in
return
for
the
variance
is
you
know,
there's
a
commitment
made.
L
So
I
can
speak
to
2019
and
it
was
a
very
narrowly
focused
request
and
with
the
understanding
of
these
conditions
that
were
in
existence
since
1987
would
be
carried
forward
with
respect
to
1987.
To
be
perfectly
honest,
I
was
in
law
school
and
the
attorney
who
was
representing
sarcus
has
passed
away
so
I
have
his
filed.
So
the
best
way
to
answer
your
question
is
I'm,
going
to
ask
Sarkis
to
come
up
and
tell
you
what
happened
back
in
1987.
So.
If
you
give
me
a
moment,
surface.
H
Guess
why
did
you
agree
to
it
because
you
got
something
in
return
for
it
in
return,
you
gave
up
something.
What
was
what
was
your
thinking
in
terms
of
well
I?
Why
you?
You
would
limit
your
ability
to
pass
on
the
business.
N
Well,
I
came
to
ask
a
permit
to
put
a
spray
booth.
You
know
something
modern
to
control
the
fumes
and
all
that
or
sprays
the
going
out
which
originally
I
was
granted
just
very
premature
ventilation
and
then
that
trigger
to
city
and
some
neighbors
to
come
to
stop
me
operating
so
that
time
in
87,
I
already
already
had
13
years
in
the
business
and
I
didn't
want
to
give
up
that.
N
That
was
my
dream.
After
three
years
coming
to
this
country
having
your
own
business
and
somehow
they
granted
me
not
the
extension
on
the
building,
even
though
it
was
a
hardship
just
putting
that
a
spray
but
and
that
time
it
cost
me
like
80,
some
thousand
dollars
with
all
the
rules
and
regulations
and
sprinkler
system
and
all
that
I
was
okay
with
that
operating.
N
So
but
I
didn't
think,
or
probably
that
time
of
my
knowledge
about
these
things,
I
thought
as
long
as
it's
in
the
family
we
can
operate,
but
that
was
I
didn't
think
it
was
just
for
the
land
not
for
the
business.
But
now
later
the
years
say
10,
15
years
before
this,
my
son
came
in.
N
So
he's
operating
right
now
and
that's
his
future.
So
that's
why
we're
here
to
ask
and
along
with
him,
we
also
have
eight
nine
employees
which
they've
been
us
over
the
years
and
I've
been
operating
since
75
at
the
same
condition,
nothing
has
changed
and
my
way
of
operating
or
arms
were
not
open.
Saturdays
we're
not
open
like
after
five
p.m.
We
don't
park
outside
of
our
permitted
land.
N
You
know,
that's
we're
operating
the
same
way.
The
best
way
we
can
to
please
everybody
with
our
neighbors,
which
I'm
sure
they're
all
pleased
the
way
we're
operating
the
business,
but
the
main
thing
I'm
here,
because
I
I
didn't
think
that
time.
You
know
my
son
is
going
to
be
in
the
business.
How
should
I
know
you
know
like
that?
N
L
And
I
also
think,
if
you
look
in
the
staff
report,
there
was
also
a
discussion
about
the
overlay
District
that
was
going
in
at
that
time
in
the
change
to
the
zoning
to
try
to
remove
small
commercial
uses
like
this
and
make
it
fully
residential
and-
and
so
my
interpretation
after
the
fact
was.
This
was
just
a
way
to
keep
that
down.
Zoning
going,
it
was
tied
to
you
know
the
individuals,
man.
L
N
N
And
I
really
appreciate
it.
If
you
consider
I
mean
like
my
son's
future
and
his
kids,
and
also
eight
nine
other
employees
and
their
kids,
that's
why
we're
here
we're
not
going
to
change
anything
our
hours,
everything
we're
limited,
we're
not
adding
any
more
business
and
I've
been
here
since
75
or
actually
72
in
Evanston.
D
I
just
was
going
to
make
a
comment
that
the
the
Central
Street
overlay
happened
somewhere
in
the
2000s,
probably
2006
or
seven
somewhere
in
there
before
2.
You
know
2010-ish,
let's
say.
K
Correct
that
is
when
the
overlay
was
established.
I
believe
that
down
zoning
has
occurred
on
Central
Street
for
probably
a
couple
of
decades.
D
So
I
think
that
that.
A
L
A
You
before
I
close
the
record
I
have
a
couple
questions
for
staff.
Have
we
received
any
complaints
anywhere
on
this
business
and
and
was
there
anything
voiced
in
2019?
I
was
not
on
zba
at
that
time.
So
I
don't
know
if
there
were
any.
K
A
A
With
that,
we
will
close
the
record
and
begin
our
deliberation.
I
will
ask
the
Commissioners
if
they
have
any
thoughts
to
share.
Commissioner
lindwall
is
moving
towards
our
microphone.
D
Sure
I
think
that
and
I
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me.
The
the
only
condition
that
the
condition
that
applies
to
the
ownership
was
F
I
believe
is
that
correct,
I
think
somebody
is
looking
at
it,
but
it
seems
to
me
that
that
you
know
removing
that
one-
and
you
know
especially
since
is
my
understanding
is,
is
if
there
is
an
increase
in
activity
even
with
a
transfer
of
ownership
that
would
that
would
trigger
it.
D
Coming
back
before
us
and
I
think
in
in
reference
to
George's
comment
about
special,
you
know,
having
special
uses
come
with
a
change
of
ownership.
I
believe
that
had
that
one
case
recently
had
to
do
with
the
cannabis
in
which
I
think
is
a
very
I,
think
that's
a
unique
kind
of
special
use,
so
I.
Don't
think
that
the
change
of
ownership,
you
know,
is
necessarily
an
issue.
D
I
think
that
it's
it's
made,
you
know
maintaining
the
kind
of
the
current
level
of
of
operation,
which
apparently
does
not
have
a
adverse
impact
on
the
neighborhood.
As
far
as
we
can
tell.
A
If
not,
I
will
make
my
comments.
Basically,
while
I
go
through
the
standards
again,
we
have
standards
that
we
must
go
through
to
find
or
met
we'll
be
going
through
the
same
I'm
using
the
same
seven
standards
for
a
variation,
the
first
one
being
the
requested
variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
A
I
would
say
that
this
standard
is
met.
This
business
has
been
in
operations
for
decades.
Under
the
current
ownership,
it
seems
like
he
has
plans
to
hand
it
to
another
member
of
his
family,
which
currently
he
has
prohibited
from
doing
under
the
current
ordinance,
and
we
have
had
no
one
show
up
here
tonight
to
speak
against
a
project,
something
that
I
would
think
in
this
particular
neighborhood
with
with
the
over
Street
or
at
the
overlay
district
for
Central
Street.
Typically,
we
have
some
people
show
up
to
to
voice
opposition
to
something
there.
A
A
We
do
allow
legal
non-conforming
uses
to
continue
to
exist
again.
This
property
has
been
operating
under
the
the
in
the
manner
in
which
it
is
currently
operating
for
several
decades,
and
there
is
no
reason
that
I
would
see
that
allowing
this
to
continue
to
continue
to
operate
would
stand
in
opposition
to
the
the
zoning
ordinance
as
it
is
currently
written.
Number
three.
The
alleged
hardship
for
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
We've
already
had
some
discussion
about
this
that
quite
often
this.
A
So
the
fact
is
that
we
have
created
a
particular
hardship
on
this
particular
property
because
of
the
fact
that
we
have
made
a
condition
that
sort
of
steps
outside
of
typical
land
use
by
making
it
based
on
the
owner
and
naming
individuals
that
can
own
this
property
without
a
change
to
the
ordinance
art
that
that
governs
this.
This
business
to
exist
so
I
believe
that
standard
is
met.
A
Number
four:
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
If
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out,
we've
heard
testimony
that
this
basically
would
cease.
The
operations
of
this
business
should
something
happen
to
the
present
owner
and
therefore
we
would
have
several
people
who
would
be
immediately
without
work
and
obviously
that
creates
a
a
practical
difficulty
and
hardship
as
opposed
to
an
inconvenience
so
I
believe
that
standard
is
met.
A
It
also
would
probably
lead
to
a
property
that
would
become
a
an
empty
property
that
would
sit
and
not
be
touched
for
a
while,
because
of
the
remediation
efforts
that
would
be
needed
in
order
to
make
it
a
residential
establishment
number
five.
The
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property.
A
We've
heard
testimony
this
evening
that
there
are
no
real
plans
to
sell
the
property
at
this
particular
time
and
and
that
it
really
is
to
allow
the
property
to
continue
to
operate
with
the
sun
of
the
present
owner
becoming
the
owner
in
the
future,
so
that
his
father
can
retire
and
no
longer
have
to
be
working
here
in
order
to
keep
the
business
open.
So
I
believe
that
standard
is
met.
