►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 8/1/2017
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
this
is
a
public
hearing
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
of
the
city
of
Evanston.
The
zoning
ordinance
direct
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
make
either
a
final
determination
or
send
its
recommendation
to
City
Council
Melissa.
Will
you
please
call
the
roll.
C
D
E
F
A
Right
with
six
members
present,
we
do
have
a
quorum
tonight
also
present
tonight.
Our
zoning
planner
Melissa
Klotz
and
what's
your
title
assistant
city
attorney
Mario
chato.
This
is
a
formal
meeting
and
there
are
rules
that
govern
our
proceedings.
Most
importantly,
only
one
person
speaks
at
a
time
so
that
all
testimony
may
be
accurately
recorded.
Anyone
who
wishes
to
address
the
board
at
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
seek
a
continuance
of
the
hearing.
When
all
supporting
an
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
deliberations.
All
testimony
will
be
under
oath
and,
although
do
we
do
not
apply
the
strict
rules
of
evidence,
please
limit
your
testimony
or
statement
to
your
personal
knowledge
when
you
address
the
board,
please
state
your
name
and
address
and
sign
in
on
the
provided
sheet.
Our
meetings,
our
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
A
A
Second,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye,
all
those
not
commenting
were
not
at
that
meeting.
So
now
we
will
move
on
to
old
business,
which
is
1125,
Madison
Street
and
if
I'm
not
correct
or
if
I
am
correct,
there
were
at
least
two
people
who
were
not
here.
For
that.
For
that
start
of
that
case,
have
both
of
you
had
a
chance
to
review
the
documents
and
the
testimony
that
was
given
at
that
previous
meeting
I
sure.
G
A
Sorry,
okay,
so
Scott's
up
to
speed,
so
everybody
is
on
the
same
playing
field
and
at
that
meeting
we
continued
that
for
the
neighbor
to
make
to
make
give
comments
and
ask
questions.
So
I
would
like
to
invite
you
to
come
up
and
give
us
your
comments
and
questions,
and
then
we
will
have
the
applicant
answer
and
wrap
up
great.
H
A
H
H
As
it
pertains
to
the
procedure
of
the
hearing,
I
would
like
to
have
some
questions,
because
I
have
the
rules
that
are
available
online
and
if
we
are
going
to
hold
this
thing,
if
we're
going
to
hold
this
in
a
way
that
is
more
first,
that
the
appellant
handle
this
matter.
Then
for
me
to
rebut
it
or,
depending
on
who's,
going
to
have
the
closing
statements.
H
A
A
Sure
I'm
going
to
give
you
what
I
think
is
clarification
and
if
Mario
agrees
with
me,
he'll
say
yes,
if
he
doesn't
he'll
fix
it.
So
just
for
clarification
right,
we
don't
follow
the
strict
rules
of
evidence,
so
there
isn't
a
strict
burden
of
proof
and
the
way
that
the
procedure
goes
is
that
the
applicant
makes
their
case.
People
who
live
within
500
feet
get
to
ask
questions
and
make
their
statements.
The
applicant
then
gets
to
make
their
final
closing
statement,
and
then
we
close
the
case
and
we
deliberate
great.
H
D
H
H
As
I
mentioned,
my
name
is
Marco
Rodriguez
and
I
reside
at
1122
Madison
with
my
wife,
Amy
sisal,
who
cannot
be
here
today.
I
firm
as
I
stated,
I
want
to
formally
address
the
procedural
aspect
of
this
forum
and
I
respectfully
not
to
antagonize
this
board,
but
I
want
to
do
three
points
and
I
think
there
may
not
to
be
a
ruling
on
because
for
the
record,
I
do
want
to
record
it
because
I
object
to
this
hearing
for
the
following
reasons.
H
The
original
decision
was
tendered
on
1120
to
2016
and
had
a
copy,
and
it's
in
your
packet
that
letter
they
mailed
out
to
all
the
residents,
including
myself
states
and
the
fourth
of
fifth
paragraph,
the
second
to
last
paragraph
that
there
must
the
appellant
had
10
days
from
which
to
file
an
appeal
from
the
decision
of
the
Zoning
Administrator.
That's
one
apartment,
the
public
notice.
Clearly
note
the
Lambert's
may
appeal
within
those
10
days
of
the
notification.
The
record
shows
that
the
Lambert's
failed
to
appeal
the
decision
within
the
10-day
period
after
notification.
H
In
fact,
the
appeal
was
not
tendered
until
May
2017
now
I've
addressed
this
before
with
a
corporate
council,
Alderman
Fleming,
even
covering
copied
mr.
Mangum
in
this
matter.
Because
for
the
you
know,
you
can't
just
simply
take
a
decision,
an
ordinance
and
look
at
it
and
sit
on
your
hand,
so
to
speak,
and
then,
when
you're
supposed
to
remove
the
patio
prior
to
enforcement
or
penalties
being
levied
and
then
decide
to
put
together
an
appeal,
it
doesn't
work
that
way.
There's
a
reason
for
ordinances
in
the
city
of
Evanston.
H
There
is
a
reason
for
laws
in
our
statutes
and
at
this
point,
I
do
object
to
this.
The
hearing
being
held
and
this
appeal,
because
it's
not
timely
one
of
the
important
cabinets
that
we
have
in
law
and
statutes,
ordinances
and
cities
and
planning,
is
that
we
follow
the
intent
and
the
ordinance.
So
at
this
juncture,
if
I
may
and
I'm
don't
mean
to
surprise
you
with
this,
but
I've
said
it
before,
and
it's
in
the
packet
I
object
to
this
hearing
and
this
appeal
because
it
was
not
timely.
J
Mario,
trudeau
assistant
city
attorney,
had
mr.
Rodriguez
and
I
have
already
discussed
this
issue
at
hand,
and
this
is
outside
of
the
jurisdiction
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals.
What
is
that,
and
is
there
determination
of
whether
the
zoning
administrators
decision
is
correct
or
not
whether
it
be
this
hearing
is
appropriate
or
not
as
outside,
of
the
jurisdiction
of
the
TVA?
Does.
B
To
clarify
there
is
a
10-day
window
for
appeals
on
minor
variations
that
was
back
in
November.
The
appeal
at
hand
is
not
an
appeal
of
that
minor
variation.
It
is
an
appeal
of
the
zoning
administrators
determination
about
the
gravel
area
and
whether
or
not
that
constitutes
a
patio,
so
it's
not
actually
about
the
minor
variation.
H
Yes,
miss
mr.
Klotz,
however,
the
minor
variation
as
written
by
the
appellant
on
handwriting,
the
application
states
that
the
intended
use
for
that
at
area
I.
We
want
to
describe
it
as
a
patio
and
that
such
that
it
has
been
used
for
their
purpose
and
that's
the
discussion
at
Hilton
and
then
to
add
one
more
thing
to
miss
to
counsel
at
those
are
words
and
the
email
that
he
sent
me
with.
The
the
code
that
was
cited.
H
I
do
want
to
read
it
because
I
think
it's
relevant
and
important
and
on
point
with
this
council,
the
code
and
the
city
code
that
was
given
to
me
by
the
council.
Treta
was
a
follower
city
code,
6-3
11,
Section
B,
and
it
is
clear
when
it
appealed
and
it's
clear
that
one
appeal
the
appeals
incentives
intended
as
means
to
subvert
the
clear
purposes,
meanings
or
intent
of
the
ordinance
for
the
rightful
authority
of
the
Zoning
Administrator
towards
force
requirements
of
the
ordinance
to
to
these
ends.
H
The
review
embodies
should
give
all
proper
deference
to
the
spirit
and
intent
embodied
in
the
language
of
this
ordinance
and
to
the
reasonable
interpretations
of
the
language
of
those
charged
with
the
administrator.
This
ordinance
to
put
that
in
layman's
terms,
I
suspect,
as
if
the
appeal
is
such
that
you're
to
circumvent
the
original
decisions
of
the
Zoning
Administrator,
that
being
the
November
22nd
2016
decision,
then
I
don't
know
how
much
further
on
point
we
can
be
with
a
subsequent
ordinance
that
was
provided
to
me
by
assistant
corporate
counsel
for
the
city
of
Evanston
Mario.
D
H
Well,
it
was
an
opinion
out
of
decisions
of
the
despite
to
clarify
and
again
not
to
be
belligerent,
the
rather
to
file
proper
form
and
and
procedure.
Because,
however,
this
comes
out,
there's
still
an
appeals
process
for
me
as
well.
So
we
have
a
you
know
here,
fair
hearing
for
everybody,
but
let's
proceed
with
it
and
thank
you.
I
wanted
a
clarification.
So
it's
been
a
determination.
