►
From YouTube: Preservation Commission Meeting 10-12-2021
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
Thank
you
all
right.
All
right!
Welcome
to
the
tuesday
october
12
2021
meeting
of
the
evanston
preservation
commission
as
the
first
matter
of
business,
we
have
to
suspend
the
rules
in
order
to
permit
virtual
participation
in
the
meeting
by
the
commissioners
and
the
public.
E
A
Commissioner
driller
hi
and
I'm
and
I
thank
you
as
a
first
order
of
business.
I
just
wanted
to
take
the
opportunity
to
publicly
congratulate
commissioner
cohen,
who
is
receiving
the
aia.
Chicago's
lifetime
achievement
award
for
2021
on
friday,
and
anybody
wants
to
participate
can
get
the
link,
I
think,
off
the
aia
chicago
website,
but
it's
an
incredible
honor
stewart's
in
the
company
of
a
lot
of
very
well
known,
architects
of
international
renown,
and
it's
it's
amazing
that
any
of
us
are
serving
other
commissioners
stewards.
So
congratulations
thank.
F
A
Before
we
start
the
order
of
business,
I
I
think,
as
we
go
through
each
manner,
we'll
have
the
applicant
present
their
application,
showing
us
key
features
of
what
they
presented
of.
What's
included
in
the
in
the
packet
that
they'd
like
to
show
us
we'll
have
commissioners
ask
questions
and
ask
for
clarifications.
A
Will
then
give
members
the
public,
mostly
those
who
have
signed
up
a
maximum
of
two
minutes
to
comment
as
they
wish
and
then
any
final
discussion
by
the
commissioners
and,
generally
speaking,
a
role,
call
vote
just
to
kind
of
remind
everybody
at
the
meeting.
The
evanston
preservation
commission
is
a
commission
that
has
very
limited
powers.
Our
our
mission
is
to
view
building
and
demolition
permits
against
the
requirements,
the
standards
for
alteration,
construction
and
demolition
in
the
evanston
preservation
ordinance.
A
We
only
have
a
say
on
those
we
need
to
adhere
to
those
in
judging
whether
applications
should
be
approved
or
disapproved,
but
for
everybody
at
the
meeting
there
may
be
a
number
there
may
be
any
number
of
things
that
are
good
or
bad
about
an
application.
Any
reason
many
number
of
reasons
why
projects
should
or
should
not
be
built,
but
we
only
have
jurisdiction
over
the
limited
matters
that
are
specifically
set
forth
in
an
and
there
may
be
all
kinds
of
other
matters
that
would
be
worthy
of
discussion
in
a
different
forum.
A
So,
having
said
that,
why
don't
we
start
the
presentations?
So
the
first
matter
of
new
business
is
585
ingleside
place
a
landmark,
and
I
guess
it's.
The
northeast
evans
in
historic
district
and.
F
A
Invite
the
whoever
speak!
You
know
in
each
case,
when
you
speak,
please
introduce
yourselves
for
the
camera
and
present
your
application.
D
I
A
L
Okay,
hello,
everybody.
My
name
is
fred
wilson
from
organza,
wilson,
architects,
congratulations,
stuart
on
your
award
and
this
is
elliot
flaws,
the
project
architect
for
the
for
the
buildings
we
are
proposing.
There
are
actually
two
structures
that
one
was
an
existing
building.
The
existing
boathouse
that
was
destroyed
by
lake
action
and
the
other
is
a
new
boat
storage.
With
a
terrace
and
sitting
space
up
above
the
site
exists,
it's
kind
of
a
funky
site.
The
building
is
pushed
all
the
way
to
the
west,
the
sort
of
dock
area.
L
This
is
the
existing
building.
It
has
a
very
steep
pitch
which
we
are
trying
to
mimic
with
the
building
that
we're
creating
it's
a
limestone
and
brick
structure
with
painted
windows
and
then
there's
a
large
north
south
gable
that
if
you
can
go
to
the
ridge
on
the
back
that
establishes
that
steep
pitch
for
the
home.
L
So
this
gives
you
the
flavor,
we're
doing
the
coin
corners
and
the
masonry
where
we
have
that.
So
let's
go
to
the
next.
L
L
This
is
showing
the
existing
structure
that
was
there
that
housed
their
kayaks
and
paddle
boards
and
such
there's
a
dabbit
that
is
used
to
launch
the
the
the
boats
that
are
there
that
existing
sort
of
dock
concrete
dock
has
been
there
for
many
many
years
there
is
a
preventment
wall,
that's
to
the
west
of
that
docked
area,
that's
in
very
good
shape.
L
L
This
just
shows
you
now
standing
at
the
south
end
looking
north.
So
that's
where
the
kind
of
we're
sort
of
standing
where
the
one
structure
was
is
gone
and
then
that's
where
the
new
structure
is
going
to
be.
L
L
This
is
the
south
building,
it's
just
a
long
storage
facility.
What
we're
gonna
do
is
it's
gonna,
be
a
steel
structure,
steel
frame
structure
with
six
inch
masonry
block
back
up
with
four
inch
masonry
veneers.
So
it's
going
to
be
a
very
solidly
built,
so
they
don't
go
through
this
again.
We
arcked
the
roof
structure
so
that
you
kind
of
visually
look
right
over
the
top
of
it.
L
This
is
pushed
down
again
onto
the
dock
and
our
height,
because
it's
dropping
off
from
our
approved
or
whatever
you
want
to
establish
great
we're
only
coming
out,
seven
inches
above
the
approved
height
or
the
accepted
height
for
the
piece
of
property.
Because
of
the
contours,
we
essentially
are
pulling
the
coin
corners
along
the
two
sides.
With
the
limestone
lintels,
the
windows
will
be
the
blue,
painted
color,
we're
actually
going
to
do
them
in
aluminum
clad,
and
then
we
have
a
metal
roof.
That's
up
at
the
top.
L
The
next
building,
then,
is
the
northern
structure
that
then
has
storage
below.
As
I
mentioned,
the
micropiles
will
be
done
from
the
inside
of
the
foundation.
That'll
run
all
the
way
around
they're
going
to
be
about
I'd,
say
40
feet
down
something
in
that
range.
Until
we
get
the
friction
required
to
maintain
a
stable
building
the
you
go
up
the
stairs
right
here
to
an
open-air
terrace
and
then
there's
a
small
sitting
room
that
is
in
an
inside
structure
that
has
no
plumbing
or
kitchen
or
anything
like
that.
L
It's
just
more
of
a
sitting
room
and
then
this.
These
are
the
lines
that
it
looks
like.
So
the
lower
level
have
the
coins
that
match
the
existing
home
and
then
the
upper
the
upper
area
has
the
limestone
and
that
runs
as
a
small
parapet
and
then
the
slate
roof
that
is
going
to
match
the
slate
roof
of
the
house.
L
It's
all
hurricane
rated
glass.
We
did
a
project
down
in
st
john's
that
we
used
the
hurricane-rated
glass
and
when
the
two
hurricanes
came
through,
everything
was
fine.
So
we're
we're
going
to
follow
the
same
building
standards
we
use
down
there.
Then
we
did
a
rendering
that
shows
you
the
structure
to
the
left.
L
That
is
very
transparent
and
again
it's
just
more
of
a
an
indoor
gazebo.
If
you
will,
we
thought
the
roof
lines
would
tie
in
nicely
to
the
current
home,
and
then
you
can
just
see
the
roof
of
the
southern
storage
building
and
we
did
that
as
a
curve.
So
it
really
just
kind
of
flows
right
over
our
property,
the
grab,
the
lawn,
the
meadow
in
the
backyard
and
then
again
just
to
refresh
where
the
architecture
came
from
the
coin
corners.
The
limestone
parapet
wall
that
goes
up
the
roof
pitch
is
extremely
exaggerated.
L
G
L
So
if,
if
you
have
any
questions
about
our
presentation,
let
me
know.
E
L
Yeah,
we
could
look
at
that.
I
I
I
do
like
the
millions
on
the
house
and
again
it
adds
to
part
of
the
I
like
the
blue
windows.
I
think
they
add
a
nice
little
pop
to
the
to
the
structure,
but
I
could
see
looking
at
doing
millions.
C
E
Yeah,
fred,
the
other,
the
other
thing
is,
is
sort
of.
I
appreciate
the
whole
idea
of
trying
to
make
structures
that
look
pretend
they're
not
there,
but
I
sort
of
feel
the
same
way
about
the
glass
panel
railings.
Well,
I
think
they're
kind
of
cool
they
are
going
to
be
there
and
I
wonder
since
there's
a
railing
system,
a
metal
railing
system.
That's
on
the
house,
that's
rather
prominent
in
the
pictures.
You
showed
us
whether
you
looked
at
doing
the
same
kind
of
a
railing
system
on
that
little
terrace.
L
We
did
not
again
that
was
sort
of
the
idea
to
really
feel
like
you're
on
the
edge
you
know
kind
of
looking
out
over,
but
I
could
talk
to
peter
dorothy
about
that.
That's
not
a
problem.
E
Yeah
I
mean
I
I
I
appreciate
the
sighting
of
the
two
buildings
and
the
and
the
kind
of
suggestive
recall
of
the
of
the
roof
forms
and
and
think
as
a
scheme.
It's
nice
overall,
and
I
just
wonder
if
you
know
I
mean
I,
I
get
the
desire
to
combine
things
that
are
very,
very
modern,
with
sets
of
forms
which
are
also
traditional,
and
you
know
the
question:
is
you
know
where
do
you
do
that
and
where
do
you
stop
and
then?
What's
the
sense
relationship
to
the
existing
house.
L
Go
back
to
the
to
the
existing
home.
N
I
just
wanted
to
make
one
note
just
about
the
glass
railings.
I
think
that
if
there
was
some
consideration,
I
was
a
little
not
comfortable
with
the
glass
railings
either
just
because
of
standard
number,
seven,
the
relationship
of
materials-
and
it
was.
K
F
J
A
All
right
we'll
come
back
for
any
final
discussion
by
commissioners.
All
right
now,
I'm
going
to
ask
kade
to
read
the
names
of
people
who
signed
up
to
speak
for
each
person.
First
of
all,
please
limit
your
talk
to
two
minutes.
We
do
have
a
lot
of
people
who
wish
to
speak
tonight
and
before
you
start
to
state
your
name
for
the
the
recording
so
kade.
I
I
have
one
individual
that
signed
up
lucy
and
ken
lehmann.
The
property
owners
immediately
north.
M
Ken
and
I
first
of
all
had
a
wonderful
relationship
with
our
neighbors
next
door,
and
we
feel
now
that
there
are
some
issues
with
talking
about
the
one
story
masonry
building
that
existed
before
I
did
historic
research.
There
is
no
evidence
of
any
building
being
there,
except
for
what
the
marxists
built
when
they
moved
into
into
the
place.
I
have
never
just
as
an
aside
seen
anything
in
there
that
resembles
a
kayak
or
paddle
boards.
It
has
only
been
jet
skis.
M
M
M
Consequently,
I
don't
have
the
skill
set
to
do
what
the
architects
are
doing,
but
I
we
believe
that
the
height
the
extra
height
really
impacts
on
our
deck
and
our
light.
Excuse
me
our
light.
Our
airflow
and
what
we're
very
concerned
about
is
the
closeness
of
it
destabilizing
our
pool
our
boathouse
and
our
deck.
But
it's
really
the
pool
foundation
that
has
been
in
place
for
45
years,
the
boat
house
we
restored
extensively.
M
Again,
I
haven't
memorized
the
standards,
but
it
looks
like
the
scale
of
the
structure.
It's
unnecessarily
tall
because
repeating
the
roof
line
is
fine,
except
that
that
tall
exaggerated,
which
the
architect
has
also
point,
was
not
original,
and
so
we
feel
that
the
height
is
out
of
performance.
Brother.
A
I'm
sorry
could
we
ask
people
who
are
not
speaking
to
mute
themselves,
you're
interrupting
the
speaker.
M
A
M
A
Okay
and
just
to
clarify
our
our
commission
is:
if
we
issue
a
certificate
of
appropriateness,
then
the
applicant
still
has
to
go,
obtain
a
building
permit.
It's
not.
You
know.
M
A
No.
Is
there
any
discussion
by
commissioners.
E
Yeah
hi
to
ken
and
lucy.
What
would
be
really
useful
in
evaluating
this
would
be
to
see
the
site
plan
for
the
existing
house
and
the
two
new
pavilions,
which
need
to
be
approved
and
permitted
in
relation
to
a
site
plan
that
shows
your
pool
and
your
house
so
that
we
can
better
understand
the
degree
to
which
these
will
form
part
of
the
view
from
the
back
of
your
house
and
from
the
from
from
your
yard.
So
that
would
be
just
a
schematic
plan
of
the
adjacent
property.
E
I'm
sure
the
engineering
and
the
support
of
these
new
structures
on
micropiles
is
is
being
done
so
as
not
to
destabilize
the
bluff,
because
the
whole
idea
of
that
kind
of
structure,
which
you
say
your
pool
is
on,
is
that
it
doesn't
transfer
any
lateral
load
to
the
bluff
until
you
get
down
to
the
bottom
or
the
lower
sections
of
the
micropiles
which
are
below
the
the
toe
should
be
below
the
toe
of
the
bluff.
M
We
are
worried
and
I
think
that
our
architect,
christopher
rudolph,
can
speak
to
that
and
furnish
what
you
need.
A
Okay,
well,
this
is
a
we're
moving
on
to
any
other
public
comment.
So
if
your
architect
would
like
to
speak
as
the
mayor
of
the
public,
you
know
now
would
be
the
time.
O
Yeah,
I
I
am
on
the
call.
I
am
the
been
involved
with
the
lehman
since
about
1977
or
eight
on
this
property
and
the.
O
Stabilization
of
the
bluff
is
the
biggest
concern
during
construction.
Whatever
is
built
there
once
the
building
is
built,
it
actually
stabilizes
the
bluff
for
both
property
owners,
and
you
know
the
building,
permit
and
engineering
of
the
site
is
clearly
a
concern
to
the
municipality
as
well,
and
both
property
owners
but
unstable
bluff
conditions
are
unpredictable
and
no
matter
what
style
of
building
is
approved.
Or
you
know
what
is
eventually
built
is
is
really
not
the
concern.
O
It's
the
stabilization
of
the
bluff
from
what
I
can
tell
is
is
a
danger
and
the
engineering
that
morganton
wilson
will
have
to
provide
to
get
a
building
permit
has
to
address
that
issue.
I
mean
that
that
is
typical
along
the
lake,
and
you
aren't
here.
A
So
carlos
and
kade
will
the
I
mean
with
the
building.
I
mean
these
aren't
preservation
issues.
Will
the
building
department
be
reviewing
the
plans
for
that
purpose?.
I
F
P
A
A
All
right
would
any
commissioner
like
to
make
a
motion
to
approve,
and
in
this
regard,
to
the
extent
I
know
there
are
a
couple
of
modifications.