Number
six,
the
alleged
difficulty,
our
hardship,
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property.
A
We've
heard
testimony
that
the
fact
that
this
was
a
legally
non-conforming
parcel
of
land
and
operation
and
the
city
has
actually
the
one
who
has
created
the
hardship
for
the
owners
by
creating
down
zoning
and
placing
conditions
that
we
normally
do
not
place
on
properties,
but
I
do
not
believe
that
any
owner
of
the
property
or
anyone
with
an
interest
in
the
property
from
that
side
has
created
any
issues.
That
standard
is
met
and
number
seven.
A
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
land
use
commission
and
the
city
council
and
I
believe
that
this
is
a
simple
thing:
where
he's
not
asking
for
a
drastic
change
in
all
of
the
other
conditions
to
which
she's
agreed
over
the
years.
A
So
I
really
believe
that
that
making
a
a
plan
for
succession
of
the
business
is
a
minimal
change
and
is
probably
about
the
least
that
he
he
could
be
asking
for
considering
the
other
conditions
that
are
currently
placed
on
this
property,
so
I
believe
that
is
met.
Is
everyone
in
agreement
with
my
finding
on
standards
with
that,
I
will
ask
if
there
are
any
conditions
that
anybody
is
concerned
about
out
of
the
initial
group,
or
that
feel
needs
to
be
strengthened.
Added
on
or
anything
like
that,
commissioner
Westerberg.
J
I
would
suggest
that
we
add
a
condition
that
requires
any
new
ownership
to
continue
the
by
appointment,
only
operations
just
to
protect
the
residential
neighbors
around
them.
A
And
I'm,
assuming
just
by
a
shake
of
the
head,
that
that
would
be
an
agreeable
condition
placed
on
the
applicant.
They
seem
to
have
no
issue
with
continuing
under
that
under
that
operation.
A
J
I'll
give
it
a
try.
I
move
that
the
commission
approved
the
request
from
Lakeside
Auto
rebuilders
to
amend
the
existing
major
variation
condition
required
by
ordinance,
105-0-19
and
27-0-87.
D
A
B
A
So,
with
the
condition
I'm
sorry
with
a
vote
of
eight
to
zero,
it
will
go
forward
to
city
council
with
a
recommendation
for
approval
and
staff
will
let
you
know
when
you'll
be
appearing
before
pnd
and
city
council.
So
good
luck
and
thank
you.
A
The
next
item
we
have
on
our
agenda
this
evening
is
for
10,
12,
1016,
Church,
Street
and
I.
Don't
know
who
is
is
ashball
doing
that
one.
So
if
you'd,
please
read
that
into
the
record.
B
Chair
Rogers,
if
I
may
ask
for
a
clarification
as
I'm
clarifying
the
motion.
Did
you
mean
that
if
any
new
ownership
wanted
to
change
any
conditions
that
they
only
be
heard
by
this
body
or
that
they
would
just
go
through
to
city
council
all
the
way
all
the
way
again?
Because
it
said
you
said
this
commission
I
just
wanted
to
clarify.
B
Thank
you.
I
will
read
the
next
item
into
the
record
for
the
property
located
at
10
12
through
1016
Church
Street
case
22plnd-007,
a
major
adjustment
to
a
plan
development,
Janet
mullet
applicant
Northlight
Theater
submits
for
a
major
adjustment
to
the
plan
development
approved
by
ordinance
114-0-19
in
the
D3
downtown
district.
The
applicant
is
requesting
to
modify
the
approved
building
elevations.
The
land
use
commission
makes
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council,
the
determining
body
for
this
case,
in
accordance
with
section
6-3-6-12
of
the
Evanston
zoning
code
and
ordinance
92-0-21.
A
Thank
you
if
the
applicant
would
like
to
come
up
and
State
their
name
and
address
for
the
record.
C
O
P
P
Name
is
Tim
Evans,
I'm
executive
director
at
Northlight
Theater.
This
is
Janet
mullett,
who
is
our
managing
director
and
project
manager
for
the
property
that
we
have
purchased
at
10,
12,
1016,
Church
Street
and
we
are
seeking
a
modification
of
the
elevation,
the
front
elevation
of
the
building
and
facade
of
the
building,
and
we
are
working
with
Craig
Smith
from
eichenhoff
Saunders.
Who
is
our
architect
and
he'll?
Explain
what
we're
seeking
here
tonight.
Thank
you.
Q
I'm
Craig
Smith,
with
Econo
Saunders,
Architects
and
I've,
been
working
with
Northlake
for
a
number
of
years
on
the
project,
including
going
through
the
plan
development
approval
back
in
2019..
Since
that
time,
A
lot's
happened
in
the
world
and
the
reality
became
apparent
during
the
pandemic
that
we
had
to
make
some
adjustments
because
of
supply
chain,
and
then
the
war
in
Ukraine
happened
and
I.
Don't
know
if
everyone
knows,
but
one
of
the
largest
glass
manufacturing
plants
in
the
world
is
in
Ukraine
and
glass
prices
just
skyrocketed.
Q
So
we
decided
to
look
re-look
at
the
facade
and
in
the
in
the
intervening
two
years
we
kind
of
came
to
the
conclusion
that
we
wanted
a
kind
of
a
simpler
facade
to
create
more
of
a
just
a
kind
of
a
blank
pallet.
So
when
you're
driving
down
by
Church,
Street
you're,
really
looking
at
a
very
simple
facade
looking
into
the
lobby
and
seeing
what's
there,
so
we
kind
of
wanted
to
downplay
the
architecture
and
make
it
just
a
simple
architectural
expression
of
glass
and
aluminum.
Q
It's
still
an
all
glass
facade,
it's
going
to
be
clear
glass
so
that
you
will
be
able
to
see
through
into
what's
happening
in
the
theater,
because
one
of
northlight's
goals
is,
of
course,
to
activate
the
street
and
be
really
a
part
of
the
downtown
community.
So
the
billing
itself
is
the
same.
It's
the
same
height,
the
same
use,
the
same
scale
and
everything
is
really
the
same,
but
it's
just
the
art,
the
literal
articulation
of
the
facade.
Q
So
now
it's
a
gridded
it'd
be
a
it's
a
black
aluminum
grid
and
then
I've
got
a
sample
of
just
a
clear
glass
and
we
are
using
the
fritted
glass
for
bird,
the
bird
glass.
So
I
don't
know
if
you
can
see
it,
but
there's
a
frit
in
there
that
the
birds
will
not
crash
into
the
glass.
Q
Hopefully,
so
you
can
see
that
it's
a
still
a
two-story
building
and
then
on
the
second
floor
we
have
the
rehearsal
hall
now
and
the
ground
floor
is
all
the
lot,
the
public
Lobby,
which
will
be
open,
hopefully
more
than
just
the
times
of
theater.
So
it's
a
very
open
and
transparent
expression
as
you're
driving
by
Church
Street.
So
we
feel
it's
a
an
improvement
to
the
facade,
actually
I,
really
like
the
way
it
turned
out.
So
we're
hoping
you'll
agree
with
this.
I
Actually,
my
first
question
is
for
staff,
and
this
gets
back
to
the
process
that
we
talked
about
variation.
There
are
changes,
minor
changes,
major
changes.
This
is
considered
a
minor
change
and
it
was
listed
as
a
minor
change
in
the
new
language
that
we
approved.
I
K
Assuming
it
is
approved,
this
would
be
a
minor
change
which
would
go
straight
to
pnd
and
city
council,
since
it
does
not
affect
any
site
development
allowances,
it
would
skip
this
body.
I
I,
just
I
guess
my
thought
on
this
is
that
I
consider
this
a
fairly
significant
call.
It
major
or
minor
I,
don't
know,
but
fairly
significant
request
and
I.
Just
think
this
is
an
example
of
something
that
we
should
review,
but
we've
talked
about
this
before,
but
I
just
wanted
to
raise
my
concern,
which
I
expressed
when
we
talked
about
this
text,
amendment
that
we
wouldn't
see
things
like
this
and
I
think
we
should
see
them.
I
I
have
I
have
other
questions.
Okay,
so
you
said
that
the
war
in
Ukraine
and
the
fact
that
Guardian
I
think
it's
Guardian
right
is
the
is
makes
has
a
plant
in
Ukraine
and
that's
the
reason
why
you
can't
get
this
class.
Q
Can
be
really
the
cost
of
glass
went
up
dramatically
in
the
past
year
due
to
that
the
fact
that
it's
not
the
specific
glass
or
the
plant,
but
the
price
of
glass
skyrocketed.
So
the
cost
of
our
curtain
wall
went
up
by
about
a
half
a
million
dollars.
I
I
Q
I
And
this
is
the
and
okay.
