►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 08/19/14
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
This
is
a
public
hearing
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
of
the
city
of
Evanston.
The
zoning
ordinance
directs
this
body
to
hear
applications
for
major
variations,
special
uses
and
appeals
from
decisions
of
the
Zoning
Administrator,
depending
on
the
type
of
matter.
This
board
will
either
make
a
final
determination
or
send
its
recommendation
to
City
Council.
Would
you
please
read
the
roll
Rogers.
A
You
with
four
members
present
we
do
have
a
quorum
also
present
tonight
our
planning
and
zoning
administrator,
lori
pearson
and
assistant
city
attorney
mario
trecho.
This
is
a
formal
hearing
and
there
are
rules
that
govern
our
proceedings.
Most
importantly,
only
one
person
speaks
at
a
time
to
accurately
record
the
proceedings.
Anyone
who
wishes
to
address
the
board
regarding
any
matter
on
the
agenda
will
have
the
opportunity
to
do
so
at
the
appropriate
time.
A
Our
procedure
is
to
hear
from
staff
on
the
documents
on
file
and
then
receive
testimony
and
other
evidence
from
the
applicant
or
appellant
next.
Persons
who
wish
to
make
a
statement
regarding
the
matter
may
do
so
at
that
time,
any
person
with
a
legal
interest
in
property
located
within
500
feet
of
the
subject.
Property
may
present
evidence
reasonably
question
witnesses
or
see
continuance
of
the
hearing.
When
all
supporting
and
opposing
testimony
and
statements
have
been
heard,
the
applicant
or
appellant
will
be
given
the
opportunity
for
rebuttal
or
closing
statement.
A
Then
the
board
will
close
the
record
and
begin
its
deliberations.
All
testimony
will
be
under
oath,
although
we
do
not
apply
the
strict
rules
of
evidence.
Please
limit
your
testimony
or
statement
to
your
personal
knowledge
when
you
address
the
board,
please
state
your
name
and
address
and
be
sure
to
sign
up
on
the
provided
sheet.
We
are
audio
and
video
recorded.
Please
make
sure
that
you
are
at
a
microphone
when
asking
questions
or
making
statements
so
that
you
can
be
properly
recorded.
All
proceedings
are
subject
to
broadcast
at
a
later
date.
A
Any
matter
not
concluded
at
tonight's
hearing
will
be
continued
to
our
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
We
do
have
two
items
on
the
agenda
this
evening.
The
third
item
has
been
withdrawn
is
the
applicant
for
27
27,
Woodbine
present
and
4
for
23
Greenleaf.
Yes,
alright.
Thank
you
with
that.
The
first
matter
of
business
on
our
agenda
this
evening
is
to
approve
the
minutes
from
our
meeting
on
August
fifth:
does
anyone
have
any
changes
at
its
to
the
minutes?
A
I
do
have
one
which
is
on
page
for
the
last
paragraph
has
me
making
a
motion
which
I'm
sure
I
did
not
do
as
chairman.
So
I
would
recommend
that
we
find
out
who
made
the
motion
and
make
that
correction,
but
that's
the
only
change
that
I
have
noticed
with
that.
Is
there
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes.
A
It's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor,
please
say:
aye
aye
opposed
I
notice
that
the
number
is
not
voting
was
not
present
at
the
last
meeting
with
that
we
will
move
into
our
cases
for
this
evening.
The
first
matter
on
the
agenda
is
22
727,
woodbine
avenue,
and
I
would
ask
that
that
please
be
read
into
the
record
andrew.
B
Venom
or
zoning
case
representative
applies
for
majors
only
relief
to
construct
a
two-car
detached
garage.
The
applicant
requests
a
two-foot
rear
yard
setback
where
three
feet
is
required.
The
zoning
code,
section
6
8,
28
c
4
and
3
feet
between
a
principle
and
accessory
structure
where
ten
feet
is
required.
Zoning
code
section
646
to
see
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
is
the
determining
body
for
the
case.
A
Thank
you
at
this
point.
I
could
have
anyone
who
would
be
speaking
to
us
in
the
matter
of
27.
