►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 6/19/2018
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
this
is
a
public
hearing
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
of
the
city
of
Evanston.
The
zoning
ordinance
directs
this
body
to
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
Sunda
turn
recommendation
to
City
Council
Melissa.
Will
you
call
roll
please
Lisa.
C
B
D
A
Five
members
present
tonight
we
have
a
quorum
also
present
tonight
our
zoning
planner
Melissa
Klotz
and
Planning
and
Zoning
Administrator
Scott
Mangum.
Nobody
for
legal
is
here.
This
is
a
formal
meeting
and
there
are
rules
that
govern
our
proceedings.
Most
importantly,
only
one
person
speaks
at
a
time,
so
all
testimony
may
be
accurately
recorded.
Anyone
who
wishes
to
address
the
board
regarding
any
matter
on
the
agenda
will
have
the
opportunity
to
do
so
at
the
appropriate
time.
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
and
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
and
opposing
testimony
and
statements
have
been
heard,
the
applicant
or
appellant
will
be
given
the
opportunity
for
rebuttal
or
a
closing
statement.
A
Then
the
board
will
close
the
record
and
begin
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
sign
in
on
the
provided
sheet.
Our
meetings
are
audio
and
video
recorded.
Please
make
sure
that
you
are
at
a
microphone
when
asking
questions
or
making
statements
so
that
you
can
be
properly
recorded.
All
proceedings
are
subject
to
broadcast
at
a
later
date.
A
Any
matter
not
concluded
at
tonight's
hearing
will
be
continued
to
our
next
regularly
meeting.
There
are
four
items
on
the
agenda
this
evening.
There's
2901
central.
Are
you
here,
18
22
lions,
hopefully,
they'll
show
up
752,
cago
Avenue,
you
guys
are
here
and
21
12
Ewing,
okay,
so
everybody
went
lines
is
here
so
we'll
wait
and
see
when
they,
if
and
when
they
show
up
all
right.
The
first
agenda
on
our
the
first
item
on
our
agenda
are
the
meeting
minutes
from
the
last
meeting.
Has
everybody
had
a
chance
to
review
those?
C
A
Been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye
opposed
I
will
note
that
I
did
not
vote
since
I
was
not
at
that
meeting.
All
right
for
everyone.
Who's
going
to
plan
on
speaking
at
tonight's
meeting
can
I
get
you
to
raise
your
right
hand
and
your
swear
affirm
to
tell
the
truth.
Throughout
the
course
of
these
proceedings.
A
F
Evening,
thank
you,
madam
chair
where's.
The
board
members
of
public
requests
on
this
item
is
for
a
special
use
permit
to
operate
a
type
2
restaurant
gotta
be
crepes
within
the
b1,
a
business
district
and
also
within
the
Central
Street
overlay
district.
On
this
matter,
the
Zoning
Board
is
a
recommending
body
to
the
City
Council
who's.
A
determining
body
staff
and
design
and
project
review
committee
have
reviewed
the
request
and
are
recommending
approval
of
this
especially
used
for
the
type
2
restaurants
it
does
appear
to
meet.
All
all
standards
does
not
require
any
zoning
variations.
F
G
G
So
you
know
Cathy
know
we
met
making
crepes
13
years
ago,
August
2005
and
when
the
place
closed
down,
we
start
up
on
our
front
porch,
eight
years
ago,
this
Thursday
and
just
made
for
neighbors,
so
we're
very
excited
to
find
a
spot.
That's
a
nice
neighborhood
area
when
we
first
moved
Evanson
in
2010
I
was
over
on
Central
Street
by
the
stadium,
so
it's
nice
to
be
having
our
first
business
up
on
the
same
street
if
you've
seen
us
at
the
farmers
market.
G
What
we're
looking
forward
to
here
is
continue
to
make
crepes
to
order
sourcing
from
the
different
farmers
and
family
producers
here
in
the
area,
or
you
know
those
we
find
at
the
markets
around
town
and
in
this
case,
having
outside
of
the
market,
where
we
just
a
picnic
table
having
place
for
people
to
sit
and
join
and
relax
and
enjoy
crepes
and
dice
conversation
or
celebrations.
So
we're
very
excited-
and
it's
our
first
venture
like
this,
and
so
we're
very
excited
and
looking
forward
to
continuous
adventure.
A
G
Have
four
spaces?
Okay,
our
cargo
van
is
one
or
the
business
truck
is
one
so
there's
just
three
other
spaces
available.
Okay
for
each
shift
over
there
is
just
between.
You
know.
Right
now
is
we're
doing
it
just
for
the
markets
just
between
one
and
three
people,
but
once
we
open
those
doors
up
on
the
busier
shift,
maybe
no
more
than
60
people
working.
G
A
G
Usually
the
family,
farmers,
Edward,
I'm
or
natural
director
would
be
the
two
larger
companies
and
we're
done
has
a
larger
box
truck
a
natural
Drex
a
little
bit
smaller.
But
besides
that,
it's
just
the
smaller
box
trucks
for
the
different
farmers,
C&D
family
farms,
Jase
country
meats
and
all
the
rest.
It's
usually
just
smaller
vehicles
and.
G
I
G
Worked
on
usually
late
early
afternoon,
the
only
early
morning
thing
was
the
Mahoney
for
the
grease
trap,
but
we
just
talked
with
them
because
of
the
neighbors
right
there
right
about
coming
at
the
end
of
their
shifts.
Okay,
they
said
they
start
at
1:00
in
the
morning,
but
they
don't
finish
till
I
believe
late
morning,
so
we
just
requested
they
to
come
no
earlier
than
8:00,
okay,.
G
C
C
E
G
E
J
G
We'll
just
utilize
that
space
there
just
to
communicate
to
people
that
we
got
good
food
and
we'd
be
happy
to
feed
their
hunger.
So.
G
A
G
G
K
G
D
A
A
J
Think
this
is
an
example
of
a
business
that's
been
operating
in
our
community
for
many
years
at
the
markets
that
people
have
enjoyed.
You
know
I
myself
have
enjoyed
your
gluten-free
crepes
I,
hope
that
you
continue
to
carry
those
in
your
new
bricks
and
mortar
location.
This
is,
you
know,
a
location
that
roses
has
moved
out
of
I,
don't
know
over
two
years
ago,
and
so
the
space
has
sat
vacant.
So
this
is
an
opportunity
to
fill
this
space
activate
the
space.
E
D
A
Excellent
I
think
the
only
thing
that
we,
besides
going
through
their
standards,
is
that
the
hours
of
operations
so
Scott
had
just
given
me
a
quick
download
on
what's
on
the
Block
on
that
Street.
So
Starbucks
opens
at
6:00,
backlot
coffee
opens
at
6:30,
Kurtz
opens
at
7:00,
and
the
old
neighborhood
grill
is
open.
Till
11:00
p.m.
and
Hartigan's
is
open,
till
9:00
p.m.
so
are
we
thinking
like
6:00
to
10:00
for
hours?
Does
that
seem
reasonable?
Everybody
yep.
K
A
Then
you
won't
be
out
of
whack
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood
all
right,
so
let's
go
through
the
nine
standards
for
special
uses
number
one.
It
is
one
of
the
special
uses
specifically
listed
in
the
zoning
ordinance.
It
is,
and
there
are
no
further
restrictions
in
the
Overland
Central
Street
overlay
district
number,
two,
it's
in
keeping
with
the
purposes
and
policies
of
the
adapted,
comprehensive
general
plan
and
the
zoning
ordinance
as
amended
from
time
to
time.
A
A
There
certainly
aren't
very
many
special
uses
in
that
particular
part
of
town,
so
I
don't
think
that
this
causes
any
sort
of
negative
cumulative
effect,
so
I
think
that
that
standard
certainly
has
been
met.
Number
four:
it
does
not
interfere
with
or
diminish
the
value
of
the
property
in
the
neighborhood
to
the
contrary.
A
Vacant
land
vacant
storefronts
certainly
detract
and
diminished
value
of
property.
So
by
filling
one
of
those
vacant,
storefronts
I
think
we're
definitely
increasing
the
value
of
the
property
and
increasing
the
the
the
viability
of
that
part
of
straight
so
I
think
that
that
standard
has
certainly
been
met.
Number
five:
it
can
be
adequately
served
by
public
facilities
and
services.
It
is
on
a
on
a
bus
route.
A
It
is
also
a
long
walk,
but
a
walk
nonetheless
from
the
train
station
and
there's
certainly
a
a
loyal
following
of
people
who
walk
to
things
on
central
street,
so
I
think
that
that
certainly
will
be
adequately
served
by
public
public
facilities.
So
I
think
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
six.
It
does
not
cause
undue
traffic
congestion.
A
There's
been
a
restaurant
in
that
location
before
and
there
were
no
problems
related
to
that
particular
use
of
the
building,
also
as
I
just
mentioned,
about
the
the
the
walkability
of
it
from
the
neighborhood,
so
I
think
that
that
that
will
most
likely
be
the
way
that
most
people
will
get
there.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
seven
preserves
significant
historical
and
architectural
resources.
Aside
from
reusing
an
existing
building,
that's
been
vacant,
there's
nothing
significantly
historical
or
architectural
about
that
building,
but
certainly
using
a
building.
A
That's
existing
is
a
benefit,
so
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
eight.
It
preserves
significant
natural
and
environmental
features.
I,
don't
think
that
standard
applies
and
number
nine
it
complies
with
all
other
applicable
regulations
of
the
district
in
which
it's
located
and
all
everything
else
you'll
be
required
to
to
meet
so
that
standard
will
certainly
be
met.
So
with
that
can
I
have
a
motion
with
ours
and
lui
parking
litter.
All
that
good
stuff
I'll.