Such
an
intent
of
the
letter
was
not
given
to
me.
It
just
said
that
this
is
the
code.
H
A
J
H
Thank
you
I
again,
the
procedure,
as
we
know,
substances
in
the
context
procedure
is
very
important.
Again.
I
will
submit
and
I
hear
you
that
this
has
been
adjudicated
already
once,
meaning
that
it
has
been
decided
and
they
wish
to
have
an
appeal.
They
ought
to
have
exercised
the
right
for
the
appeal
within
kind
of
a
period
provided
by
the
rules.
It
all
stems
from
the
same
set
of
issues
that
being
the
interior
side.
Patio
which
is
in
is
in
direct
violation
of
the
ordinance
that
we
have
city
of
evidences.
H
H
H
H
It
might
be
possible,
but
not
very
likely
further
in
2001
when
the
addition
was
submitted
for
approval
to
the
Zoning
Board.
It
already
provided
a
variance
allowing
her
to
build
out
our
home
and
front
porch
closer
to
the
lot
line,
then,
is
typically
allowed
in
the
smaller
Lots
we
enjoy
on
Madison
Street.
H
In
fact,
the
record
shows
that
plenty
of
accommodations
were
made
already
16
years
ago
and
that
the
Lambert's
already
maximized
their
lot
usage
by
the
addition
allowing
the
additional
usage
of
space
on
the
interior
medicine
simply
violates
the
ordinance
I
wonder
if
maybe
my
neighbors
knew
that
in
advance,
and
maybe
that
is
the
reason
why
the
patties
were
built
without
permits
or
power
plants.
This
is
not
about
an
impervious
material
or
any
type
of
landscaping.
This
is
about
an
interior
patio
which
is
built
illegally.
H
The
back
patio
was
conditioned
as
a
ruling
for
the
November
22nd
determination.
It
was
conditioned
and
subject
to
the
removal
of
the
interior
side
patio,
because
the
side
Cuddy
was
not
allowed.
Yet
here
we
are
today
discussing
a
side
patio
that
is
10
by
15,
whose
substrate,
or
whose
gravel
or
whatever
flooring
mechanism
is.
We
are
still
addressing
a
patio.
H
Let
me
share
with
the
council
members
and
those
that
are
present
here:
the
definition
by
the
Webster
dictionary
patio
definition,
her
patio,
plural,
patios,
special
courtyard,
specially
an
inner
court
open
to
the
sky
to
a
recreation
there
they
joined.
The
dwelling
is
sometimes
paved
and
it's
adaptive
especially
to
outdoor
dining
gathering
and
entertaining.
Let
me
also
provide
and
offer
the
definitional
walkway
a
passage
for
walking
common
size
use
as
per
custom,
2
to
3
feet
wide
and
the
current
use.
H
The
intent
in
the
dimensions
of
the
space
is
still
10
by
15,
with
gravel,
which
has
been
defined
by
the
Zoning
Board
as
a
hard
scape
material
which
is
used
by
other
cities
and
defined
as
the
same
as
the
hard
scape,
which
is
if
we
want
to
define
the
employment
or
address
station
pervious.
But
that's
not
the
issue
at
hand.
That's
a
secondary
tertiary
issue,
not
a
primary
one.
H
H
H
These
photos
are,
as
recent
of
this
last
week,
July,
29th
and
30th.
Here
is
the
finished
product
that
supposedly
were
supposed
to
have
plans
provided
to
this
council
before
any
further
work
was
being
done
now,
if
I
read
the
definition
of
a
patio
and
I
see
an
umbrella,
I
don't
know,
is
that
a
patty
or
not?
But
let's
look
at
some
of
the
other
pictures.
I
think
are
very
pertinent,
and
that
is
the
initial
use
of
the
patio.
H
H
Let's
look
at
the
subsequent
ones
and
I
think
this
is
I
think
this
is
important
to
discuss
because,
as
you
look
at
the
patio
you'll
also
see
my
property
line,
and
you
see
where
my
sidewalk
is
on
the
west
end
of
my
home
and
I.
Think
in
my
prior
objections
to
this.
It's
because
we
have
privacy
issues
and
earlier
I
discussed
that
the
Lambert's
already
were
provided
variances
in
granted
back
16
years
ago,
with
the
increased
front
porch
and
the
build-out
of
twelve
or
fourteen
hundred
square
feet
towards
the
back.
H
So
whether
I'm
in
my
front,
porch
in
the
piano
room
in
the
hallway
in
the
bathroom
or
my
home
office
by
virtue
of
the
prior
variances
I,
am
really
intruded
upon,
and
that
is
what
this
whole
motion
is
about
and
I
think
the
intent
of
the
legislature
of
the
ordinance
is
probably
right
on
point.
Let's
look
at
then
the
rebuilding
of
the
patio
with
gravel.
H
This
is
also
black.
Tarp
put
it
on
top
before
you
put
the
gravel
same
dimensions
now
gravel
and
let's
look
at
the
gravel
patio
this
is
in.
This
is
dated
of
423
17.
Let's
talk
about
intent,
we
said
in
December,
it
was
removed
and
it
was
removed.
Now,
let's
talk
about
on
for
twenty
seven,
twenty
third,
twenty,
three,
seventeen!
Let's
look
at
a
couple,
additional
pictures,
that's
another
one!
Let
me
look
at
another
one
here:
that's
where
the
point
that
gravel
on
the
black
thing
so
about
it.
H
You
want
to
talk
out
in
pervious,
I,
don't
know
if
plastic
qualifies,
let
alone
the
hardscape
that
they're
using,
which
is
a
grade,
eight
gravel,
which
is
consistent
with
an
impervious
material
as
we
go
to
more
use.
Let
me
see
this
one
remember
what
we
said
about
the
intent
in
the
use
of
the
fire
pit
8:00
a.m.
in
the
morning
on
a
Sunday,
gravel
fire
pit
ready
to
go
I
would
think
my
house
is
on
fire.
Would
you
like
to
wake
up
that
early
in
the
morning?
C
H
H
They
obtained
the
permits
for
the
four
fifteen
for
eighteen
to
do
the
back
patio
and
then
later
after
those
permits
were
obtained,
even
though
the
adjudication
said
that
the
back
patio
permit
was
subject
to
the
removal
inside
patio,
then
we
had
the
installation
of
the
patio,
and
this
was
on
for
you
can
see
where
that
worth
workman
is.
Where
is
this?
This?
Is
it
the
workmen
here's
done
for
2117
after
they
obtained
the
permit
for
the
back
patio.
Then
here
comes
the
workmen
and
it
reinstall
the
gravel
pit
same
dimensions.
H
Now
we
can
say
all
day
every
day
our
intent
is
now
to
use
it
as
a
walkway
for
intent
is
to
use
it
as
we're
wash
the
dog
we
get.
The
spigot
is
there,
but
clearly
this
photo
here.
Today's
eight
one.
This
is
seven
twenty
nine
and
you
can
see
that
dates.
I
can't
change
the
date
on
photos
and
if
I
can
then
Steve
Jobs
or
someone
else
at
Anna's
I
would
love
to
get
me
to
work
for
them.
You.
K
H
Gather
these
are
the
pots
that
she
intended
and
I
think
on
July
11th,
a
couple
of
the
council
men
members
council
members
asked
for
plans.
I
complained
to
the
city
subsequent
to
that,
because
there
were
continuing
no
plans,
they
continued
building
out
the
patio
and
and
I
have
emails
to
that
effect
and
I
believe
mr.
H
Mangum
receive
those
emails
are
covering
copying
alderman
plumbing
on
these
emails,
so
as
I
recall
correctly,
whether
it's
miss
burns
or
miss
McCauley
I'm,
not
quite
sure,
but
a
quick
review
would
let
us
know
that
we
were
very
specific
on
forward-looking
to
the
vision
right.
It's
always
a
change
in
vision,
at
the
exact
words
that
we
use
you,
someone
said
you
know
where
it's
going.
I
want
to
see
where
these
things
are
going
to
go
before
you
do
anything
further
yet
from
the
prior
July
11
photo.
This
doesn't
show
any
plans.
This
shows
action.
H
H
H
For
24
17,
we
have
a
person
here
we
have
another
person
here
we
have
the
fire
pit.
We
have
one
two
three
chairs
plus
a
table.
I
think
in
the
July
presentation
had
said
I
think
the
chairs
were
flipped
over
and
I.
Don't
know
how
things
happen
where
that
photo
was
taken,
but
this
was
subsequent
to
that.
So
you
know
the
intent
changes
all
the
time
and
as
we
can
see
from
the
picture
subsequent
to
the
subsequent
to
the
July
11th
hearing,
the
intent
change
quite
a
bit.