So
my
second
question
is
this:
is
an
aesthetic
opinion,
I
guess,
but
I
I
are,
did
you
consider
what
other
Alternatives
did
you
consider,
and
this
is
to
me
this
is
quite
a
quite
a
step
down
and
that's
an
aesthetic
opinion.
What
other
Alternatives
did
you
consider
or.
Q
Did
you
we
looked
at
a
number
of
Alternatives
but
working
with
North
plate
and
in
ownership
they
really
liked
the
design.
This
design
that
we
came
up
with
it's
a
very
it
just
seemed
compatible
with
the
the
scale
of
the
building,
and
we
just
wanted
to
go
with
a
very
a
much
simpler
expression.
So
we
actually,
we
being
us
Architects
and
the
owner
like
the
new
design.
J
What
is
the
concern
here
that
you
have
in
terms
of
who
does
oversee
this?
If
you
grant
site
allowances,
if
you
Grant
certain
developments
the
right
to
build,
but
you
end
up
with
a
change
pretty,
as,
as
commissioner
Hollick
said,
a
pretty
determined
change
in
the
appearance
and
I.
Ask
that
only
because
it's
without
some
design
oversight,
you
can
end
up
with
any
situation
where
a
developer
can
say.
You
know
over
the
last
two
to
three
years,
as
we've
been
developing
this
and
designing
this
costs
have
gone
up.
We're
going
to
have
to
change
this.
J
We're
going
to
have
to
we've
seen
this
already
with
a
couple
of
other
situations,
I'd
like
to
know,
as
far
as
the
city
is
concerned,
where
you
want
assistance
and
where
you
think
you
need
that
assistance
to
make
sure
you're
getting
what
someone
did
approve
several
years
ago.
K
So
as
part
of
the
building
permit
process,
the
project
would
go
to
the
design
and
project
Review
Committee
for
review
of
the
materials
and
to
make
sure
that
that
all
the
materials
match
what
was
approved.
The
city
is
currently
looking
at
changing
the
how
the
design
and
project
Review
Committee
operates.
That
may
or
may
not
include
establishing
a
new
committee
that
has
some
additional
oversight
on
that.
The
discussions
are
ongoing
and
we
do
expect
a
text
amendment
to
proceed
to
this
commission
to
specifically
address
those
concerns.
J
All
right
so
again
in
this
particular
situation
that
comes
before
the
planned
commission
and
I
guess.
My
question
for
the
other
Commissioners
to
talk
about
a
little
bit
is:
how
far
involved
do
we
want
to
get
with
design
and
how
far
involved
do
we
want
to
get
with
the
idea
that
how
many
changes
can
you
allow
a
developer
to
make
so
as
things
Roll
Along
in
the
process?
So.
A
This
would
be
my
response
is
that
we
have
passed
along
to
city
council
and
ordinance
proposed
ordinance
that
says
that
if
it
is
a
site
allowance,
it
comes
back
to
us.
If
it
is
not,
it
goes
to
p
and
B
anything
that
goes
to
P
and
D.
If
city
council
feels
it
is
a
significant
change,
can
return
it
to
this
Commission
on
a
referral,
but
that's
that's
the
the
measure
that
is
in
place
currently
or
will
be
in
place.
If
city
council
adopts
the
ordinance
the
text
Amendment.
J
I
Another
question
did:
did
you
consider
the
budget
is
the
whole
budget?
You
know,
and
glass
is
one
part
not
insignificant?
Did
you
consider
changes
to
any
any
other
materials
or
anything
else
about
the
about
the
project
that
might
be
internal
that
wouldn't
affect
basically,
every
citizen
who
walks
by
this
building
or
drives
by
this
building.
Q
Oh
absolutely
I
mean
we
went
through
a
and
Tim
can
speak
to
that.
We
went
through
a
long
process
of
you
know
the
standard
value
engineering,
but
of
evaluating
almost
every
aspect
of
the
building.
In
turn,
in
terms
of
the
the
size
of
the
rooms
like
on
the
building
back
on
the
Alley,
we
pulled
in
a
few
feet
to
make
it
actually
a
smaller
building
in
volume
by
making
a
larger
space
off
the
alley.
Q
P
P
This
project
bought
the
property
and
then,
when
we
looked
at
a
second
quote
on
the
building
itself,
because
we're
a
non-profit
entity-
and
we
have
to
raise
all
this
money
ourselves-
the
the
cost
skyrocketed
with
everything-
as
you
know,
steel,
and
and
and
wood,
and
and
concrete
and
glass
in
particular,
so
we
we
needed
to
sort
of
reduce
the
cost
of
this
building,
Without
Really,
reducing
the
impact
of
this
building.
For
us.
P
The
last
thing
we
really
wanted
to
change
was
the
theater
space
itself,
and
we
wanted
to
maintain
that
and
make
sure
that
the
activity
in
the
actual
theater
and
the
art
wasn't
wasn't
changed.
So
we
did
a
couple
of
things
which
was,
as
Craig
said:
We
Shrunk,
the
building,
We
Shrunk
The,
the
basement.
Frankly,
digging,
as
you
know,
is
very
expensive,
so
we
modified
the
size
of
the
basement
and
made
sure
that
it
conformed
to
what
we
had
you
know
said
before,
but
it
also
We
Shrunk
it.
P
So
we
shrunk
a
lot
of
things.
None
of
them
were
major
changes,
except
we
were
going
to
have
a
balcony
in
the
theater
I.
Don't
think
we're
going
to
have
a
balcony
now,
because
that's
a
million
plus
dollars
to
put
a
small
balcony
in
there
and
we
we
found
other
ways
to
maintain
the
Integrity
of
the
theater
and,
frankly,
the
the
seating
capacity
to
the
theater.
But
the
glass
front
was
was
a
real
killer
for
us
in
the
sense
that
this
glass
was.
You
know
the
other.
P
The
other
design
had
two
layers
of
glass
and
it
had
this
wavy
curtain
effect
that
we
all
loved,
but
when
we
priced
it
out
and
and
found
that
the
costs
were
enormous
in
this
at
this
time
after
supply
chain
and
Ukrainian
issues
and
and
and
just
the
cost
of
glass,
we
decided
that
we
really
needed
to
address
this
so
that
we
could,
you
know,
you
know,
basically
get
this
building
built,
so
we
felt
that
a
a
Midwest
Industrial
look
to
the
building
which
actually
it
had
before
it
just
had
this
curtain
wall.
P
If
you
look
at
the
other
photo
you'll
see
that,
instead
of
a
black
grid,
there
was
a
white
grid
underneath
all
of
this.
So
we
wanted
to
maintain
that
look
and
that
really
open,
look
and
I
think
this
allows.
The
new
design
allows
us
to
to
do
that,
but
also
gives
us
a
little
bit
more
of
a
Midwestern
industrial
feel
and
look
to
it,
which
really
works
to
the
ethics
of
our
of
our
of
our
theater
company.
So
those
were
the
issues
that
that
we
had
to
deal
with.
H
What
would
the
delay
be
in
terms
of
needing
now
to
raise
this
additional
help?
We're
talking
one
year
two
year,
three
I
mean
what
will
be
the
delay
in
getting
the
building
built,
and
is
it
even
possible,
in
your
view,
to
to
raise
the
additional
money
needed
because
you're
already,
you
know
right
it
raise
the
additional
money
needed
to
to
comply
with
the
original
sure.
P
Well,
I
would
I
would
say,
the
cost
of
the
entire
building
has
risen
right,
so
everything
in
the
building
has
gone
up
and-
and
so
we've
already
had
to
up
our
fundraising
goals.
Because
of
that-
and
you
know
the
the
goal
here
from
for
for
us
for
North
light
and
for
our
board
of
directors
and
frankly
for
the
community
is,
is
to
get
this
building
built
in
a
timely
fashion
and
I.
P
Couldn't
tell
you
what
another
three
quarters
of
a
million
dollars
would
take
to
raise,
but
I
think
that's
what
we're
looking
at.
If
we
at
all
wanted
to
do
the
the
original
facade,
it's
not
a
an
easy
fundraising
environment
between
you
know,
inflation
and
and
the
stock
market,
and-
and
you
know
the
coming
recession
that
everybody
seems
to
talk
about.
However,
we
are
making
progress
and
we
are,
we
are
getting
to
our
goal.
P
J
Question
on
the
new
design
see
that
relating
to
elsewhere,
along
the
streetscape
there
on
Church.
Do
you
see
it
kind
of
picking
up
any
motifs
or
themes
that
are
around
there
or
do
you
find
it
something
that
you
wanted
to
stand
out
in
this
sort
of
industrial
Midwest
way.
Q
Yeah
I,
don't
think
it
relates
to
anything
specifically
I
think
the
scale
of
the
building
being
where
the
the
visual
part
is
a
two-story.
You
know
it's
height,
wise
and
scale
wise.