J
J
A
A
B
Alamin
architect
applies
for
major
zoning
relief
to
establish
an
outdoor
seating
area
at
firehouse
Grill
in
the
c1,
a
commercial
mixed
use
district.
The
applicant
requests
to
eliminate
288
parking
spaces
for
a
total
of
zero
parking
spaces
for
28
parking
spaces
were
originally
required
and
two
parking
spaces
currently
exist.
Zoning
code,
section
616,
3/5
table
16,
B,
a
three-foot
tall,
wood
fence,
continuous
planter
box
that
is
1
foot
behind
the
front.
B
Building
facade
of
Chicago
Avenue
we're
fencing
must
be
at
least
three
feet
behind
the
front:
building
facade
zoning
code,
Section,
six,
four:
six:
seven
f
2e
and
an
8
foot
tall
wood
fence
with
a
zero
foot
street
side
yard
setback
on
Madison
Street,
where
the
maximum
allowed
fence
height
is
six
feet
and
a
2
foot
street
side
yard
setback
is
required.
Zoning
code
Section
six,
four,
six,
seven
F,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
makes
a
recommendation
to
City
Council
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
B
Following
the
recommendation
of
the
dapper
committee,
the
applicant
did
submit
a
revised
site
plan
with
a
total
of
one
on-site
ad,
a
parking
space
and
that
eliminates
the
ad
a
drop-off
zone,
but
maintains
the
current
delivery
truck
zone.
That
is,
their
documents
included.
As
part
of
the
record
include.
A
L
L
I'm
excited
to
be
here
in
Evanston
I'm,
a
longtime
Evanston
resident
I
just
recently
purchased
the
firehouse
grill
last
year
and
excited
to
be
here
in
Evanston
and
I.
Give
back
to
a
community
that
I've
been
a
part
of
for
a
long
time.
We're
here
tonight
seeking
variation
to
extend
the
patio
that
already
exists
at
the
firehouse
grill
and,
along
with
me,
I
have
Thomas
Thomas.
A
C
So
it
have
is
we've
heard
the
presentation
can
ask
a
question.
We
have
a
letter
here
objecting
to
the
proposed
eight-foot
tall
wooden
fence
with
zero
setback
along
Madison
Street.
The
the
concern
that
the
neighbor
from
seven-eleven
Madison
raises
is
that
the
8-foot
tall
fence
may
obscure
traffic
turning
onto
Madison
from
Chicago
Avenue,
particularly
since
there
there's
the
fire
station
right
there
at
Custer
and
Madison
Street.
C
Any
reason
that
fence
could
not
be
lowered
a
little
bit
or
moved
in
a
little
bit.
I
mean
I,
do
understand
the
concern
with
that
I'm
thrilled
that
the
garbage
there
is
going
to
be
contained
because
I'm
really
very
familiar
with
that
corner,
actually
live
on.
Madison
Street
paint
right
off
iris
grill
for
a
long
time,
but
but
you
know
that
it's
great,
that
the
refuse
will
be
contained,
but
I
do
understand
the
concern
for
an
8-foot
tall
fence.
There
I'm
wonder
if
you
could
speak
to
that
sure.
M
So
you
know,
as
you
know,
part
of
the
dapper
review,
there's
somebody
from
the
Tristen
from
the
fire
departments
there
and
there
were
no
concerns
from
the
people.
That
would
be
the
most
concerned,
so
I
think
technically
I
think
we
feel
comfortable
with
it
and
I
think
part
of
the
reason.
It
is
a
unique
situation,
because
it's
it's
the
the
embankment
there
and
I
think
the
idea
is
to
obscure
as
much
of
the
embankment
which
isn't
the
most
attractive
part
of
that
location.
M
J
That
point
I
think
that,
in
addition
to
sort
of
the
the
fire
and
the
safety
concern
with
the
8-foot
fence
was
the
idea
that
it
would
create
sort
of
a
wall
for
the
pedestrian
experience.
I
guess
in
part,
I'd
like
to
better
understand
why
that
Toliver
of
offense
is
needed.
I
understand
here
what
you're
saying
about
the
embankment,
but
in
order
to
enclose
the
patio
could
that
be
lowered
and
then
a
a
question
to
staff
is
how
is
this
in
keeping
with
other
similar
structures
across
the
city
for
other
patio
type
uses.
M
Well,
I
mean
the
fence
could
be
built
any
height,
I.
Think
it
like
I
would
go
back
to
my
point
about
it
being
a
little
bit
unique
that
it's
not
I,
think
the
six
foot
fence
there's
a
security
concerns
when
there
are
neighbors
and
things
like
that.
But
the
neighbor
in
this
case
is
the
embankment
and
so
we're
just
obscuring
more
of
something.
That's
not
particularly
attractive
I.
E
L
E
J
I'm,
looking
at
your
site
plan-
and
you
know,
I
was
trying
to
picture
it
and
you
know
I've
been
to
your
site,
I'm
familiar
with
the
corridor
and
well
so
just
south
of
theirs
is
the
parking
lot
and
then
I
understand
where
you're
situated
against
the
embankment,
but
from
a
pedestrian
experience
along
Chicago
Avenue.
There
is
still
going
to
be
a
significant
wall
there.
The.
A
M
M
C
M
A
Think
our
point
is
as
you're
walking
on
Madison
East,
what
you're
looking
at
once
you
get
beyond
the
embankment
is
you're
looking
at
that
eight-foot
wall
and
you
can't
see
through
to
Chicago
Avenue,
okay,
I
think
that's
the
concern!
Okay
and-
and
that's
obviously
one
of
my
concerns
as
well,
because
if
you
look
at
all
the
residential
which
does
back
up
to
that
embankment,
you're
not
allowed
to
put
an
8-foot
fence
on
the
back
of
your
property.
A
A
M
M
So
one
of
the
things
that's
been
going
on
in
the
city
is
we're
building
a
lot
of
tall
buildings
and
I
think
open
space
is
at
a
premium
and
I
think
essentially
creating
a
plaza
that
everyone
can
enjoy.
That
takes
what
was
dumpster
and
that
particularly
attractive
parking
area
and
making
it
a
public
amenity
is
a
good
thing.
Well,.
A
M
A
M
F
Believe
that
this
state
law
has
changed
on
that
and
so
that
you
do
pay
the
meter
now,
even
with
the
placard.
That's.
C
L
Yeah
parking
spaces
yeah,
so
in
the
new
the
new
revised
proposal
we'd
still
be
keeping
188
parking
space
available.
As
we
pointed
out,
there
are
the
other
there's
other
handicapped,
a.da,
accessible
spaces
on
the
city
streets,
as
well
as
immediately
to
the
south
parking
lot
available
as
well.
So
there's
plenty
of
parking
available.
J
B
B
J
It
seems
to
me,
be
you
know
this
is
similar
to
other
restaurants
in
our
commercial
quarters.
You
know
inline
restaurant
with
our
commercial
quarters
that
has
very
minimal
on-site
parking
and
it
seems
almost
like
we're
penalizing
them
because
they
have
some
on
street
parking
available
for
you
know
having
to
provide.
J
You
know
additional
ad,
a
parking
I
think
it's
you
know
certainly
advantageous
and
admirable,
but
we
have
it's
a
pretty
competitive
marketplace
in,
to
the
extent
that
we
have
a
new
owner,
that's
trying
to
stay
competitive
with
fireplace
grill,
that's
been
in
existence
for
a
long
time.
Certainly
there's
new
residential,
that's
moving
in
there,
but
I
think
the
ad
a
issue
is
I:
don't
want
to
be
penalizing
a
business
unduly
in
ways
that
we
don't
treat
other
businesses
I.
C
M
The
plan
is
currently
and
there's
a
couple
of
perspectives.
Maybe
the
next
one,
which
is
a
little
bit
more
of
a
close
up
to
have
the
idea
of
the
of
the
lighting
and
cover
the
the
lights,
should
be
similar
to
Fountain
Square,
which
creates
a
nice
atmosphere
and
then
having
some
shade,
which
is
very
functional
with
hot
sunny
weather
right.
C
J
So
perhaps
I
don't
know
if,
if
we
want
to
consider
as
part
of
our
recommendation
well
I'd
like
to
understand
what
the
hours
of
the
proposed
hours
of
the
outside
dining
are-
and
you
know,
the
the
nearby
residents
spoke
of
the
door
being
kept
a
jar
which
is
you
know
it
encourages
the
noise.
You
know
the
noise
issues,
so
if
you
can
it
speak
to
those
two
points
sure.
L
A
A
J
To
the
letter
that
we
received
part
of
the
issue
with
the
noise
is
that
the
door
being
kept
ajar,
perhaps
from
the
restaurant
to
the
patio,
was
part
of
the
issue.
My
understanding
was
noise
from
inside
the
restaurant
music.
I'm,
not
sure
was
that
you
know
noise
was
traveling
to
nearby
residences,
I.
Think.
C
L
A
Oh
yeah,
it
does
anybody
else,
have
any
other
questions.
No
in
my
own
little
world
here,
okay,
is
there
anybody
here
who'd
like
to
speak
about
this
project?
We
do
have
some
of
your
neighbors,
so
if
you
guys
would
have
a
seat
we'll
let
them
come
up
and
and
and
tell
us
what
they're
thinking
so
come
on
up.
If
you
can
give
us
your
name
and
address,
that
would
be
great.
H
H
Of
those
is
from
707
Madison
and
the
other
is
directly
across
the
street
from
me:
I'm
not
sure
the
number
720,
maybe
okay,
thank
you
and
my
main
concern
has
to
do
with
the
visibility
of
the
corner
I'm
a
little
concerned
that
the
usage
of
that
passage
is
such
a
heavy
use
for
recreational
people
for
bikes
and
anyone
getting
to
the
lake.