27
Woodbine
be
sworn.
If
you
please
raise
your
right
hand.
Do
you
swear
our
firm
to
tell
the
truth
throughout
the
course
of
these
proceedings?
Thank
you
and
if
you'd
please
come
forward
and
give
us
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
D
D
So
the
project
deceiving
that's
before
you
is
to
locate
a
rather
minimally
sighs
two-car
garage
in
the
rear
of
this
existing
property.
The
home
at
the
moment
has
a
rather
small
attached,
one-car
garage
and
the
owners
are
intent
on
converting
that
space.
That's
on
the
east
side
of
the
home
into
living
space
to
form
more
part
of
the
house.
At
the
moment,
this
house
that
was
built
in
nineteen
thirteen
is
missing.
D
The
owners
have
narrowed
the
size
of
the
proposed
garage
to
18
feet,
basically,
a
standard
size,
garage
or
rather
minimal
standard.
Such
garages
are
20
by
20
they've
decided
in
order
to
reduce
the
extent
of
the
variation
requests
to
narrow
that
garage
down
to
the
18
feet
in
order
to
still
get
a
place
to
put
their
vehicles
off
the
street
and
out
of
the
public
view,
but
also
again,
as
I
mentioned,
just
to
make
it
a
little
bit
more
practical
to
get
around
the
garage
and
also
to
reduce
the
extent
of
the
variation
request.
D
The
two
requests
before
you
this
evening
for
a
separation
of
structures.
The
requirement
from
the
ordinance
is
to
have
10
foot
between
the
single-family
residence
and
any
accessory
building,
in
this
case,
we're
down
at
three
feet
between
the
structures
and
then
re
yard
setback
for
the
garage.
The
requirement
is
for
three
feet:
that's
being
reduced
to
two
feet
as
I
mentioned,
even
though
the
sim
rather
extreme.
Our
goal
was
to
try
to
make
them
less
extreme
by
only
doing
it
an
18-foot
wide
structure.
D
So,
although
they
are
particularly
the
separation
of
structures,
down
from
ten
foot
to
three
foot
is
is
quite
large.
We
tried
to
make
it
as
practical
as
we
could
so.
Hardship
relates
to
essentially
rates
to
the
layout
of
the
the
house
on
the
property
houses
built
in
we
think
around
1913.
At
that
point,
obviously,
there
wasn't
much
consideration
given
to
houses
having
much
in
the
way
vehicle
storage,
so
the
garage
that's
on
the
property
now
like
I
mentioned,
while
it's
going
to
be
converted
to
living
space
anyway,
is
rather
minimal
as
it
stands.
D
So,
with
the
location
of
the
structure
on
the
property,
there
really
isn't
a
lot
of
other
space
for
a
detached
garage,
obviously
to
the
east,
where
we
have
Woodbine
and
Jenks,
that's
really
the
front
of
the
house.
You
certainly
don't
want
to
be
putting
any
structure
out
there,
so
this
is
essentially
the
only
location
that
we
can
identify
to
practically
put
a
detached
garage.
D
So
we
feel,
like
we've
done
the
best
job
based
on
the
kind
of
limited
parameters
that
the
property
is
giving
the
homeowners
and
while
they
are
rather
large
variation
requests,
we
did,
as
I
mentioned,
try
to
do
the
best
job
of
limiting
those
those
requests.
So
we
have
the
book.
The
board
feels
the
same
way
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
have.
I.
A
D
A
D
All
right,
you
were
right.
The
original
the
original
thought
was
to
basically
kind
of
the
narrowness
and
the
tightness
of
everything
they're.
The
original
thought
was
to
give
a
driveway
that
would
allow
a
little
bit
more
practical
space
there,
however,
based
on
them
the
neighbors
concerns,
we
would
have
always
been
I
think
preserving
one
of
the
larger
trees,
but
we've
given
that
even
more
width
now
so
we've
got
a
nine-foot
curb
cut
that
opens
up
into
a
16-foot
opening,
as
it
gets
closer
to
the
garage.
So
the
I
think
it's
a
26
inch.