It's
similar
to
the
buildings
like
the
building
next
door
is
a
two-story
Main
Street
building
with
a
very
simple
punched,
open
windows.
So
no
I,
don't
think
it
has
any
specific
relationship,
but
in
terms
of
just
the
an
urban
context
and
a
very
simple
modular,
gridded
facade,
I
think
it's
it's
pretty
typical
in
in
a
Midwestern
Urban
setting.
P
And
I
would
add
that
it.
It
relates
the
the
downtown
public
library
has
a
Midwestern
ethic
to
this.
The
new
facade
of
the
Fountain
Square,
building
the
the
pie
shape
building.
Has
this
kind
of
look
as
well.
There
are
others
in
town,
but
for
for
us
we
just
felt
that
this
had
a
a
little
more
meatier
industrial
look
which,
which
we
liked.
A
Q
Exactly
yeah,
it's
pretty
much
exactly
the
same,
so
the
whole
width,
the
site
is
100
feet
wide
and
other
than
the
concrete
appears
at
each
end.
It's
it's
continuous
class.
So
it's
exactly
the
same
dimensions
vertically
and
horizontally,
and
so
and
also
the
probably
the
percentage
of
millions
is,
is
very
similar.
Like
Tim
said
that
before
we
had
a
serrated
or
segmented
portion,
so
there's
technically
more
surface
area
glass,
but
the
facade
Dimension
is
still
the
same.
P
The
only
thing
I
would
say
is
that
I
brought
this
to
the
attention
of
the
city
when
we
knew
we
were
making
some
changes,
because
I
had
read
about
the
project
at
Howard
and
Chicago
Avenue,
and
it
felt
to
me,
like
the
right
thing
to
do,
would
be
to
notify
the
city
and
bring
it
as
a
good
citizen
to
everybody's
attention
that
we
needed
to
change
the
facade
of
this
building.
So
that's
frankly,
why
we're
here.
P
A
R
I
I
do
agree
with
commissioner
helick
in
his
comment
that
the
the
proposed
new
facade
design
is
a
remember
how
you
put
it
is
a
downgrade
aesthetically
in
my
opinion
than
the
then
the
original
approved
design
and
I'll
reiterate
something
that
I
I've
mentioned
before
and
that
you
know
there
are
circumstances
with
Russia's
attack
on
Ukraine
and
and
rising
cost
inflation
supply
chain.
But
there
there
are
always
issues
associated
with
with
construction
Costco.
They.
You
know.
R
And
I'm
sympathetic
with
their
plight,
but
this
is
it's.
You
know
it
seems
that
one
facade
was
approved
because
of
cost
issues
and
other
an
alternate.
A
downgraded
alternate
is
being
proposed
and
and
again,
as
commissioner
halek
mentioned,
that
the
interaction
with
the
facade
is
is:
is
anyone
who's
using
the
street
any
any
pedestrian
any
driver?
I
I
I
think
when
you
guys
were
up
here
and
one
of
them
was
that
you,
you
did
read
about
the
other,
the
other
project
that
that
had
a
similar
situation
and
you
decided
on
your
own
to
come
in
which
I
think
it
was
the
right
thing
to
do
and
certainly
appreciated,
yeah
I'm
saving
my
opinion
for
the
facade
the
last,
but
but
the
other.
The
other
thing
I
appreciated
is
that
you,
you
did
have
an
overall
cost
cutting
you
know
session
because
listen
Costco,
I
I.
I
This
is
a
crazy
business
and
you
know
a
building
is
a
crazy
business.
I
think
running
a
theater
is
a
crazy
business
and
fundraising
and
all
that
is
I
think
really
difficult
from
what
I
know
of
it.
I.
Even
though
I
made
the
comment
about
the
all
the
citizens
walking
past,
the
building
I
also
do
appreciate
that
you're,
a
theater
and
your
first
obligation
has
to
be
to
the
to
the
performance
and
so
I
hope
you
didn't
change.
I
I
hope
you
didn't
downgrade
that
experience
for
the
for
the
theater
goer
and
it
doesn't
sound
like
you
did
so
all
those
things
I
and
I
I.
So
listening
to
you,
I
I
I
had
a
much
better
appreciation
for
your
situation.
I
I
wasn't
happy.
I'll
tell
you
when
I
read
that
the
reason
why
you
you
did
this
was
because
of
the
war
in
Ukraine
and
I
thought
to
myself.
Well,
wait
a
second
glass
classes
available
everywhere:
Guardian
has
plants
everywhere.
I
You
know
you
could
go
somewhere
else
other
than
Ukraine
and
get
your
glass
I.
Don't
know
the
details
of
all
of
that
and
what's
happening
right
now,
so
I'll
I'll
believe
you
when
you
say
that
the
overall
cost
of
glass
has
gone
up,
like
other
things,
I
think
the
in
the
end,
the
facade
is
it's.
It's
unfortunate.
I
think
that
the
facade
that
was
originally
approved
is
is
more
interesting
than
what
is
going
to
be
built
apparently,
but
again.
I
Listening
to
you,
I
I,
think
that
Evanston
is
is,
is
excited
very
excited
to
have
Northlight
come
downtown,
and
this
has
been
a
long
struggle.
I
think
you
know
for
you,
as
especially,
but
also
for
Evanston,
to
get
you
guys,
Guys
downtown,
so
I'm
I'm
I'm,
overlooking
what
I
I
think
is
unfortunate
situation
and
and
saying
if
this
is
overall.
If
this
is
the
best
we
can
do,
then
better
is
better
than
not
having
a
theater.
So.
M
Yeah
I'm
in
favor
of
granting
the
change
as
well.
I
I
think
that
the
the
designers
are
not
making
an
egregious
change.
It's
pretty
reasonable.
The
changes
aren't
affecting
any
of
the
previously
granted
variances
and
they're
doing
what
they
have
to
do.
It
isn't
I
agree
with
the
unfortunate
comments
about
the
quality
of
the
facade
that
is
unfortunate,
but
so
are
Wars
and
pandemics.
So
I'm
in
favor.
D
Sure
you
know
I
keep
thinking
about
the
context
of
this
building
and
and
frankly,
I
think
that
the
proposed
facade
you
know
Works
relates
a
little
better
to
the
Shan
moorhand
building
across
the
street,
from
it
in
terms
of
facade
and
materials
but
and
again,
I
also
appreciate
you
coming
and
bringing
this
matter
to
us
early
enough
in
the
the
development
process,
so
that
we
can
weigh
in
and
the
city
council
can
can
weigh
in
so
I
think
that's
important,
so
I'm
in
favor
of
the
proposed
change.
H
I'm
also
in
favor
of
the
change
I
mean
I
do
prefer
the
original
facade,
but
you
know
the
theater
I
think
is
extremely
important
for
the
city.
There's
excitement
to
bring
the
theater
in
I
think
it
has.
It
needs
to
happen,
and
you
know
we
are
in
unusual
times.
Yes
in
the
construction,
business
costs
do
go
up,
it's
a
risk,
one
always
undertakes,
but
these
are
unusual
times
once
in
a
century
pandemic
award
that
we
haven't
seen
in
since
World
War
II
and
with
a
difficult
fundraising
environment.
H
So
I'm
you
know,
I,
don't
want
to
make
the
perfect
the
enemy,
the
good
and
so
I
would
I
would
Echo
the
thoughts
of
my
fellow
Commissioners
in
terms
of
supporting
supporting
this.
This
request.
C
O
So
I
will
vote
Yes
for
this
application.
In
my
opinion,
the
previous
facade
was
better
my
opinion,
but
two
reasons
for
yes.
First,
we
really
need
this
theater
downtown,
Evanston
and
second
knowing
it.
Knowing
the
process,
as
mentioned
by
Mr
Smith
of
vital
engineering,
I
know
that
they
did
everything
to
reduce
the
cost.
So
probably
this
is
the
optimal
I
would
call
it
solution
between
Aesthetics
and
value
engineering
and
construction
requirements.
So
I'll
vote
Yes.
J
A
I'll
just
make
a
couple
comments
before
going
through
standards
and
I'll
say
that
to
my
untrained
architectural
eye
that
I
do
notice
a
difference
in
the
building,
but
I
feel
that
if
this
building
had
been
the
one
that
had
been
presented
to
us
I
think
a
lot
of
people
would
have
been
very
happy
with
this
I
think
a
lot
of
people
are
disappointed
in
in
not
getting
what
they
were
shown,
but
I
think
that
this
building
in
and
of
itself
is
a
nice
aesthetically
pleasing
building
I'm
happy
that
we
are
keeping
roughly
the
same
amount
of
Glass
on
the
facade
and
so
so
I
I
think
I.
A
Think
the
project
is
a
nice
project.
Is
it
as
nice
as
the
last
one?