So
the
normal
500
feet
that
got
this
notice
and
this
right
to
speak,
I
think
really
under
counts.
H
How
used
that
passage
is
because
our
neighborhood
sort
of
serves
as
a
funnel
to
that
viaduct,
because
people
can't
get
through
at
the
other
Street.
So
there's
a
lot
of
traffic,
including
a
lot
of
schoolchildren
going
to
and
from
Lincoln
school,
because
we
cross
the
boundary,
so
we
they
have
to
cross
there.
So
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
in
an
eight-foot
wall
really
would
block
a
lot
of
visibility.
It's
already
difficult
for
me
as
a
driver
when
I'm
coming
home
and
turning
onto
Madison,
it's
a
very
sharp
turn
when
their
delivery
trucks
are
there.
H
It
I
can't
see
anything
when
I'm
coming
around
there
and
I
always
have
to
go
very
slowly
and
cautiously
to
come
around
the
corner.
I
think
an
eight-foot
wall
would
have
a
similar
effect
and
I
think
it
would
really
decrease
the
safety
of
a
very
highly
used
intersection
and
safety
is
the
biggest
concern,
but
also
just
the
aesthetics
of
it.
When
you're
coming
through
it's
already
kind
of
a
tunnel
to
come
through
to
viaduct
I
agree:
it's
not
beautiful.
It's
not
aesthetic
for
everyone
except
the
patrons
of
the
restaurant.
H
This
walls
only
gonna
make
that
worse,
it's
going
to
be
a
much
longer
tunnel.
You
can't
see
what
you're
coming
out
to
so,
rather
than
building
a
big
wall,
I
would
rather
them
see,
put
some
money
into
beautifying
the
embankment
can
we
get
some
public
art
or
some
flowers
on
the
embankment
or
landscaping
or
something
that
wouldn't
require.
You
know
wouldn't
close
off
that
for
their
patrons
make
it
making
it
worse
for
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood.
H
H
So
as
a
church
there's
concern
about
adequate
parking,
I
know,
it
says:
there's
only
two
spots
that
we're
there
and
only
handicapped,
but
it
seems
sometimes
I've
seen
four
or
five
cars
I,
don't
know
if
they're
employees,
when
they're
not
open
and
they're
there,
but
I,
don't
know
if
more
people
are
using
those
off
hours,
I'm,
not
sure
whose
those
cars
are,
but
if
they
could
find
places,
maybe
by
purchasing
leasing
a
couple
places
across
where
there's
parking
alongside
the
railroad
tracks.
That
would
help,
but
we
would
be
concerned
also
about
parking.
Thank
you.
Thank.
N
When
I'm
steeve
hearing
also
from
7/15
medicine,
III
see
the
plans
there
and
I
see
the
diagrams
nine
days
ago,
I
was
walking
that
intersection
and
there
was
a
comment
truck
that
was
doing
some
some
work
on
underground
there.
The
comment
truck
was
parked
approximately,
where
I
understand
the
law
would
be
I
was
shocked
by
the
impact
to
visibility.
I
would
urge
you
to
perform
the
experiment
rather
than
rely
on
diagrams
or
imagination,
because
the
eight-foot
wall
does
have
a
huge.
A
surprisingly
large.
It
surprised
me
impact
on
his
ability.
N
Elementary
school
children
travel
that
intersection,
because
there's
the
Lincoln
School
District
spans
two
spans
of
tracks.
The
fire
truck
fire
department
spans
that
the
tracks,
as
my
wife
mentioned,
it's
it's
many
more
people
affected
than
within
the
500
foot
radius.
That's
the
work
that
were
notified.
It's
it's
a
large
number
of
blocks
beyond
there
that
time
use
that
as
a
natural
route
to
get
to
the
lake.
N
So,
like
I
say,
the
stakes
are
higher
than
then
for
an
average
intersection.
The
intersection
is
already
kind
of
strange
because
of
the
offset
of
the
light
at
Kedzie
versus
the
the
madison
offset
and
the
lack
of
a
left-hand
turn
lane
office
Chicago
on
to
Madison,
so
the
intersection
is
already
problematic
to
add.
You
know
some
possible
visibility
issues
just
just
exacerbates
the
problems,
so
I
think
we
should
think
very
seriously
in
rejecting
the
issue.
Thank
you.
Thank.
N
A
B
A
M
Thanks
for
coming
and
that's
to
be
honest,
I
hadn't
thought
about
that,
and
we
were
talking
about
it
and
we
have
no
problem
while
wearing
it
to
6
feet
and
I.
Think
maybe,
if
you
want
to
go
back
to
the
plan,
even
maybe
making
more
of
a
difference
would
be
pulling
the
east
end
of
the
fence
that
a
wall,
the
fence
in
because,
if
the
right
tunnel
right.
So
if
we
pull
it
in
it'll,
widen
that
angle
and
bringing
it
down
you.
M
A
I
A
A
M
B
A
A
E
C
I
C
C
C
The
other
thing
about
the
six-foot
fence
is
I
really
think
that
the
canopy,
the
greater
enclosure
of
the
patio,
is
something
that
is
desirable
to
a
lot
of
the
residential
residents
at
I.
Know
what
Emily
but
I
think
just
in
general
that
that
it
would
be
appreciated
if
that
were
self
contained,
so
to
speak.
So
I
think
that
a
the
final
analysis
is
a
really
good
compromise.
Yeah
I
want.
J
To
clarify
points
so
we're
talking
about
both
the
height
of
the
fence
from
eight
foot
to
possibly
six
foot
as
is
allowed
by
right
and
then
the
setback
issue,
because
they
were
proposing
this
fence
at
the
zero
setback
right
and
as
of
right.
We're
talking
about
a
two
foot
setback,
so
I'm
curious.
If
it
came
back
to
two
feet,
a
two
foot
setback.
How
does
that
impact
the
seating
of
the
patio,
the
capacity
of
the
patio
I?
Don't.
J
C
A
That
I
would
like
to
not
get
into
that.
I
know
what
we
have
done
for
other
recreational
facilities
that
make
noise
is
tell
them
they
have
to
keep
their
doors
closed
and
I
know
that
that
generally
works,
so
I
think
if
we
can
get
them
to
keep,
if
we
can
put
it
in
the
ordinance
in
the
recommendation
to
keep
their
doors
closed,
that
should
solve
most
of
it.
Well,.
C
A
A
Know
that
I'm
said
as
a
good
as
a
good
owner.
He
doesn't
want
to
do
that
now.
You
guys
have
all
are
under
have
have
said
that
you
would
like
this.
I
am
completely
against
getting
rid
of
a
DA
parking
I,
do
not
support
that
by
any
stretch
imaginable
I,
don't
think
it's
right
to
be
taking
away.
What
is
there
and
putting
in
more
seating,
so
we're
we're
marginalizing
one
group
of
people
for
the
benefit
of
others,
and
so
I
cannot
get
behind
that.
A
That
said,
doesn't
really
matter,
so
we
just
get
to
these,
so
we
won't
I,
won't
belabor
the
point.
So
if
we
can
make
those
other
modifications
that
make
things
better,
I
think
that's
going
to
be
helpful.
It
just
means
that
when
I
go
through
the
standards
for
major
variations,
somebody's
got
a
pipe
in
when
I
say
no
all
right.
So
the
standards
for
major
variations
there
are
seven
of
them
and
number
one
is.
The
requested.
Variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
youths,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
a
genie
adjoining
properties.
A
I
think
this
standard
has
been
met
because
the
addition
of
36
seats
to
that
space
will
not
have
a
major
impact,
there's
already
sort
of
a
vibrancy
to
that
corner.
That
is
expected
in
that
location
and
is
expected
by
the
multi-family
across
the
street.
So
I
do
think
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
two:
the
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
The
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
is
to
allow
businesses
to
expand
and
to
make
improvements
to
their
property,
as
is
seen
necessary
to
keep
them
in
a
competitive
situation,
and
so
I
think
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
A
I
didn't
particularly
see
a
hardship
here.
I,
don't
think
that
this
is
necessarily
peculiar
to
the
property.
I
know
that
this
property
has
had
a
parking
requirement
in
the
past
that
just
seemed
to
magically
vanish,
and
that
troubles
me
to
a
great
extent
and
so
I
don't
think
that
moving
we
releasing
them
from
the
requirement
of
having
to
ad
a
spots
is
appropriate.
So
I
don't
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
I
agree.
C
Think
it's
it's
unfair
to
this
particular
business.
It
is
by
and
large
a
transit
oriented
area
of
the
city,
and
there
is
ad
a
parking
on
the
street
and
they
are
maintaining
one
ad
a
parking
space
on
their
premises,
where
that's
one
ad
a
parking
space
more
than
any
other
restaurant
I,
can
think
of
a
long
Chicago,
Avenue
I
agree.
J
With
those
points
and
I
would
just
add
that
when
those
parking
numbers
weren't
put
in
place,
I
think
development
patterns
have
changed
in
Evanston.
Our
commercial
corridors
continue
to
change
and
I
agree
that
it's
not
in
keeping
with
the
intent
to
allow
businesses
to
expand
and
be
competitive
in
a
competitive
marketplace.
I.
E
Agree
with
you,
Mary
Beth,
because
I
do
believe
that
the
ad
a
parking
that
they
point
out,
that's
on
the
street
there's
a
lot
of
competition
for
that
with
the
other
restaurants
and
the
other
businesses
and
I
feel
like
this.
Business
should
be
able
to
maintain
the
two
that
they
have
that's
minimum
as
it
is.
A
Okay,
number:
four:
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
If
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out,
I
don't
think
this
standard
has
been
met
because
I'm
not
sure
that
the
additional
the
addition
of
30
seats
is
is
necessarily
a
practical
difficulty.