H
H
H
Realize
there's
much
ground
to
cover
tonight
and
I
appreciate
your
understanding,
because
there
are
a
couple
of
you
know
there
as
a
couple
of
your
honorable
counseling
men.
This
is
a
very
large
file
and
a
great
deal
of
issues
occurring
all
at
the
same
time.
Allow
me
to
address
the
testimony
of
the
witnesses
and
the
supporters
of
the
Lambert's
Donnelly
who's,
a
professional
architect,
correct
and
I.
Think
she's
present
here.
Thank
you,
lovely
I!
Didn't
get
your
lesson.
Thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
for
your
input.
I
do
understand.
H
You
don't
live
on
the
block
or
near
within
500
feet
of
the
affected.
No
I
can
understand
your
confusion
and
what
I
can't
reconcile
it's
why
we
would
have
difficulty
in
reading
and
understanding
and
clear
ordinance
as
to
interior
side
pettings.
The
ordinance
is
very
straightforward.
The
primary
the
primary
issue
is
not
material
to
substrate,
the
gravel
or
the
stone
or
the
papers
that
was
alleged.
H
Let's
use
this
one
here,
you
need
not
look
very
far.
The
city
of
Evanston
and
Scott
Mangum
and
it's
offices
determine
what
we
discussed
the
impervious
and
the
amount
of
usage
of
space.
So
now
we
have
the
10
by
15,
plus
we
decided
to
add
all
this
flagstone
in
the
front
and
the
back.
So
if
we're
going
to
address
not
only
the
size
of
this
space
that
we're
calling
whatever
we're
calling
it,
we
actually
have
to
come
back
and
redress
this
well.
H
B
H
A
B
A
H
H
As
I
see
the
pictures
in
the
graph
and
upend
the
gravel
on
the
stepping
stones,
I
just
don't
see
how
the
rule
did
not
change
as
you
posited,
miss
Donnelly,
the
rule
about
no
interior
type,
edges,
never
changed
and
again
I'm.
Addressing
the
comments
made
on
the
July
11th
hearing
and
perhaps
I'm
not
giving
you
her
comments
and
then
my
response
for
the
for
the
importance
of
brevity
and
trying
to
get
through
this
succinctly.
H
If
the
appellant
asked
questions
to
find
a
way
to
make
a
solution
fit
but
failed
to
understand
that
the
dimensions
of
the
patio
was
not
allowed,
then
the
material
selves
not
issued
at
all
and
they
started
with
that.
We're
not
talking
about
whether
it's
a
gravel,
whether
mr.
mangroves
authors
accidentally
gave
some
more
information
consistently
inconsistent.
The
true
meaning
of
the
ordinance
is
clear
as
day
I
believe.
A
A
H
And,
thank
you,
sir,
so
as
I
continue
attend
by
fixing
a
10
by
15
square
foot
area
is
not
a
path.
It's
a
patty
whose
intent
can
vary
at
the
discretion.
The
resident
given
China
has
been
shown
to
by
these
photos
with
your
most
recent,
as
has
been
shown
over
time,
and
even
though
the
resident
states
is
not
being
used
as
a
petit,
since
the
blue
stone
was
removed,
which
is
not
accurate,
again
I've
shown
here
through
the
photos
showing
the
pictures
in
April
and
even
late
July.
H
Absolutely
I,
love
adhering
and
those
are
my
you
know,
comments
for
Donna's
testimony
as
it
pertains
to
Pam
Johnson
who's.
A
Betty
is
a
friend
of
Betty
from
two
to
three
thousand
feet
from
the
effective
properties,
I
think
at
8:07,
Madison
correct
and
a
you
at
8:07
Madison
great.
Thank
you
for
clarifying
that
miss
Johnson
mentioned
that
the
neighbor
and
report
at
eight
eleven
he
had
similar
had
a
similar
side.
Patio
well
I
took
some
recent
pictures
of
the
property
lines
between
miss
Johnson
and
the
sport.
Let's
take
a
look
at
the
pictures.
I.
C
A
H
Well,
so,
for
the
purposes
of
brevity?
Yes,
if
you,
if
you
will
allow
me
just
you-
know,
embellishment
just
for
literally
one
minute
on
each
changed
person.
Well,
miss
Johnson
mentioned
the
neighbor.
Had
a
similar
side.
Patio
I
took
some
recent
pictures,
I
also
researched
the
addition
built
with
the
city
of
Evanston
records,
and
it
shows
eight
eleven
filed
for
an
application
obtain
permits,
use
architects,
lights
and
contractors
to
work.
Yet
on
a
July,
eleventh
2017
is
hearing.
H
Miss
Johnson
stated
that
how
come
they
were
allowed
and
they
were
done
so
without
permits,
and
this
council,
this
council
board,
said
it's
on
the
owners.
You
can
complain
about
it.
Well,
I
find
that
to
be
very
inconsistent.
In
fact,
I
can't
reconcile
the
statement
with
the
facts
and
the
documents
that
are
with
the
city
the
Fords
filed
for
an
application.
There
was
no
variance
granted.
There
was
an
opportunity
to
object
in
2006.
H
She
failed
to
take
objection
or
have
our
word
heard,
and
therefore
you
can't
come
ten
years
later,
eleven
years
later
and
say
you
can't
because
there's
nothing
there.
It's
not
it's
not
congruent
to
this
to
the
situation
before
us
and
that
being
we
built
an
illegal
patio
on
a
Sunday
without
permits,
in
violation
the
ordinance.
It's
not
a
similar
thing.
H
Reading
the
renting
reading
the
letter
of
the
tenants
renting
of
Karen
Harold
who's,
a
horticulturist
and
a
professional
and
the
letter
states
that
clearly
succinctly
that
Karen
has
been
helping
miss
Lambert
since
the
very
beginning
when
the
grass
was
removed,
the
nisshin's
leach,
the
initial
installation
of
the
patio
and
interior
was
in
late
August
pocket.
Excuse
me
in
late
August
2016,
yet
the
author
of
the
letter,
Karen
Harold,
who
rents
the
house
from
David
Watkins
at
11:31,
did
not
move
into
the
neighborhood
until
April
2017,
again,
I
can't
find
how
to
reconcile
those
things.
H
I
can't
seem
three
Qin
saw
a
tenant
who
moved
in
April.
2017
has
been
helped
in
this
Lambert
since
the
very
beginning
in
August
2016
mr.
Walken
introduced
the
new
tenant,
be
an
email
and
I'd
be
happy
to
provide
a
copy
of
the
letter
that
it's
we
here
with
me
today
and
I'd
like
to
read
it.
If
you
like,
because
the
objective
the
thing
is
to
rebut
the
testimony
of
those
that
have
proposed
letters,
I
have
that
letter
and
I
can
provide
it
or
I
can
read
it
out
loud
whichever
you
prefer.
If.
I
H
Only
have
a
couple
more
things
and
I
appreciate
your
patience.
I
think
I
think
there
was
a
some
discussion
as
to
you
know,
stated
expensive
aspect
of
this
whole
matter
and
I.
Think
if
I
recall
correctly,
my
notes
were
taken
properly.
I
think
miss
McCauley
mentioned
something
about
the
expense
and
so
forth
and
with
all
due
respect,
I
think
if
we
had
applied
for
a
permit,
I
had
a
decision
from
the
Zoning
Board
in
advance
and
a
pro
forma
way
we
wouldn't
be
here.
H
We
wouldn't
be
expending
our
resources,
my
time,
your
time
or
anyone's
time,
and
and
we
would
continue
with
a
harmonious
neighborhood
that
we
have
instead,
this
is
we're
doing
this
retrospectively.
So
as
you
look
and
make
the
determination
you
kind
of
have
to
think
about
from
someone
who's
built
in
addition,
16
years
ago,
with
an
architect,
who's
dealt
with
the
city,
electing
intent
once
right.
In
the
same
way,
we
have
to
figure
out
the
ordinances
I.
H
Drove
around
because
that
some
people
is
data
that
that
you
know
there
are
lots
of
side,
patios,
I
drove
around
from
Maddox
all
the
way
from
Chicago
all
the
way
to
dodge
on
Madison
and
not
one
has
a
side
patio.
In
fact,
I
actually
visited
a
home
at
834
Madison,
which
is
a
home
for
sale
by
Ida,
been
spurred
on
by
bob,
been
spurred.
H
I
believe
his
name
is,
and
I
notice
that
they
have
a
yard
east
of
them,
just
east
of
them,
and
I
wonder
if
he
or
she,
the
new
owners,
decide
to
build
a
patio
illegally.
How
that
impact
that
neighbor
and
see
what
that
mess
is
the
scent,
because
this
is
very
critical
right.