D
D
It
was
initial
consideration
given
to
that.
What
drove
the
the
direction
that
we
are
now
presenting
is
two
things
cost
for
an
attached.
Garages
is
quite
a
lot
higher
than
that
a
detached
structure
and
separately.
If
we
had
attached
to
the
back
of
the
house,
we'd
still
be
before
you
anyway,
because
I
wouldn't
then
have
that
accessory
building
three
foot
setback
I'd
then
have
a
primary
structure
set
back
on
the
lot
lori,
I
think,
is
somewhere
in
the
20-foot
range,
and
I
would
have
encroached
into
that
anyway.
D
So
we
were,
you
know
when
trying
to
figure
out
okay.
How
do
we
approach
this?
Whichever
way
we
were
to
do
it?
We'd
be
standing
here
it
just
you
know,
based
on
how
things
laid
out
and
being
able
to
get
a
conversion
of
the
existing
space
and
a
family
room
plus,
you
know
kind
of
squeezing
this
to
cast
structure
and
it
made
more
sense
to
go
down
that
path.
D
E
There
so
they
bought
the
house
with
the
intention
of
renovating
it
correct.
Okay,
so
would
you
mind
addressing
for
me
the
issue
of
it
not
being
an
owner
created
hardship,
particularly
from
my
point
of
view,
they're
taking
away
a
garage
to
make
living
space,
which
means
they're
creating
that
hardship?
They.
D
Are
the
way
that
the
ordinance
reads
is
that
it
requires
two
parking
spaces
per
lot,
so
the
aspect
of
designing
this
use
is
to
give
them
two
parking
spaces.
Now
to
the
chairs
point,
did
they
consider
doing
an
attached
garage?
Yes,
that
was
an
initial
proposition,
but,
as
I
mentioned
I'd,
you
know,
we'd
still
be
here
requesting
relief
for
that
re
yard
setback
plus
they
would.
D
What
can
we
do
here?
We'd
like
to
convert
but
we'd?
Also,
we
also
need
to
two
parking
spaces,
so
you
know
it
whatever
direction
we
ended
up
going
in,
we
would
still
need
to
request
the
zoning
relief,
so
it's
somewhat
being
created
by
the
necessity
to
have
the
two
parking
spaces.
So
the
audience's
is.
A
D
Initial
interest
in
the
property
was
to
remodel
an
all
time.
By
doing
so
that
would
the
idea
was
to
convert
the
attached
garage
space
into
a
living
space
because
the
home
doesn't
have
a
family
room.
Now
you
can
you
contend
that
a
family
room
isn't
a
necessary
use
in
in
the
city,
I
mean
that's,
certainly
a
position
somebody
could
take,
but
I
think.
D
If
you
look
at
the
way
a
lot
of
new
homes
are
built
now
and
I
think
whether
you
live
in
a
home
that
has
one
or
not
it's
a
pretty
common
use
to
have
a
family
room
on
on
a
current
home.
So
by
converting
that
space
and
then
looking
towards
still
meeting
the
parking
spaces,
whether
I
had
attached
the
garage
or
not,
you
know
to
provide
that
space
just
say
if
it
was
in
a
position
of
providing
that
secondary
space
and
doing
nothing
else.
D
D
Whereas
you
know
I,
don't
know
what
the
actual
number
would
be
from
encroachment
into
the
required
Riyadh.
It
would
probably
be
greater
than
one
foot
up
from
a
percentage
standpoint.
Maybe
they'd
be
about
the
same,
but
the
the
process
would
you
know,
we'd
still
be
here,
requesting
that
same
a
measure
of
relief.
C
F
A
A
G
G
My
wife
and
I
have
been
before
this
group
before
when
we
tried
to
get
our
one
car
garage
into
a
space,
because
my
our
house
there's
four
houses
that
are
actually.
There
were
originally
two
lots.
That
became
424
half
lots,
so
we
didn't.
We
couldn't
remember
if
we
were
held
to
a
different
set
of
measures
because
we
weren't
full
lots.
We
were
certainly
not
expected
to
put
a
two-car
in
our
half
lot.