I
think
you'd
like
them
and
I
think
that
they
might
create
some
additional
revenue,
but
again
at
the
at
the
at
the
offset
of
rights
to
other
people
in
the
in
the
community
and
particularly
handicapped
people.
J
C
Add
to
that
that
the
the
the
when
someone
purchases
a
business
there
is
an
immediate
uptick
in
overhead
expenditure,
because
you've
purchased
a
business
and
so
for
the
businesses
to
be
able
to
to
thrive.
They
need
to
be
able
to
grow
under
those
circumstances.
So
I
don't
think
that
it
is
a
mere
inconvenience
to
have
to
maintain
a
patio
that
is
deficient
for
the
demand
of
the
neighborhood
and.
E
A
Number
five:
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property
or
there's
a
public
benefit.
Clearly,
the
the
point
of
this
is
to
extract
additional
income,
which
is
fine.
It's
just
that
in
doing
that,
we
hope
that
there
is
a
public
benefit
and
I
do
think
that
there
to
certain
extent,
there
is
a
public
benefit
of
this
being
more
of
an
open,
vibrant,
plaza,
slash
patio
sort
of
a
more
animated
corner.
A
However,
I
I
just
can't
offset
that
with
the
with
the
decrease
in
benefit
to
a
handicapped
population
that
is
getting
marginalized
by
the
minute
and
so
I
just
I
don't
see
that
that
as
being
a
higher
benefit
and
then
the
benefit
of
meeting
the
requirements
of
providing
parking
for
handicapped
populations.
So
I
don't
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met
with
you.
C
Well,
the
inclusion
solutions
is
a
business
here
in
Evanston
that
provides
solutions
precisely
for
issues
such
as
this,
so
that,
if
you
have
a
handicapped
patron,
come
to
the
front
they
can,
you
know
they
can
park
their
car.
They
can
actually
even
call
in
to
your
restaurant
and
say
I'd
like
to
come
and
and
get
a
table
have
someone
available
to
go
out
and
and
park
their
car
and
one
of
the
other
spaces
then
go
get
it
for
them.
I
mean
that's.
C
What
inclusion
solutions
has
been
doing
for
a
lot
of
businesses
is
finding
ways
to
accommodate
handicapped
patrons,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
the
the
patio
should
be
that
this
business
should
not
be
allowed
to
grow
for
a
new
owner.
Furthermore,
I
think
that
there
is
a
public
benefit
in
that
that
is
not
an
attractive
lot
right
now.
C
A
I'm,
sorry,
you
can't
we've
closed
the
record
and,
unfortunately
yep
so
sorry
to
be
tough
about
that
number.
Six,
the
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property,
certainly
the
the
lot
size
as
it
is,
and
the
location
of
the
building.
That's
all
existing
and
the
number
of
parking
spaces
that
are
on
the
spot
on
the
site
are
all
existing.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
seven.
A
So
they're,
okay,
so
they
had
to
and
they've
given
their
they're
asking
to
give
up.
One
I
don't
believe
that
that's
the
least
deviation
necessary
I.
Don't
think
there
should
be
any
deviation
from
the
required
parking.
The
required
parking
for
this
location,
so
I
personally,
do
not
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met
and.
J
I,
disagree
I'm
glad
that,
based
on
Deborah's
comments,
they
were
able
to
include
one
of
those
ad
a
parking
spots
back
into
the
site
plan,
I'm,
also
more
comfortable
with
the
proposal.
Now
that
we
have
been
able
to
shorten
that
fence,
you
know
and
sort
of
address
that
that
View
corridor
for
the
pedestrians
and
drivers
in
that
area,
so
I,
do
think
you
know
I
disagree
with
your
findings.
A
So
because
we
have,
this
is
a
recommendation
and
it
seems
that
we
are
going
to
recommend
against
the
8-foot
tall
fence
and
the
zero
foot
side.
Street
side,
soured,
sat
street
side,
yard
setback
and
recommend
approval
for
the
other.
I
would
ask
that
we
separate
this
into
two
motions
to
make
it
clear,
and
so
who
wants
to
do
that?.
C
C
With
a
one
foot
setback
and,
and
then
there's
the
the
proposal
for
the
8
foot
fence,
which
we're
saying
will
be
denied
right,
so
that
would
make
it
three
motions.
Sure
three
motions
on
ok
I'll
go.
First
I
move
in
the
case
of
GBA
18
cm
JV
0:04.
For
that
we
recommend
a
City
Council
that
they
approve
the
variation
allowing
the
3-foot
fence
with
planters
at
a
one
foot
setback
rather
than
a
three
foot
setback
along
Chicago,
Avenue,
I.
A
C
J
C
I
would
I
would
recommend
that
we
or
I
would
move
that
we
recommend
approval
by
the
City
Council
for
one
ad,
a
parking
space
on
the
premises
with
the
provision
that
the
business
seek
the
assistance
of
inclusion
solutions
to
accommodate
other
handicapped
clients
that
might
wish
to
patronize
the
firehouse
grow.
Second,.
E
C
I
A
B
Margaret
hens,
property
owner
applies
for
major
zoning
relief
to
eliminate
conditions
imposed
on
granted
variation
case,
za
r0
133
m
to
allow
the
coach-house
to
be
legally
occupied
and
rented
by
persons
who
are
not
members
of
the
family
occupying
the
principal
dwelling
unit,
as
would
otherwise
be
allowed
by
city
code,
if
not
for
the
variation
conditions.
Zoning
code,
section
63,
814,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals,
is
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
Documents
included
as
part
of
the
record,
include.
B
A
O
Gonna,
take
that
line
perfect.
Well,
thank
you
all
for
taking
the
time
tonight
to
review
this
property
I'm
here
to
request
two
things
number
one:
to
remove
the
17-year
old
condition
from
the
two
one,
one
to
un
coche
house
that
have
been
placed
on
it
in
exchange
for
being
built
four
and
a
half
feet
taller
than
was
standard
so
that
it
can
be
rented
under
the
same
ordinance.
That
now
allows
every
other
existing
coach
house
in
Evanston
to
be
rented.
O
Instead
of
this
condition,
I
would
like
to
suggest
the
condition
that
one
of
the
two
homes
be
owner
occupied
instead,
I
know
you've
received
six
or
seven
letters
of
concern
about
this
coach
house
being
rented,
maybe
seven
or
eight
I'm,
not
sure
of
the
total
number
I
actually
have
a
couple
more
petitions,
but
I
know
you
also
received
26
or
27
letters
and
petitions
of
approval
for
the
Coach
House
to
be
rented.
However,
with
any
variance
I
know,
it's
not
just
a
matter
of
majority
opinion
and
I
know:
there
are
standards
to
be
met.
O
So
I'd
like
to
take
this
time
to
show
the
variance
I'm
requesting
tonight
does
meet
the
seven
standards
to
grant
this
variance
and
to
hopefully
shed
some
light
on
any
of
the
concerns
that
you've
received.
Sorry
I
didn't
know
you
guys
went
through
the
variances
afterwards,
so
I'm
just
going
to
go
through
them
now,
okay,
number
one!
This
will
not
have
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
the
adjoining
properties.
Obviously
this
is
a
big
one.
A
few
concerns
around
this
first
standard
were
raised.
O
The
first
one
I'm
going
to
address
is
density.
If
you
can
go
to
the
the
other
direction,
for
the
parcel
map
would
be
great
perfect,
allowing
this
coach
has
to
be
rent.
It
would
not
significantly
increase
the
density
of
this
block.
The
small
main
home
and
coach
house
are
on
a
double-wide
lot
and
even
with
two
families
living
there,
the
density
of
the
property
would
remain
in
keeping
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood.
There
are
currently
19
families
on
our
block,
including
two
families
in
a
two
flat
just
50
feet
away
from
mine.
O
Adding
a
family
to
the
coach
house
would
bring
our
total
family
count
to
20.
This
is
not
a
significant
amount
and
nowhere
near
the
density
that
some
other
coach
houses
coach
house
rentals
are
now
bringing
to
their
blocks.
For
example,
the
single
block
at
the
former
site
of
Kendall
College
has
19
homes
and
11
coach
houses
built
only
six
years
ago
with
the
assurance
that
the
coach
houses
would
not
become
rentals
that
changed
with
January's
new
ordinance,
which
brings
the
possible
number
of
families
on
that
one
block
from
19
to
a
possible
30.
O
Our
block
would
only
increase
by
one
family
most
likely
and
increase
headcount
of
three
people,
as
you
can
see,
allowing
this
coach
house
to
be
rented
would
not
significantly
increase
the
density
on
the
block
and
so
will
not
have
substantial
negative
impact
on
the
adjoining
properties
parking.
This
is
a
non-issue.
Her
neighborhood
has
abundance
of
parking,
probably
triple
the
amount.
We
need.
Everybody
just
parks
waiting
for
another
house.
If
you
have
to
park
one
car
away,
it's
very
odd
allowing
this
coach
has
to
be
rent.
O
It
would
not
cause
any
parking
issues,
neighborhood
integrity,
allowing
this
coach
house
to
be
wrenched.
It
would
not
significantly
change
the
integrity
or
feel
of
the
neighborhood
on
this
block.
One
family
living
in
a
coach
house
tucked
in
the
back
of
a
large
lot,
hardly
has
the
power
to
change
the
neighborhood.
Furthermore,
rental
dwellings
are
completely
in
keeping
with
the
history
of
our
block
and
its
current
makeup.
72
feet
from
my
property
is
a
large
home.
That
was
a
tooth
that
was
first
a
four
flat
several
decades
ago.
O
The
coach-house,
as
I
said,
is
tucked
in
the
back
of
a
double-wide
lot,
which
is
separated
by
its
neighbors
from
its
neighbors
by
an
eight-foot
wood
fence.