We
want
to
be
very
consistent
with
our
message
with
our
ordinances
with
eyes,
blind,
regardless
of
neighbors,
who
they
are,
what
they
do.
He
has
to
be
blind
because
of
the
pollutants.
Justice
is
blind.
C
H
A
mask
and
miss
McCauley
I
didn't
know
that
it
has
it
used,
it
may
be
gravel,
I,
I,
don't
know,
I
have
to
look
again,
I'd
have
to
go
in
the
house
and
kind
of
take
a
look.
It
could
be
grass
to
I.
Don't
know
that
for
certain
but
I
wonder
if
they
have
chairs
and
they
have
fire
pits
and
whether
they
bit
though,
if
you
live
there
and
I,
was
unaware
that
you
live.
There.
Apologies
well.
C
No,
no,
it's
it.
I
I'm,
simply
saying
this
to
cast
some
perspective
on
it.
The
the
side
yard
that
the
band
stores
been
stores
have
has
been
used
in
a
variety
of
ways
since
I've
lived
in
that
house,
which
is
a
long
time,
and
some
of
the
uses
have
been
very
loud
and
raucous
and
kids
playing
ball,
and
some
of
these
have
been
dog
run
and
sometimes
when
they've
had
parties,
they've
used
it.
C
H
And
that
thank
thank
you
I
appreciate
that
it
is
I,
think
something
hit
right
on
point,
and
that
is
whether
a
patio
is
a
10
by
15
or
a
walkway
which
is
2
to
3
feet
right,
because
maybe
your
example
is
not.
The
best
examples
could
have
stumbled
upon.
But
if
that
in
facts,
the
case,
if
someone
builds
a
patio
without
permits,
puts
bluestone
and
has
a
fire
pit
and
now
it
doesn't
need
it
to
be
long-term
use
for
a
specific
purpose,
which
the
ordinance
is
very
clear.
H
There's
no
interpretation
for
the
ordinance,
the
ordinance
I
think
it's
one
sentence,
no
interior
side
patios.
That
decision
was
made
on
November,
22nd,
2016
I,
don't
know
if
it's
up
to
me
to
decide.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
up
to
this
council
to
decide
whether
we
interpret
that
or
we
change
that
law.
But
right
now,
that's
the
law
and
all
we
can
do.
H
Let's
say
to
the
elevator
right,
but
they're
not
10
feet
wide
550
feet
and
we
can
consider
that
a
walkway
and
it's
conformed
at
it's
a
far
cry
from
a
walkway
and
to
take
mulch
and
cover
it
and
to
put
plants
that
are
in
pots
and
to
put
and
decorate
ants
lovely
I'll,
be
the
first
one
to
tell
you
she's
done
a
wonderful
job,
she's,
a
lovely
neighbor
as
Kings
her
home
and
as
individual
orchids
I
got
to
know.
But
when
it
comes
to
something
that
impacts
the
value
of
your
house
and
violates
an
ordinance.
H
That
are
the
bundle
of
Rights
that
we
have
in
real
estate,
which
are
very
important
to
protect
and
in
closing
you
know,
I
appreciate
your
patience
in
closing
I
would
ask
this
council
to
consider
the
intent
and
the
enforcement
and
the
actions
of
the
appellant.
How
do
we?
How
do
we
enforce
I've
shown
you
through
photos
and
over
time?
The
intent
changes
right?
H
H
They
didn't
appeal
in
time,
then
we
decided
to
build.
Excuse
me
what
is
called
a
walkway
where
we
wash
our
dogs
and
do
other
things,
but
if
you
use
is
inconsistent
with
the
photos
of
a
walkway,
a
walkway
I
can
see.
Maybe
these
steps
right
here
or
maybe
two
to
three
feet
this
way,
that's
a
walkway,
not
a
10
by
15
I,
appreciate
your
time
and
effort
and
your
and
your
ability
to
take
a
time
to
take
a
look
at
this.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
H
D
D
D
H
H
A
A
Okay,
was
there
anybody
else
who
wanted
to
speak
against
the
1125,
Madison
Street?
Sorry,
I,
I,
don't
know
what
to
you
guys
are
here
for.
Are
you
guys
here
for
11:20
buy
medicine,
okay,
okay,
all
right
fine.
So
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
to
give
the
applicant
an
opportunity
to
respond
to
some
of
the
comments
and
also
to
explain
or
donnelly
to
to
explain
what
modifications
you've
made.
Based
on
our
comments
from
the
last
meeting.
L
Good
evening
I'm
Donna
leaf
loader
I
am
a
licensed
architect.
I
do
live
in
Evanston
and
I
was
the
architect
for
the
Lambert's
addition
17
years
ago.
One
quick
note
is
in
30
years
of
working
in
Evanston
I
find
everyday
someone
who
doesn't
know
that
you
need
a
permit
for
a
patio
professional
people,
longtime
citizens,
and
they
think
you
need
a
permit
for
that.
L
L
Made
the
drawing
that
was
submitted,
describing
the
gravel
area
and
the
rock
garden
and
see
two
other
citizens
of
Friends
of
Betty
Ann
neighbors
submitted
letters
describing
the
actual
Zen
rock
garden
effect.
That's
meant
to
be
created
and
she's
working
on
that,
so
she's
installed
a
lot
more
plants,
a
lot
more
planters
with
and
a
lot
more
sculptures
and
the
stepping
stones
have
been
rearranged
twice
since
we've
been
there,
but
it
isn't
intended
as
a
passage
through
from
the
front
yard,
there's
a
gate
right
at
the
porch.
L
M
And
address
Lambert,
1125,
Madison.
Shame
you
and
I.
Don't
understand
why
mr.
Rodriguez
didn't
take
a
picture
of
me
actually
working
under
that
umbrella
and
I
got
sunburned,
so
I
actually
took
this
umbrella.
That
I
borrow
from
my
neighbor
Chelsea
at
work,
L
words
and
stuck
it
in
the
ground.
To
give
me
some
protection,
so
I
was
newly
Bernie
from
villages.
M
M
F
J
A
J
You,
but,
but
technically,
what
we
typically
do
is
the
rebuttal
cross-examine
does
stuff
that
rare
right
now
is
my
proposing
testimonial
statements.
I've
included
the
applicant
may
cross-examine
all
persons
who
testified
in
opposition
to
the
applicant
cross-examination
of
persons
giving
testimony
must
be
relevant
to
the
matters
heard
and
be
confined
to
the
points
raised
during
that
person's
testimony.
A
A
H
H
So,
thank
you.
What
I
want
to
do
is
I'm
going
to
reduce
this
drawing
next
to
the
I
want
to
place
it
right.
Next
to
this
other,
drawing
and
I
want
to
see
if
that
looks
anything
like
it,
whether
the
umbrella
was
there
or
not
there
again,
it's
a
moving
intent
right
and
whatever
that
intent
may
be
and
I'm
trying
to
find
that
her,
drawing
that
she
was
supposed
to
submit
before
doing
more
work
and
I
want
to
point
that
out,
rather
than
cross-examine.
B
H
H
Great
the
points
being
made
as
to
the
planters
and
so
forth.
We
still
have
the
patio
of
10
by
15
here
and
I
want
to
reiterate
that
just
putting
mulch
over
the
gravel,
which
is
a
hard
scape
which
is
still
not
a
walkway
as
I
really
said,
a
walkway
2
to
5
feet,
I
think
there's
an
ordinance
on
that
for
the
city
as
well
such
that
should
a
resident
come
from
their
porch
front.
Porch
I
need
to
traverse
through
here,
I.
H
N
A
Just
want
to
be
clear
and
say
we're
just
let's
just
close
the
record
right,
so
we
have
heard
from
the
neighbors
we
have
heard
from
the
applicant
I
just
want
to
close
the
record,
and
now
we
can
ask
questions.
Oh
did
you.
Oh
sure,
I
know
I'm.
So
sorry
come
on
up.
I
didn't
close
the
record
I
unclose
the
record.
If
you
can
give
us
your
name
and
address
please
my
name
is
Chris
Oakley.
If.
N
The
times
I
timed
it
at
3
minutes
if
I
can
just
fly
through
hello,
my
name
is
Chris
Oakley
I
live
at
3
1
5
Fair
Street
in
Evanston
I've
been
an
Everton
resident
for
over
20
years.
I
am
a
licensed
architect
by
profession
and
work
in
the
real
estate
industry
of
in
real
estate
development.
Over
many
years,
I
have
worked
on
a
wide
variety
worked
with
a
wide
variety
of
municipal
zoning
ordinances.
We've
been
considering
a
new
home
in
Evanston
have
been
looking
for
a
while.