No,
but
that's
sometimes
you
can
dream
big
and
reality
comes
and
hits
you
in
the
face,
and
you
can't
get
what
you
wanted
with
that.
Do
you
want
to
bring
up
the
standards
for
because
I
don't
have
those
printed?
Actually,
maybe
I
do
have
those
printed
out?
No
I
don't
have
those
printed
out.
C
A
Okay,
I
do
have
these
printed
out,
so
the
first
one
is.
We
have
to
go
through
the
standards
for
a
plan
development
which
there
are
five,
the
first
one
being
the
requested
site.
Development
allowances
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
That
is
beyond
a
reasonable
expectation.
A
Given
the
scope
of
the
applicable
site,
development
allowances
of
the
plan
development
location,
the
one
thing
that
we
have
discussed
tonight
a
little
bit
is
that
there
are
no
changes
in
the
site:
development
allowances,
we're
not
being
requested
for
additional
height
or
density,
or
anything
like
that.
So
this
standard
really
is
met
under
the
original
plan
that
was
approved
in
2019.
A
number
two.
The
proposed
development
is
compatible
with
the
overall
character
of
existing
development
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
subject.
Property
we've
heard
a
little
bit
of
of
back
and
forth
on
this
that,
although
the
the
building
does
not
necessarily
lean
into
any
adjoining
property,
there
has
been
discussion
from
at
least
one
commissioner
that
feels
that
the
the
design
of
the
of
the
new
facade
actually
is
more
in
keeping
with
the
neighborhood,
which
is
basically
a
lot
of
masonry
type
buildings
along
there.
I
believe
the
standard
is
met.
A
Number
three:
the
development
site
circulation
is
designed
in
a
safe
and
logical
manner
to
mitigate
potential
hazards
for
pedestrians
and
vehicles
at
the
site
and
in
the
immediate
surrounding
area.
Again,
we
have
not
heard
anything
that
is
being
changed
on
this
particular
property
or
this
particular
project,
and
therefore
this
standard
is
unchanged
from
the
original
2019
ordinance
number.
Four.
The
proposed
development
aligns
with
the
current
and
future
climate
and
sustainability
goals
of
the
city.
A
We
haven't
really
discussed
anything
there,
except
for
the
fact
that
it's
not
really
a
sustainability
or
climate
goal,
but
one
of
the
things
that
is
very
important
to
the
City
of
Evanston
is
using
glass
that
is
bird
friendly
and
mitigates
damage
to
our
to
birds.
Traversing
the
city
number,
five,
the
public
benefits
that
are
appropriate
to
the
surrounding
neighborhood
and
to
the
city
of
whole
will
be
derived
from
the
approval
of
the
requested
site
development
allowances.
Again,
we've
now
not
discuss
site
development
allowances,
in
particular
on
this
project,
since
they
are
unchanged.
A
However,
we
have
heard
a
lot
of
discussion
about
the
benefits
the
public
will
derive
from
bringing
a
a
noted
theater
back
into
Evanston
after
several
decades
away.
I,
don't
remember
the
exact
number
of
years,
but
I
know
this
has
been
a
topic
of
discussion
in
the
city
for
a
number
of
years,
so
there
obviously
will
be
a
great
public
benefit
added
by
their
by
their
return.
Is
everyone
in
agreement
with
my
finding
on
the
standards
for
plan
development?
A
Yes,
the
next
set
of
Standards
is
the
standards
for
special
uses
number
one.
It
is
one
of
the
special
uses
specifically
listed
in
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
theater
is
permitted
in
our
downtown
core
area
and
was
approved
in
2019.
number
two.
It
is
in
keeping
with
the
purposes
and
policies
of
the
adopted,
comprehensive
General
plan,
and
the
zoning
ordinance
is
amended
from
time
to
time.
As
mentioned,
bringing
arts
and
theater
into
our
downtown
area
is
part
of
the
comprehensive
General
plan.
A
It
does
encourage
additional
traffic
into
the
downtown
area,
which
helps
generate
tax
income
on
surrounding
properties,
as
well
as
increased
sales
at
restaurants
and
those
sorts
of
venues
in
the
area.
Number
three
will
not
cause
a
negative
cumulative
effect
when
its
effect
is
considered,
in
conjunction
with
the
cumulative
effect
of
various
special
uses
of
all
types
on
the
immediate
neighborhood
and
the
effect
of
the
proposed
type
of
special
use
upon
the
city
as
a
whole.
A
I've
heard
nothing
this
evening.
That
would
would
cause
a
negative
accumulative
effect
on
on
the
particular
area,
because,
again,
the
the
the
impact
of
this
particular
project
has
not
changed.
What
we
are
looking
at
is
a
facade
change
and
we've
had
several
comments
made
about
that.
A
Already
number
three,
our
number
four
I'm:
sorry,
it
does
not
interfere
with
or
diminish
the
value
of
property
in
the
neighborhood,
obviously
having
a
functioning
space
in
the
downtown
area
that
replaced
a
semi-functioning
restaurant
I
believe
was,
as
part
of
part
of
the
block
that
you've
you've
taken.
I
can't
remember
what
else
was
there
at
this
particular
time,
but
obviously
this
will
generate
much
more
traffic
into
the
area
and
should
have
an
increase
on
property
values
in
the
downtown
area,
as
well
as
generating
additional
income
for
the
neighboring
properties.
A
Number
five:
it
can
be
adequately
served
by
public
facilities
and
services.
Nothing
has
changed
here
from
2019
number
six.
It
will
not
cause
undue
traffic
congestion.
We
didn't
really
talk
about
this
again.
This
was
something
that
was
approved
in
2019
and
I
will
just
note
that,
this
being
in
our
downtown
area,
we
do
have
several
parking
garages
in
the
area
as
well
as
public
transit
in
the
area.
So
I
don't
anticipate
any
additional
traffic
congestion
number
seven.
It
preserves
significant
historical
and
Architectural
resources.
A
There
are
no
historical
areas
there
or
architecturally
significant
areas
there
on
this
particular
site,
and
so
that
standard
is
met
number
eight.
It
preserves
significant
natural
and
environmental
features.
Again,
nothing
really
has
changed
here.
I
will
note
that,
although
it's
not
technically
an
environmental
feature,
the
inclusion
of
bird
friendly
glass,
which
is
something
the
city
has
really
emphasized
of
late,
it
can
be
considered
an
environmental
feature
because
it
does
have
an
impact
on
Wildlife
number
nine.
A
It
complies
with
all
other
applicable
regulations
of
the
district
in
which
it
is
located
and
other
applicable
ordinances,
except
to
the
extent
such
regulations
have
been
modified
through
the
plan
development
process
or
the
grant
of
a
variation.
There's
no
reason
to
believe
that
this
particular
applicant
would
not
meet
any
regulations
that
the
city
has
required
of
them.
A
So
far,
I
will
note
also
for
the
record
that
the
applicant
of
their
own
volition
did
come
to
the
city
when
they
realized
there
would
be
a
significant
change
allowing
the
city
to
respond
to
that
proactively
instead
of
reactively.
So
I
do
thank
the
applicant,
for
that
is
everyone
in
agreement
with
my
findings
on
the
standards
of
special
uses.
A
Answer
there
are
slides
for
them
right
now,
since
they
aren't
really
standards.
They're
guidelines.
I
will
ask
staff
to
please
make
sure
that
those
are
adhered
to,
so
that
I
don't
have
to
go
through
those
because
they
aren't
really
actual
standards
that
we
can
follow
easily
with
that,
or
is
there
any
other
conditions
comments
that
people
would
like
to
have
added
in
before
we
make
a
recommendation
to
City
Council
on
12
6
or
12
10
12
through
10
16,
Church
Street.
M
Yeah,
the
only
condition
I
want
to
add
is
just
to
make
sure
that
the
the
new
material
is
still
in
compliance
with
the
City's
bird
friendly
or
ordinance.
I
I'll
recommend
approval
of
the
of
the
revised
facade
design.
A
Okay,
so
that's
with
the
condition
with.
A
Is
there
a
second,
oh
second,
second
End
by
Miriam
Chef
moved
by
Hallock
any
further
discussion
hearing.
None!
Would
you
please
call
the
roll.
H
B
A
With
a
vote
of
eight
to
zero,
the
project
will
move
forward
to
the
city
council
to
their
pnd
committee
first
and
with
an
8-0
vote
and
good
luck
with
your
project.
A
K
2012
Maple
Avenue,
22zmjv,
0075
Marcin
Kawa
contractor
appeals
the
zoning
administrator's
decision
to
deny
minor
zoning
relief
case
number
22
ZM
nv0059
to
construct
a
two-car
detached
garage
with
proposed
building
lot
coverage
of
43.8
percent,
where
a
maximum
of
40
percent
is
permitted.
Section,
6866
and
impervious
surface
coverage
of
57.4
percent
or
a
maximum
55
is
permitted
section
6869
in
the
r4a
general
residential
district.