G
As
matter
fact,
our
struggle
was
to
get
a
structure
built
in
this,
essentially
the
same
space
only
across
the
street
and
the
concession
being
that
we
had
to
build
our
one
car
garage
open.
So
it
was
like
a
gazebo
carport
and
we
have
a
I
have
a
picture
of
that.
If,
if
you
need
that
to
be
so
I
guess,
one
of
the
concerns
we
have
is
technically
I.
Think
the
address
is
on
Woodbine
but
visually.
G
It
really
looks
like
the
front
of
the
house
is
what
faces
what
we
look
looking
at
and
then
I
assault
and
then
the
only
other
thing
we
kind
of
remembered
then
back
then
too
was
the
concession
we
had
made
was
because
of
a
feeling
of
openness,
because
there
was
now
four
houses
on
essentially
a
to
house
property.
A
lot,
and
so
that's
so
part
of
my
concern
was:
how
is
that
going
to
affect
openness?
And
then
you
know
if
this
gets
approved?
How
can
we
get
ours
in
case?
G
A
Me
just
kind
of
address
that
we
have
the
map
that
shows
the
properties,
and
these
are
not
uncommon.
In
evanston,
where
a
corner
lot
was
divided
into
two
in
a
second
house
was
put
facing
what
would
be
the
side
street
effectively
of
the
main
house,
even
though
the
face
of
the
house
may
be
on
that
side
street?
So
it
looks
like
1904.
1905
are
the
two
your
house
and
the
one
directly
across
the
street
are
the
ones
that
are
the
smaller
Lots
on
that,
so
we
can
see
on
our
map
exactly
you
know
the
situation.
H
But
one
of
the
things
they
were
concerned
about
is
just
sort
of
like
having
an
open
space
garage
that
would
have
you
know,
bikes
in
it
and
all
kinds
of
stuff
that
you
would
see
from
the
street
and
we
were
in
a
sense
held
to
a
higher
standard
because
we
did
have
a
smaller
lot,
so
we
had
to
so
we
had
to
sort
of
ante
up
the
structure
that
we
built
cost
probably
five
times
as
much
as
an
enclosed
garage
from
abroad.
You
know,
would
have
cost
it's
made
out
of
stucco.
It's
got
cedar
beams.
H
You
know
we
trot.
We
did
our
best
to
make
them
as
happy
as
we
could
and
you
know.
In
the
end
they
were
content,
but
our
concern
is
because
my
concern
more
than
my
husband's
is
when
we
look
across
the
street.
Now
we
see
a
charming
house,
and
we
see
you
see
the
garage
that
we
already
see
on
the
street
directly
the
house
directly
across
from
us.
H
If
our
neighbors,
our
new
venables,
would
be,
would
build
a
quality
structure
that
matched
the
house
or
that
we're
attached
to
the
house
it
we
would
be
more
comfortable
with
it.
But
as
it
is
it's
you
know,
we
don't
know
how
they're
going
to
remodel
the
existing.
You
know
dork
doorway
to
the
existing
garage.
We
don't
know
how
it's
going
to
look
for
all.
We
know
it
could
end
up
still
looking
like
a
garage
and
in
which
case
we'll
be
looking
at
a
garage
door
next
to
a
very
common
looking.
H
You
know,
garage,
two-car,
garage
and
it'll,
give
us
for
garages
to
look
at
and
it's
it.
I
really
do
think
that
it
would
sort
of
bring
down
value
for
the
property
for
the
actually
not
just
us,
but
for
even
the
property
itself.
If
they
were
to
even
build
their.
You
know
finish
off
their
family
room
and
let
everybody
see
how
it
would
look.
It
would
inform
the
decision
about
a
two-car
garage
better,
but
as
it
stands
I'm
you
know
personally,
I'm
not
happy
with
with
the
way
things
are
progressing.
H
A
No
all
right,
thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
with
that.
Is
there
anybody
else
who
wanted
to
speak
to
us?
I
think
I
only
see
a
couple.
So
if
you
get
a
speed,
you
get
a
chance
to
respond
and
sum
up
here.