N
All
the
properties
we've
considered
would
require
significant
work
through
that
process.
We
have
heard
from
from
other
architects
and
contractors
that
the
zoning
process
in
Evanston
has
become
more
challenging.
I'm,
often
difficult
because
of
that
I've
been
tracking
information
package
published
for
the
CBA,
especially
appeals
to
minor
variation
denials
I
don't
live
anywhere
near
1124
Madison.
In
fact,
I
probably
live
about
as
far
from
1124
matters
and
as
you
can
the
city
of
Evanston
and
still
be
in
the
city
of
Evanston
and
I.
N
Don't
know,
I,
don't
know
the
owners
of
their
neighbor,
but
I
find
the
zoning
administration's
interpretation
totally
off-base.
The
Evanston
zoning
ordinance
is
not
the
most
clear
document,
but
it
must
be
interpreted
in
its
totality
and
not
just
by
select
statements
and
tables.
Is
it
a
patio
or
not?
A
patio
debate
is
irrelevant,
as
defined
yards
in
required
yards
in
the
ordinance
as
a
many
zoning
ordinances
are
synonymous.
N
Evanston's
ordinance
defines
a
yard
as
open
space
on
a
lot
that
is
unobstructed
or
unoccupied
and
unobstructed,
from
its
lowest
level
to
the
sky,
except
as
otherwise
permitted
in
this
ordinance.
The
otherwise
permitted
is
the
area
you
are
allowed
to
build
upon
and
improve
in
the
r-1
district.
The
side
yard
is
the
five
feet.
Parallel
to
the
interior
lot
line,
not
the
open
space
the
property
may
may
have
between
the
house
and
the
lot
line.
N
The
administrator's
denial
is
predicated
on
patios
only
being
allowed
as
a
yard
obstruction
in
the
required
rear
yard
reference
section,
6,
4-6-3
table
for
a
item
number
10.
This
tables
key
actually
specifically
states
required
yards
which,
in
an
r1
district,
the
rear
yard
is
30
feet.
The
side
yard
is
5
feet.
The
table
reference
by
the
administrator
clearly
identifies
what
required
yard
you
may
place
or
construct
various
elements
in
including
decks
and
patios.
N
It
is
not
intended
as
limiting
improvements
on
other
portions
of
a
lot
that
are
not
part
of
the
required
yard,
providing
that
the
patio
at
1124
Madison
is
not
in
the
5
but
required
side
yard.
There's
no
violation,
no
need
for
variation
and
administrators
denial
unfounded.
If
you
accept
the
administrators
interpretation,
you're
essentially
saying
the
only
location
on
a
lot
patios
are
allowed
in,
our
one
district
is
within
the
rear,
most
thirty
feet
of
a
lot
or
the
required
rear
yard.
N
This
would
render
the
vast
majority
of
impiety
in
patios
in
Evanston
illegal,
including
the
abutters
patio,
considering
the
zoning
administrators
responsible
for
rendering
interpretations
of
the
ordinance
I
find
this
determination
disturbing.
The
administrator
is
either
selectively
applying
ordinance
sections
to
support
subjective
opinions
of
what
improvements
should
or
should
not
be
allowed
or
does
not
have
the
necessary
comprehension,
comprehensive
understanding
of
the
ordinances
charged
with
interpreting
in
either
case.
N
This
has
obviously
created
a
lot
of
stress
time
and
expense
for
the
owners
of
1124
Madison
and,
frankly,
for
yourselves
and
I'm
sure
other
taxpaying
eveson
residents
who
wish
to
improve
and
enjoy
their
homes.
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have,
but
not
granting
the
applicants
appeal,
would
set
a
terrible
precedent
for
how
the
zoning
ordinance
may
be
interpreted
in
the
minor
variation
process.
Thank
you.
Oh.
A
J
Correct
we've
surpassed
the
standard
protocol
that
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
rules
allows
for
okay.
I
A
A
H
A
We
keep
yeah,
no
we're
going
to
I'm
going
to
draw
the
line
there.
I
do
want
need
Scott,
so
we're
going
to
go
back
to
closing
the
record
and
I.
Do,
however,
want
Scott
to
be
able
to
comment
on
that,
because
a
lot
of
things
have
been
set
and,
quite
frankly,
you
and
I
had
a
very
similar
conversation,
because
I
came
at
it
the
same
way
and
I
think
it's
imperative
that
you
explain
your
thinking
and
the
city's
interpretation
of
that
document.
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
that
wasn't
particularly
prepared
to
speak
to
that,
because
I
know
tonight
has
to
do
with
appeal
of
the
decision,
whether
it's
a
patty
or
not
the
appeal
about
or
appeal
whether
it
could
be
allowed
in
the
side
yard
or
not
was
part
of
the
minor
variation
yeah.
That's
tonight's
hearing
is
not
about
the
minor
variation
determinations
about
whether
the
current
improvements
constitute
a
patty
or
not.
Okay,.
A
C
J
Just
to
just
just
to
reiterate
that,
with
one
section
on
that
I
referenced
earlier,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
members
all
are
very
aware
of
this.
Testimony
and
evidence
which
is
cumulative,
repetitious,
harassing
argumentative
or
irrelevant
to
the
case
being
heard,
will
be
disallowed,
so
there's
an
understanding
that
the
CBA
members
will
not
take
that
into
consideration.
J
A
Want
to
remind
us
that
every
time
can
we
just
post
that
above
my
head,
okay,
so
now
the
records
closed,
now
we're
going
to
have
a
delightful
discussion
about
this.
Whoever
would
like
to
go.
First.
I
have.
E
A
We
do
because
we
get
to
decide
anyway,
we
get
to
either
confirm
we
get
to
we
get
to
affirm,
we
get
to
deny
we
get
to
say
somewhere
in
the
middle,
or
we
get
to
say
this.
What
they
have
a
plot.
What
they
have
supplied
meets
meets
the
definition
of
a
walkway
and
a
planting
area
such
that
the
patio
is
not
in
question,
and
so
then
we
deny
the
appeal,
because
it's
not
a
patio,
it's
a
walkway
in
a
garden.
Okay,
that's
that's!
My
interpretation
of
what's
happened
in
here,
I
think.
C
And
and
the
mr.
Rodriguez
the
difficulty
that
that
I'm
having
with
this
is,
it
appears
from
your
testimony
as
though
really
the
primary
issue,
for
you
is
an
intrusion
into
your
privacy,
and
you
have
a
large
wall
of
arborvitae,
but
there's
noise
there
and
there
is
activity
there
that
you
don't
appreciate
and
I
think
that
it
got
off
to
a
bad
start,
because
the
patio
was
built
on
a
Sunday
morning
and
that
was
aggravating.
C
But
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
that
the
people
must
be
allowed
to
use
all
of
their
property
and
and
the
they
removed
the
bluestone
patio,
because
that
was
clearly
a
patio
and
they
have
altered
the
use
of
the
space
in
order
to
be
in
conformance
and
they
they
just.
They
must
be
allowed,
nonetheless,
to
use
all
of
their
property.
C
C
You
know
lots
of
yapping
dogs
and
not
necessarily
Pleasant
for
next-door
neighbor,
although
you
know
it's
part
of
being
neighbors,
so
so,
in
light
of
the
fact
that
there
have
been
enormous
modifications
to
the
side
yard
and
that
there
have
been
more
planting,
materials
lay
down
that
there
have
been
great
efforts
to
create
a
gravel
garden
area,
I
I'm,
having
a
hard
time
denying
this
person
any
use
of
her
side
yard,
and
so
it
will.
It
will
morph.
Yes,.
G
C
But
there's
no
more
and
I
should
apologize,
because
it's
it's.
It
is
me
who
should
be
addressing
my
colleagues
here
on
the
panel
right,
and
so
those
are
my
comments
to
my
colleagues
here
on
the
panel.
Thank
you
and
as
I
apologize
for
that.
That
is
my.
The
trouble
that
I
have
with
this
issue
is
that
there
will
be
some
use
of
that
and
I.
Don't
think
that
you
know,
perhaps
the
table
and
chairs
would
define
it,
but
there
have
been
you
know
over
and
over
and
over
again.
C
D
People
are
and
must
be
permitted
to
use
their
properties,
as
the
ordinance
allows.
I
agree
with
that.
The
ordinance
does
not
allow
a
side
yard
to
have
a
patio
use.
That's
not
allowed
so
that
side
yard
can
be
used
in
some
other
way
that
conforms
with
the
ordinance.
The
question
before
us
as
I
interpret
it
is:
is
this
applicant,
notwithstanding
the
beautiful
garden,
that's
planned
using
that
side
yard
as
a
patio
and
best
I
could
tell
from
the
picture
with
the
umbrella.