A
E
And
mark
just
to
clarify
the
whole
question
of
since
this
is
in
their
property.
The
questions
of
bluff,
stabilization
and
the
question
of
whether
this
is
going
to
be
a
prominent
new
feature
in
the
lehman's
view
is
not
something
that
we
have,
as
you
pointed
out
at
the
beginning,
have
any
are
in
power
to
address.
Is
that
correct.
A
Well,
clearly,
the
criteria
of
you
know,
engineering
criteria
for
issuing
building
permit
are
are
not
something
we
that
are
in
our
standards.
The
you
know.
I
think
that
the
standards
don't
addressing
and
we
we
have
these.
You
know,
unfortunately,
constant
conflicts
where
you
know
neighbors
want
different
things.
The
view
from
from
a
neighborhood
lot
is
not
per
se
a
standard.
I
think
you
know
there's
every
reasonable
effort
should
be
made
to
like
require
minimal,
minimal
alteration
of
the
property
structure,
site
or
object.
A
I
mean
you
know
clearly
things
visible
from
the
public
view,
we're
entitled
to
to
judge
whether
there's
preservation
concerns
with
that.
But
again
they
have
to
be
preservation
concerns
not
just
and.
I
Yeah
correct,
I
would
just
say
one
one.
Additional
comment
on
that
steward
is
that
there
are
various
standards
that
deal
with
associations
between
structures,
but
those
are
primarily
intended
for
relationships
within
a
district
and
to
be
clear,
the
property
to
the
north
is
not
in
a
local
district,
nor
is
it
a
local
landmark.
I
E
If
it
wouldn't
be
an
undue
hardship
on
the
on
the
owners,
I
would
love
to
see
suggestions
about
dividing
the
large
areas
of
glass
and
the
glass
railings,
and
I
wouldn't
mind
seeing
the
some
indication
of
the
adjacent
property,
because
it
looks
like
the
coastline
as
you
move.
I
guess
it's
to
the
north
is
that
right
to
the
lehman's
house
seems
to
angle
away,
so
it
may
be
when
we
see
the
the
placement
of
the
back
of
the
house
that
the.
L
So
you
can
see
here
that
light
line
right.
There
is
the
boathouse
that
projects
out
past
our
building,
so
we
we
drew
that
as
a
reference
point,
that's
their
handrail
up
there
and
let's
go
back
to
the
go
back
to
the
rendering
and
I'm
okay
stuart.
If
we
do
the
millions
to
look
more
like
the
house
and
the
railing,
I
think
that
would
be
pretty.
L
But
if
you
can
see,
then
these
the
trees
that
are
just
to
our
they're,
pretty
prominent.
That
kind
of
obscures
the
house
from
their
main
house.
P
M
But
more,
but
the
trees
that
you're
referring
to
are
not
where
you're
thinking
they
are.
Those
trees
are
down
on
a
lower
area.
They
are
not
on
the
deck
they
do
not
they
don't
hide
anything
here
at
all.
This
is
all
our
deck
and
those
two
trees,
those
two
arborvitae
and
that's
it
there's
these
two
trees
do
not,
and
the-
and
you
know
the
architects
for
the
marxists
are
welcome
to
see
for
themselves.
F
E
What's
in
the
view
from
the
adjacent
house,
I
I
was
just
curious:
how
much
of
that
you
would
you
would
see
from
the
back
of
your
house
from
your
yard.
Obviously,
you'll
see
it.
M
E
Again,
understanding
those
relationships
is
really
informational.
What
we're
being
asked
to
do
is
to
evaluate
the
structure
which,
under
the
zoning,
I
think
the
applicant
has
the
right
to
build
on
their
property
and
we're
reviewing
it
for
its
relationship
and
compatibility
with
the
existing
structure.
A
E
E
Yeah
well
with
the
arbor
vita
that
were
in
the
picture
that
we
just
looked
at
and
the
fence.
Are
you
worried
that
this
new
pavilion
is
going
to
limit
your
views
of
the
lake.
M
M
I
mean
I
recognize
that
we
are
not
allowed
to
say
we
lose
a
view
that
we've
had
for
45
years.
That
obviously
does
not
count
in
this
venue,
but
in
terms
of
the
rest
of
it
it
is
important
to
us,
and
I
we
really
would
appreciate
you
know-
and
we've
asked
in
the
past
to
have
somebody
the
architect.
Somebody
come
over
and
explain
exactly
what
the
visual
impact
would
be.
M
We
were
not
given
that
that
request
was
not
honored
when
the
first
renovation
was
done
20
years
ago
and
we
feel
like
we
would
like
to
to
know-
and
we
were
not
made
aware
of
this
plan
in
a
neighborly,
timely
manner
where
we
could
even
know
these
things.
So
that's
why
we
encourage
visitations,
and
you
know-
and
I
mean
it's
not
what
they
want
to
build
is
not
an
unattractive
thing.
A
Q
We
make
a
motion.
I
just
want
to
ask
my
fellow
commissioners
when
we're
when
we're
talking
about
them,
looking
at
exploring
mullion
options
in
the
instead
of
the
clear
sheet
of
glass
that
they
have
are.
We
are
we
thinking
of
breaking
it
up
into
multiple
windows,
as
they've
done
on
the
south
elevation
with
mullions,
or
are
we
talking
in
addition
to
that
that
it
should
be
broken
up
into
the
individual
mutton
bars
within
each
window?.
Q
But
I,
the
reason
why
I
ask
is
if
the
applicant
is,
is
prepared
to
agree
to
the
terms
if,
if
we're
happy
with
the
south
elevation-
and
they
were
willing
to
it's
the
same
shape,
they
were
willing
to
duplicate
that
on
the
east
and
the
west.
Can
we
can?
We
agree
that
that
is
is
something
that
we
would
approve.
L
I
would
say
the
mutton
bars
are
what
I
feel
is
where
we're
heading
with
it.
That
I
think,
would
look
more
like
the
the
building.
You
know
the
main
building,
so
I
could
see
breaking
those
pieces
up
into
into
the
mutton
bars.
I
think
will
look
great
and
I
think
the
handrail
will
probably
replicate
exactly
the
handrail
from
the
house.
A
I
mean
if
we
could
make
the
motion
subject
just
to
a
you
know,
quick.
A
J
A
N
No
more
okay,
okay,
let's
see
then
okay,
I
recommend
that
for
the
property
at
585
angle,
side
place
landmark
case
21
press
0133
that
we
issue
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
construct
a
single
story.
Masonry
boathouse
in
the
same
footprint
as
an
original
wood
frame
structure,
previously
demolished
and
construct
a
new
two-story
accessory
structure
with
ground
floor
boat
storage
and
upper
roof
enclosure
and
upper
and
open
terrace,
pending
an
administrative
review
of
a
new
muntin
pattern
for
the
large
glass
walls
on
the
east.
N
N
G
A
Okay,
commissioner
cohen
seconded,
are
we
all
clear
on
the
the
present
of
the
exact
wording
of
the
motion?
Okay,
then,
let's
vote
well
call
about
commissioner
beaudin.
N
L
F
A
The
next
manner
is
217
dumpster
street,
the
lakeshore
historic
district.
So
it's
like
it's
a
landmark
home.
Could
the
person
making
the
presentation
for
the
applicant
to
introduce
themselves
and
show
us
the
project.
B
I'm
david
with
reno
ogden
architects
and
we
are
looking
to
add
to
a
rear
coach
house
of
a
daniel
burnham
house
which
we're
currently
renovating
with
our
with
the
clients
there.
It's
a
it's
a
showpiece
of
a
home
and
they're
doing
some
wonderful
work
out
there
to
renovate
that
just
see
the
previously
approved
drawings
there
and
then
at
the
back.
B
There's
an
old
coach
house
that
we
want
to
add
onto
to
the
side
to
help
frame
the
only
yard
they
have,
which
is
that
side
yard,
and
also
to
give
a
an
escape
for
parents
of
three
daughters
every
now
and
then
and
we're
keeping
identical
materials.
Everything
exactly.
What's
there
just
adding
another
gable
to
the
end
of
that
to
get
a
little
more
height
out
of
the
space,
with
a
lowered
floor
and
a
storage
area
beneath
and
a
picture's
worth
a
thousand
words,
and
my
words
are
not
not
that
eloquent.
B
So
you
want
to
go
through
the
pictures
that
would
communicate
I'll.
Take
any
questions.
A
I
mean:
could
you
just
show
us
the
the
alterations
in
new
construction
yeah?
It's
the.
B
As
you
see
the
existing
on
the
left
side
of
that
page,
south
elevation
existing
and
the
right
side
is
the
addition,
which
is
just
that
matching
dormer,
going
over
an
extension
of
the
roof
to
match
that.
So
it's
that
little
piece
on
the
right
that
we're
adding.
B
B
B
B
The
existing
coach
house
there,
entry
from
the
side
for
the
cars
and
then
the
next
page
next
photograph
over,
is
the
existing
dormer,
adding
kind
of
doubling
that
dormer
going
out
to
the
right
on
that
piece.
There.
B
B
B
B
B
A
Why
does
the
new
gable
structure
to
the
I
guess
this
towards
the
lake,
have
no
lower
story
windows?
Well,
the
because
the.
B
The
the
carriage
house
has
a
very
high
ceiling
in
it
that
there's
very
little
space
up
there,
so
the
new
floor
line
kind
of
cuts
in
cuts
the
bottom
of
the
window,
cuts
through
there.
So
there's
it'll
be
an
odd
position
to
have
the
windows
either
up
higher.
We
thought
that
looked
a
little
strange.
It
looks
strange
to
have
windows
that'll,
be
cut
by
a
floor.
B
We
have
in
the
past,
put
in
windows
and
just
painted
them
black,
so
they
look
like
they're
there,
but
just
disappear
they're
black
from
the
outside
anyway,
during
the
during
the
day
at
night,
there's
no
lights
on,
so
we
we
considered
that,
but
often
in
the
way
of
honesty
in
this
case,
but
we
can
certainly
add
those
to
match
exactly.
What's
there.
B
Q
Sure
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
regarding
217
dempster
street
21
prez
dash,
oh
landmark
in
the
lakeshore
historic
district,
that
we
approve
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
construct
an
addition
to
the
east
volume
of
the
property's
detached
accessory
structure
and
alter
the
accessory
structures
fenestration
on
the
north
elevation
upper
story.
Applicable
standards,
alteration
one
through
ten
construction,
one
through
five
and
seven
through
eight
and
ten,
through
thirteen
and
fifteen.
A
A
second
second
measure
coin:
okay,
then,
a
rocker
vote.
O
B
R
Hello,
do
I
start
now
or
are
you
introducing.
R
All
right,
I'm
nathan,
kipnis,
I'm
the
architect
of
the
property.
We
have
our
office
here
in
evanston
and
I
can
introduce
the
project
as
well.
It's
a
four
unit
masonry
building
it
is
contributing
in
the
neighborhood.
R
R
So
here
you
can
see
the
solar
panels
in
two
sets:
there's
a
dormer
in
between
set
about
approximately
halfway
back
on
the
building,
and
then
you
see
the
deck
and
we'll
go
to
a
enlarged
image
in
a
minute
or
we'll
start
working
our
way
there.
So
these
are
the
existing
floor.
I'm
sorry.
The
new
floor
plans
there
on
that
image
right.
There
is
showing
the
dormer
the
stairs
coming
up
and
going
out
to
a
roof
deck.
R
The
roof
deck
is
set
back
three
feet
from
the
south
property
line
to
align
with
the
setback
and
that's
it.
The
windows
are
going
to
be
all
casement,
clad
windows
that
are
mimicking
in
proportion
and
dimension.
All
of
the
double
hung
windows
and
we're
doing
that
for
high
performance
in
the
building.
R
R
R
R
R
R
E
Nate,
do
you
have
a
three-dimensional
view,
which
is
one
of
the
requirements
for
the
submission.
R
Yeah
they're
definitely
interconnected.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
make
a
building.
That's
all
electric,
that's
I
would
say
ultra
high
performance
and
to
accomplish
that
double
hung.
Windows
are
not
very
good
at
all,
with
their
keeping
in
the
heat.
They
lose
a
lot
through
the
lap
seal,
as
opposed
to
a
casement
that
shuts
kind
of
like
a
refrigerator,
a
gasketed
door.
R
So
the
idea
is
we're
going
to
go
all
electric,
so
air
source
heat
pumps
for
the
heating
and
the
air,
heating,
cooling
and
water,
heater
and
dryer
in
an
induction
cooktop
and
the
solar
panels
will
connect
to
a
battery
backup
system
we're
going
to
air
seal
this
building
very
tightly.
C
R
E
The
the
presence
of
the
storm
windows,
I
think
factors
into
the
difference
in
the
way
the
windows
will
look.
Obviously
the
casement,
the
glass
is
all
in
one
plane,
whereas
with
the
action
of
the
double
hung
window,
the
lower
sash
is
set
in,
which
is
the
problem
you're
identifying
for
air
infiltration,
but
the
minute
you
put
a
storm
window
over
that
you
know
even
the
triple
tracks,
the
you
know.
E
So,
frankly,
I
totally
get
what
you're
trying
to
do
going
from
the
casements
to
the
double
hungs,
and
I
don't
know
how
I
you
know
from
an
energy
point
of
view,
you're
doing
absolutely
the
right
thing
from
a
historic
preservation
point
of
view.
I'm
not
sure
how
I
feel
about
the
change.
R
F
E
Yeah
yeah,
nato.
I
think
that
it
that
might
be
helpful
to
the
other
commissioners.
We've
done
exactly
the
same
thing,
because
unless
you've
got
a
very
wide
double
hung
in
a
bedroom,
you
can't
meet
egress,
be
when
you
can
just
get
out
the
lower
section.
R
R
I
believe
we
drew
what's
there,
so
I
don't
think
there
are,
but
I
I
could
check
that
and
get
back
to
you,
but
I
do
not
believe
that
is
the
case,
and
I
don't
think
that
the
you
know
the
pictures
aren't
going
to
show
any.
I
don't
believe.
F
All
right
excuse.
N
For
the
alteration
standard
number,
three
talking
about
alterations,
alterations
to
sites
building
structures
are
objects
that
have
no
historic
basis
shall
be
discouraged.
Can
you
talk
about
that?
Roof
deck.
R
So
the
roof
deck
is
a
it's
a
very
tempting
thing
to
have
in
in
in
a
building.
So
there
is
this
flat
roof
section.
If
you
go
back
to
page
eight,
I
think
you'll
see
the
flat
roof
area
and
the
owner
had
identified
the
thought
yeah.
So
in
that
one
section,
there's
a
flat
roof
and
it's
a
perfect
opportunity
for
a
roof
deck.
So
obviously
the
deck
isn't
seen
it's
a
pretty
steep
pitched
roof,
though,
and
so
there
are
some
stairs.
R
If
you
go
down,
I
think
three,
more
images
you'll
see
the
close-up
of
that,
and
so
the
railings
are
the
one
part
that
shows.