It
is
over
fifty
feet
away
from
every
home
in
the
neighborhood,
except
for
my
north
neighbor,
who
wrote
a
letter
in
support
of
allowing
it
to
be
rented.
O
There
is
nothing
to
show
that
renting.
This
coach
house
would
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
the
surrounding
neighbors
property
values
with
parking
and
non-issue
the
change
in
density,
negligible,
use
and
enjoyment,
unaffected
and
neighborhood
integrity
intact.
It
follows
that
renting
this
coach
house
would
not
adversely
affect
property
values
of
the
neighborhood.
In
fact,
rental.
O
Cook
County
counts
both
structures
as
homes
and
taxes
it
accordingly,
but
unless
the
coach-house
is
able
to
be
rented,
it
most
likely
will
seldom
be
a
home,
and
it's
unrealistic
to
think
that
the
next
hundred
years
of
future
owners
will
have
a
steady
stream
of
relatives
to
fill
it
without
the
coach-house.
This
property
would
only
be
valued
around
$400,000.
This
low
value
is
not
good
for
the
neighboring
properties,
however,
allowing
the
coach-house
to
be
rented
as
a
standard
rental
brings
the
property
value
closer
to
the
six
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollar
the
Cook
County.
O
That
Cook
County
access
to
that,
and
that
is
good
for
neighboring
properties
as
well
later
review.
The
suggested
affordability
clause
to
this
rental
would
give
the
coach
how
1/3
less
of
what
it
should
be
based
on
tax
valuation,
which
in
turn
means
less
property
value
boost
for
the
surrounding
neighborhood,
either
way
the
coach-house
either
way
allowing
the
coach-house
to
be
rented
will
only
have
a
positive
effect
on
the
neighborhood
property
values
as
it
increases
the
overall
sale
average.
O
Standard
number
two:
it
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
The
intent
of
the
new
ordinance
covering
existing
coach
houses
was
to
remove
previous
restrictions
and
allow
them
to
be
added
to
the
rental
pool.
It
is
also
key
to
note
that
City
Council
specifically
removed
the
affordability
clause
before
unanimously
passing
the
ordinance
allowing
this
coach
house
to
be
rented
as
a
regular
dwelling
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
standard
number
three.
This
hardship
is
peculiar
to
only
to
this
property.
O
This
coach
house
is
literally
the
only
existing
coach
house
in
Evanston
that
is
currently
unable
to
be
rented
standard
number
four.
The
property
owner
would
suffer
financial
hardship
with
Cook
County,
taxing
this
property
based
on
a
valuation
of
six
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars,
not
allowing
the
coach
house
to
be
rented
places,
a
disproportionate
burden
on
what
is
otherwise
a
modest
fourteen
hundred
square
foot
basement
less
home.
O
Not
only
would
future
owners
being
paying
taxes
on
a
dwelling
that
is
largely
unusable,
they
would
be
paying
for
its
heating
and
maintenance
costs
as
well
all
for
a
home
that
is
unable,
for
most
intents
and
purposes,
to
be
lived
in
standard
number.
Five.
The
purpose
of
the
variance
is
not
based
exclusively
on
the
desire
for
more
income.
O
This
is
a
practical
matter,
both
twelve-hour
being
taxed
and
both
are
fully
built
as
homes
that
need
to
be
maintained
and
repaired,
and
allowing
one
to
stand
empty
due
to
a
lack
of
future
relatives
to
fill
it
as
a
waste
of
housing,
a
waste
of
resources
and
does
not
contribute
to
the
neighborhood
standard
number.
Six.
This
create
this
condition
was
not
created
by
the
owner.
The
previous
owner
got
permission
from
Evanston
17
years
ago
to
make
the
coach-house
four
and
a
half
feet
taller
than
standard
out
of
all
the
coach
Alice's.
O
All
the
200-plus
coach
houses
covered
by
the
new
ordinance
2112
Ewing
is
not
the
tallest
nor
the
newest,
nor
is
it
the
one
with
the
most
controversy
surrounding
it.
I
think
that
dubious
award
probably
goes
to
the
Kendall
College
coach
houses.
This
condition
was
not
created
by
me.
However.
I
do
think
it's
time
for
this
property
to
stop
being
an
stop
being
an
outlier
and
be
brought
into
the
group.
It
has
the
most
in
common
with
the
other
200
plus
existing
coach
houses
in
Evanston
and,
lastly,
standard
number.
O
Seven,
this
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
regulation
bringing
this
existing
coach
house
under
the
same
ordinance
as
all
other
existing
coach
houses
does
require
the
least
amount
of
deviation
from
the
regulation
and
brings
the
single
outlier
solidly
into
a
group.
I
felt
it
was
very
important
to
take
the
time
to
review
the
seven
standards
and
say
no
that's
what
you
use
to
determine
each
case
and,
as
you
see,
this
property
does
meet
every
standard
needed
in
order
to
remove
the
condition
of
non
rental
cities
change
and
short-sighted
earn.
O
O
O
Based
on
the
comments
found
in
the
petitions
and
letters
you
received
from
both
sides
of
this
issue,
the
condition
of
affordability
is
not
that
compromise
that
the
neighborhood
prefers
instead
I
want
to
suggest
a
condition
of
the
property
being
owner
occupied,
with
only
one
of
the
homes
being
rented
at
a
time.
This
is
a
condition
which
many
neighbors
supported
and
is
a
condition
that
would
truly
address
some
remaining
concerns
and
I
believe
I
got
I
just
recently
got
these
in
I.
O
O
Additionally,
the
80%
ami
suggested
is
unduly
low
for
the
inexpensive
neighborhood
with
very
expensive
taxes,
and
80%
am
I,
for
this
coach-house
puts
it
at
a
rental
amount
of
only
66%
of
what
would
rent
what
it
would
rent
for
in
the
open
market,
without
even
factoring
in
the
additional
loss
of
Payne
tenant
utilities
and
I
actually
put
together.
There's
a
couple,
embarrassing
typos
on
here,
but
there's
a
little
summary
this
that
one
yeah
that's
perfect.
It
kind
of
shows
how
it
breaks
down.
O
Let's
see,
let's
see
and
finally
allowing
this
coach
has
to
be
rented,
even
without
the
affordability
clause
adds
to
the
overall
housing
pool,
which
in
turn
helps
to
make
all
housing
more
affordable
in
heaven,
Stan.
In
fact,
I
experienced
this
firsthand.
As
a
year
ago,
I
moved
to
Michigan
for
a
work
and
rented
the
Coach
House
to
a
young
family
of
three
which
was
allowed
under
the
current
condition,
since
they
were
the
only
family
living
on
the
property.
O
For
that
that
time
of
their
lease
once
their
lease
was
up,
they
asked
to
stay
another
month
since
they
had
not
been
able
to
find
a
new
place
to
live
after
four
weeks
of
searching.
This
family's
income
was
well
above
any
need
for
affordable
housing,
and
yet
they
found
it
difficult
to
find
any
housing,
and
so
this
coach
house
can
be
added
to
the
rental
pool
and
can
become
a
productive,
much-needed
home
without
having
an
affordable
condition
placed
on
it,
one
which
is
unduly
low
and
is
not
preferred
by
many
in
the
neighborhood.
O
O
As
the
27
positive
petitions
and
letters
neighbors
sent
over
the
past
week
demonstrate,
the
neighborhood
is
open
to
2112
un
coche
house
being
brought
into
the
fold
under
the
new
ordinance
that
covers
every
other,
existing
coach
house
in
heaven
stone
and
while
many
in
they
would
prefer
it
not
be
affordable,
housing
and
others
indicated
they
would
prefer
one
of
the
homes
be
owner-occupied.
The
majority
consensus
was
that
this
coach-house
should
be
allowed
to
be
rented
as
all
the
other
existing
coach
houses
in
Evanston
are
today.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
O
H
A
O
Basically,
you
know:
I
should
have
filed
a
homeowner's
exemption.
Okay,
look!
Basically
when
the
taxes
came
out,
I
had
just
lost
my
job
in
when
the
taxes
came
out
last
year
and
in
the
rush
of
moving,
and
you
know
to
get
a
new
job
and
so
on.
I
somehow
didn't
receive
my
new
tax
bill.
It
slipped
my
mind
and
I
didn't
appeal.
A
A
O
Sure
I
mean
you
know,
and
I
was
you
know,
and
that
that
is
fine.
I
I
am
just
looking
to
sell
it
now,
because
I
don't
want
to
really
deal
with
the
all
that
stuff
anymore.
I'm
moving
I'm
tired
of
the
winter,
that's
a
whole
different
issue:
okay,
but
basically
what
you're
minding
it
you're
moving
out
of
Evanston
I'm
moving
to
North
Carolina,
okay,
yeah
I
was
basically
what
happened
is
I
mean
I,
don't
know
that
it
was
that
much
of
a
tax
break.
O
To
be
honest,
because
the
the
main
house
was
in
a
pretty
rough
state
when
I
bought
the
property.
I
would
say:
I
bought
the
property
for
$300,000
five
years
ago,
and
I
would
say
that
was
really
what
it
was
worth
and
did
you
get
permits
for
that?
All
that
worked
most
of
what
I
was
did
was
I
did
get
permits
for
windows
I
had
floors.
We
we
covered
over
floors.
O
O
Then,
when
I
talked
to
Mitzi
about
the
taxes
and
I
actually
had
to
come
in
and
spoken
to,
Scott
and
and
and
I
had
been
under
the
impression
that
my
coach
house
was
was
covered
by
this
new
ordinance
after
chatting
with
him,
and
so
then
I
decided
well
I'm
gonna,
you
know,
I
had
been
going
to
sell
it
sort
of
as
is,
and
so
then
I
just
thought.
You
know
what
I'm
gonna
fix
it
up
and
sell
it
and
then
and
then
sort
of
be
done
with
it
and.