So
if
you
would
like
the
applicant
would
like
to
come
up
and
speak
to
us,
you
can
say
anything
in
summation
or
you
can
ask
questions
of
VO
cicadas
if
you'd
like.
D
First,
the
idea
their
interest
was
in
converting
the
space
you
know
taking
out
the
garage
door
putting
in
the
family
room,
putting
in
the
windows
stuccoing
the
front
and
then
moving
on
to
the
garage,
but
they
were
told
that
you
have
to
actually
go
out
about
it
in
the
reverse
fashion,
because
you
have
to
have
those
two
parking
spaces.
You
can't
eliminate
spaces
to
that.
D
Mean
I
think
we
understand
the
the
board's
concerns.
I
think
the
neighbor
has
a
valid
concern.
She,
while
the
look
of
the
exterior
the
structure
is
certainly
not
within
the
boards
per
view.
The
intent
the
owners
intent
had
always
mean
to
make
it
make
that
ultimately
make
the
house
appear
like
there
was
never
a
garage
there.
Therefore,
with
windows
and
stucco,
and
then
make
the
garage
appear
like
it
always
had
been
there
by
having
it
looked
very
similar
to
the
house.
D
D
D
These
setbacks
are
the
only
requested
variations.
It
may
seem
like
this
as
I
said
this
end
of
the
light
is
kind
of
busy,
but
based
on,
what's
being
proposed
that
we're
still
compliant
with
like
coverage,
we're
still
compliant
with
impervious
surface.
So
it's
just,
it
is
those
setback,
variations
that
are.
You
know
that
of
what
would
what
were
we
being
faced
with
tonight?
Thank
you.
Thank.
E
So
right
so
I
have
a
couple
problems
with
this.
I
have
a
problem
with
it
being
a
hardship,
that's
peculiar
to
the
property.
These
sorts
of
sizes
of
properties
are
typical
throughout
evanston
and
house.
Without
a
family
room
for
me
is
not
I.
Don't
perceive
that
as
a
hardship
when
we
look
at
evanston
and
its
totality
and
the
variety
of
housing
stock
that
should
be
here
in
evanston
and
that's
part
of
the
comprehensive
plan
is
to
have
a
variety
of
housing.
I
also
have
a
an
issue
with
the
hardship
not
being
self
created.
E
For
me.
I
see
it
as
being
self
created
because
they're
trying
to
take
that
one
car
garage
base
that
is
legally
non-conforming.
They
can
leave
that
one
car
garage
where
it
is
and
park
in
it
and
keep
everything
just
the
way
it
is
I
see
that
their
desire
for
making
that
a
family
room
to
be
creating
their
own
hardship.
A
I
tend
to
agree
with
Mary
Beth
on
the
fact
that
I
have
a
real
problem
with
this,
not
being
a
an
owner
created
situation.
If
this
had
been
a
situation
which
someone
had
lived
in
the
house
for
many
many
years,
family
had
grown
that
sort
of
thing,
but
the
idea
of
basically
purchasing
the
house
and
then
coming
and
reworking
the
house
right
away.
I
have
a
bit
of
an
issue
with
because
of
the
fact
that
we
do
try
to
keep
a
number
of
different
types
of
housing.
A
But
with
that
said,
we,
as
I
mentioned,
do
have
nine
standards
that
we
must
find
our
met
because
of
the
fact
just
general
feeling
on
how
the
board
is
leaning.
I
will
note
that
it
takes
for
concurrent
votes
either
for
or
against
the
project
in
order
to
have
it
move
one
way
or
the
other
I.
Don't
think
we're
going
to
reach
that
vote
tonight.
So
it
will
probably
be
continued
on
for
a
vote
at
the
next
meeting,
where
people
will
have
the
opportunity
to
have
looked
through
the
transcripts
and
then
record
their
vote.
A
But
with
that
said
the
let
me
get
to
the
right
standards.
There's
only
seven
of
these
I
was
going
to
give
you
a
special
use,
one.