D
R
Black
metal,
railings
and
they're,
just
you
know
again:
we
set
them
back
from
the
property
line
because
the
existing
building
is
non-conforming
and
over.
So
you
see
that
set
back
on
the
left
there.
But
that's
all
you
know,
that's
a
aluminum
pre-finished
aluminum
railing
system.
A
All
right!
Well,
why
don't
we
we'll
come
back
to
the
commissioners?
Was
there
any
member
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak
to
this
matter.
F
N
Just
I'm
just
not
I'm
having
trouble
with
the
full
program
of
window
replacements
on
a
building
where,
for
you
know,
with
our
standards
in
mind,
with
original
100
plus
year
old
windows
being
replaced
for
energy
efficiency,
which
I
applaud.
But
I
think
that
there
are
ways
to
make
wood
windows
plenty
energy
efficient,
so
that
they
are
not
the
main
problem
in
the
building
envelope,
and
I
think
that
those
options
should
be
attempted
first,
before
a
wholesale
replacement
with
windows
that
are
going
to
be.
You
know,
replaced
again
in
20-25
years.
N
I
just
don't
think
that
that's
the
option,
especially
then
using
you
know,
changing
the
operability,
the
form
of
operation
and
then
changing
the
the
the
the
depth
of
the
windows,
and
you
know
making
them
a
flat
presentation
rather
than
the
depth
that
you
get
from
the
true
double
videos
and
then
the
roof
deck.
I
just
don't
see
it
as
fitting
on
this
building,
it's
a
neighborhood
where
or
it's
a
building,
that's
situated
among
a
variety
of
different
kind
of
homes,
and
I
just
don't
see
the
roof
deck.
N
I
I
feel
like
it's
just
kind
of
like
landing
on
there
and
not
really
working
within
the
existing
building
and
design,
also
just
not
having
a
historic
basis.
R
I
want
to
make
one
point:
if
I
can:
the
roof
deck
is
going
to
be
accessed
only
by
one
unit,
who's,
the
building
owner,
and
so
it's
it
won't
in
effect,
it'll
be
like
a
single
family.
J
N
My
point
is:
that's
a
good
point.
I
hadn't
thought
about
that
quite
a
bit,
but
I
think
my
concern
is
just
the
just
the
visual
of
it
just
all
of
a
sudden
having
those
the
railings
up
there
yeah.
I
just
don't
see
it
fitting
in.
E
Mark
are
you
recommending
that
the
debt,
the
railing
in
the
deck
which
is
already
set
back
from
the
property
line,
which
would
be
the
right
in
this
photograph,
might
be
set
back
further
from
the
front
ad
so
that
the
view
from
the
street
you
know
so
you
wouldn't
see
the
railing,
except
maybe
from
a
house
the
second
floor
of
a
house
across
the
street
or
from
maybe
the
lawn
of
one
of
the
houses
across
the
street.
A
E
Hey
kade,
could
you
remind
us,
I
should
remember
this,
but
is
this
a
contrib,
a
landmark
a
contributing
structure
or
simply
in
a
district.
A
Yeah
I
mean
commissioner,
voted
in
the
you
know.
I
mean
the
city
has
certainly
asked
that
we
favor
energy
efficiency
and
sustainability
and,
of
course,
in
the
context
of
the
solar
panels,
or
I
think,
initially,
a
few
years
ago,
we
were
reluctant
to
have
approved
them,
because
they
are,
you
know,
look
so
jarringly
industrial
and
not
consistent
with
historic
district.
We
then
pass
specific
standards
for
those
which
you
know,
I
think,
by
the
particularly
by
the
direction
they're
facing
in
this
house.
You
know
me
will
meet
those
standards.
A
The
issue
of
window
replacement
for
where
it's
necessary
for
energy
officials
is
not
one
we've
actually
ever
talked
about.
I
mean
it's
a
really
good
point
and
I
think
it's
just
one
of
those
issues
where
you
know
two
things:
we
we
we
care
about
both
of
historic
preservation
and
energy
efficiency,
simply
conflict
with
each
other,
and
so
I'm
not
sure
we've
never
had
before
had
to
discuss
this
exact
issue.
N
Well,
I
don't
agree,
I
think
that
historic
windows
can
be
energy
efficient.
I
I
don't
think
that
they,
I
think
that
there's
many
options
that
can
be
done
to
to
make
the
windows
more
weather
tight.
You
know
like
when
was
the
last
time
that
they
were
replaced
re-puttied
when
was
when
were
the
you
know
when
were
the
stops
and
were
they
taken
off
and
repainted
and
scraped?
N
N
I
think
it's
a
tough
balance.
I
understand
the
goal,
but
I
just
I
hate
to
see
I
hate.
I
just
don't
think
it's
the
right
step
to
take
to
do
a
wholesale
replacement
like
that.
Can
I.
D
Can
I
ask
you,
would
you
be
talking
about
then
standard
number,
one
for
alteration
where
it's
done
in
a
manner
that
requires
minimal
alteration?
Is
that
what
you're,
referring
to
some
attempt
at
minimal
alteration?
I.
N
Think
that's
prepared
whenever
and
a
number
of
on
as
well
too.
It's
just
you
know
when
you
have
a
program
of
windows
that
are
in
fair
condition
that
are
still
operating
with.
You
know,
still
working
within
120
years,
and
I
understand
that
they're
working
in
a
different
way
than
what
the
goal
is
right
now.
So
so
do
the
maintenance
to
do
the
work
that
it
takes.
Do
the
minimal
minimal
work
that
it
could
take
and
then
start
your
measurements
and
and
take
and
and
see
if
it's
possible
and
see
what
your
performance
is.
R
Can
I
answer
one
aspect
of
that
sure,
so
the
existing
windows,
little
glazed
with
storm
windows
are
going
to
be
an
r2
and
the
new
windows
will
be
double
that
and
then
the
infiltration
rates-
I
don't
have
them
at
my
fingertips,
but
they're
multiples
of
what's
existing
there.
So
when
you
combine
those,
it's
almost
like
a
factor
of
10
that
they
that
these
windows
are
better
than
what's
gonna.
Well,
then,
a
single
glaze,
you
know,
certainly
it's
going
to
be
a
tremendous
multiple
of
what's
existing
there.
R
So
I
I
mean
I
understand
what
you're
saying
I
understand
what
you're
trying
to
do.
I've
been
involved
with
the
with
the
historic
districts
in
evanston
for
a
couple
decades,
and
I
I
certainly
know
what's
involved,
but
I
this
is
a
whole
different
animal.
R
This
is
trying
to
make
this
building
an
order
of
magnitude
better
than
what's
existing
there
and
that's
honestly
what
we
need
to
be
doing
one
other
quick
point-
and
I
apologize
for
not
saying
this
before,
but
there
is
a
roof
deck
2
building
south
at
12
30
south
of
this
building,
I
don't
know
the
address,
but
just
for
reference.
E
You
know
I
I
think
mark
brings
up
a
good
point
by
by
making
a
comparison
to
the
acceptance
of
of
solar
panels
on
these
buildings
and,
while
I'm
generally
in
favor
of
rebuilding
double
lung
windows,
which
which
we've
done
including
reinstalling
them
with
with
fins
to
stop
infiltration
at
the
side
of
the
of
the
frames
you
still
have
to
deal
with.
You
know
the
best
you
can
do
on
the
meeting.
E
Rail
we've
had
them
re-glazed
with
you
know,
with
thin
therma
pain
with
and
it's
a
wild
expense
compared
to
a
new
window,
which
is
still
a
much
better
product
from
an
energy
point
of
view.
So
for
me
I
would
almost
say
you
know
if
this
were
a
landmark
building,
I
would
say:
no.
If
it
were
a
contributing
structure,
I
would
you
know
I
would
have
to
think
twice
about
it.
E
But
in
this
case
I
understand
what
nate
is
trying
to
do,
and
you
know
I
think
it's
applaudable
and
I
think
I
do
think
it
creates
a
dilemma.
If
you're
you
know
a
purist
or
are
trying
to
adhere
to
the
standards
which
ask
for
things
to
be
repaired
and
rebuilt.
Instead
of
replaced
because
simply
because
they're
historic,
so
you
know.
C
I
want
to
go
on
record
and
just
support
what
chef
has
been
saying.
I
I
agree
with
this
and
I
think
I've
mentioned
in
other
meetings
that
I've
personally
gone
around
my
house
and
restored
my
own
hundred-year-old
wood
windows.
So
I
know
it
can
be
done
and
I
understand
the
points
about
the
testing,
but
I'd
like
to
see
you
know
a
performance
testing
comparison.
So
what's
the
comparison
between
a
totally
swapped
out
window
and
an
upgraded
addressed,
double
hung
versus.
What's
there
now.
I
I'll
just
think
one
point
as
a
point
of
recommendation
is
that
I
think
the
life
cycle
of
the
new
windows
is
important
to
consider
as
compared
to
a
historic
window.
I
N
R
Be
happy
to
give
you
the
life
cycle,
carbon
analysis
of
all
of
that.
I
There
may
to
be
perhaps
certain
elevations,
that
you
could
restore
the
windows
on
nate
and
other
elevations,
where
you
could
replace.
Certainly
the
elevations
that
aren't
visible.
E
Well,
is
that
a
compromise
that
somebody
wants
to
to
suggest
that
the
front-facing
windows
are
restored
and
that
they're
fitted
with
new
storm
windows
and
that
the
rest
of
the
stuff
is
replaced.
F
F
A
Like
the
idea
I
mean
nate
we've,
you
know,
we've
consistently
required.
We've
always
required.
I
think,
with
good
reason.
People
to
document
the
the
condition
of
wood
windows
that
they're
removing
is-
and
I
think,
on
the
whole-
we've
leaned
somewhat
towards
the
applicants
and
allowed
them
pretty
wide
leeway.
K
A
I
think
I
do
think
we're
going
to
have
to
compromise
on
the
energy
efficiency
issue
and
it's,
but
it's
a
real
hard
case.
It's
further
than
we've
ever
gone
before
and
I'd
prefer
the
apple
can
come
back
both
with
you
know,
documentation
this
energy
efficiency
and
then
you
know
some
kind
of
proposal
to
pre
I
mean
I
think,
keeping
the
windows
the
front
facade
would
be
a
great
idea.
E
Nate
with
with
those
windows
restored
with
storms
on
them,
in
terms
of
both
our
value
and
infiltration,
how
would
they
compare
to
the
new
wood,
casements
you're,
proposing.
R
You
know
it
would
be
really
in
interesting
to
see
if
we
got
hot,
very
high
quality
storms.
You
know
with
a
hard
coat
low
e
on
it,
and
then
I
might
need
to
talk
to
you
stuart
about
what
you
used
on
some
of
these
components.
You
know,
but
if
we
were
to
try
and
make
a
super
tight
existing
window,
it
might
even
be
a
good
research
project
for
the
district.
So
you
know,
maybe
that
is
a
good
thought
I
mean.
Certainly
we
can
look
at
that.
R
F
A
Well,
I
think
I
mean,
unless
anybody
has
additional
comments.
I
think
you
know
it
sounds
like
a
lot
of
commissioners
would
appreciate
a
re-look
at
this
and
you.
A
Commissioner
voting
correctly
says:
we've
never
approved
anything
like
this
before
and
we're
going
to
have
to
think
hard
about
energy
efficiency,
but
you
know,
I
think
we
need
to
examine
the
question
really
carefully
and
have.
N
And
if
I
may,
I
think
what
you're
saying
I
I
support
what
you're
saying,
especially
because
the
idea
of
using
this
as
a
precedent
moving
forward.
I
think
then
doing
a
little
bit
more
steady
now
would
be
really
helpful
helpful
for
this
property,
as
well
as
the
commission.
A
F
A
I
don't
remember
if
we
asked
if
there's
any
public
comment,
I
assume
there
wasn't.
I.
I
E
My
my
feeling
about
the
rooftop
deck
is
that
it's
certainly
an
acceptable
use.
I
think
that
the
concern
would
be
whether
or
not
you
see
the
railing
from
the
front
just
looking
at
the
at
the
deck
as
proposed,
you
know,
or
the
railing
system
as
proposed.
I
wonder
if
you
could
figure
out
a
way
to
eliminate
the
heavy
balusters
and
to
make
the
whole
thing
just
light.
E
D
Might
it
might
be
helpful
to
do
sort
of
a
mock-up
on
this
photo
that
that
is
here.
D
Kind
of
it
doesn't
have
to
be
fancy
just
showing
us
the
height.
A
All
right
would
someone
like
to
make
a
motion
to
continue
this
matter
till
our
november
meeting.
D
Mark
I'm
happy
to
do
that,
but
I
have
never
made.
D
Oh
okay,
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
continue
the
application
for
1233
judson
avenue
in
the
lakeshore
historic
district,
21
prez
0135
to
the
next
meeting
the
november
commission
meeting.
A
Do
I
hear
a
second
I'll
second,
okay,
commissioner
vaudan
hi
commissioner
morris.
R
Well,
thank
you
and
congratulations.
Stuart
on
your
award.
E
A
All
right,
so
our
next
matter,
which
is
not
the
education
of
appropriateness,
is
1217
michigan
avenue
the
lakeshore
historic
district.
A
A
What
needs
to
be
decided
today
and
what
doesn't
so
the
the
process
that
we
go
through,
maybe
a
dozen
times
a
year
as
per
the
last
you
know,
application
is
well.
A
If
the
commit
the
commission
we
can
disapprove,
or
in
that
case
continue,
but
at
any
rate
in
the
preservation
ordinance
there's
a
provision
that
if
we,
if
the
commissioner
disapproves
the
commissioner
shall
make
reasonable
efforts
to
confer
with
the
applicant
offer
technical
guidance
and
attempt
to
resolve
differences,
the
applicant
may
resubmit
an
amended
application
based
upon
the
recommendations
of
the
commission
and
so
quite
frequently.
A
Every
year
we
continue,
we
encourage
the
applicant,
you
know,
even
if
we
turn
it
down,
we
encourage
the
applicant
to
resubmit,
and
then
we
offer
to
confer
to
try
to
have
the
resubmission,
successful
and
and
I'd
say
that
you
know.
Certainly
the
majority
of
time
the
modified
or
re-submitted
application
is
successful,
and
you
know
that
process
works
and
that's,
I
think,
how
we'd
all
like
it
to
work.
A
I
I
don't
know
that
we
formally
offered
the
applicant
at
the
last
commission
the
opportunity
to
do
that,
but
certainly
the
opportunity
to
confer
to
submit
a
modified
application
and
seek
approval
is
you
know,
certainly
an
avenue
that
I
think
does
remain
open
and
you
know
most
of
the
time
applications
like
this
are
approved
on
resubmittal.
If
there
are,
you
know
reasonable
compromises
made.
A
What
the
applicant
has
asked
today
is
not
that,
although
I
think
again,
it'll
still
be
available,
whether
or
not
we
approve
this,
but
it's
a
what's
called
a
request
for
reconsideration.