A
B
O
Yeah
because
I
had
when
I,
when
I
did
look
the
affordable
housing
situation,
I
thought
we
had
discussed
and
also
that
I
had
discussed
with
Savannah
and
even
looked
at
the
chart
that
a
two-bedroom
would
would
be
three
people
in
it
for
affordable,
so
I
assume
that
for
renting
purposes
or
regular
renting
purposes,
it
would
be
the
same.
It.
B
O
Go
so
yes,
so
I
for
a
year
when
I
didn't
did
not
for
the
year
that
I
was
in
Michigan
I
did
rent
it
to
a
young
couple
and
their
daughter.
It's
a
two-bedroom
that
seemed
logical
to
me
that
each
didn't
need
their
own
bedroom
and
and
then
I.
Actually,
when
their
lease
was
up,
they
were
supposed
to
leave
and
they
were
unable
to
find
housing
at
that
time.
A
Can
we
talk
briefly
about
the
standard
number
five?
The
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income.
It
seems
clear
to
me
that
it
is
and
that
so
what
we're
looking
for
is
that
public
benefit
and
that
public
benefit
is
really
why
everyone
is
talking
about
having
affordable
housing.
A
Okay,
there's
a
concern
throughout
the
city
of
Evanston
that
affordable
housing
is
limited
to
neighborhoods,
where
the
the
average
income
is
less
and
that
we
really
need
to
spread
these
out
throughout
every
single
community
and
everything
some
word
throughout
right
yeah.
So
this
is
a
perfect
opportunity.
We
don't
have
very
many
opportunities
in
the
seventh
Ward
to
be
able
to
start
sixth
to
be
able
to
get
some
affordable
housing
into
the
neighborhood.
So
that
is
the
public
benefit,
so
you're
saying
that's,
not
a
public
benefit.
No.
O
I
am
I
agree
that
could
be
a
public
benefit.
My
understanding
for
condition
was
that
it
was
usually
put
on
as
a
way
to
appease
or
make
a
compromise
with
a
more
immediate
neighborhood
for
something
that
was
happening
in
their
neighborhood.
That
you
know,
obviously,
having
this
property
be
affordable
would
be
ideal,
you
know,
would
be
better
than
not
having
it
rented
at
all
for
sure
and
I
understand.
A
That
you
got
a
benefit,
I
mean
not
you
specifically,
but
the
previous
owner
got
a
benefit.
Their
benefit
was
they
were
able
to
build
at
five
and
a
half
feet
taller.
That
makes
a
substantial
difference
to
that
second
floor,
without
that,
seventh,
that
extra
five
and
a
half
feet
that
second
floor
doesn't
exist
and
there
is
no
living
space
up
there.
A
So
there
is
a
clear
benefit
that
came
with
that
cochons
and
that
benefit
now
was
was
was
first
modified
was
first
mediated
by
limiting
it
to
a
family,
someone
in
the
family
who
had
rent
that
and
now
that
that
restriction
has
been
removed
right,
you
still
get
the
benefit,
and
so
we're
still
looking
for
potentially
the
ones
that,
if
in
when
that
gets
removed
right
by
this
thing
or
ordinance,
there's
still
a
benefit,
you
still
get
the
benefit
without
the
public
benefit.
That's.
A
Right
right
because
I
think
that,
although
you,
you
suggest
that
a
homeowner
and
owner
occupied,
one
of
those
units
being
owner
occupied
I,
don't
think
that
that's
a
real
public
benefit
to
have
that
the
owner
occupied
I
think
that's
gonna
be
the
norm.
I!
Don't
think
that
that
that
particular
location
is
gonna,
go
to
an
investor
who's
gonna
rent
out
like
unit
I,
agree.
O
A
Did
I
appreciate,
but
I
don't
think
that's
a
real
benefit.
I
also,
don't
particularly
think
that,
have
you
considered
that
most
of
the
coach
houses
in
Evanston
aren't
actually
rented
out
most
coach
coach
houses
in
Evanston
are
used
as
somebody's
home
business
or
a
studio
space,
or
something
like
that
so
I,
don't
think
you're,
necessarily
reducing
your
market
share
and
your
ability
to
market
this
and
sell
it
and
by
having
that
by
having
that
be
a
second
space.
Yeah.
O
O
A
C
So,
yes,
you
want
to
extract
additional
income
because
it
has
become
necessary
based
on
the
Cook
County
Assessors
evaluation
of
it
as
so
do
they
do
you
know
it's
a
class
212,
then
I,
don't
know,
I
didn't
look
closely
enough
at
the
tax
bill,
but
you
know
one
way
or
the
other.
That
is
going
to
make
a
big
difference.
A
205,
okay,
well
205.
C
I
P
C
O
O
Think
last
time,
I
looked
a
couple
years
ago,
the
the
amount
of
Coach
houses
that
were
being
rented
that
had
registered
were
something
like
I
think
over
100
at
the
time
and
I
know
this
adds
another
hundred
potential
renters
to
the
mix
and
I
think
that
while
some
people
may
be
interested
in
using
it
from
for
working
for
home
or
even
you
know
for
for
relatives,
I
mean
it's
a
little
difficult
for
older
people.
It's
up
a
flight
of
stairs,
you
know
bita,
so
you
can't
keep.
O
O
You
know,
I
I
do
think
that
it,
you
know
it
kind
of
seems
like
it
should
have
been
done
across
the
board
to
all
coach
houses.
It
was
rather
odd
the
way
it
was
just
kind
of
taken
off
at
the
last
minute,
but
you
know,
and
so
it
does
seem
a
little
bit
like
this
one
is
being
singled
out.
However,
you
know
I
understand,
that's
the
way
it
goes.
I
don't
really
know
what
else
to
tell.
A
J
Point
is:
is
that
another
way
of
thinking
about
public
benefit
here
is
that
this
is
adding
to
the
housing
supply
a
type
of
housing.
That
generally
does
not
exist
in
the
sixth
Ward.
So
if
you
have
families-
or
you
know
whether
it's
a
couple-
and
you
know,
however,
this,
however,
you
define
how
many
people
can
occupy
this
unit
that
are
interested
in
Northwest
Evanston
that
want
to
be
in
is
this
Linkwood
school
as
the
neighborhood
school
that
want
to
be
in
Lincoln
would
school?
J
O
We
do
have
two
families
just
down
the
block
who
live
in
like
I
said
who
live
in
a
two
flat.
You
know
semi-retired
couple
and
a
mom
and
and
her
her
daughter,
I
mean
I,
think
you
know
it's
not
a
neighborhood
that
is
really
gonna
appeal
to
college
students.
Obviously
right,
it's
gonna
appeal
to
people
who
are
looking
for
something
that
is
in
a
good
school
district
writing,
as
and
so
on.
O
J
O
A
O
A
Appreciate
that,
thank
you
so
much
if
you
mind
having
a
seat,
let
your
neighbors
come
up
and
so
I
don't
go
anymore.
So
I
know
some
people
walked
in
late,
so
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
ask
everybody
who
wasn't
here
before
to
go
ahead.
If
you
plan
on
speaking
to
raise
your
right
hand,
I
know
there
were
people
who
weren't
here
I'm
talking
to
you.
A
R
Evening,
Thanks
I
am
a
beep.
You
Jam
I
live
at
2108
Ewing
Avenue,
my
husband,
Peter,
Steinhaus
and
I
are
longtime
Edison
residents,
we've
owned
and
lived
a
2108
Ewing
since
March
1997
in
2001.
The
original
variation
requested
by
the
then
owners
stated
that
quote
the
applicant
proposes
to
demolish
an
existing
garage
and
construct
a
new
garage.
The
variance
was
needed
at
that
time,
because
the
height
of
the
proposed
new
garage
exceeded
the
limits
imposed
by
the
city.
R
We
were
asked
by
our
neighbors
to
write
a
letter
to
the
city
stating
that
we
were
not
opposed
to
the
height
of
the
new
garage.
We
did
so
at
that
time
in
an
effort
to
be
good
neighborly,
when
it
was
revealed
that,
in
addition
to
a
garage,
there
would
be
an
apartment
as
a
part
of
the
structure,
it
was
stipulated
that
the
apartment
constructed
above
the
garage
was
never
to
be
rented
to
non
relatives
and
that
there
would
never
be
more
than
one
family
living
on
the
property
as
a
whole.
R
We
were
assured
by
the
then
owners
that
the
apartment
was
for
their
business
and
or
an
in-law
apartment.
The
current
owner,
the
property
at
2112,
Ewing
Avenue,
was
well
aware
of
the
limits
regarding
the
rental
of
the
garage
apartment
when
she
purchased
the
property
in
2013.
Her
ownership
immediately
followed
a
contentious
fight
to
overturn
the
variance
which
resulted
in
her
purchase
of
the
property.
R
R
Current
owner
is
now
seeking
to
sell
the
property
and
is
once
again
requesting
that
the
original
variance
be
lifted
to
allow
for
the
rental
of
the
garage
apartment.
It's
her
intention
to
maximize
the
price
on
the
sale
of
this
property
by
advertising.
It
currently
prior
to
a
decision
made
here
tonight
by
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals,
that
it
has
an
income-producing
coach
house.
There
are
no
other
coach
houses
on
our
block
or
on
the
contiguous
blocks
we
live
in
a
single-family
neighborhood.
R
We
chose
to
live
in
a
single-family
neighborhood
in
1997
when
we
purchased
our
home.
We
lent
her
support
to
the
construction
of
an
oversized
garage
with
an
apartment
above
it
in
2001,
in
an
effort
to
be
good
good.
Neighbors.