The
requested
variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
youths,
enjoyment
and
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
We
have
heard
some
comment
from
one
neighbor
who
feels
that
it
will
have
impact.
We've
also
received
documentation
from
the
neighbor,
who
would
probably
be
most
impacted,
which
is
the
neighbor
to
the
east.
A
I
believe
saying
that
she
had
some
concerns
she
or
he
had
concerns,
but
those
were
addressed
in
the
document
that
were
given
to
us.
So
why
is,
whereas
there
probably
will
be
some
impact.
I
do
not
feel
that
it
will
be
substantially
adverse
and
so
I
believe
that
this
standard
has
been
met
if
at
any
point,
as
going
through
the
standards,
people
disagree
with
me
just
feel
pre
feel
free
to
state
it
at
that
time.
A
Number
two:
the
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intents
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
while
it
is
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
to
produce
as
many
off
street
parking
spaces
as
we
can
in
order
to
get
traffic
off
our
to
get
parking
off
of
Main
streets.
We
also
do
have
to
balance
that,
with
such
things
as
housing
stock,
exactly
what
we're
allowing
to
be
built
to
accommodate
that
parking
and
so
I
feel
this
standard
has
not
been
met,
but
I
will
ask
if
anybody
has
a
differing
opinion.
C
I
I
disagree:
I,
disagree:
we're
not
increasing
the
bedrooms
of
this
home
or
adding
a
small
family
room
and
increasing
some
storage
and
garage,
sighs,
I
I,
don't
see
that
is
it's
not
going
to
affect
the
property
value
of
this
particular
home
to
such
an
extent
that
it's
going
to
alter
the
ability
of
some
future
buyer
to
buy
into
the
neighborhood
at
sort
of
a
starter
home
price.
It's
still
going
to
be
a
three
bedroom
one
and
a
half
bath,
so
I
don't
see
that
it's
set
odds
with
Thea
with
that
aspect
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
I
A
You
number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property
as
I
before
we
have
someone
who
spoke
to
us
who's
on
one
of
these
half
lots
where
we
end
up
with
four
houses
on
what
we're
technically
to
city
lots.
This
is
not
uncommon
in
the
city
of
Evanston
I
think
it
is
a
little
unique
that
we
have
the
the
owner
of
the
property
with
the
larger
of
the
two
spaces
coming
to
us.
A
E
I
think
these
are
these
properties
are
very
common
throughout
Evanston
and
I.
Don't
we're
not
trying
to
go
around
a
landmark
tree?
We're
not
trying
to
do
any
of
that
sort
of
thing.
There's
no
particular
grading
issues.
So
I
don't
see
anything
that
is
unique
to
this
property.
That
requires
the
variance.
A
I
Disagree:
I
noticed
that
the
house
was
sold,
as
is
so
I'm,
assuming
that
there
was
a
great
deal
of
work
that
needed
to
be
done
upon
the
purchase
of
the
home.
I
am
sure
that
the
owners
in
good
faith
thought
that
their
renovations
could
and
should
include
a
family
room.
I
agree
with
mr.
ventimore
that
that's
a
reasonable
desire
to
have
in
a
home
in
evanston,
even
though
I
don't
actually
have
one,
but
at
any
rate
I.
I
think
the
standard
in
fact
has
been
met,
I
think
it's
going
to
be.
A
Standard
number:
five:
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property.
I
have
a
feeling
that
the
standard
is
met,
although
it
obviously
would
improve
the
quality
of
the
house.
I
don't
see.
This
is
something
that
the
owner
is
is
doing
in
an
attempt
to
immediately
increase
the
property
value
in
order
to
sell
the
house
or
in
any
way
to
extract
additional
income
by
changing
the
overall
structure
in
and
of
itself,
so
that
it
would
be
moving
into
a
higher
income
area.
A
Number
six,
the
ledge,
difficulty
or
hardship
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property.
I
think
this
is
the
one
where
we
have
the
greatest
issue
and
the
fact
that
obviously
putting
a
garage
into
the
onto
the
property
is
being
created
exclusively
by
the
desire
to
add
family
room
to
the
home,
and
so
I
believe
that
this
standard
has
not
been
met.