That's
not
in
the.
A
And
it's
very
limited,
it
says
the
applicant
is
allowed
to
present
evidence
in
support
of
the
request
for
reconsideration.
Such
evidence
shall
be
limited
to
that
which
is
necessary
to
enable
the
commission
to
determine
whether
or
not
there
has
been
a
substantial
change
in
facts,
evidence
or
conditions
relating
to
the
application,
and
so
really.
A
A
And
then,
if
we
did
approve
it
would
that
have
to
set
the
new
hearing,
which
I
assume
would
be
at
the
next
meeting.
Although
that's
something
that
comes
so,
we
have
to
decide
the
timing
of
it.
So
the
applicant,
at
any
rate
this
the
the
issue
today,
is
not
whether
the
requested
certificate
of
appropriateness
should
be
issued,
but
simply
whether
we
should
whether
they're
new
facts.
A
Well,
actually,
it's
the
scientific
facts,
evidence
or
conditions
related
to
the
application,
which
suggests
we
should
rehear
the
application,
and
so
I
think
I'll
turn
it
over
to
the
applicant
to
introduce
the
speaker
and
again
just
make
the
presentation
with
respect
to
the
motion
you've
made
based
on
the
criteria
and
the
rules.
S
Thank
you.
My
name
is
bernard
citron
of
the
law
firm
of
thompson
coburn,
I'm
representing
the
nickel
family
today,
along
with
me,
are
the
nichols
and,
along
with
them,
is
gary
schumacher
and
blair
our
architects,
who
were
present
at
the
prior
hearing,
very
briefly
to
just
address
the
motion
that
we
are
requesting
today.
S
We
strongly
believe
that
there
were
issues
both
in
the
mainly
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood
that
were
not
taken
into
account
by
the
commission
in
denying
our
application
when
this
was
first
before
the
commission.
I
will
keep
this
brief
to
just
those
major
issues
number
one
and
we
have
provided
the
actual
documentation.
S
There
are
any
number
of
houses
in
this
neighborhood
that
have
garages
that
are
not
only
attached
garages
but
follow
the
front
line
of
the
houses.
This
is
not
a
landmark
residence
or
or
building
it's
not
even
noted
as
being
a
contributing
building.
S
It
is
a
building
in
a
landmark
district,
and
if
you
look
at
your
own
statute
that
you
are
bound
to
follow
the
change,
while
it
does
change
the
exterior
view
of
from
the
street,
it
does
so
in
a
minimal
way
and
it
is
not
out
of
line
with
other
houses
in
the
neighborhood,
and
we
don't
believe
that
was
taken
into
account
at
the
hearing.
That
was
held
the
first
time
two,
and
I
cannot
substitute
myself
for
the
views
of
of
the
commission.
S
S
It
would
be
disingenuous
of
myself
to
argue
that
there
would
be
no
effect
if
this
garage
was
moved
to
where
we're
seeking
to
move
it,
but
the
effect
long
term
is,
I
hate
to
say
this,
somewhat
minimal,
with
all
due
respect
to
those
neighbors
one
one
of
the
windows
out
of
the
three
you
can't
see
out
of
any
way
it
is
entirely
covered
with
ivy,
and
you
can
see
that
from
a
picture
that
was
not
brought
up
at
the
first
hearing
two,
there
is
a
tree,
a
very
large
tree
that
blocks
those
windows.
S
Again,
we
don't
believe
that
was
brought
up
in
sufficient
detail
at
the
first
hearing
and
three.
The
these
are.
These
windows
do
not
serve
a
major
light
and
air
provision
for
those
for
that
unit.
All
of
the
rooms
that
that
that
have
these
windows
in
them
have
another
set
of
windows
on
the
interior
courtyard.
S
For
this
reason,
because
they
put
the
windows
on
the
property
line,
other
structures-
if
this
was
not
a
historic
district,
other
structures
could
be
built
here
with
the
same
effect.
Without
any
issue
is
to
lighten
air
on
those
windows
because
they
are
on
the
property
line,
those
rooms
would
still
be
legal
and
would
still
have
light
and
air
from
the
interior
courtyard,
and
we
don't
believe
that
was
brought
up.
It
was
also
a
sort
of
a
minor
thing
that
we
weren't
too
sure
about
in
the
findings
that
this
commission
made.
S
Those
windows
were
bricked
up
many
many
many
many
years
ago,
so
if
that
was
at
all
a
consideration,
that
should
also
be
a
reason
for
a
reconsideration
of
what
we're
presenting
here
today
going
a
little
further
into
what
the
chair
came
up
with
is
we
were
not
afforded
that
ability
to
potentially
take
this
project
back
and
bring
it
forward
at
a
continued
hearing
dealing
with
some
of
the
issues,
for
instance
the
eyebrow,
maybe
the
rough
height,
the
the
length
of
the
port
crochet.
S
Those
are
typically
the
type
of
items
that
this
commission
we
saw
that
happen
this
evening,
would
allow
someone
to
to
to
make
those
changes
and
be
back,
and
that
wasn't
done
so
gary.
Unless
you
have
something
else
to
add
to
this,
those
seem
to
be
to
be
the
major
issues
that
we
wanted
to
bring
forward
here
today
in
support
of
our
motion
to
reconsider,
because
they
were
not
dealt
with
in
what
we
believe
a
strong
enough
matter.
At
the
first
hearing.
T
One
clarification:
this
building
is
a
landmark
in
the
district
it's
listed
as
such,
and
we
have
treated
it
as
such,
and
the
the
homeowner
will
speak
in
a
moment
to
to
reiterate
their
value
of
that
landmark
status.
T
We
addressed
this
more
specifically
as
an
addition
and
alteration
to
an
existing
house,
and
it
was
made
clear
in
finding
the
fact
that
this
commission
saw
this
more
as
a
construction
project
and
more
strenuously
viewed
under
those
standards.
So
we'd
like
the
opportunity
to
present
additional
evidence
and
information
to
those
to
those
points
specifically.
H
I'm
jake
nichol
and
my
wife
shauni,
and
I
we
we
live
here
at
1217,
michigan
avenue
and
I'll
keep
this
brief.
I
really
just
wanted
to
take
a
moment
to
let
the
commission
know
that
how
much
we
care
about
preserving
the
historic
significance
of
this
home.
H
In
fact
during
we
did
a
major
window
restoration
project
which
was
interesting
to
hear
just
now,
because
you
know
we
used
leaded
glass,
apparently
from
the
same
era
that
the
house
was
built-
and
I
remember
in
the
process
carlos
even
suggested
that
we
apply
for
one
of
the
preservation
awards
that
it
looks
like
you're
discussing
shortly
after
this,
and
so
I
our
decision
to
work
with
the
shoemaker
design
associate
says
our
architect
was
really
rooted
in
their
experience.
H
So
we
really
knew
he'd
respect
the
history
of
our
home
he'd
respect
the
neighborhood
in
this
process,
and
I
think
he's
really
demonstrated
that
in
the
work
that
he's
done,
we
feel
like
keeping
the
garage
itself
detached,
but
keeping
it
in
the
rear
of
the
lot
and
then
using
the
attached
roof
as
a
breezeway
felt
like
the
most
viable
solution
that
we
could
find
with
both.
You
know
the
history
of
the
home
and
as
a
functional
solution
for
our
family,
but
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
that
I
greatly
respect
the
opinions
from
our
neighbors.
H
We
understand
that
having
a
view
affected
can
be
annoying,
and
you
know
I've
been
in
that
situation
as
and
having
a
neighbor
that
made
changes
to
their
property.
That
affected
our
view
in
the
past,
and
you
know,
but
we
understood
it's
their
right
to
to
do
so.
H
Also,
construction
is
obviously
no
fun
to
live
through
we're
not
looking
forward
to
that
ourselves.
Glad
it's
temporary,
but
basically
just
want
to
say
we
really
respect
your
feedback
in
this
process
and
hope.
You'll
consider
this
new
evidence
that
we
have
to
present,
and
just
thank
you
for
your
time.
A
I
don't
know
if
commissioners
have
viewed
the
package
and
don't
need
to,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
the
kind
of
new
documentation
presented
was
comparison
to
other
houses
in
the
neighborhood
that
wasn't
shown
last
time.
Would
that
help
or
do
commissioners
feel
that
they've
already
viewed
that
and
understand
it.
E
My
memory
of
the
meeting
was
that
the
commissioners
apologized
to
the
people
in
the
lower
levels
of
the
adjacent
building
and
explained
to
them
that
we
have
no
purview
over
protecting
their
light
and
air
and
that
the
positioning
of
the
garage
as
long
as
it
fell
within
the
zoning
setbacks
required
was
allowable
and
that
it
may
have
been
unfortunate
that
they
were
going
to
be
looking
at
the
side
of
the
garage,
but
that
that
would
not
and
should
not
factor
into
our
evaluation
of
the
project.
Cade.
E
I
also
would
like
kate
to
confirm
the
following,
because
I
may
have
a
faulty
memory
of
it,
but
did
we
ask
gary
whether
he
wanted
a
continuation
or
wanted
a
determination
at
that
point,
because
I
think
my
memory
is
that
gary
said
he
wanted
to
vote
on
the
project
and
that
his
position
was
at
that
point
beginning
to
be
adversarial.
I
I
I
don't,
I
don't
recall
ever
asking
gary
if
if
he
would
like
to
continue
it
to
come
back
or
not
I'll,
be
completely
transparent
and
say
that
the
video
is
recorded,
but
it
has
not
been
made
accessible
to
me.
It's
been
about
30
days
and
it's
the
broadcast
coordinator
has
not
released
it
yet
for
various
reasons.
Yeah.
So.
A
S
I
My
notes
and
my
in
my
minutes
those
are
handwritten
notes
in
the
minutes.
Your
other
point,
I
don't
specifically
recall
mentioning
that
elevation
not
being
under
the
purview
of
the
commission.
I
think
it
would
be
true
to
say
that
the
light
and
air
issues
specifically
may
not
be
within
the
commission's
purview,
but
certainly
that
is
the
association
between
structures.
Many
of
the
standards
deal
with
that.
E
Yeah,
I'm
I'm
not
sure
why
we
didn't
propose
a
continuation.
Maybe
I
misremember
the
information
I
for
one
would
have
been
happy
with
that.
I
think
that
the
objections
which
your
lawyer
actually
did
mention
had
to
do
primarily
with
the
scale
of
the
eyebrow
window
and
then
with
the
depth
of
the
of
the
porch
connection
from
the
front
of
the
garage
to
the
to
the
existing
house,
which
gary
shoemaker
had
compared
to
the
front
porch
and
the
commissioners
observed
was
you
know
more
than
twice
the
depth
of
the
front
porch?
E
A
Okay,
I
I
think
the
you
know
the
bottom
line
on
that
is
that
there
were.
There
was
a
lot
of
discussion
but
they're.
Definitely
if
you
read
even
the
the
findings,
there
were
specific
architectural
preservation
issues
mentioned,
I
think
private.
You
know,
I
think
mr
cohen
mentioned
them
most
coachingly
and
you
know
whatever
issues
there
are.
Are
you
know
going
to
be
discussed
again?
At
a
hearing
I
mean
the
there's
a
ton
of
requested
public
comment.
A
If
we
do
have
a
hearing
that
I'm
sure
people
will
show
up
again,
but
from
the
point
of
view
of
the
commission,
there
definitely
were
specific
architectural
issues
to
be
addressed.
I
mean
just
as
admitted
procedure
the
you
know.
If
we,
if
we
agree,
if
we
vote
to
reconsider
and
again
I
assume
it'd-
be
our
next
meeting
the
applicant.
A
It
says
the
applicant
should
be
given
the
opportunity
to
present
any
other
additional
supporting
evidence,
and
then
I
think
I
did
see
some
summary
somewhere
that
that
evans
could-
and
I
think,
would
need
to
you
know.
F
A
Some
changes
to
the
the
plans,
so
I
think
it
would
be
really
the
equivalent
of
the
conferring
and
resubmitting.
A
This
specific
part
of
the
rules
doesn't
mention
it.
You
know
it's
clear
that
the
sentence
in
the
disapproval,
paragraph,
that
the
commission
you
know,
shall
make
reasonable
efforts
to
confer
with
the
applicant.
You
know
attempt
to
resolve
dis
differences
is
something
we
would
all
still
be
happy
to
apply.
I
mean
this
is
not
the.
This
is
the
kind
of
thing
that,
generally
with
reasonable
compromises
done.
You
know
it
gets
approved
almost
every
time,
and
we
would
definitely
you
know.
A
Advise
the
applicant
to
try
to
you
know,
have
a
positive
relationship
with
commissioners
and
try
to
work
through
the
problem
and
come
up
with
something
that
does
get
approved.
I
Mark,
if
I
can
just
clarify
one
point,
when
I
talk
to
the
city's
legal
counsel,
they
inform
me
that
if
there's
a
motion
for
reconsideration
that
the
case
would
be
heard
that
same
night,
I
think
there's
language
in
there
that
it
says
treat
it
as
a
new
case
at
that
time
and
that's
how
they
interpreted
that
that
it
would.
I
I
D
I
Yeah
so
I
yeah
to
be
a
considered
a
reconsideration.
It
can't
be
just
a
resubmission,
so
he
he
wasn't
permitted
per
our
legal
department's
direction
to
make
substantial
changes
or
even
make
the
changes
that
that
commissioner
cohen
suggested
at
the
previous
meeting,
because
then
it
it
would
be
considered
just
a
new.
I
A
You
know
it
actually
doesn't
say
that
kate,
it
says
if
the
commission
finds
there's
been
a
change
in
facts.
It
showed
there
upon
truth,
requires
a
new
application
received
at
that
time,
so
it
says,
received
at
that
time.
It
doesn't
say
to
be
heard
at
such
time
and
again
I
don't
think
that
would
give
the
the
applicant
an
opportunity
to
present
some
modifications
as
to
the
architectural
issues
that
would
considerably
improve
the
chances
of
passage.
E
Could
could
someone
summarize
whether
it's
marcade
or
or
the
applicant,
what
the
change,
what
the
new
information
presented
tonight
was,
because
I
have
difficulty
identifying
it.
E
He
well,
he
talked
about
the
the
issue
of
light
and
air
being
blocked
to
the
adjacent
building,
and
I
thought
we
had
discussed
that
at
the
original
when
the
when
the
project
was
originally
reviewed
and
said
that
that
wasn't
something
that
should
or
factor
into
our
considerations.
D
A
Piece
of
new
evidence,
I
I
do
think
the
application
actually
contained
quite
a
bit
of
you-
know
additional
photographs
on
additional
subjects,
including
in
the
neighboring
houses
and
quite
a
bit
of
additional
factual
material,
and
I
thought
that's
what
mr
citroen,
I
think,
should
have
taken
us
through.
That's
the
evidence
right
and
I
don't
know
I
mean
I
know
personally
having
reviewed
the
packet.