Excuse
me,
we
would
never
have
agreed
to
the
construction
of
this
new
garage
in
2001
if
the
contingency,
barring,
multiple
families
living
on
the
property,
was
not
built
into
the
variance
which
made
the
structure
possible
in
the
first
place,
with
the
overturning
of
the
restrictive
variance.
R
We
are
extremely
concerned
that
this
unusual
and
confusing
piece
of
property
would
then
be
eligible
for
as
many
as
four
or
five
unrelated
persons
to
rent
in
both
the
primary
and
accessory
dwellings.
Current
owner
herself
shared
with
us
in
conversation
that
if
the
roles
were
reversed,
she
would
be
opposed
to
this
property
I'm
a
rental
property
as
well.
We
stand
firmly
in
opposition
to
a
neighbor
who
seeks
to
change
the
nature
and
culture
of
this
block
and
then
move
away.
His
hens
posits
in
her
application.
That
quote.
R
If
only
relations
can
live
in
the
coach-house,
it
will
probably
be
vacant
a
majority
of
the
years
ahead.
We
do
not
believe
that
this
is
a
valid
argument.
There
are
many
other
options
for
the
use
of
this
structure,
which
are
in
keeping
with
the
intention
of
the
original
variance
personal
home
office
workshop.
Worse
work,
space,
creative
space,
sub
positions
of
what
will
probably
happen
are
not
a
reason
to
remove
a
variance.
None
of
us
have
the
ability
to
know
what
the
future
will
bring.
R
Her
suggestion
that
rental
of
the
garage
structure
quote
will
positively
impact
the
neighborhood,
since
it
will
allow
the
property
to
be
properly
maintained
by
a
future
owner
is
also
not
a
valid
argument.
In
my
opinion,
we
are
confident
that
future
owners
will
be
quite
capable
of
maintaining
this
property,
just
as
Miss
hen's
has
been
able
to
in
the
last
five
years
that
she's
lived
there.
R
We
do
not
believe
this
is
an
application
to
improve
the
quality
of
our
neighborhood
or
our
street.
We
believe
that
this
is
an
application
intended
to
maximize
the
owners
profit
on
the
sale
of
the
property.
Why
should
a
resident
seeking
to
leave
the
neighborhood
be
allowed
to
have
a
say
in
what
it
will
look
like
when
she's
gone,
Peter
and
I
have
lived
here
for
21
years?
We've
raised
her
daughter's
here
and
we
have
every
intention
to
live
here
for
at
least
another
21.
R
We
recognize
that
the
garage
apartment
at
2112
Ewing
avenues
an
unfortunate
and
confusing
complication
to
this
property.
This
is
not
a
traditional
coach
house,
it
is
not
a
traditional
garage
and
it
should
not
be
compared
to
a
hundred
year
old,
two
flat
there
resides
on
the
same
block,
all
of
which
are
suggested
by
Miss
Henin's
in
her
application
to
the
Zoning
Board.
This
is
a
structure
which
towers
over
all
of
the
neighborhood
buildings
in
square
footage.
This
structure
is
65%
the
size
of
the
main
dwelling.
R
It
is
900
square
feet
compared
to
a
1400
square
feet.
Primary
dwelling.
There
is
nothing
traditional
about
this
structure
and
it
should
not
be
treated
like
any
other
coach
house
in
Evanston.
Although
the
dapper
committee
has
recommended
that
the
building
is
structurally
appropriate
for
rental
inhabitants,
this
unique
structure
only
came
into
existence
because
of
the
unique
and
restrictive
variants
on
its
inhabitants.
R
A
S
Hi,
my
name
is
Cheney
Glassman
I
moved
to
Evanston
into
late
2009
and
I
live
at
21
16
Ewing,
Avenue
I
also
live
in
a
quirky
little
luxembourg,
farmhouse
and
I
do
support
Peggy's
ability
to
rent
this
coach
house
for
a
young
family
I.
Think
it's
very
important
in
Evanston.
It
was
an
opportunity
that
wasn't
given
to
me
when
I
was
looking
for
housing
in
Evanston
and
I
would
have
really
appreciated
the
ability
just
live
and
a
cute
coach
house
like
this.
S
If
you
look
at
the
pictures
online
and
that
she
provided
it's
a
very
nicely
well-maintained,
building
and
I
think
any
young
family
or
young
couple
moving
to
Evanston.
If
it's
grad
students
at
Kellogg
or
young
working
professionals,
they
would
appreciate
the
opportunity
move
into
our
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
T
Hi,
my
name
is
Brad
Knight
I
live
in
21:09
Forest
View,
which
is
the
house
immediately
behind
the
property
in
question.
I
would
agree
with
everything
that
the
first
speaker
mentioned:
I've
lived
there
for
fifteen
years
with
our
family.
We
moved
there
15
years
ago
from
out
of
state,
and
we
love
the
neighborhood.
It's
unfortunate
that
this
issue
continues
to
come
up
and
drive
a
division
between
our
neighbors
who
get
along
and
all
other
topics,
but
this
topic
has
continued
to
fester.
T
T
When
we
bought
the
property,
it
was
two
years
after
it
had
been
built.
We
were
well
aware
of
the
rules
that
it
would
be
never
rented
to
anybody
outside
the
main
family
of
the
main
main
house.
That
rule
was
violated
several
times
when
we
brought
it
up
to
a
similar
council.
I
think
some
of
you
may
have
been
here.
Then
the
the
vote
was
six
to
one
in
our
favor.
There
was
even
a
council
member
who
abstained
a
vote
because
he
felt
it
should
have
never
come
to
this
council.
T
So
the
only
argument
that
I've
heard
that
I
don't
think
is
compelling
the
only
argument
that
I've
heard
that's
been
proposed,
which
I
would
argue
was
not
compelling.
Is
this
uniformity
argument
that
we
need
to
put
it
in
the
fold
of
all
the
other
coach
houses?
This
coach
house
is
very
different
than
other
coach
houses.
It's
significantly
larger,
there's
no
similar
structures
nearby
and,
if
I
wouldn't,
if
you
don't
mind,
I,
have
pictures
of
my
allowed
to
share
these
because
I
couldn't
bring
them.
So
these
are
pictures
that
are
the
perspective
from
our
we're.
A
T
All
right,
so
this
structure
is
quite
large
and
imposing,
and
although
the
pictures
that
were
provided
previously
show
it
tucked
away
into
the
back
of
the
lot,
that
also
was
tucked
away
very
close
to
the
back
of
our
property.
Another
thing
I
would
actually
question
it
would
like
information
on.
Is
the
windows
and
this
coach
house
faced
away
from
the
main
property
not
toward
it?
T
There's
several
windows
that
face
directly
into
the
windows
of
our
children,
and
that
has
been
an
issue
and
concern
of
ours
in
the
past
that
we've
brought
up
at
the
last
meeting.
I
would
say
another
argument
that
I
would
try
to
propose
is
a
definition
of
the
coach
house,
as
I
saw
online
and
I
think
you
have
it
in
your
material
here.
This
is
a
structure,
that's
significantly
larger
than
the
main
property,
and
what
our
doesn't
fit.
The
definition
of
a
coach
house
can.
J
T
J
J
T
Mike,
if
I
may
interrupt
you,
my
concern
is
knowing
the
people
well,
that
live
in.
That
structure,
which
is
I,
can
see
the
faces
of
the
people
in
that
window.
So
I
think
we're
all
used
to
having
neighbors
that
are
right
up
next
to
us
on
the
sides,
but
we're
not
used
to
having
neighbors
that
we
don't
know
that
turn
over
on
a
frequent
basis
is
a
rental
property
within
a
few
feet
of
my
patty.
Oh
thank.
Q
My
name
is
Laura
Bianchi
and
I
live
at
2800.
Payne
I
wanted
to
also
say
that
I
agree
with
Jeanie
and
Margaret
and
I
hadn't
planned
to
speak,
but
I
will
say:
I
lived
in
a
coach
house
years
ago
and
it
was
really
nice
to
have
the
opportunity
to
live
in
the
neighborhood
that
I
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
live
it
and
now
I
live
in
this
wonderful
neighborhood,
I
love
someone
else
to
have
a
chance
to
do
it
too.
That's
it.
Thank.
U
A
O
A
little
mixed
bag
first
of
all
the
five
years
ago,
as
a
be
alluded
to
the
then
owner,
had
brought
this
up
as
a
hardship
case,
and
she
wanted
to
be
able
to
rent
the
coach-house.
Because
of
that
that's
a
whole
different
thing.
That's
not
this
time.
I
wouldn't
have
even
been
asking
and
I
have
not
asked
in
all
these
five
years.
For
this
to
be
allowed
to
be,
rented
I
was
only
asking
now,
because
literally
every
other
existing
coach
house
in
Evanston
is
able
to
be
rented
and
because
I
had
I
had
thought.
O
I
am
NOT,
obviously,
that
familiar
with
government
I
assumed
that
the
other
hundred-plus
coach
houses
also
had
some
sort
of
condition
that
allowed
them
not
to
be
rented,
but
obviously
that's
not
the
case
but
but
anyway.
So
I
just
don't
want
to
confuse
that
case
with
the
case
today.
The
case
today
is
only
being
requested
because
of
this
recent
ordinance
being
passed.
Furthermore,
you
know
I
think
it's
it's
kind
of
reaching
some
of
the
arguments
that
my
a
few
of
my
neighbors
have
brought.
O
As
you
mentioned,
the
volume
of
the
coach
house,
the
extra
four
and
a
half
feet
that
it
is
it's
not
going
to
change.
You
know
you
know,
and
so
that's
a
4-1
foregone
conclusion.
Whether
or
not
family
live
in
it
or
or
it's
empty.
It's
gonna
still
be
there
and
it
was
definitely
a
mistake
to
have
allowed
it
to
exist
to
begin
with,
but
it's
there
and
it's
got
to
be
dealt
with
and
leaving
it
empty.