In
it
it
looked
like
some
of
those
flag.
D
D
Don't
think
the
intent
of
the
ordinance
should
be
that
it
needs
to
be
a
game
of
gotcha
where
a
neighbor
who's
using
it
quote/unquote
illegally
one
day,
can
simply
remove
their
table
and
chairs
and
say
well,
it's
a
moving
target
I'm,
not
really
using
it
as
a
patio,
except
for
one
Saturday
every
two
weeks,
and
so
therefore,
it's
not
a
patio.
In
my
view,
you
know
it
does
look
like
there's
still
a
patio
use
of
this
space.
Oh.
C
We
had
the
applicants
testimony
that
the
umbrella
was
used
to
shield
her
from
the
Sun
during
her
working
in
her
newly
refigured
garden
and
and
so
I
posed
to
you
the
converse
situation,
if
it
is
a
rock
garden,
a
Zen
garden.
Who
are
we
to
decide
that
now
she
isn't
allowed
to
do
that
either
because
it
still
is
gosh
darn
close
to
a
patio
I
you
you
see
what
I'm
saying
that
we
can't.
We
can't
police
this
neighbor
anymore,
that
I'm
sure
her
next-door
neighbor
really
wants
to
I.
C
Think
that
the
message
has
been
made
clear.
These
people
have
been
neighbors
for
17
years
once
this
issue
has
been
laid
to
rest
one
way
or
the
other
I
think
that
they
will,
you
know,
get
back
to
probably
a
level
of
accommodation.
I
certainly
hope
so,
but
in
the
meantime,
we're
sitting
here
saying:
okay
well,
take
out
the
pavers
okay,
now
take
out
the
furniture.
Okay
now
take
out
the
plants
that
you
just
put
down.
Okay,
now
remove
the
gravel
I.
C
D
With
that,
in
my
comments
had
nothing
to
do
with
the
aesthetics
of
it.
To
be
honest,
it's
about
what
do
I
in
my
heart
think
is
going
on
in
this
space
or
do
I
think
this
space
is
being
used
as
the
umbrella
notwithstanding,
which
I
found
to
be
completely
credible
testimony.
It
still
looks
like
a
patio
space
to
me
with
pavers
that
have
been
added
to
add
the
appearance
of
a
walkway,
but
the
rest
of
that
walkway
is
running
through
grass
immediately
to
one
side
of
it
and
probably
to
the
other
side
of
it.
D
K
Say
that,
in
addition
to
gravel
serving
a
function
within
a
rock
garden,
I
think
it
also
serves
the
function
as
creating
a
sense
of
place
and
I.
Think
we
heard
in
the
testimony
at
the
when
we
originally
heard
this
in
July,
that
you
know
that
they
did
originally
intend
to
put
in
a
patio
with
the
pavers,
and
so
when
they
were
instructed
to
take
those
out.
You
know
they
weren't,
starting
from
a
blank
slate.
They
were
starting
from.
You
know
where
they
had
gone
to
and
so
I
don't
know.
K
If
going
back
from
the
beginning,
they
would
have
constructed.
You
know
the
dimensions
would
have
been
the
same
as
they
are
today
so
I
it's
this
isn't.
This
is
in
no
way
a
perfect.
You
know
a
perfect
scenario
and
I
think
it's
a
matter
of
trying
to
work
with
the
ham.
That's
been
dealt
and
I'm
struggling
I
respect
both
of
your
perspectives
on
this
and
I'm
struggling
with
this
one
and
frankly,
this
case
just
makes
me
sad
and
I
will
reiterate
and
saying
that.
However,
this
is
found.
K
C
Had
been
previous
testimony
as
well
Scott
that
the
from
the
horticulturalist
who
had
spoken
to
this
matter,
that
the
gravel
side
yard
rock
garden
was
environmentally
more
friendly
than
grass
as
well,
because
it
required
less
water
and
that
that
actually
there
is
a
trend
in
landscaping
throughout
communities
that
are
concerned
with
that
to
employ
non
impervious,
but
non
grass
surfaces
like
mulch
and
gravel
and
rock
Arden's,
etc.
I
think
that
it
is
also
misleading
to
judge
this
as
a
patio
when
you
are
viewing
it
from
above.
C
E
Appreciate
your
remarks,
Lisa
they're,
very
sensitive,
and
it's
unfortunate
that
your
relationship
with
your
neighbor
has
been
marred
by
this
I
did
go
out
and
look
at
your
place
and
I
see
where
you
have
planted
in
front
yard
so
beautifully.
I
have
no
doubt
that
if
you
follow
this
plan
that
you
submitted
that
it
will
be
a
beautifully
landscaped,
walkway
I.
Think
if
you
follow
this
plan,.
F
Okay,
here
are
my
two
cents
believe
that
the
whole
thing
is
simply
matter
of
using
space.
So
there
are
several
things
to
consider.
First,
it
was
submitted
as
a
vacuum
and
then
the
ordinance
no
matter
to
a
certain
extent.
I
will
agree
with
some
of
the
comments
here.
There
are
not
very
precise
things
in
the
ordinance,
and
we
commented
this
before
and
now,
though,
the
things
changed
a
little
bit
with
this
submittal
and
it
is
an
accepted
package
by
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals.
F
So
we
are
considering
not
only
the
original
appeal
we
are
considering
what
is
submitted
now
to
us
and
this
development.
It
is
already
not
the
exact
pattern
that
we
saw
before
it
is
an
additional
part
of
the
package
that
we
are
considering
and
waiting
making
decisions
on
it
together
with
the
previous
league.
F
D
A
There
are
two
points
here
and
Mario
is
going
to
get
in
on
this,
you
ready.
So
if
so,
yes,
we
have
to
weigh
in
on
whether
the
Zoning
Administrator,
whether
we
agree
with
his
determination
that
it
was
a
patio
and
a
patio,
is
not
allowed
in
a
side
yard
right.
So
we
first
have
to
agree
or
disagree
with
that.
The
second
thing
it
seems
is,
if
we
were
to
hypothetically
say
that
we
consider
this
to
be
a
walkway
and
it
is
an
allowed
use
in
a
side
yard.
How
do
we
phrase
that?
A
J
I
J
C
N
I
C
A
A
O
O
D
C
I
C
So
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
say,
and-
and
this
is
again
is
where
the
nebula
sness
of
the
zoning
ordinance
comes
into
play.
But
I
think
that
we
can
say
we
agree
with
the
Zoning
Administrator
that
patios
are
not
allowed
in
the
side
yard.
However,
we
find
that
this
side
yard
is
a
rock
garden
and
the
or
we
find
that
this
side
yard
is
not
a
patio
and
is
being
used
in
an
acceptable
fashion.
Consistent
with
zoning
ordinances
and.
C
J
I
think
that
will
be
very
helpful.
You
think
Robert
and
Betty
Lambert
property
owners
appeal
the
zoning
administrators
determination
that
the
gravel
area
in
the
east
side
yard
is
a
patio
zoning
code,
section
618,
three
definitions:
the
zoning
administrators
determination
requires
the
removal
of
the
gravel
patio
as
patios
are
not
permitted
inside
yards
zoning
old
section,
6-4
6-3
table
4,
8,
a
4
8
4,
a
10
and
a
previous
variation
request
to
allow
patio
within
the
east
side
yard
was
denied
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
as
a
determining
body.
J
C
I
think
that
that
is
instructive
because
it
could
have
been
a
very
square,
gravel
area
in
the
side
yard
that
in
fact
the
owner
had
intended
to
use
as
a
dog
run.
You
know
there
were
tables
on
it
by
the
owners.
Testimony
at
that
time
that
the
Zoning
Administrator
went
by
it
was
because
the
back
patio
was
still
under
construction.
So
I
I
think
that
we
can
answer
that
straight
up.
What
do
you
think
other
zba
members
might.
E
B
E
D
A
O
A
O
E
O
A
A
I
K
D
D
I
D
Applicants
own
testimony
is
that
it
was
used
that
she
was
using
it
as
a
patio
and
therefore
it
to
me.
That's
pretty
simple.
The
second
question
is
as
reconstituted
or
repurposed
today,
notwithstanding
the
fact
that
it's
still
the
same
surface
area
and
still
gravel
but
perhaps
being
used
differently,
is
it
still
being
used
as
a
patio?
That's
the
second
question
flash
motion.
C
G
D
You
know
it's
not
a
variation,
it's
an
interpretation
question.
Did
they
insert
the
Zoning?
Administrator
interpret
the
ordinance
correctly,
so
there's
not
a
standard.