You
know
I.
I
certainly
viewed
a
lot.
A
decent
amount
of
new
material
and
new
photographs
of.
T
T
Our
understanding,
after
reaching
out
to
both
the
head
of
community
development
and
to
cade,
was
that
as
kade
described,
we
could
not
change
this
application
in
any
way.
Our
application
may
not
change.
However,
we
can
we
can
submit
information.
That
would
further
clarify
our
original
argument
and
that's
what
we've
done.
T
We
spoke
with
kade
several
times
myself
and
the
project
architect
assigned
to
this
job
and
cade
was
very
clear
that
the
first
order
of
operation
here
is
for
us
to
say
we
have
new
evidence,
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
proportion
scale
of
the
street,
the
reality,
the
historic
value
of
the
adjacent
properties,
and
why
you
should
hear
our
reconsideration
evidence
before
we're
able
to
present
it.
Mr
citron
rightly
outlined
why
we
are
here
and
we
clarify
that
we
do
have
additional
information,
which
I
think,
mr
simon
you've
you've
skimmed
through
and
said.
T
Yes,
there
is
more
information
here,
but
if
this
is
reintroduced,
if,
if
you
agree
to
reconsider
this
project,
we
will
begin
the
presentation
with
the
new
information.
I
have
queued
up
the
existing
application
unchanged.
T
If
we
can
negotiate
the
few
changes
that
mr
cohen
desired
and
some
and
clarify
some
of
those
issues,
it
would
be
the
commission's
purview
then
as
a
new
application
to
suggest
those.
But
we
are
not
at
this
point,
according
to
the
legal
staff
and
kade's
interpretations
of
this,
as
we've
prepared
this
information
to
present
any
new
drawings
sketches
or
information
relative
to
the
design.
T
I
I
I
That
that's
the
why
I
got
the
information
from
our
legal
counsel
that
that's
why
it
would
be
heard.
The
same
evening
is
so
he's
he's
contending
that
there
were
certain
facts
that
weren't
considered
they
weren't
considered
appropriately.
You
know,
maybe
they
weren't
true,
I'm.
You
know
I'm
just
spitballing
out
why
this
is
in
there.
So
he
would
say
that
generally
go
into
that
in
more
detail,
and
then
it
can
be
reconsidered
that
same
night
and
it
hasn't
been
changed
previously
other
than
that.
A
I'm
going
to
say
it
doesn't
seem
to
provide
a
good
format
for
it,
the
parties
to
confer
and
get
to
an
end
solution.
I
mean
so
it
I
mean.
The
ordinance
itself,
which
is
you
know,
certainly
means
more
than
the
rules
has
the
sense
that
if
the
commission
votes
to
disapprove,
the
application
they'll
be
notified.
So
that's
happened
and
she'll
be
accompanied
by
recommendations
concerning
changes
to
the
plans.
Well,
you
know.
Certainly
there
was
you
know.
A
A
All
right,
I
guess
the
applicant
made
the
you
know,
ask
the
motion
to
be
considered.
So
it's
up
to
them,
but
I
guess
the
two
choices
are.
We
consider
solely
based
on
whether
there
was
a
change
of
facts
or
evidence,
and
then
we
could
only
consider
and
approve
or
disapprove
based
on
the
plans
we
already
disapproved.
A
Let
me
just
let
me
just
be
sorry
for
the
choices
and
then
I'll.
Let
you
comment
on
them.
It
seems
to
me
that
the
second
choice
would
be
that
the
applicant
instead
decided
to
resubmit
following
conferring
you
know,
continuing
confirm
between
the
commission,
the
applicant,
so
they
would
have
a
chance
to
submit
a
revised
plan
at
a
good
chance
of
approval.
I'm
sorry,
sir.
Those
are
our
two
choices.
Please
go
ahead.
E
Okay,
the
the
question
of
resubmission
has
to
do
with
the
presentation
of
new
evidence.
Mr
citroen
suggested
that
some
of
the
evidence
they
wanted
to
present
had
to
do
with
other
existing
houses
on
the
block
and
in
the
near
vicinity.
E
Can
I
get
kate
or
someone
to
clarify
for
me,
that
would
be
a
consideration
for
the
standards
for
new
construction,
and
it
wasn't
clear,
mr
citron
or
somebody
I
think,
was
suggesting
that
it
was
evaluated
not
as
an
addition
to
the
existing
house
and
the
standards
for
addition,
but
under
the
standards
for
new
construction
and
my
memory
is
that
it
was
evaluated
under
the
standards,
foreign
addition
which
to
the
existing
house,
which
clearly
it
is
the
minute
you
physically
attach
it,
which
means
that
evidence
or
or
examples
of
houses
that
had
garages
that
did
similar
things
in
the
neighborhood
wouldn't
be
applicable,
that
the
referent
would
really
just
be
the
relationship
of
the
proposed
design
to
the
existing
house.
E
Can
we
get
some
clarification
on
that
kay?
Do
you
remember?
Do
we
have
a
record?
Did
anyone
talk
about
it
with
respect
to
the
standards
for
new
construction.
I
Yeah
we
certainly
I
mean
the
applicables.
The
standards
are
both
alteration
and
construction,
but
in
general
additions
you
know
the
standards
for
for
new
construction
apply
to
additions
more
so
than
the
standards
for
alteration.
T
Specifically,
mr
cohen,
the
findings
of
facts
stated
that
alteration
standard
number
one
was
not
met
and
construction
standards,
two
three
five,
eight
and
ten
were
not
met,
and
I
would
I
would
agree
with
you.
The
discussion
and
the
debate
had
by
the
commission
was
primarily
around
the
standards
of
alteration
which
would
have
would
have.
I
think,
in
your
opinion,
referenced
the
addition
and
the
nature
of
this
as
an
addition.
T
However,
the
findings
of
fact
indicated
that
the
commission's
findings
were
otherwise,
and
we
are
prepared
this
evening
to
present
evidence
to
toward
the
argument
that
this
does
meet
the
standards
of
construction,
and
I
I
would
argue
that
there
was.
There
was
little
debate
relative
to
those
standards,
but
it
was
indicated
in
the
findings
of
facts
issued
with
the
denial.
A
All
right,
I
guess
before
I
ask
the
applicant
this
question.
I
want
to
ask
commissioners
if
they
have
an
opinion
on
it,
so
my
feeling
about
what
would
be
best
here
to
reach
a
solution
would
be
to
offer
the
applicant
the
opportunity
to
go
under
the.
A
Of
this
motion
to
consideration
to
go
under
the
resubmitting
amended
application
pursuant
to
the
ordinance
section
whatever
this
is
e,
if
the
applicant's
willing
to
do
that,
so
that
there's
an
opportunity
to
make
some
modifications
to
architectural
features
that
a
few
of
the
commissioners
felt
would
need
to
be
modified.
So
do
our
other
commissioners.
Okay,
with
that
before
we
offer
that
up
opportunity.
N
A
Okay,
so
thank
you
so
I'll
ask
the
applicant
if
they
would
like,
instead
of
the
motion
to
reconsider,
which
seems
to
constrain
what
they
can
do
if
they
would
instead
con,
you
know,
have
ongoing.
You
know
conferring
as
they
feel
they
wish
to
with
the
commissioners,
attempt
to
resolve
those
differences
and
resubmit
an
amended
application
for
next
month.
T
I
I
think
we
would
need
we'd
need
a
few
moments
to
chat
with
our
client
about
that,
but
to
be
clear,
this
commission
has
typically
and
for
decades
ahead
of
this
one
afforded
applicants
who
needed
to
make
minor
corrections
to
projects
the
ability
to
do
so
in
the
in
the
administrative
forum.
I
was
part
of
that.
You
guys
have
all
been
part
of
that
for
several
meetings
in
your
in
your
current
status.
T
The
reason
we
pursued
the
reconsideration
as
opposed
to
a
full
appeal
to
city
council
at
this
point
is
because
we
do
not
want
this
to
take
three
months
to
get
through.
It
is
now
two
months
into
this
process
for
effectively
a
detached
garage
in
an
in
a
district,
and
I
you
know
I
I
don't
know
how
my
client
is
going
to
feel
about
delaying
this
another
month.
We
will
very
likely
have
missed
any
opportunity
to
get
into
construction
in
this
season
anyway.
T
So
I,
I
think,
we'll
we'll
put
you
on
mute
and
I'll
make
a
quick
phone
call
if
you'll.
E
A
I
think
the
the
issues
expressed
by
commissioners
were
material
enough
that
they
voted
on
the
application.
So
I
think
I
I
you
know,
you
know
again.
I'd
wish
you'd
been
more
conciliatory
gary
and
come
back
and
offer
to
make
changes,
but
you
didn't
so
we're
not
going
to
I'm
personally
not
going
to
take
responsibility
for
that,
but
I
think
you
know
definitely
you
should
my
preference
would
be
you
resubmit,
an
application
that
you
take
the
advantage
of
the
opportunity
to
bounce
things
off
people
before
then,
and
I.
A
So,
let's
take
a
five
minute
break
until
what
is
it
8
56?
Let's,
let's
say
let's
say
five
minutes:
okay,.
T
After
some
discussion
with
the
client
with
our
clients
and
our
our
council,
the
reason
that
we've
asked
for
this
reconsideration
this
evening
this
evening,
chairman,
is
because,
starting
over
with
a
new
application,
is
laborious
and
time
consuming
and
puts
us
into
the
next
month.
This
has
been
denied,
so
there
is
not
an
opportunity
to
continue
it.
It's
it's
a
close
matter.
We've
asked
for
the
reconsideration
to
reopen
it.
We
are
happy
to
discuss
making
the
changes.
We
are
amenable
to
those.
T
We
had
mentioned
that
in
the
last
one
we
acknowledged
the
size
of
the
eyebrow
dharma
was
something
we
were
also
of.
The
opinion
could
be
reduced
in
scale.
We
have
begun
the
process
of
understanding
how
we
can
lower
that
roof.
A
little
bit,
we've
prepared
evidence
to
show
you
how
that
could
be
done.
We've
done
the
math.
On
the
depths
of
these
things,
we're
prepared
to
reduce
that
and
explain
how
we
would
do
it.
A
All
right
well,
we'll
take
one
step
at
a
time.
Let's
go
back
to
the
motion
to
reconsider,
then.
Would
I
think
the
the
evidence
of
change
in
facts
was
alluded
to
by
council
for
the
applicant,
but
not
shown
would
would
commissioners
like
that
evidence
shown
before
voting,
so
any
commissioner
feels
that
they
need.
They
need
to
see
that
I'm
not
going
to
take
the
time
unless
the
commissioner
feels
that
they
need
that
reviewed.
S
A
Okay,
we're
required
to
find
in
the
motion
if
new
say
it
again,
if
we've
already
decided
that
there's
been
a
substantial
change
in
the
facts,
evidence
or
conditions.
A
Personally,
I
know
I
did-
I
mean
a
hundred
percent
of
the
time
we
have
applicants,
take
us
through
the
basis
for
what
they're
asking
for
by
showing
us
the
basis
for
it.
But
if,
if
other
commissioners
are
willing
to
go
to
vote
on
the
motion
and
then
have
the
presentation
made
personally,
I
know
I
reviewed
the
materials
carefully
and
and
don't
need
it,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
whether
any
other
commissioners
feel
they
need
more
information.
A
You
know
actually
shown
to
them
before
voting
on
the
initial
motion
is
there.
Any
commissioner
would
like
to
see
more
before
voting
on
the
motion.
A
Q
I'll
make
a
motion
can.
Q
In
the
agenda
there
under
and
reference
the
property,
the
preservation
case
and
the
applicable
standards,
are
there
also?
So
I
can
do
you
want
me
to
read
the
full
description
as
it
was
originally
presented.
A
I
think
all
you
have
to
read
is
identify
the
project
and
then
read
the
basically
the
sentence.
That's
in
reformat
the
sentence.
That's
in
you
know,
added
in
in
a
lighter
type,.
Q
Q
A
A
N
A
N
A
T
Be
clear,
chairman
simon:
it
has
been
our
understanding
through
the
city's
own
legal
department.
You
have
two
potential
motions
this
evening.
The
first
one
is
to
agree
to
simply
reconsider
it.
That's
a
yes
or
no
vote.
If
you
say
yes,
then
we
are
afforded
the
opportunity
to
walk
you
through
the
presentation
that
we've
attached
relative
to
the
original
application,
then
to
miss
to
commissioner
jacob's
question.
T
Then
you
were
evaluating
it
again
as
a
new
application,
and
you
could
make
suggestions.
You
could
make
changes,
we
could
discuss
it.
It
could
be
continued.
Whatever
is
necessary
in
that
dialogue
could
happen,
but
you
have
two
motions,
as
I
understand
it,
the
first
is
to
agree
to
reconsider
it.
The
second
is,
after
we've
made
our
presentation,
then
you
can
decide
whether
or
not
we've
made
a
compelling
argument.
T
A
Yeah,
I
I
think,
that's
basically
the
I
think
that
is
what's
what's
been
moved
correct.
In
those
words,
I
think
it's
already
been
moved
and
I
think
we
need
just
to
vote
on
that
that
motion.
So,
okay,
I'm
sorry
any
other
commissioners
have
just
clarifications
if
the
extent
that
the
words
are
capable
of
being
clarified.
A
Okay,
we
better
vote
come
back
to
commissioner
bowdan
hi,
commissioner
morris.
J
F
A
I
so
all
right,
so
the
let's
just
see
what
we're.
A
I
mean
so
that
so
we're
down
to
the
part
the
commissioner
has
found
that
there's
been
such
a
change,
and
so
therefore
we
treat
the
request
as
a
new
application,
and
so
I
think
the
presentation
should
be
of
the
new
application.
I
think
you
no
longer
need
to
support
the
motion
we
already
passed
and
so,
to
the
extent
your
materials
are,
I
mean
I
do
think.
A
A
lot
of
the
new
materials
are
presented
are
germane
to
a
new
application,
and
but
again
you
don't
need
to
to
prove
the
ancient
facts
anymore,
you're
free
to
present
it
just
as
if
we're
any
application
starting
from
from
ground
zero.
T
Kate,
if
you
could
give
me
the
control,
I
I
have
queued
up
the
original
application,
which
is
germane
to
this.
If
we
need
to
reference
it,
but
I
will
begin
if
you
will,
with
our
new
evidence.
I
O
T
All
right,
you
should
be
able
to
see
slide
number
one
before
you
now
so
relative
this
slide.
When
we
met
last
time,
we
talked
about
the
the
way
in
which
this
edition
connects
to
the
existing
house,
because
these
are
not
viewable
from
the
public
way
we
didn't
present
them
before
we
are
presenting
as
new
evidence
today,
because,
as
you
can
see,
this
is
the
television
watson
addition
to
the
house.
T
T
This
should
be
pretty
clear
in
our
in
our
presentation.
We
indicated
this
is
a
very
tenuous
connection
to
the
house
so
that
it's
not
affecting
the
original
integrity
and
fabric
of
the
house.