The
appellant
was
denied
zoning
relief
to
construct
a
two-car
detached
garage.
A
Thank
you,
you
are
the
applicant
no.
S
Mr
chairman,
my
name,
is
Stephen
Peck
I
am
counsel
for
Marcin
Kawa
property
owner
applicant,
who
is
present
all
right.
Also,
president
is
Walter
okochinski.
A
All
right,
thank
you
if
you
would
go
ahead
and
present
your
case
to
us.
S
S
S
Apparently,
that
structure
was
condemned
by
the
city
prior
to
Mr,
Kawa,
purchasing
the
property
when
he
purchased
the
property
in
early
2021,
he
was
intending
to
submit
demolition,
permanent
application
and
permanent
application
to
develop
the
properties
of
single-family
residents
with
a
two-car
garage,
but
the
city's
request
he
put
off
the
application
for
the
new
buildings
for
the
application
for
the
demolition
permit
and
demolish
the
building
right
away.
Shortly
thereafter,
he
submitted
the
application
for
the
single
family
residents
and
the
two-car
garage.
S
And
it
was
decided
to
go
ahead
and
construct
the
residence
itself
and
put
off
the
two-car
garage
or
construct
a
one-car
garage
with
a
one-car
pad
in
the
rear.
As
time
went
on,
the
construction
of
the
residents
is
currently
ongoing.
There
has
been
no
construction
on
the
two
on
any
garage
and,
as
as
construction
of
the
residence
was
ongoing.
S
I
believe
that
Mr
cower
finally
came
to
the
realization
and
Mr
o'baron
can
testify
to
this
or
ask
answer
questions
to
this,
that
it
would
be
extremely
difficult
to
sell
the
residents
with
only
a
one-car
garage.
S
One
other
point
that
I
wanted
to
make
that
I'm,
not
exactly
sure
if
the
administrator
was
aware
of-
and
this
affects,
the
permeability
of
the
land
itself
and
the
permeability
of
the
land
would
influence
the
impervious
cover
and,
and
we
understand
part
of
the
purpose
of
the
limiting
the
impervious
cover
is
to
prevent
flooding,
prevent,
surface
runoff,
etc,
etc.
S
Mr
Kawa
commissioned
a
geologist
to
do
two
soil,
borings
and
opine
on
the
permeability
of
the
soil
at
the
property,
and
this
was
in
I
believe
May
of
2021.,
and
we
I
have
a
several
copies
of
the
May
2021
report
from
the
geologist.
If
the
commission
would
like
to
review
that
again,
I
don't
know
if
the
administrator
saw
this
or
not.
S
But
what
this
geologist
found
was
the
the
soil
at
the
property
is
Sandy
soiled
down
to
about
17
feet,
in
which
case
it
becomes
a
silty
clay
and
the
permeability
of
the
soil
is
very
good
and
so,
for
instance,
either
Mr
cower
or
Mr.
Okachinsky
could
tell
you
that
one
of
the
first
things
they
they
did
when
creating
constructing
the
residence
was
to
do
the
sump,
and
that
was
earlier.
S
This
year,
and
as
as
yet
they
have
put
a,
they
have
not
put
a
pump
into
the
sump,
there's
been
no
need
to
as
yet
and
I
asked
about.
Yesterday,
I
live
in
the
southwest
suburbs.
I've
done
exactly
how
much
rain
you
got
here.
We
got
quite
a
bit
yesterday,
there's
no
there's
no
water
in
the
sump
now,
so
it's
all
draining
into
the
the
soils
around
the
property
and
again
we
believe
that
we
agree
with
many
of
the
Commissioners
comments
about
the
standards
we've.
S
S
S
There
we
are
the
property
without
a
garage
is
2012..
The
property
to
the
right
in
the
photograph
is
the
blue
garage.
That's
either
a
three
or
four
garage
with
a
coach
house
above
and
the
property
to
the
left
is
the
white
colored,
two-car
garage
and
the
third
or
fourth
photograph
shows
there
are
several
two-car
garages
down
the
alley
again
without
agreeing
to
the
administrator's
decision
itself.
We
agree
that
the
difficulty
is
really
created
by
the
non-conforming
lot
size.
S
We
have
taken
steps
to
at
least
for
the
impervious
lot
coverage
to
use
pervious
materials
walkways
to
the
house
to
the
back,
instead
of
concrete
they'd,
be
either
paver
stones
or
paver
stones
with
a
separated,
so
it
allowed
more
soil
or
grass
service
in
between
the
semi-pervious
building
materials,
and
we
believe
that
the
residents
currently
being
construction
constructed
is
fitting.
With
you
know
the
size
of
the
residences
in
in
that
block,
and
that
the
two-car
garage
would
be
fitting
with
other
properties
in
that
block
for
off-street
parking.
S
The
two-car
garage
would
encourage
on
property
and
off
street
parking,
which
would
minimize
congestion
on
the
street,
and
although
we
realize
that
the
we
are
slightly
exceeding
both
the
lot
area
coverage,
excuse
me,
the
the
the
building
area
coverage
and
the
impervious
lot
coverage.
These
are
not
large
deviations
and
again
because
of
the
particular
nature
of
the
soil.
I
think
the
risk
of
flooding
and
or
Surface
one-off
is
small,
and
we
have
the
owner
his
project
manager
and
a
real
estate
agent.
S
Who
could
ask
or
answer
any
questions
you
may
have
about
how
the
two-car
garage
would
affect
the
area
and
really
the
feasibility
of
being
able
to
sell
the
house
with
only
one
car
garage.
A
S
Is
correct?
What
you
see
here
is
a
photograph
taken
about
a
month
ago
by
Mr,
okachinski
and
I've
been
informed
that
it
is
the
garage
area
or
the
pad
area.
Whatever
is
in
that
same
condition.
Today,
okay.
A
S
No,
what
what
I'm
trying
to
state
is.
We
know
that
by
putting
any
impervious
cover
over,
the
soil
will
affect
the
amount
of
you
know:
snow
melt,
rain,
water
percolating
down
into
the
soil
on
the
lot.
We
understand
that
that
the
only
reason
I
bring
that
up
is
to
say
that
the
soil
which
is
on
the
lot
is
reasonably
permeable
and
so
that
water,
which
Falls
onto
the
lot,
certainly
if
it
falls
in
the
alley
it'll
rinse
off
it
falls
in
the
side
rock
it'll
rinse
off.
S
But
if
it
falls
on
the
lot,
it
is
more
likely
to
percolate
downward
in
sandy
soil
than
in
silty
clay
soil
and
we're
not
hitting
silty
clay
according
to
the
geologists
to
about
17
feet,.
D
T
Owner
of
the
12th
2012
maple,
so
as
it
was
a
very
long
process
to
get
the
permit
so
I
I
bought
that
was
a
previous
owner
reached
out
to
me
to
build
a
house
for
her
on
the
site
and
the
city
was
asking
to
demolish
the
existing
structure
because
it
was
a
dangerous
condition.
So
she
was
like
a
second
owner
that
was
asked
to
demolish
this
building.
So
she
decides
she
would
not
do
it.
She
asked
me
if
I
want
to
buy
it
from
her
and
do
it
I
said
yeah.
T
Why
not
and
I
did
this
so
we
applied
for
the
permit
for
new
construction
with
the
two-car
garage
and
the
demolition
Prem
as
well.
Demolition
process
was
much
quicker
thanks
to
the
city
because
they
want
to
speed
up
the
process
because
they
were,
you
know,
afraid
this
building
on
a
fall
down
with
the
neighbor
property,
so
I
got
a
permit
within
the
three
months
and
the
new
country
permit
was,
you
know,
dragging
the
feed.
T
There
was
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
between
the
my
architect
and
the
zoning
and
the
building,
and
after
so
there
was
I
bought
it
January
2021
I
got
the
demo
permit,
April
21
I
knocked
down
May
21
and
I
I
was
promised
by
the
city
that
my
permit
for
a
new
construction
going
to
be
like
done
very,
very
quick,
which
is,
you
know,
didn't
happened.
T
It
took
another
I,
don't
know
eight
nine
months
and
on
the
very
beginning
of
the
process,
I
was
told
that,
oh
by
the
way,
the
the
Tuka
garage
cannot
be
took
a
garage
needs
to
be
Wonka
garage,
which
is
you
know,
I'm
I'm,
doing
this
for
20
years
and
I
never
heard,
or
something
like
this
that
you
know
single-family
house,
that's
kind
of
usual
thing
having
a
two-car
garage,
so
I
was
so
tired
of
the
process
waiting
for
the
permits.
T
You
know
paying
the
you
know:
fees
to
the
bank
property
tax
I
had
a
temporary
fencing
on
the
property
with
the
temporary
toilet.