It's
a
question
whether
the
ordinance
was
correctly
interpreted
yes
or
no
I'm
comfortable
making
the
first
motion
because
I
think
their
time
in
the
majority,
but
I
would
not
make
the
second
motion
because
I
think
I'm
in
the
minority.
Okay,.
A
D
C
C
I'm
asking
you
is
if,
if
we
vote
that
the
Zoning
Administrator
was
correct,
when
he
went
out
and
found
that
the
that
that
was
a
patio,
then
legally,
the
property
owner
has
to
remove
the
patio.
And
what
does
that
mean?
I
think
that
that
gives
fodder
to
those
opposed
to
come
back
and
demand
that
further
alterations
be
made
to
this
yard.
C
Whereas
I
think
if
we
are
just
clear
to
say
the
interpretation
as
well-meaning
as
it
was
because
there
was
furniture
Stewart
there
that
this
was
a
patio
was
incorrect
because
it
was
a
gravel
bed
with
the
patio
pavers
removed.
That
was
in
process
of
being
reconverted
being
converted
to
a
rock
garden.
So
not
understanding
that
fully
at
the
time
the
Zoning
administrators
finding
was
incorrect
and
therefore
the
owner
can
continue
installing
her
Zen
rock
garden
and
without
having
to
make
any
further
alterations
other
than
following
her
plan.
So.
D
Before
you
weigh
and
I
just
want
to
tell
you
I
just
want
to
weigh
in
with
how
I
interpret
things
a
little
bit
differently.
I
think
that
you're
partially
correct
so
I
think.
If
the
only
issue
we
were
addressing
is
was
he
right
or
wrong
on
may
fur
as
of
May
as
of
May
1st,
and
if
we
decided
he
was
right
and
that's
how
it
was
still
being
used,
then
the
owner
would
need
to
remove
the
patio.
However,
as
we've
observed
sort
of
throughout
the
last
hour
and
a
half
use,
is
a
snapshot
exact.
C
D
And
here's
the
major
problem-
I
have
a
problem
with
flying
about
finding
and
I.
Have
a
problem
with
the
whole
thing
actually
uses
a
snapshot.
So
it's
still
a
it's
still
a
square
gravel
area,
and
if
we
decide
tonight,
it's
not
being
used
in
this
snapshot
right
now,
as
a
patio,
there's
literally
nothing
stopping
the
owner
from
throwing
a
table
and
chairs
out
there
tomorrow
and
requiring
a
neighbor
to
paddle
on
them
again
and
restart
the
whole
thing.
C
D
Your
finding
of
what
happened
because
I
disagree
with
that,
my
I
think
it
was
being
used
as
a
patio
I
mean
as
of
one
as
of
May
1st
or
when,
whenever
the
Zoning
Administrator
went
out,
I
don't
think
he
was
incorrect,
but
the
use
has
changed
in
my
view
and
I
think
perhaps
it's
not
being
used
as
a
patio
now
but
I.
What
you're
you're
arguing
your
conclusion,
rather
than
a
cleaner
resolution,
I'm.
C
D
C
C
She
had
removed
the
pavers
and
that
it
was
in
process
of
conversion,
and
it
was
an
honest
finding
on
the
part
of
the
Zoning
Administrator
that
it
was
so
you
know
we
can
say
on
that
day
there
were
chairs
there,
so
it
was
a
patio
or
we
can
say
it
was
in
process
of
being
converted.
I
think
that
there
are
legal
problems,
yeah.
A
E
J
D
Immediately
but
that's
how
it
got
here
in
the
first
place,
because
it
went
to
the
Zoning
Administrator
to
say:
hey,
it
looks
like
they're
misusing
this
space
in
a
way
that's
not
allowed
and
then
it
got
and
then
that's
been
appealed.
So
indirectly
it
comes
to
the
CBA.
If
it
follows
the
same
steps,
but.
O
One
of
those
elements
is
in
the
definition
of
the
patio,
the
hardscape
material
right,
that's
one!
That's
that's
easy
and
kind
of
black
and
white
portion
of
it.
Some
of
the
others,
a
little
less
clear
and
indirection
would
be
great
because
again,
we
did
get
here
through
this
process
and
we
want
to
hopefully
get
some
resolution
this
evening
and
then
not
repeat
vagueness.
That's.
C
Why
I
asked
the
question
Scott
and
you
know
I'm,
just
I'm,
trying
to
get
real
clarification
to
that's?
Why
I
asked
the
question
as
to
whether
or
not
a
gravel
dog
run
was
allowable
and
and
if
a
gravel
dog
run
is
allowable?
That's
the
same
hardscape,
it's
the
same
material!
It's
a
question
whether
there's
a
dog
running
over
it's
the
end
of
their
table
and
chairs
on
it
right.
O
O
F
I
C
Would
like
to
make
motion
I
move
in
the
I.
Don't
have
the
numbers
of
this
case?
I
move
in
the
case
of
1125
Madison
Street.
With
regard
to
whether
the
Zoning
Administrator
was
correct
in
his
finding
that
the
gravel
side
yard
constituted
a
patio
that
the
Zoning
Administrator
was
incorrect
and
that
the
property
owner
should
be
able
to
proceed
with
the
conversion
of
this
space
to
a
rock
garden.
D
B
C
D
B
A
F
D
C
Can
we
same
it
in
this
way?
Let
me
ask,
while
the
zoning
administrator's
finding
that
this
still
constituted
a
patio
while
it
was
in
transition,
was
correct.
It
was
in
transition
and
therefore
it
was
becoming
a
rock
garden
I.
You
know
I
just
I.
Just
don't
think
that
you
I
have
a
real
problem,
saying
that
his
interpretation
was
correct,
because
because
then
any
25
by
whatever
foot
gravel
area
is
a
patio.
A
D
All
right,
I
think
I've
actually
talked
myself
full
circle
on
the
second
motion,
so
I
can
make
I
can
make
both
of
them
say:
okay,
okay,
I
move
in
the
case;
11:25
Madison,
Street,
17d,
mjv,
zero,
zero,
four,
eight
that
the
board
uphold
the
zoning
administrators
determination
that,
as
of
May,
1st
2017,
the
owner
of
the
property,
was
using
the
side
yard
as
a
patio,
necessitating
a
change
in
that
use
or
removal
of
the
patio.
Second
wait.
K
I
D
A
D
D
Let
me
back
at
it.
So
that's
the
motion,
but
let
me
back
out
of
that.
I
think
the
guidance
that
you're
seeking-
or
at
least
the
guidance
from
our
thinking
is
in
the
discussion
which
is
there
are
certain
uses,
for
example,
walkways
and
dog
runs
and
rock
gardens
that
are
permitted
without
having
to
seek
permission
and
in
your
wisdom,
in
looking
at
a
use
and
whether
it
constitutes
a
patio
or
not.
You
need
to
take
into
account
all
of
the
factors
you
otherwise
might,
including
the
surface,
the
hardscape,
whether
it's
hard
scape
or
not.
D
I
O
O
A
C
Just
have
such
a
real
I
don't
have
such
a
real
problem
with
this
and
that
how
are
we
to
determine
what
somebody
can
put
a
garden
or
a
grotto
or
a
dog
run,
or
you
know,
as
long
as
they
are
conforming
with
impervious
surface?
What
one
area
of
clarification
that
I
think
might
be
helpful
is
if
we
say
that
there
not
be.
A
D
C
D
A
D
A
D
C
E
A
D
D
D
L
A
E
I
P
P
P
A
A
B
Paul
Janicki
architect
applies
for
major
zoning
relief
to
demolish
a
one
car
detached
garage
and
established
one
open
parking
space
in
the
east
interior
side
yard
and
to
demolish
a
mudroom
to
construct
a
one-story
bay
addition
in
the
r1
single-family
residential
district,
the
applicant
requests,
a
0.5
foot,
East
interior
side
yard
setback
for
open
parking
where
5
feet
is
required.
Zoning
code,
section
6,
8,
2,
8,
c
3,
a
12
point;
9
foot,
rear
yard
setback
for
the
bay
addition
where
30
feet
is
required
and
fifteen
point.
B
B
Documents
included
as
part
of
the
record
include
variation
application
submitted,
June
21st,
2017
standards,
form
zoning
analysis,
plaintiff
survey,
site
plans,
elevations
photos
of
property
from
applicant
image
of
property,
aerial
view
of
property,
zoning
map
of
property,
Preservation
Commission
draft
meeting,
minutes,
excerpt
of
June
20th,
2017
and
dapper
draft
meeting
minutes.
Excerpt
of
June
28th
2017
so.
P
P
And,
along
with
that,
we
have
a
plan
on
the
first
floor
at
the
rear
of
the
house
is
sort
of
unusable
with
the
mudroom
is
sort
of
unusable.