This
should
also
serve
to
show
that
this
is
affecting
the
existing
mass
of
the
house
and
the
existing
shape
of
the
house
very
minimally
and
could
be
according
to
the
park
service
standards
and
the
ordinance
easily
removed
without
disturbing
the
integrity
of
the
of
the
original
structure.
T
In
this
slide,
we
move
a
little
bit
lower
again
to
show
you
that
what
we've
done
is
taken
this
existing
roof,
which
is
part
of
an
addition
that
was
done.
We
believe
in
the
80s
we've
created
this
and
connect
we've
connected
this
to
the
open
port
cochair
as
a
breezeway
which
makes
that
a
larger,
open
connection
to
this
room
entrance.
We
talked
about
that
a
little
bit
and
showed
you
some
some
images
of
that
in
the
plan
and
the
renderings
last
time.
T
Here
we
come
down
to
birds
that
are
to
ground
level.
As
you
leave.
One
of
the
things
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
in
our
original
presentation
was
our
desire
to
mimic
the
roof
lines
on
this
house.
This
again
isn't
an
original
roof
line
to
the
house,
but
it
is
replicated
from
the
front
which
is
an
original
roofline.
This.
T
This
is
an
addition
done
in
the
80s,
that's
been
since
remodeled,
so
we've
taken
that
sloping
roof
and
that
flared
shingle
detail
which,
on
the
main
body
of
the
house
and
throughout
the
house,
transitions
from
shingle
siding
to
copper
flashing
to
asphalt.
Shingle
we've
continued
that
around
the
back.
In
order
to
create
that
cloistered
rear
yard
and
to
minimize
the
height
and
the
bulk
of
this
structure,
this
is
the
parapet
cap
that
we've
talked
about
from
the
front
of
the
house
as
well.
T
T
Any
of
the
statements
of
significance
for
the
house,
we're
not
affecting
those
our
roof
connection
is
right
here
against
the
side
of
the
existing
covered,
porch
and
creating
a
larger
connected
breezeway
through
here
to
mr
cohen's
point
earlier,
we're
showing
here
that
the
depth
of
our
pork
cochair
or
our
covered
garage
extension
or
breezeway.
However,
we
wanted
to
want
to
discuss
this
now.
We're
17
foot
17
feet
four
from
the
face
of
the
columns
to
the
face
of
the
garage
door.
T
So
we
aren't
so
far
off
of
that
I'll
show
you
a
slide
a
moment
that
shows
that
the
average
setback
between
the
15
foot
six
and
the
bay
here
is
about
11
foot
four
and
we'll
show
that
relative
to
some
of
the
other
street,
some
of
the
other
street
frontages
in
that
neighborhood,
I'm
showing
here
an
additional
diagram
indicating
one
of
the
concerns
that
the
commission
had
had
had
raised
and
we
didn't
fully
address.
This
is
the
existing
line
of
the
driveway
as
it
moves
along
that
that
zero
lot
line
building.
T
We
have
moved
this
building
to
five
foot
three,
which
is
more
than
the
zoning,
which
is
more
than
the
zoning
setback,
requires
creating
a
much
more
a
much
more
green
and
quiet
path
between
these
structures.
This
is
the
location
of
the
existing
garage.
I'm
also
going
to
note
that
in
our
previous
in
our
previous
presentations,
we
had
neglected
to
show
the
the
two
and
a
half
story
coach
house
behind
this
building,
which
also,
which
also
affects
this
rear
yard
space.
T
T
This
building
is
quite
tall.
It
almost
matches
the
same
height
as
the
main
house
here
and
because
this
is
to
the
south,
this
does
block
a
significant
amount
of
light,
so
us
by
moving
this
garage
forward,
we
allow
this
courtyard
light
from
behind
the
building
to
the
south
to
enter
the
backyard
and
to
provide
more
access
in
the
backyard
again.
T
T
This
is
the
corner
of
their
building
in
the
in
the
preservation
commission's
designation
of
the
of
the
thematic
historic
district
for
apartment
buildings.
They
slide
a
number
of
issues,
a
number
of
redeeming
qualities
with
regard
to
this
particular
building
to
the
south.
One
of
those
is
is
the
the
rear
yard
courtyards
the
rear,
courtyards
and
the
center
courtyards
being
the
being
the
way
that
these
buildings
are
lit,
ventilated
this
building
was
added
shortly
after
the
original
building.
T
This
followed
the
main
building
by
a
couple
of
years
and
is
also
built
directly
on
the
lot
line.
Although
from
our
property,
it's
set
back,
maybe
six
feet
from
the
property
line,
which
creates
a
small
courtyard
in
the
corner
between
this
fence,
which
belongs
to
our
homeowner
and
the
face
of
that
building.
T
T
T
T
This
is
the
light
well
on
the
existing
building,
and
these
are
the
windows
in
question
you
can,
if
you
notice
these
windows,
are
the
this
building
begins?
Half
a
flight
up
roughly
so,
discussions
about
basement
windows
and
light
and
access
to
basement
windows
is
not
relevant.
You
can
see
here
that
those
basement
windows
and
in
this
image
these
basement
windows
have
all
been
blocked
up
so
again
for
context.
T
Is
a
grove
of
of
tall
trees
and
evergreen
hedges
that
were
put
that
were
put
in
place
for
privacy
many
years
ago.
These
this
grove
of
evergreen
is
significantly
taller
than
the
garage
structure
we're
proposing
so
by
taking
these
down
to
construct
the
garage
and
return
the
and
return
our
garage
roof
along
the
side.
T
T
T
This
is
the
grove
of
tree
material
that
we
talked
about
a
moment
ago,
we're
not
showing
the
the
damaged
tree
because
it's
going
to
be
removed
and
it
shouldn't
be,
it's
not
providing
it's
not
it's
not
creating
a
light
or
air
issue
for
any
of
these
windows,
but
this
is
the
relationship
of
our
building
relative
to
the
light
well,
which
is
inset
on
the
side
of
the
building
and
the
lot
line,
windows
that
exist
on
the
side
of
the
building
and
then
the
proximity
of
the
coach
house
in
the
rear
yard,
again
on
that
rear
property
line.
T
Therefore,
making
the
movement
of
this
garage
forward
in
order
to
take
advantage
of
as
much
of
this
light
coming
from
the
south
as
possible,
is
to
the
is
taking
advantage
of
the
site
constraints
and
making
better
use
of
this
property
for
context.
These
are
the
windows
in
that
adjacent
building.
This
is
the
light
well
that
I've
shown
you
pictures
of
here,
so
these
windows
are
lot
line
windows.
This
is
a
mirror
image
of
every
apartment
unit
in
that
building.
Typically,
this
is
mirrored
about
that
common
party
wall.
T
These
windows
in
a
typical
urban
situation,
are
not
there
and
if
another
building
were
to
be
built,
there
would
be
gone.
I
think
mr
citron
mentioned
earlier
and
and
we've
looked
through
the
zero
lot
line.
Issues
with
this.
Those
windows
should
another
building
be
put.
There
are
existing
wood
windows,
their
existing
non-conforming
condition.
T
We
understand
that
there's
some
value,
but
they
do
not
affect
and
is
not
your
purview.
They
do
not
affect
the
light
and
ventilation
in
that
unit,
as
is
evidence,
there's
a
bay
window,
there's
kitchen,
there
are
kitchen
windows,
there
are
bedroom
windows
and
there
are
corridor
windows
that
are
unaffected
by
our
proposal.
T
Pursuant
to
what
we
mentioned
earlier,
when
we
talk
about
the
construction
standards,
you've
in
your
findings
of
fact,
you
noted
that
the
construction
standards,
2
3,
5,
8
and
10-
were
not
met.
A
lot
of
those
have
to
do
with
proportions
and
relationships
to
the
adjacent
structures
in
the
neighborhood
to
which
it's
visibly
visually
related.
T
T
It
is
our
it's
our
contention
and
there's
no
historic
data
to
prove
either
that
the
garage
was
originally
located,
tucked
in
the
back
corner
behind
this
building
or
over
here.
But
it
would
stand
to
reason
that
the
court
that
this
large
side
yard
would
have
indeed
been
the
entry
point
for
the
bar
and
the
carriages
the
garages
on
that
side
of
the
property
when
this
particular
owner
built.
What
is
now
a
landmark
structure,
30
feet
of
this
property
were
sold
to
them.
T
T
We
want
to
point
out
that,
when
we,
when
we
proportioned
the
structure
and
the
size
of
our
addition,
we
took
into
consideration
the
horizontal
datums
of
the
existing
house,
picking
up
on
the
porch,
which
also
correspond
to
the
peaks
of
the
arches
on
the
main
entrances
of
the
building
to
the
north.
They
pick
up
on
the
cornice
and
the
roof
line
of
the
building
to
the
south
and
the
proportional
midline
of
this
house
on
the
end,
but
there's
clearly
a
there's.
Clearly
a
horizontal
relationship
between
all
these
buildings.
T
T
So
we
think
it.
We
think
it's
important
to
to
note
that
the
height
the
height
of
this
structure,
which
we
have
again,
as
I
mentioned
in
the
back
this
curved
roof,
this
curved
roof
on
the
porch,
comes
up
to
meet
the
shingled
siding
here,
which
is
exactly
what
we've
done
here
in
order
to
continue
visually.
T
The
horizontal
datum
of
that
sloped
roof,
which
is
an
original
detail
to
the
house,
which
then
corresponds
with
what
perhaps
was
a
datum
picked
up
by
this
building
when
it
was
designed
and
constructed,
but
certainly
picks
up
on
the
horizontal
datum
of
this
of
the
house
further
to
the
north,
which
would
have
been
contemporary
with
the
house
that
that
we're
making
the
alteration
to
so
we
would.
We
would
like
the
commission
to
understand
that
there
has
been.
T
T
Also
when
we
talk
about
the
rhythm
of
the
structures
and
the
spacing
on
the
street,
this
is
a
high
building,
roughly
the
same
ridge
height
a
little
bit
shorter
than
ours.
That
drops
down
to
a
low
flat
structure.
In
between
this
is
a
high
ridge
structure
that
drops
down
to
a
low
slung
structure
here
that
then
comes
back
up,
so
we
feel
that
our
the
rhythm
that
we've
established
with
this
garage
and
with
its
location
is
also
in
keeping
with
the
natural
rhythm
of
this
street.
T
The
distance
with
which
we've
set
this
back
is
also
in
keeping
with
with
the
setbacks
between
the
plate,
glass
living
room
windows
and
the
forward
face
of
this
building.
You'll
also
notice
that
when
this,
when
this
modern
building
was
constructed,
there
is
a
there
is
a
concrete
or
there
is
a.
There
is
a
brick
garden
wall
that
runs
from
lot
line
to
lot
line
on
the
front
face
of
this
so
also,
and
as
evidenced
by
this
building,
there
is
a
tendency
on
this
block
to
go
from
lot
line
to
lot
line
hotline
to
lot
line.
T
We
are
le.
We
are
maintaining
our
five
foot
setbacks,
but
the
rhythm
on
this
street,
as
you
move
through,
is
a
full,
is
a
full
occupation
of
these
front
of
these
front
lot
lines
and
these
front
facades
with
the
architectural
integrity
of
these
structures.
So
again,
we're
showing
here
this
is
that
this
is
the
wall
coming
forward.
This
is
this
punch
back.
T
So
in
this
particular
drawing
what
we're
showing
you
is
that
again,
the
front
of
this
courtyard
wall,
the
garden
wall,
runs
down
the
side.
So
this
is
a
zero
lot
line
condition
for
our
homeowner.
This
is
a
zero
lot
line,
condition
for
our
homeowner.
This
is
a
maintained
setback.
This
is
a
maintained
setback.
You
can
see
here
that
these
garages
also
attached
and
very
approximate
to
the
to
the
property
line.
The
distance
from
here
to
here
the
distance
from
here
to
here.
T
These
things
are
rhythmically
in
keeping
with
this
block,
we're
not
we're
not
proposing
to
put
put
a
garage
in
a
location,
that's
dissimilar
from
the
other,
the
other
garages
and
the
other
rhythms
on
this.
On
this
blog
I
mentioned
earlier.
This
is
this:
is
the
average
porch
setback
15
6
9
10
7
11,
which
averages
to
11
foot
11.
L
T
We're
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
from
for
a
moment
we're
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
some
of
the
context
and
some
of
the
precedent
in
the
neighborhood
we've
got
a
series
of
slides
that
show
specific
houses
that
we
think
are
relevant
to
this
conversation
and
and
then
the
dots
represent
a
series
of
houses
that
I
think
I
think
are
worth
are
worth
noting
are
not
dissimilar.
T
This
was
mentioned
in
the
last
one.
We
were
unaware
of
this.
I
think
this
is
a
good
example
of
this.
This
is
a
significant
garage
structure.
That's
been
pulled
forward,
it's
directly
across
the
street,
again
the
massing
and
the
and
the
street
wall.
That's
created
between
the
continuous,
the
con,
the
continuous
fence,
the
gable
end,
the
fence
and
the
connection
to
this
house
and
the
rhythm
of
higher
to
lower
is
not
dissimilar
from
what
we're
proposing.
T
This
was
a
project
recently
recently
approved
by
the
commission
and
currently
under
construction.
That
was
an
extension
of
a
similarly
roofed
shape,
similarly
roofed
garage
addition
and
extension,
while
stylistically
and
historically
not
in
keeping
with
the
same
project.
We
think
it
is
of
note
that
an
extension
of
these
rooflines
and
in
a
continuation
of
some
of
the
significant
architectural
details
is
certainly
been
was
certainly
found
to
be
acceptable
and
successful
in
this
application
of
the
standards.
T
T
T
This,
we
believe,
is
an
original
garage
we've
attached
to
this
package,
the
copy
of
the
statement
of
significance
on
this
as
well,
but
we
feel
that
the
the
use
of
the
roof
forms
and
the
adherence
to
these
things
in
this
example
is
also
why
it's
important
that
we
that
we
continue
to
do
that
with
the
addition
that
we're
proposing
this
is
a
house
diagonally
on
the
corner.
This
is
a
very
significant
shingle
style
house.
I
had
the
good
fortune
of
working
on
this
house
with
mr
cohen.
T
When
I
worked
for
his
office.
This
has
two
additions
on
it.
It
has
well
we.
We
suspect
that
the
the
porque
shares
is
likely
original
to
the
house,
but
also
in
keeping
with
the
with
the
rhythm
that
we've
proposed,
the
main
house
and
the
gable
and
then
the
shape
of
the
pork
cochere
with
a
matching
but
diminutive
gable
edition
off
to
the
side.
T
We
think
these
are
beautiful,
they
are
inspirational.
We
think
that
the
shingle
style
house
that
we
are
working
on
is
just
as
unique
and
would
deserve
a
similar
addition
and
and
ability
to
create
that
pork,
chair
edition
and
in
this
case
screen
porch.