I
Again,
I,
I
disagree.
I
think
it's
all
in
the
way
that
you
look
at
it
if
you're
framing
it
that
yeah
they're,
all
they
want
to
do
is
put
a
family
room
in
then
sure
you
could
say
this.
You
can
make
very
valid
argument
that
the
standard
isn't
met.
However,
if
you're
positing
that
the
hardship
is
caused
by
the
odd
and
unique
shape
of
the
lot,
then
it's
not
owner
created
they.
They
need
to
have
parking
to
build
new
parking.
It
has
to
be
a
two-car
parking
set
of
spaces
and
and
so
I-
that's
that's!
A
A
I
I
A
Has
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor,
please
say:
aye
aye
opposed,
nay,
so
the
vote
will
stand
as
a
one
in
a
favor
three
opposed
until
our
next
meeting,
which
will
be
on
sep
tember,
ninth,
in
which
there
will
be
no
further
testimony.
But
we
will
ask
the
members
who
are
not
present
to
have
reviewed
the
transcript
the
videotape
and
then
to
cast
a
vote
either
in
favor
or
opposed
to
what
was
presented
this
evening.
So
it
will
be
continued
until
that
time.
Thank
you
with
that.
B
Stephens
property
owner
applies
for
majors,
only
relief
to
construct
a
roofed
front
and
side
yard
porch.
The
applicant
requests
a
seven
foot
front
yard
setback
where
24.3
feet
is
required
for
porch
zoning
code,
section
64,
19,
b1
and
forty
two
point.
Nine
percent
building
lot
coverage
where
a
maximum
thirty
percent
is
allowed.
Zoning
code
section
6,
8
27,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
is
the
determining
body
for
the
case.
A
I'm
sorry,
we
were
just
discussing
the
fact
that
this
that
a
case
on
this
property
has
come
before
us
before
and
usually
we
look
for
a
substantial
difference.
In
the
case
that's
been
presented
before
in
the
case
that's
being
presented
to
us
tonight
and
I'm
fine
with
the
case
that
is
being
for
the
project
is
being
presented
tonight
moving
forward
unless
there
are
any
objections
for
members
of
the
board,
I'm.
A
F
A
A
Okay,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
hi.
We
will
hear
your
case
on
sep
tember
9th,
then
thank
you.
Thank
you.
I'm.
Sorry,
if
I
had
known
that,
you
were
going
to
be
continuing,
I
would
have
let
you
go
a
long
time
ago
with
that.
I
will
note
that
we
have
concluded
our
business
this
evening.
I
will
note
that
we
have
changed
our
meeting
scheduled
for
September
from
our
typical
first
and
third
tuesdays
to
specifically
September
ninth
and
sep
tember
23rd.
I
A
Yeah,
so
we
have
made
accommodations,
hopefully
to
everyone
who
responded.
I
know
some
people
will
be
out
at
certain
times.
We
should
have
quorum
for
those
two
days
based
on
previous
responses
from
people.
I
will
note
meeting
on
September
night
because
of
the
continuation
now
we'll
have
five
cases
add
it.
A
We
may
look
to
move
one
of
those
cases,
but
it
sort
of
starts
a
domino
effect,
because
we
do
have
a
rather
full
agenda
coming
down
the
road,
so
I
will
work
with
staff
to
see
if
there
is
something
that
can
be
moved
or
if
we
can
rearrange
things.
So
we
have
some
simple
cases,
so
we
aren't
stuck
with
five
cases
that
may
have
people
discussing
pros
and
cons.
A
You
are
not
here
last
week,
our
last
meeting
when
Clara
announced
that
tonight
was
supposed
to
be
her
last
meeting
due
to
her
absence,
I'm
guessing
the
last
meeting
was
her
last
so
with
that.
Thank
you
to
her
for
her
board
service
and
we
wish
her
luck.
I
know
she
is
moving
outside
of
evanston
I,
don't
believe
far
outside
of
evanston,
but
she
will
no
longer
be
within
the
borders
of
evanston
and
eligible
to
serve
on
this
board.