So
the
notion
was
to
make
a
bathe.
It's
large
enough
on
the
back
of
the
house
to
actually
form
a
room
at
the
same
time
and
getting
rid
of
the
bulkhead
there's
kind
of
really
hard
to
traverse
and
get
bikes
up
and
down
and
stuff
and
replace
that
with
a
real
stair
that
wraps
around
and
connects
underneath
this
new
addition.
P
It
didn't
use
me
so
the
actual
open
space,
if
you're
looking
at
satellite,
would
actually
work,
there'll
be
less
stuff
covering
the
site,
but
because
we
have
to
count
our
area
to
the
east
of
the
house
as
a
as
a
parking
space
which
it
will
be
as
10
foot
by
20
foot.
That
is
considered
lot
coverage.
So
that's
how
we
get
over
what
we
have
now,
if
that
wasn't
part
of
the
ordinance-
and
it
was,
you
were
just
looking
at
this
thing
from
how
much
architectures
on
this
piece
of
property
rasher
reducing
it.
P
But
because
the
way
the
ordinance
is
written
and
I
understand
this,
that
particular
thing
throws
us
into
in
excess
of
where
we
are
now
we're
also
encroaching
more
on
the
rear
yard,
which
is
already
in
violation
by
like
a
lot
to
make
this
a
small
little
bay.
That
becomes
of
the
this
room
that
we're
trying
to
create
some
I'm,
making
a
clear
something
yeah
and
then
we're
putting
in
pervious
pavers.
Instead
of
the
asphalt
rivalry,
that's
all
going
to
be
Korea's
behaviour,
so.
A
P
No,
it's
kind
of
standard
furniture
just
came
out
of
our
template,
yeah
they're
on
the
right
mm-hmm.
So
it's
it's
big
enough.
First
of
all,
we're
also
getting
into
the
room
from
the
staircase,
so
there's
also
there's
circulation.
That
kinda
has
to
happen
and
we
just
kind
of
put
together
a
loveseat
and
a
couple
of
chairs,
that's
kind
of
what
they
want.
P
Do
they
want
to
have
a
family
area
where,
when
they're
cooking
dinner
and
stuff
that
everybody
can
Kang
out
together
and
be
part
of
the
whole
same
space,
whereas
right
now,
if
you
see
on
the
left
side,
it's
sort
of
like
I'm
notes,
call
it's
a
little
corridor
that
goes
through
here
and
then
you
have
this
other
little
space
beyond
a
bits:
the
so-called
mudroom
that
vestibule.
So
it's
not
really
usable
as
a
family
space.
So
that's
that's!
P
That's
really
what
they're
trying
to
do
and
then
the
reason
for
the
grunt
game
where
the
garages
they
don't
really.
First
of
all
the
garages
sort
of
falling
down
had
fire
damage.
It's
not
historic,
because
I
would
be
the
last
one
to
take
down.
Ask
to
take
down
a
garage
at
Restorick,
and
but
you
came
in
open
to
Karthik
or
you
can't
get
a
car
door
so
now
or
you
can't
get
a
standard
car
door
to
open,
so
you
can
get
kids
in
out.
So
it's
kind
of
an
issue.
P
D
P
D
A
I
P
A
A
A
D
Wasn't
part
of
the
testimony,
but
it's
part
of
the
document.
This
lot
is
tiny
and
went
to
have
a
tiny
house
on
a
tiny
lot
with
a
garage
that's
non-functional
and
to
be
able
to
make
use
of.
That
seems
like
a
great
idea
to
me
and
I
do
believe.
The
proposal
is
the
minimum
change
necessary
to
accomplish
that
so
I
I'm
in
favor
of
the
project
I
agree.
E
I
A
For
two
hours,
alright,
so
I
happen
to
agree
with
with
Scotts
assessment.
I
do
think
that
this
is
the
minimum
change
necessary
and,
quite
frankly,
it's
really
just
enough
to
get
that
door
open
and
not
hit
that
chair
and
get
through.
So
I
think
that
that
is
a
reasonable,
a
reasonably
modest
addition
to
making
this
house
substantially
more
functional.
Okay
with
that
we're
going
to
go
through
the
nine
standards.
A
A
I
think
that
the
garage
being
removed
will
actually
improve
the
light
and
air
that
goes
to
all
the
neighboring
properties,
and
so
I
think
that
there
is
a
benefit
to
that.
I
also
think
this
addition
is
so
modest
that
it
will
not
happen
in
at
the
one-story
addition
that
it
will
not
have
any
impact
on
any
of
the
neighbors.
So
I
think
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
two:
the
cuesta
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
The
intent
is
to
be
able
to
allow
people
to
update
their
homes
as
necessary
for
modern
uses
and
having
a
family
space.
That's
adjacent
to
a
kitchen
is
a
modern
use,
and
this
so
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
There
are
a
couple
of
peculiarities.
One
is
that
this
is
a
tiny
lot.
It's
a
fairly
large
house
on
a
tiny
lot
and
three
that
garage
was
originally
for
a
horse.
I
think
so.
A
I
think
that
those
pieces
all
all
combine
to
make
this
a
peculiar
property
that
is
not
likely
to
be
found
elsewhere,
except
the
new
Jason
house,
so
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
that
number
for
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.
As
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
It's
a
strict
letter
of
the
carrot,
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out.
A
Making
them
build
a
garage
rather
than
letting
them
use
that
the
pad
would
be
a
hardship,
so
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
than
mat
number
five.
The
purpose
of
this
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income,
the
homeowner
plans
to
live
in
this
house
and
not
not
resell
it
quickly,
for
all
intents
and
purposes,
but
in
any
case,
there's
still
a
benefit
to
bringing
the
house
up
to
current
codes
and
standards.
A
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
that
number
six,
the
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property.
Again.
This
is
a
stork
house
on
a
very
small
lot,
and
this
was
all
done
well
before
current
zoning
rules,
so
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
five.
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals.
A
There
is
no
place
else
to
put
this
parking
pad,
except
on
the
driveway,
so
that
is
the
minimum
change
and
then
the
size
of
the
addition
is
again
the
minimum
change,
given
that
you
are
just
getting
enough
to
get
a
doorway
and
get
that
door
open
and
have
a
piece
of
furniture
behind
that
door.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
So
do
I
have
a
motion.
E
A
K
A
A
So
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor
hi,
all
those
opposed
with
a
vote
of
6
to
0.
You
go
on
to
City
Council,
with
a
recommendation.
Good
luck
with
your
project,
all
right
anything
else
on
the
agenda.
No
we're
not
talking
about
anything!
Yes!
Sorry,
other
business
discussion,
adjournment.
B
I
A
A
C
A
A
C
C
I'm
concerned
that
our
finding
tonight
we've
this
property
owner
open
to
litigation
on
the
part
of
the
neighbor,
because
you
know
there
what
difference
is
there
if
there
is
still
underneath
her
planter,
a
10
by
12
square
foot,
gravel
area
and
if
anyone
sets
a
chair
there
boom?
So
you
know
I,
think
that
that
we
needed
to,
I
mean
I'm
concerned
about
that.
Do
you
understand
what
I'm
saying
I.
D
Think
that
I
think
she's
from
this
particular
neighbor
may
be
open
to
litigation
regardless,
but
it
doesn't,
in
my
view,
she's
not
open
to
liability
to
the
neighbor,
which
is
really
what
I
would
be
concerned
about.
If
I
were
and
I'd
be
happy
to
discuss
that
with
you
in
a
non
Zoning
Board
discussion
as
a
between
professional
litigator
right
anytime,
you
would
like,
but
I
don't
I,
don't
think
there
would
be
much
merit
to
a
claim
like
that.
Well,.
E
B
A
But
that's
part
of
the
reason
of
bringing
together
everything
so
that
we
can,
you
know,
come
to
some
agreement
on
what
we,
as
a
board,
feel,
is
most
important
like
on
porches,
let's
determine
when
they're
allowed
in
a
front
yard
setback
so
that
we
don't
have
to
litigate
this
every
time.
How
about
that
one
have.
A
B
C
C
C
A
But
I
had
a
very
similar
conversation
with
Scott
because
I
came
at
it
from
the
same
perspective.
What
do
you
mean
I?
Can't
it's
not
a
required
yard
and
the
fact
is
it's
not
about
a
required
yard.
It's
a
yard
and
the
yard
is
defined
as
anything
between
the
building
and
the
side
lot
line.
So
it's
not
required
yards.
So
that's
where
that's
where
the
clarification
lies
so
anyway,
so
text
amendments
Carol's
got
a
bunch.
I
know
he
does
yeah
all
right.
Who
has
an
emotion,
I'm.