T
This
is
a
house
on
the
far
south
block,
also
a
significant
shingle
style
home
there.
This
is
a
difficult
image
to
see.
We
did
take
all
of
our
photographs
in
the
public
way,
but
there
is
a
pork
cochair
here
that
is
lined
up
with
a
garage
directly
in
the
back
again
minimizing
the
shape
the
roof
shape
of
this
is
similar
to
the
gable
lens.
It
is
diminutive,
it
is
stepping
down.
It
is
subordinate
to
the
main
body
of
the
house.
T
We
think
that
there
is
a
precedent
with
these
houses.
Two
of
the
last
probably
the
last
three
that
we
showed
you
are
original
context
very
likely
original
construction,
which
would
which
would
indicate
that
there
is
a
historic
precedent.
There
is
original
precedent
and
we
are
not
attempting
to
do
something
that
is
dissimilar
from
the
structure
or
from
what
would
have
been
done
to
a
single
file
house
of
that
particular
period.
T
Again,
a
series
of
photographs,
not
not
with
the
implication
that
these
are
are
examples
of
how
we
would
like
to
execute
an
attached
garage,
but
these
are
all
houses
within
very
short,
walking
distance
directly
across
the
street,
for
example,
at
the
end
of
the
block,
these
are
all
attached
garages,
some
with
large
overhead
additions,
some
with
small
ones,
but
showing
that
the
the
precedent
for
an
attached
garage
in
this
neighborhood
is
a
strong
one.
This
is
with
the
exception
of
the
modern
house
directly
beside
it.
T
If
you
feel
like
you
need
to
see
any
of
that,
but
I
would
say
that
now
that
this
is
being
considered
as
a
new
application.
We
do
not
disagree
that
the
dormer
on
the
garage
should
be
modified.
We've
begun
to
think
about
how
to
make
that
smaller
and
how
to
proportion
that
a
little
bit
better.
We
think
it's
an
important
architectural
feature
of
our
project.
We,
we
certainly
want
to
keep
it
and
integrate
it,
but
we
do
agree
that
it
could
be.
It
could
certainly
be
fine-tuned.
T
Reducing
the
depth
of
the
port
cashier,
which
I
think
was
a
was
a
concern.
Mr
cohen's.
Our
our
concern
with
that
is
making
is
making
the
slope
on
the
front
of
the
structure
match.
T
Bear
with
me
for
a
moment
match
the
datum
we're
picking
up
here.
I
think
if
we
shrink
this,
we
lower
that
and
we
shorten
the
we
shorten
the
depth
of
this
a
little
bit.
I
think
we
can
probably
we
can
accommodate
all
of
those
requirements,
but
we
want
to
do
so
in
a
way
that
maintains
the
proportions
and
the
integrity
of
the
detail,
we're
trying
to
maintain
on
the
house.
E
Now,
gary
I
you
know,
maybe
my
memory
is
totally
failing.
I
think
you're
to
be
complimented
on
a
wonderful
presentation
of
a
whole
set
of
issues
which
were
not
raised
as
issues
at
the
last
meeting
to
the
best
of
my
memory.
I
think
that
the
argument
you've
made
for
how
you
got
to
where
you
got
to
makes
perfect
sense
and
the
precedents
that
you're
showing
are
fine.
I
don't
remember
the
the
nature
of
the
attachment
or
the
pulling
forward
of
the
garage
were
anything
that
any
of
the
commissioners
actually
objected
to.
E
I
think
the
only
comments
were
about
the
scale
of
the
dormer,
which
you
said
you
want
to
address,
and
then
I
you
know
every
time
I
go
by
the
site.
There
are
like
three
or
four
cars
parked
there,
and
I
understand
that
the
depth
of
that
porch
is
not
to
match
the
or
relate
to
the
porch
on
the
front,
which
is
what
you
have
originally
told
the
commissioners,
but
is
to
actually
form
a
carport
for
a
few
more
cars
that
the
owners
have
parked
there.
E
E
But
you
know
I
mean
that
would
not
be
a
sticking
point
for
me.
So
you
know
if
you're
I
I
would
make
a
motion
and
I
don't
have
all
of
the
stuff
in
front
of
me.
But
you
know
I
would
be
fine
with
a
motion
that
asks
you
to
address
those
things
and
to
come
back
administratively
for
your
final
approval.
D
I
would
like
to
just
help
you
a
little
bit
as
stuart,
because
you
were
saying
that
you
didn't
remember.
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
I
actually
did
object
to
having
pulled
the
garage
forward
and
connecting
it
so
far
forward,
but
but
I
did
also
say
at
that
time
or
I
think
I
did
that
I
didn't
understand
why
it
had
to
be
that
didn't
seem
to
follow
the
expectation
of
the
standard
that
it'd
be
minimal.
D
But
the
new
presentation,
which
I
think
was
a
good
one
and
very
helpful,
explained
to
me
why
moving
the
garage
forward
was
something
that
you
know
had
some
value
other
than
just
bringing
it
bringing
it
forward
just
because
so
that
makes
sense
to
me.
I
want
to
be
on
the
record
in
case.
I
wasn't
clear
last
time
that
I
I
actually
do
not
object
to
the
design
of
the
garage.
For
me
it
was
the
location.
A
Last
time
are
there:
my
recollection
was
the
the
stated
objections
in
the
findings
were
all
about
specific
architectural
features
or
there
were
a
number
of
architectural
features.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
any
commissioners
any
other
architectural
features
they
wanted
to
discuss
that
we
got
that
out
on
the
table
now,
so
it
could
be
part
of
a
motion.
N
No,
I
don't
have
anything
besides
someone's
that
had
already
been
mentioned.
I
appreciate
the
the
the
new
slides
and
the
presentation.
It
helps
me
understand
some
of
the
choices
that
were
made,
and
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
you
all
that
you
placed
the
garage.
N
Foot
three
away
from
the
apartment
building
next
to
it.
I
just
have
to
ask,
though,
just
to
put
this
out
there
is
there
an
opportunity
to
slide
it
even
further
north
just
to
give
as
much
space
between
the
existing
apartment,
building
and
the
location
of
that
new
garage
and
allow
more
light
more
breeze
between
the
two
structures?
T
That,
to
be
quite
honest,
that
is
the
code
minimum
with
for
that
garage
right
now
so
of
the
garage
yeah.
That's
that's
as
that's
as
narrow
as
we
can
make
a
two-car
garage
viable.
So.
T
It's
it
is
right,
it
is
on
the
side
of
the
house.
If
we
bring
it
north,
then
you
then
we
have
to
demolish
the
back.
The
back
corner
of
the
house,
somehow.
T
T
With
the
side
of
the
house
now
so
as
I
said
that
that
is
as
small
as
we
can
build
that
garage
we're
using
two
by
four
studs
we're
using
absolute
minimums
to
get
cars
in
there.
You
know
the
portal
frame
to
build
the
front.
Face
of
this
thing
is
going
to
be
something
of
a
structural
miracle,
but
we're
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
squeeze
every
inch
out
of
that
south
side
and.
A
A
good
question:
okay:
why
don't
we
we'll
come
back
to
commissioners,
but
a
number
of
members
of
the
public?
A
number
of
members
of
the
public
were
signed
up
to
speak
and
we'll
again
go
off
the
list
of
people
who
signed
up
and
I'd.
Ask
that
two
things
that
you
limit
your
compass
to
two
minutes
and
that
you
discuss
issues
that
the
preservation
commission
has
the
ability
to
decide
yeah
it's
okay.
Do
you
want
to
call
the
name
of
the
first
person
and
we'll
ask
everybody
to
introduce
themselves
to
speaking.
I
Yes,
there
were
two
signed
up.
The
first
was
paulie
nandika.
F
U
I
live
at
12,
15
apartment
one.
I
I
could
assure
you
that
I
could
see
out
of
all
my
windows,
despite
there
being
some
ivy
evidence
that
I
have
your
view.
My
my
view
and
is,
I
have
no
concern
with
the
neighbor's
yard.
You
know
I
criticism
of
the
guard.
It's
not
all
the
concern,
it's
light,
it's
the
air,
it's
the
space,
it's
consider
it
and
those
are
my
my
main
concerns.
U
You
know
I've
expressed
this
and
you
know
that
this
discussion
about
you
know
the
resale
value
of
their
home,
like.
I
really
hope
that
this
isn't
done
and
then
they
sell
their
home.
That
would
be
painful.
U
U
U
E
Did
the
plan
that
gary
schumacher
showed
describe
your
unit?
Are
those
windows
only
in
the
hallway.
U
So
they
are
in
the
hallway,
and
you
know
those
are
the
four
largest
of
the
14
windows
in
my
home.
So
yeah
I
mean
it's
not
only
in
the
hallway.
I
mean
our
this.
All
this
isn't
entirely
a
hallway.
U
It's
one
of
these
train
buildings,
so
yeah
about
a
third
of
my
apartment
is
a
hallway,
and
you
know
that
I
open
my
bedroom
door.
There's
the
hallway,
my
kids
open
their
door,
the
hallway
the
kitchen,
the
hallway.
It
is
my
the
third
of
my
my
unit
and
light.
I
mean
it's
no
windows
anymore.
There
be
pretty
bad
and
you
know
I
I
just
can't
imagine
for
even
contemplating
imposing
that
on
somebody
and
then
living
next
door
to
them.
It's
very.
U
Yeah,
that's
my
feeling,
so
you
know
I've
been
there
for
15
years.
You
know
I
purchased
this
place
before
the
neighbors
moved
in
steve.
Upstairs
is
here
for
25
years.
You
know,
and
you
know
it's.
I
think
the
neighbors
knew
you
know
what
they
were
purchasing
and
you
know
it
would
just
affect
another.
It's
just
not
something
I
it's
not
my
comprehension
as
a
human
being.
I
really.
J
I
Yeah,
the
next
and
last
speaker
is
mr
stephen
dennenberg.
Yes,.
K
Hi,
my
name
is
steven
dennenberg.
I
live
at
1213
michigan
in
the
third
floor.
You
know
I
I've
written
a
couple
of
different
pieces
of
comment
on
this
and
I
I
was
very
pleased
with
the
decision
of
the
commission
at
the
last
meeting,
and
I
thought
that
mainly
the
objections
that
were
raised
and
that
were
the
reasons
for
the
vote
were
the
effect
of
this
structure
on
the
architecture
of
the
of
the
area
of
the
rhythm
of
the
street,
that
this
is
a
very
dramatic
change.
K
This
is
this
is
a
a
space,
a
relationship
of
buildings
in
space,
that's
been
there
for
119
years
and
I
think
you
know
that
should
be
something
to
consider.
If
this
is
the
point
is
historical
preservation?
K
That's
a
an
entity
itself
that
is
a
that
is
something
there
that
you
can't
duplicate
and
making
the
equivalences
with
other
homes
in
the
area
and
other
garages,
I
don't
think,
is
quite
appropriate
because
again,
this
is
a
very
singular
spot.
K
It's,
I
think,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
that
one
slide,
which
is
a
panorama
of
the
1200
block
of
michigan
and
actually
just
visualize
this,
this
garage
being
set
in
there,
I
think
you'd
see
that
it
really
upsets
the
entire
balance
and,
and
indeed
it
upsets
the
flow
through
there
there's
been
a
space
there
for
119
years,
there's
been
a
flow
of
energy
and
air
up
and
back
they've
been
neighbors
on
both
sides
for
all
that
time.
K
K
It
should
be
further
back
back
towards
where
the
location
of
the
current
garage
is-
and
I
understand
that
will
upset
some
things
and
you'll
have
to
reconfigure
some
things
and
perhaps
do
some
walkways
because
they
want
to
some
protection
from
the
elements,
but
I
think
it's
feasible
and
I
think
it's
something
that
should
be
considered
then
I
guess.
Lastly,
I
just
would
like
to
say
that
correct
something
that
the
windows
on
the
basement
were
not
bored
bricked
up
long
ago.
They
were
done
actually
last
year.
J
A
Okay,
so
in
terms
of
potential
motion,
it
sounded
like
the
only
the
only
qualification
I
heard
was
a
reduction
of
the
scale
of
the
dormer
on
the
garage
and
that
that
would
come
back
as
an
administrative
matter.
You
know
to
be
approved
without
another
hearing.
Were
there
any
other
points
that
any
commissioners
wanted
included
in
the
motion.
E
I
E
E
I
make
a
motion
that
we
approve
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
The
two
card
frame
garage
addition
to
1217
michigan
avenue,
landmark
preservation,
21
prez0121.
E
With
the
architects
reconsideration
of
the
scale
of
the
of
the
open
eyebrow
window
over
the
portugal
connection,
applicable
standards,
demolition,
one
through
five
alteration,
one
through
ten
construction,
one
through
eight
and
ten
through
fifteen,
and
that
the
adjustments
to
the
design
be
reviewed.
Administratively.
A
E
Yeah,
what
about
what
about
the
depth
of
the
I'm
trying
to
remember
the
architects
said
that
there
were
a
few
things
that
they
were
reconsidering.
It
was
one
of
them
the
depth
of
the
of
the
covered
portion.
T
E
Okay,
I
I
understand
that
you
want
the
back
wall
of
the
of
the
roof
garden
to
align
with
the
with
the
start
with
the
east
wall
of
the
house
and
that
that's
setting
up
the
geometries
okay,
so
both
of
those
are
part
of
the
proposal.
Sorry,
I
have
marked
that
up
so
much
mark.
E
E
Oh
yeah,
there's
sorry
and
we
approved
the
replacement
of
three
non-original
vinyl
windows
on
the
north
and
south
elevations
attic
and
basement
levels,
and
the
replacement
of
vinyl
siding
on
the
north
and
south
elevations,
with
wood,
clabber
siding
and
the
replacement
of
the
existing
window
trim
to
match
the
original
conditions
and
construct
a
new
permeable,
concrete
driveway
thanks.
A
Matt,
okay,
a
second
second,
all
right:
a
roll
call
vote,
commissioner,
about
dan.
J
T
Thank
you
very
much
chairman
simon.
There
was
a
little
bit
of
confusion.
I
believe
the
other
motion
you
need
to
make
is
for
a
recommendation
for
a
minor
zoning
variation.
If
you
remember,
we
were
reducing
the
the
existing
non-conforming
lot
coverage
by
two
and
a
half
percent.
It's
part
of
the
application,
but
we'll
need
a
recommendation
to
go
to
the
zoning
to
go
for
the
minor,
designing
variation
on
this
as
well.
I
No,
you
don't
need
it.
It's
pretty.
It's
pretty
explicit
in
the
in
the
ordinance.
Okay,
there's
some
confusion
in
the
zoning
code,
but
that
the
preservation
ordinance
overrules.
It
so
got.
A
Yep,
thank
you
all
right
at
this
point.
The
hearings
end.
The
commissioner
is
going
to
go
on
to
minutes
and
staff
reports.
I
guess
I
I.
It
asks
a
courtesy
that
everybody
else
other
than
commissioner
sina
there'll
be
no
further
discussions.