It
was
costing
me
every
month.
The
money
and
I
was
and
I
said:
okay,
let's,
okay,
fine,
let's,
let's
get
this
permit.
Let's
start
the
construction
and
I'll
be
dealing
with
this
two-car
garage
process
during
the
construction
process
right,
so
we
reached
out
to
the
Village
to
about
the
two-car
garage
permit.
T
We
got
denialed
and
there
was
back
and
forth
back
and
forward-
and
you
know
six
months
later,
I'm
here
right
now,
at
Throne
of
yo
asking
for
the
for
me
usual
thing
having
the
Toca
garage
I
mean
now
in
these
days,
family
has
the
usual
thing
having
the
two
car
took
two
cars
and
nobody
wants
to
keep
the
car
on
the
front
of
the
building
on
the
street
they
want
to
have.
You
know
cover
for
the
from
the
rubbery
for
the
rain
snow.
D
It
but
my
question
is
I
mean
that's
a
very
large
house
on
that.
Why
why
build
the
house
that
big
or
you
know,
if
you,
if
you
you,
know
push
the
and
I,
don't
know
you
know
exactly
from
you
know
as
staff,
you
know
how
much
smaller
would
the
house
needed
to
have
been?
You
know,
could
you
push
you
made
it?
You
know
three
feet
shallower
without
of
accomplished
a
lot
of
the
two-car
garage.
T
T
There's
I
mean
I
did
2
000
houses
in
my
life
like
this,
and
this
is
for
me,
is
a
less
than
average
house,
meaning
the
size
and
I
do
City
a
lot
so
25
by
125,
for
me,
is
a
typical
lot.
You
know
it's
not
no
I
I
do
understand,
for
Evanston
is
a
smaller
a
lot,
but
for
Chicago
we
do
even
do
24
by
100
and
and
we
all
I
was
honestly.
I
was
shocked.
That
I
cannot
do
the
two
car
garage
you
know,
but.
D
My
question
is:
was
this,
you
know
the
back
and
forth
with
the
discussions
with
the
city,
you
know:
did
they
not
explain
the
lot
coverage
requirements.
D
B
Can
commissioner
linwall
I
actually
was
the
staff
person
that
did
that
review
and
I
did
in
fact
explain
that
they
needed
to
re
reduce
the
lot
coverage.
B
B
B
They
did
eventually
propose
what
the
permit
was
issued
for
earlier
this
year
with
the
single
family,
home
and
parking
pad.
So
they
have,
you
know,
had
permission
to
construct
the
single-family
home.
It
was
the
accessory
structure
permit
for
the
two-car
detached
garage
where
the
same
building,
lock
coverage
and
previous
surface
coverage
issues
were
brought
up
and
so
they're.
B
Here
this
evening
they
were
granted
a
side
yard
setback,
variations
through
the
minor
variation
process
last
year,
and
so
we
were
able
to
get
the
three
and
a
I
think
it's
three
and
a
quarter
setbacks
on
the
North
and
South
lot
lines.
So
that
was
the
back
and
forth.
I
can
say
if
I,
misguided
you
and
that
you
had
to
have
a
one-car
garage
or
no
garage.
That
was
certainly
not
the
intent
of
the
review
comments,
but
it
was
ultimately
their
decision
to
proceed
with
the
house
as
it's
presented
tonight,
triggering
the
variations.
S
I
I
was
just
if
Mr
o'burn
may
be
able
to
provide
a
little
bit
different
input
to
your
question.
If
you
would
like
that,
okay
and
this
he's
a
real
estate
broker-
and
this
would
be
a
feasibility
of
the
building
process
and
developing
single
failing
property.
V
Hello,
Council
speaking
to
the
house
and
the
design
of
it.
I
was
not
party
to
the
conversations
within
the
zoning
or
architectural
approver
process,
but
the
home
is
designed
with
an
intent
to
meet
the
needs
of
modern
buyers.
V
U
V
E
V
With
regard
to
the
garage
just
doing
a
quick
Market
study,
I
looked
at
new
construction
homes
over
the
last
decade
or
so
found
95
examples.
94
of
them
were
built
with
two
car
garages.
The
one
exception
was
a
home
built
by
a
program
called
Liv
Evanston
was
an
affordable
housing
design
built
with
a
without
a
two-car
garage.
V
The
owners
have
since
put
up
a
two-car
garage,
so
the
overwhelming
evidence
is
that
this
is
what
is
not
only
feasible
to
a
builder
or
marketable,
but
also
an
expectation
or
requirement
of
owners,
so
I
think
the
reality
here
is,
you
know,
buyers
are
expecting.
This
will
have
two
cars
and
the
need
to
utilize
two-car
parking.
So
you
know
we're
not
simply
looking
at
this
Through
The
Eyes
of
profitability
but
Through
The
Eyes
of
the
community
members
hoping
to
move
into
the
Evanston
area.
A
So
I
have
a
couple
questions
for
you
sure
you
you
throw
out
some
numbers
about
houses
and
two-car
garages.
How
many
of
those
were
on
substandard
Lots,
I,
don't
have
that
information
and
then
when
were
you
brought
into
the
project
for
you
brought
into
advise
at
the
beginning
of
the
project
or
recently
I.
V
V
A
V
A
number
that's
falling
currently,
but
you
know
I
think
we
were
probably
in
the
eight
to
nine
hundred
thousand
dollar
range.
As
an
expectation,
you
know
we're
seeing
significant
price
drops
over
the
last
I
I
would
say
four
months
and
probably
expected
for
this
foreseeable
six
months.
So
when
the
project
finishes
and
where
the
market
lies.
At
that
point,
a
little
bit
unknown,
yeah.
C
O
I
I
don't
know
whether
I
have
to
address
my
question
to
you,
but
do
you
think
that
would
you
architect,
you
checked
all
the
checkpoints
that
could
be
beneficial
to
comply
with
the
two
requirements
for
imperable
surface
handful
building
coverage,
because
it's
once
again
it's
relatively
small,
it's
something
like
two
percent
in
both
cases
so
for
Imperial
surface,
there
are
very
easy
solutions
like
stepping
stones
or
reducing
the
walkways
for
the
building
and
garage,
though
it's
a
little
bit
more
difficult,
but
still
the
architectural
tricks
that
probably
could
have
been
applied
here.
O
T
That
will
be
a
question
to
me:
yeah
we
did
whatever
we
can
to.
So
all
the
sidewalks
are
done
with
the
pavers.
We
have
everything
concrete
before
understand
the
patio
back
on
the
reloaded
property
used
to.
O
I'm
just
giving
an
example
of
something
like
a
architectural
trick.
I
am
running
into
this
all
the
time,
but
ordinance
is
an
ordinance,
so
you
can
replace
this
with
Stepping
Stones.
You
can
reduce
it
to
two
feet:
six
inches,
which
will
be
probably
okay
and
you
will
eliminate
one
of
the
requests
for
minor
variants
the
impervous
surface.
Probably
this
will
be
okay
with
the
two
percent
that
you
need
to
kind
of
give
up.
T
So
I
believe
the
real
plans,
the
approved
plans
are
a
little
bit
different
because
this
is
what
we
apply
for.
So
if
you
somebody
can
move
this
down,
maybe
down
the
screen,
because
this
is
a
two-car
garage
right
now.
So
what
I
believe.
T
W
The
porch
is
already
almost
done
so
roof
on
the
porch
is
done,
we're
only
looking
to
build
the
deck.
So
at
this
point
nothing
could
be
done.
My
question
would
be
you
know
if
we're
gonna,
because
all
the
pavers
are
permeable.
Okay.
So
if
we're
gonna
get
a
smaller
percentage
of
this,
that's
gonna
give
give
us
a
coverage.
W
B
Pavers
receive
a
25
deduction,
so,
for
example,
if
you
have
a
hundred
square
feet
of
permeable
pavers,
they
would
be
counted
as
75
square
feet.
Toward
your
total
impervious
surface
lot,
coverage
from
what
I
recall,
permeable,
pavers
or
Stepping
Stones
were
suggested
to
you
to
continue
to
reduce
and
comply
with
the
impervious
surface.
W
Reducing
amount
of
the
pavers
we
can
maybe
achieve
the
basically
this
two-car
garage
right.
B
Perhaps
we
would
need
to
do
another
analysis.
I
would
say,
though,
that
the
parking
pad
was
compliant
because
I
think
you
had
permeable
pavers
for
the
parking
pad
the
garage.
It
counts
as
100
square
feet
equals
100
square
feet,
so
that
might
be
what
also
is
tipping
you
over
with
the
impervious
surface,
lock
coverage.
W
A
Hearing
none,
you
can
go
ahead
and
have
a
seat
if
you'd
like
miss
klotz,
you
were
the
zoning
administrator
who
made
this
determination.