K
E
And
I
would
like
kate
to
check
the
the
record
of
the
meeting
with
yuri
and
then
nichols
sorry
set
the
name
of
the
client.
I
would
like
the
record
check
because
I'm
not
sure
why
we
voted
the
proposal
down
rather
than
the
continuance.
E
I
A
G
J
A
I'm
just
to
clarify,
even
if
the
public
doesn't
stay,
the
video
will
be
available,
and
so
we
should
certainly
only
say
appropriate
things.
We
would
be
content
of
the
public
here
and
there
are
people
who
watch
the
tapes
and.
D
So
I
would
I
was
asking
they
are
allowed
to
stay
right.
We've.
I
I
Okay
minutes,
I
think,
we'll
hold
on
that
I'll
bring
them
back
to
the
follow
meeting,
and
that
brings
us
to
staff
reports,
which
I
think
the
first
one
is
and
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong
carlos,
is
it
the
awards?
First.
P
Yeah,
I'm
looking
at
it
right
now
so
good
evening.
Commissioners.
P
Yeah,
I'm
sorry
I
I'm
using
my
phone.
I
don't
have.
I
can
call
back
or
something
if
that
would
be
better.
I
I
Okay,
yeah
I'll
just
I'll
just
mention,
I
guess
first
the
design
awards
were
held.
I
think
this
was
maybe
two
or
three
weeks
ago
and
I'll
start
by
saying
that
it
was
kind
of
a
combination
we
cancelled
it
in
2020,
so
we
had
a
pretty
decent
turnout.
I
think
we
had
12
total
nominations
that
came
in
surprisingly
and
compared
to
other
years
we
didn't
have
any
northwestern
projects
and
they
usually,
they
usually
kind
of
dominate
the
submissions,
so
we
have,
which
is
typical.
A
jury
of
three
individuals.
I
Doug
carr
is
now
he's
a
consultant
planner
for
a
firm
in
chicago,
but
prior
to
that,
he
worked
for
multiple
municipalities
across
illinois,
most
notably,
he
was
the
preservation
officer
for
oak
park
for
for
many
years,
anne
mcguire
who's,
a
former
commissioner
on
the
preservation,
commission,
evanston
resident
and
architect,
and
then
marisa
schulz,
who
is
urban
designer
urban
planner
evanston
resident,
who
started
her
own
firm
recently
called
altogether
studio.
I
It's
a
planning,
consulting
group,
and
so
we
went
out
and
toured
the
the
various
sites
and
below
are
the
award
winners.
I
think
we'll
have
a
publication
in
the
newsletter
the
city
sends
out
and
something
on
the
website
as
well,
and
then
the
intention
is
a
year
where
we
can
host
something
in
person
that
will
do
so
and
bring
back
these
members
in
addition
to
the
new
recipients,
so
2735
sheridan
road.
This
is
an
interesting
case
as
it
relates
to
our
previous
discussion
at
the
last
meeting.
So
this
is
an
accessibility
project.
I
Everyone,
I
think,
is
familiar
with
with
this-
maybe
not
that
we
have
a
few
new
commissioners,
but
2404
ridge
won
an
award
for
adaptive
use.
It
was
a
previous
barn
structure.
It's
now
adapted
for
for
residential
use,
2235
sherman.
This
also
won
an
award
for
proper
rehab
and
restoration,
so
multiple
nominees
can
can
win
in
the
same
category.
This
house
came
before
the
commission,
maybe
in
december
I
think
of
this
last
year.
It
was
a
pretty
terrible
fire
that
gutted
the
interior
and
affected
quite
a
bit
of
the
the
exterior.
I
The
home
was
very
briefly
proposed
for
demolition,
and
then
it
was
purchased
in
rehab
by
a
company
called
property
catalyst
that
does
work
out
of
glenview.
I
think
primarily,
they
did
a
very
nice
job,
including
a
complete
rebuild
of
some
of
the
art
glass
windows
that
that
melted
during
the
fire
1620
jets,
and
I
think
this
is
a
commission
project
from
three
years
ago.
This
is
a
paul
janaki
project.
It's
a
small
addition
here
in
the
rear
of
the
home,
visible
from
the
alley
that
we
thought
was
well
done.
I
I
I
This
was
started
out
as
a
violation
of
the
ordinance.
This
is
a.
What
some
people
might
remember
is
the
fishbowl
on
dempster,
the
goldfish
bowl,
a
really
bad.
A
previous
tenant
came
in
and
put
in
ripped
out
the
historic
doors
and
put
in
like
a
home
depot
version
with
with
boarded
up
side
lights,
and
so
they
came
in
and
and
they
mimicked
the
existing
doors.
There's
only
one
set
of
historic
doors
on
this
building.
I
Now
it's
kind
of
an
amalgam
of
like
different
doors
and
windows
right
now
they
did
a
nice
job.
I
think
this
is
a
nice
inclusion,
for
sometimes
the
smaller
interventions
have
have
a
big
impact,
as
well
as
as
the
bigger
ones
1500
sherman,
the
albion
project,
this
one
award
for
appropriate
new
construction.
I
So
it's
not
preservation
related.
These
are
also
preservation
and
design
awards,
but
it
is
a
very
unique
building
if
you
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
to
drive
by
or
walk
by
that
first
first
level
kind
of
extra
extrusion
that
mimics,
you
know
the
two
and
three
part
commercial
buildings
and
then
that
it's
kind
of
like
curved
canted
residential
above
it
is
quite
an
interesting
structure
and
I
think
the
last
one
this
was
actually,
I
think,
maybe
the
the
favorite
of
the
jurors
1322
lake
street.
I
It's
a
it's
a
small
one-car
garage
in
the
ridge,
historic
district,
one
award
for
appropriate
new
construction.
I
think
some
of
their
comments
at
the
time
was
it
was
just
a
really.
It
was
a
nice
example
of
how
to
break
down
the
massing
of
a
typical
garage
into
smaller
components
that
fit
better
within
a
district.
I
And
that's
it
so
congratulations
to
all
the
winners
and
we
hope
to
celebrate
in
the
near
future
with
them.
I
Some
of
the
some
of
them
are
self-nominated,
there's
a
few,
for
example,
that
one
on
sherman
city
staff
nominated
that
I
mean
that
was
a
potential
demolition
of
a
landmark
home
that
they
rehabbed
and
then
also
the
that
storefront
door
on
dempster
city
staff
nominated
that
as
well.
P
I
can't,
but
I
don't
know
if
you
can
hear
me-
sorry,
barely
yeah,
I
don't
know
what's
the
problem,
but
I
said
earlier
that
commissioners
also
are
welcome
to
nominate
buildings
in
the
future.
P
P
We
moved
it
from
preservation
month
may
to
september,
mainly
because
over
the
years
I
hear
from
architects
and
applicants
that
it's
very
difficult
to
take
pictures
in
the
early
spring,
so
they
prefer
to
take
pictures
afterwards.
P
D
P
E
Yeah,
I
totally
missed,
didn't
know
it
was
happening.
We
did
an
addition
to
a
dwight
perkins
house
on
lincoln
that
the
owner
would
have
nominated.
K
I
Sure
so
this
is
somewhat
similar
to
what
we
did
last
time,
we're
trying
to
create
or
formalize
some
more.
I
I
don't
know
the
best
way
first
they'd
be
illustrated,
which
I
think
is
always
a
benefit
for
guidelines
and
then
they'd
be
more
comprehensive.
I
would
say
that
the
current
guidelines,
the
commission,
has
they
really
act
more
as
like
a
series
of
kind
of
value
statements
than
they
do
what
traditional
design
guidelines
are
for
historic
districts.
I
So
we
are
asking
essentially
for
two
or
three
commissioners
who
would
be
willing
to
participate
in
in
drafting
this
document
and
working
with
staff
to
review
various
drafts,
and
we
do
have
a
more
it's
not
included
in
the
packet,
but
a
really
a
more
detailed
outline
that
follows
what's
kind
of
the
best
practice
for
for
creating
a
set
of
guidelines,
and
it
really
revolves
around.
I
I
I
The
standards
within
the
ordinance
are
inherently
somewhat
subjective,
but
the
guidelines
themselves
are
not
supposed
to
be
they're
supposed
to
be
fairly
objective
and
clear-cut,
and
easy
to
understand
and
they're
a
tool
not
only
for
the
commission
to
utilize
when
they
make
decisions,
but
maybe
more
importantly,
it's
for
for
homeowners
and
architects
and
contractors
to
have
a
resource
and
a
guide
to
better
understand
what
are
the
preferred
treatment
types
when
they
do
work
in
evanston
and
then
inherently.
If
they
follow
those
preferred
treatment
types,
they
would
be
meeting
the
standards
most
likely.
N
Yeah,
I
was
just
gonna
say
I
think,
that's
great-
to
keep
homeowners
or
potential
homeowners
and
their
point
of
view
in
mind,
as
as
these
are
being
revised
great
great
idea.
I
Absolutely-
and
I
always
I
always
say
that
we're
you
know
we're
our
own
best,
laboratory
of
sorts.
So
really
the
other
thing,
in
addition
to
more
kind
of
schematic,
massing
drawings,
that
a
lot
of
guidelines
are,
is
just
photos
of
what's
appropriate,
what's
not
appropriate
and
that
those
come
from
evanston
projects
because
they're
all
over
what
not
to
do
and
what
to
do.
E
Tata,
I
have
a
question
in
terms
of
specificity
of
something
like
this,
and
it
also
would
relate
to
the
contributions
of
the
commissioners
and
our
various
backgrounds.
But,
for
instance,
you
know
if
you
wanted
what
was
essentially
a
masonry
restoration
spec.
I
know
I
couldn't
produce
that
for
you.
I
can't
speak
for
john
and
I
think
right
now
we're
currently
the
only
two
architects
on
the
commission
or
or
really
I
don't
know
whether
that's
something
that
any
of
the
other
commissioners
would
address.
E
But
would
you
consider
actually
going
to
people
who
restore
wood
windows,
people
who
do
mason,
specifically
masonry
restoration
and
bringing
them
in
somehow
as
consultants.
I
Yeah
yeah,
definitely
when
I've
done
this
in
the
past,
we've
created
somewhat
of
like
a
steering
committee,
and
it's
made
up
of
some
of
these
different
experts.
For
example,
a
window
restoration
is,
is
an
obvious
one.
It's
very
specialized
work
so
yeah.
We
could
certainly
do
that
again.
There's
a
lot
of
really
qualified
excellent
contractors
in
evanston
that
I'm
sure
would
be
willing
to
to
participate.
C
D
I
I
have
a
question
and
it's
about
the
standard
that
has
to
do
with
innovation,
so
I
I
feel
like
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
discouraging
innovation,
so
is
that
going
to
be
addressed
in
the
design
guidelines.
J
E
Think
back
to
our
discussion
about
the
was
it
a
six
flat
where
you
know
where
they
wanted
to
change
all
the
windows
and
add
solar
panels
is
that
innovation.
D
D
I
Think
you
know
that
standard
to
me
is
there,
because
it
allows
the
commission
to
constantly
be
receptive
to
evolving
treatment,
types
and
techniques
that
exist.
So
you,
you
always
have
the
possibility
to
review
a
case
and
say
you
know
wow.
What
you're
doing
is
is
really
innovative,
because
it's
like
stewart
said
it's
just
constantly
moving
target.
Basically,
so
that's
at
least
how
I've
interpreted
that
standard
is.
I
It
allows
you
to
review
projects
and
make
a
determination
whether
they're,
innovative
or
not,
but
certainly
it's
something
that
we
can
help
pinpoint
or
have
some
guidelines
that
might
come
in
to
play
more
with.
Like
some
revised,
you
know,
value
statements
or
goals
of
the
of
the
guidelines
themselves.
D
I
mean,
I
think,
design
guidelines
is
a
great
idea
exactly
as
you've
described
it
having
some
of
the
commissioners
involved
all
that
stuff,
but
I
wouldn't
want
to
have
it
be
so
definitive
the
design
guidelines
that
we
discourage
innovation.
I
guess
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at
so
just
to
make
sure
that
there's
some
play
or
kind
of
yeah.
I
And-
and
it's
usually
it
they're,
usually
much
less
specific
than
I
think
maybe
you're
thinking
design
guidelines
are,
I
think,
a
really
good
example.
If
I
can
think
of
the
best
example
out
there.
It's
probably
the
city
of
san
antonio
has
a
set
of
design
guidelines
that
are
really
excellent
and
we
could
look
at
them
sometime
or
I
can
send
them
to
you,
but
they're
they're,
not
like
example.
It's
not
a
it's,
not
a
detailed
drawing
or
a
spec
sheet
of
you
know
exactly
how
you
have
to
do
something.
It's
more
of
a.
D
I've
helped
review
them
and
stuff,
but
I
I
guess,
if
we're
talking
about
helping
homeowners
kind
of
be
inspired,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
that
it's
clear
somehow
in
these
design
guidelines
that
this
isn't
sort
of
the
edges
of
what
they
can
do.
E
I
mean
I
I
with
with
respect
to
that
and
I
just
wanted
to
finish
up
the
thought
about
innovation,
because
you
know
I
I
don't
consider
you
know
somebody
out
there
trying
to
make
architectural
forms
that
nobody's
ever
seen
before
innovation,
and
I
was
frankly
delighted
when
nate
kipnis
had
an
aha
moment
and
said
gee.
I
wonder
if
there
is
a
way
to
take
and
restore
a
historic
window
and
make
it
energy
efficient,
so
that
it
is,
you
know,
operating
at
the
same
level
as
a
as
a
brand
new.
D
C
D
Well,
yeah
anyway,
I
think
the
design
guidelines
can
be
done
in
that
way,
but
I
just
wanted
to
be
on
the
record.
As
you
know,
not
wanting
to
make
homeowners
feel
like
that's.
Those
are
their
only
choices.
I
guess.
A
Oh
so
kay,
what
do
you
want
to
do
to
take
volunteers?
How
do
you
want
to
yeah.
I
And
we
don't
even
have
to
do
it
now
if
nobody
wants
to
volunteer
now,
but
we
eventually
would
like
to
have
yeah
two
or
three
that
would
be
willing
to
to
really.
First
look
at,
I
think
a
draft
of
the
outline
that
we've
prepared
and
then
to
look
at
drafts
of
the
guidelines
themselves
and
help
write
them.
C
J
I
Thank
you,
wonderful
and
then
the
only
other
staff
report.
It's
not
even
really
a
report
so
much,
but
I
did
want
to
mention
that
the
subcommittee
we
created
last
time
I
did
send
out
kind
of
the
first,
the
first.
I
don't
want
to
call
it
an
assignment
necessarily,
but
it's
kind
of
like
homework
and
so.
I
Yeah,
so
that
is
out
there
and
we
are
working
and
we
will
have
something
to
prepare
in
the
near
future
and
come
back
to
the
the
full
commission
with.
A
E
And
move
where
we
adjourn
the
meeting.