Is
that
correct?
A
K
Just
to
clarify
that
there
there
were
discussions
by
multiple
staff,
myself
included
with
the
applicant
back
at
the
the
time
of
the
the
plans
for
the
house
prior
to
construction
and
extensive
discussion
about
whether
the
house
should
be
shrunk
to
achieve
the
garage
Etc.
And
it
was
made
quite
clear
to
the
applicant
that
if
they
were
to
max
out
building
lot
coverage
and
impervious
for
the
house
than
a
variation
to
later
at
a
garage
would
not
be
appropriate.
Since
it
is
a
self-created
hardship.
A
A
No
all
right,
thank
you
with
that.
I
will
close
the
record
so
that
we
can
begin
our
deliberation
again.
This
is
an
appeal
of
the
zoning
administrator,
but
when
we
hear
an
appeal,
we
review
a
case
as
if
it
is
coming
to
us
for
the
first
time
and
therefore
we
can
take
into
account
facts
that
other
other
factors
on
the
property
other
than
the
specific
appeal
that
is
before
us
General
thoughts
from
commissioners.
I
This
is
a
perfect
example
of
why
we
have
the
process
that
we
have
and
it's
clear
that
the
applicant
was
told
maybe
numerous
times
by
the
staff,
how
they
could
comply
with
the
zoning
code
and,
in
my
opinion,
the
applicant
disregarded
that
those
conversations
by
staff
and
did
what
they
wanted
to
do.
I,
don't
think
that's
a
knowingly
knowingly
going
against
the
zonia
code
is,
is
not
cool.
D
I
agree
with
commissioner
Hallock
I
think
that
you
know
just
that's
it
all.
A
Right
I
will
I
will
not
prolong
this
any
longer.
I
think
I
get
a
general
sense
for,
for
the
commission,
I
will
just
say
that
you
know
I
think
it
would
be
very
different
if
we
were
hearing
the
entire
project
as
one,
but
since
we
have
already
had
the
majority
of
the
project
completed
and
are
now
being
asked
to
Grant
an
exemption
or
a
variation
because
of
a
condition
that's
been
created
because
half
the
project
is
already
done
is
a
little
problematic
for
me.
A
The
fact
is
that
this
is
a
substandard
lot.
We
often
have
substandard
lots
in
Evanston
and
they
are
often
built
upon
successfully,
but
they
also
are
not
built
with
a
2100
square
foot
home,
and
if
that
is
what
the
the
applicant
desires,
then
there
have
to
be
trade-offs
and,
unfortunately
we
are
left
now
with
not
really
having
anything
to
trade
off
and
we
aren't
going
to
sit
here
and
be
able
to
negotiate
the
Permian
impervious
surface
because
we
don't
have
the
numbers
in
front
of
us
and
so
for
us.
A
That's
that's
not
fair.
It's
not
fair
to
you
to
do
that
as
well.
We
do
have
a
set
of
five
standards
that
are
standards
for
minor
variations
that
we
must
find
are
met
again.
We
are
the
determining
body
in
this
particular
case,
so
we
will
go
through
these
standards
and
as
soon
as
I,
wake
up
my
computer
just
a
moment.
A
So
the
standards
for
approval
for
a
minor
variation,
the
first
one
being
the
Practical
difficulty-
is
not
self-created.
This
is
where
I
have
the
greatest
problem,
because
again
we
are
being
asked
to
Grant
A
variation
based
on
the
fact
that
a
majority
of
the
project
is
already
already
done
and
completed
again.
If
this
had
been
a
project
that
had
come
to
us
with
a
two-car
garage
and
a
house,
we
could
have
looked
at.
How
do
we
trade
off
to
get
things
closer
to
the
impervious
lot
coverage,
as
well
as
the
building
lock
coverage?
A
A
A
We
also
see
some
properties
on
this
lot,
which
have
no
or
I'm
sorry
properties
on
this
alley,
which
have
no
garages
and
some
of
the
ones
that
we've
shown
that
are
larger
are
also
on
larger
Parcels
of
land,
but
I'm
willing
to
grant
that,
obviously
being
able
to
remove
two
cars
from
the
street
does
have
an
impact
that
would
be
an
improvement
for
the
neighborhood,
so
I'm
willing
to
grant
that
this
standard
is
met.
Number
three:
the
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
comprehensive
General
plan
and
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
Obviously,
we
we
often
seek
to
have
on-site
parking.
We
also
seek
to
have
new
new
construction,
where
old
construction
is
deteriorated,
to
the
point
that
it
is
about
to
fall
down,
and
we
are
grateful
when
developers
take
those
properties
and
are
willing
to
redevelop
them.
A
The
issue
that
again
I
think
comes
into
play
in
this
one
is
that
it
really
is
a
a
maximization
of
the
of
the
building
itself
that
creates
this
problem.
We
have
25
foot
Lots,
which
are
are
developed
regularly.
We've
even
actually
increased
some
of
the
the
setbacks
so
that
they
can
be
developed
more
easily.
A
So
I
I
think
that
this
particular
one
the
standard
just
is
not
met
on
the
requested
variation
is
consistent
with
the
preservation
policy
set
forth
in
the
comprehensive
General
plan.
There's
nothing
here
at
play
in
terms
of
the
preservation,
so
that
standard
really
is
non-applicable
and
number
five.
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
actual
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
zoning
administrator,
or
in
this
case
the
land
use
commission
and
again.
A
This
is
a
situation
where
our
hands
are
kind
of
tied,
because
the
the
applicant
or
the
appellant
moved
forward
with
the
majority
of
the
project
and
then
has
come
to
us
and
asked
us
to
approve
the
last
little
bit
of
it,
and
so
I
think
that
this
standard
is
not
met.
A
Is
everyone
in
agreement
with
my
finding
on
standards
with
that?
It
is
typically
our
practice
to
make
a
motion
for
approval,
as
opposed
to
making
a
motion
to
deny,
because
of
the
fact
that
that
way,
everyone's
a
little
more
clear
on
exactly
what
they're
voting
on
so
yes
would
mean.
Yes
would
mean
yes
to
Grant,
it
no
would
mean
no
to
deny
it.
Therefore,
I'll
ask
if
there
is
a
motion
for
approval
of
this
particular
project
located
at
20,
plus
the
address
2012.
D
A
D
Just
a
point
of
clarification:
do
is
this
one
where
we
need
to
have
six?
Yes,.
D
Six
cards
one
one
way
or
the
other:
yes,
okay,
with
that
I
move,
granting
the
appeal
of
the
zoning
administrator's
decision
to
deny
minor
zoning
relief
for
2012
Maple
Avenue
case
22,
ZM
jb-0075.
A
Been
moved
by
lindwald
and
seconded
by
Westerberg,
is
there
any
further
discussion
hearing?
None?
Would
you
please
call
the
roll
yep.
D
A
C
B
A
No,
so
with
a
vote
of
zero
in
favor
and
eight
against
the
motion
fails
and
the
project
is
not
granted,
you
can
work
with
City
staff
to
figure
out
again.
We've
talked
about
some
of
the
options
that
are
available
and
so
talking
to
City
staff
about
you
know
where
you
might
be
able
to
gain
some
some
square
footage,
and
things
like
that
understood.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
with
that.
We
will
move
on
to
just
kind
of
our
business
keeping
ends
of
our
agenda.
B
Right,
so
we
will
have
a
meeting
on
Wednesday
November,
9th
1453
Maple
Avenue.
It's
parking
variation
to
allow
apartments
at
the
Masonic
temple,
it's
being
adaptively
reused
for
residential
1603
Orrington
Avenue,
a
major
variations
for
three
signs
on
the
office
building
in
the
downtown
and
321
Howard
Street,
the
special
use
for
a
convenience
store
that
was
continued
from
the
October
12th
meeting
of
the
land
use
Commission.
B
We
are
aware
that
this
is
the
first
time
this
body
will
be
reviewing
major
variations
for
signs.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
how
that
process
may
work
and
we're
happy
to
kind
of
try
to
update
you
at
this
meeting
and
we'll
do
our
best
to
explain
that
in
the
staff
report
in
that
case
is
being
managed
by
zoning
administrator,
Melissa
klotz.
A
The
yeah
we'll
have
a
special
yeah.
B
That
we
did
do
I
guess
a
quorum
check
for
to
schedule
a
special
meeting
on
November
30th.
B
There
has
been
an
application
filed
for
a
special
use
for
a
rooming
house
at
1566
Oak
for
the
margarita,
Inn
and
Melissa
Cox
is
the
case
lead
for
that?
Okay,.
I
D
A
I'll
just
say
that
we
have
a
lot
of
very
big
cases
coming
our
way.
So
attendance
is
important
since
we
still
are
required
at
present
to
have
six
members
voting
affirmatively
for
anything
in
which
we
are
determining
body.