O
O
Additionally,
you
know
to
say
that
we're
in
our
one
neighborhood,
yes,
most
of
our
area,
is
our
one,
but,
as
we
said,
there
are
there's
a
two
flat
right
literally
fifty
feet
away
from
from
my
my
own
property
and
to
pretend
that
there'll
be
constant
turnover
is
also
not
necessarily
a
foregone
conclusion.
The
two
flat
on
our
street
was
only
recently
rented
out.
O
It
had
been
empty
for
a
while
and
and
the
people
who
the
two
families
that
live
there
have
lived
there
now
for
three
years,
I
mean
I,
don't
it's
not
really
a
neighborhood
even
of
renters.
That
would
encourage
turnover,
so
I
think
that
that's
also
not
a
good
thing.
I
also
think
that
my
comments
to
Abby
were
taken
out
of
context.
O
You
know
if
I
know
that
they
don't
really
prefer
to
I,
think
have
people
near
by
they
don't
really
come
to
a
lot
of
the
events
that
we
have,
and
so
I
can
empathize
that
I
think
that
it's
not
the
right
decision
for
them
to
live
near
people.
But
honestly,
this
coach-house
is
50
feet
away
from
their
house,
their
neighbors
I'm.
The
main
house
is
closer
to
that
than
the
coach
houses
to
them.
Their
own
neighbor
on
the
other
side
is
I'm
guessing
no
more
than
20
feet
away
from
them.
O
You
know,
and
then
the
Knights
house
once
again
is
all
the
way
across
the
alley,
all
the
way,
through
the
yard
and
acting
as
if
this
Coach
house
somehow
is
having
people
in
it.
As
a
is
a
violation
of
somebody,
you
know,
somebody's
eyes
is
rather
a
little
bit
difficult,
but
anyway,
thank
you
very
much
for
considering
this
request.
I
do
hope
that
this
could
be
folded
somehow
into
the
coach-house
ordinance.
O
It
does
seem
that
you
know,
while
I've
never
had
I've,
never
brought
this
issue
up
before,
because,
like
I
said
I
actually
intended
this
to
be
my
forever
home
I
had
very
different
plans
for
that
Coach
house.
It
remained
empty
for
many
years
and
then
it
was
in
better
shape
than
the
main
house.
So
I
moved
back
there
for
a
couple
years,
and
but
it
was
never
my
intent
to
sell
it
a
year
in
Michigan
I'll
just
make
you
a
psycho
winter
and
and
after
that,
I
just
decided.
I
was
kind
of
done.
O
So
that
is
why
I'm
selling.
As
for
the
listing
by
the
way,
I
did
only
learn
two
weeks
before
I
was
putting
it
on
the
market
that
that
this
condition
needed
to
be
lifted,
and
my
realtor
and
I
agreed
that
we
would
put
that
it
had
the
potential
to
be
rented
for
a
certain
amount
of
money,
and
that
is
true.
It
does
have
the
potential
to
be
rented
for
a
certain.
O
You
know
the
potential
and
we
did
actually
let
people
know
that
you
know
who
were
seriously
interested
and
in
fact
you
know,
I
had
an
offer
within
the
first
week
a
couple
who
decided
not
to
go
forward
once
they.
You
know
learned
that
there
was
going
to
be
an
affordability
clause
but
most
likely
placed
on
the
property,
because
you
know
he
was
going
to
go
forward
with
you
know
the
clause
of
this.
It
can
be
rented
I
wanted
if
it
can't
I,
don't
kind
of
thing
you
know
so.
O
C
C
That
would
be
my
thought.
I
I
think
that
what
people
would
find
is
that
you
know
a
young
family
moving
into
the
neighborhood
is,
is
going
to
enrich
and
and
not
hurt
it,
and
also.
It
is
true
that
the
rent
ability
of
that
unit
will
increase
the
market
value
of
that
property,
which,
in
turn
will
increase.
The
value
of
the
properties
in
the
immediate
vicinity,
so
I
would
be.
I
would
be
inclined
to
allow
the
rental
unit
to
go
forward.
C
J
J
Because
of
this
text,
amendment
that
was
just
passed
by
the
city,
it
seems
I'm
struggling
with
the
appropriateness
of
attaching
that
to
this
coach-house
and
again
I.
Think
to
your
your
your
points
earlier.
It's
sort
of
like
it
was
attached
because,
because
we
can
and
the
city
is
struggling
with
this
issue
of
affordability-
and
so
you
know
at
any
given
moment
when
we
can
address
this
issue,
we're
trying
to
and
I
get
it
that's
an
appropriate
goal.
J
I,
just
don't
know
if
it's
appropriate
here,
given
the
text
amendment
that
the
city
recently
put
in
place
that
you
know
speak
to
the
the
entire
rest
of
the
population
of
Coach
houses
in
Evanston,
I
will
say
on
a
personal
note,
when
me
and
my
family
moved
to
Evanston,
we
we
lived
in
a
coach
house
for
a
year
and
a
half
we
owned
a
home
in
another
location.
We
could
not
find
a
single-family
home
that
we
could
afford
and
we
stayed
in
that
neighborhood.
J
We
stayed
in
that
school
and
we
became
a
part
of
that
neighborhood
we
bought
in
that
neighborhood
as
we
you
know,
as
we
were
able
to
do
yours
later,
so
I
really
support
using
these
Coates
houses
to
the
extent
that
we
can
and
so
I
definitely
support
having
this
coach
has
to
be
allowed
for
as
a
rental
unit.
The
piece
that
I'm
still
struggling
with
is
whether
to
attach
the
affordable
you
get
sort
of
the
affordable,
the
affordability
clause
to
it.
J
A
Think
I'd
like
to
just
respond
to
to
that
issue,
about
the
affordability
and
and
the
city
tacking
things
on
when
they
can
I
think
that
as
a
as
I
mentioned
before
this
particular
piece
of
property
got
a
variance
before
and
without
that
five
minute,
five
foot
variance.
There
is
no
second
floor
on
this.
So
without
that
variance,
this
isn't
an
issue
at
all,
because
it
doesn't,
it
doesn't
happen
so
because
they
got
that
variance
and
now
we're
selling
it
and
they're
getting
all
this
public.
All
this
commercial
benefit
right.
This
cash
benefit.
A
A
That
being
said
right
because
of
the
way
City
Council
passed
this
this
coach-house
rule,
everybody
in
your
neighborhood
can
build
a
coach
house
in
their
backyard
right
now,
so
you
can
build
a
coach
house,
you
can
build
a
coach,
so
you
can
build
a
coach
house.
Everybody
can
build.
A
coach
house
just
have
to
meet
the
zoning
requirements
of
it.
So
not
have
not
allowing
this
to
be
a
rental
unit
does
not
eliminate
what
you
guys
are
afraid
of
and
what
your
concerns
are.
Your
concerns
are
gonna
happen
everywhere
and
I.
A
Think
that's
one
of
the
things
that
might
perhaps
be
most
misunderstood
about
this
ordinance
is
that
it
can
happen
anywhere
and
everywhere,
and
the
potential
is
out
there
and
it
will
happen
so
I
think
the
embracing
it
is
is
is
a
better.
Is
a
better
tact
to
take
so
I
am
fully
in
favor
of
making
it
a
rental
unit
again
again,
because
City
Council
just
changed
the
rules,
but
I
do
think
that,
because
you
have
that
benefit,
I
think
I.
A
Think
the
the
affordable
housing
makes
some
sense
and
I
love
that
Mary
did
the
math,
because
I
didn't
do
the
math
and
I
should
have.
Is
that
that
that
rent,
that
rent
on
that
apartment
pays
for
the
taxes?
And
so
that's
a
reasonable?
That's
a
reasonable
trade-off
there
for
a
couple
years.
So
that's
my
feeling
on
this
I
would.
D
Agree
with
you,
Mary
Beth
I
think
that
it
has
to
go
to
the
general
rule.
It
is
now
a
law
in
Evanston,
so
it
is
such
a
rental
property.
So
I
would
agree
with
that
on
the
vulnerable
housing
I
think
that
the
owner
will
agree
with
that
that
it's
it's
not
exactly
give-and-take,
but
it
is
a
kind
of
let's
say
solution
that
should
accept
it
from
both
sides.
So
I
think
that
we
can
make
a
decision,
yes
for
the
rental
and
yes
for
the
fordable
ten
years,
I.
E
C
Would
I
would
add
to
that
that
the
proviso
that
this
can
be
a
rental
unit,
provided
that
it
it
is
an
affordable
unit
for
ten
years,
does
not
mean
it
has
to
be
a
rental
unit
in
terms
of
your
marketing
of
the
property
that
there
is
a
large
market
out
there
for
people
who
are
looking
for
home
offices
and
studios
etc.
So
you
know
there
there
is
that
possibility.
No
one
really
knows
who
the
next
owner
will
be
anecdotally,.
A
J
C
A
That
will
sunset
in
ten
years:
okay,
yes,
okay!
With
that
we're
going
to
go
through
the
seven
standards
for
a
major
variation.
The
first
is
the
requested
variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment,
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
The
coach-house
again
was
constructed
seventeen
years
ago,
and
so
it's
been
there
for
a
long
time
in
this
neighborhood,
the
neighborhood
is
used
to
the
massing
and
the
volume
and
they've
been
living
with
it
for
a
very
long
time.
A
So
I
don't
think
that
that
will
have
any
change
in
the
in
their
use
or
enjoyment
or
the
property
values
of
the
adjacent
property.
So
I
think
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
two:
the
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
which
in
fact
has
just
changed
by
that
text.
A
Amendment
that
allows
for
the
rental
of
all
coach
houses,
which
was
approved
unanimously
on
a
consent
agenda,
so
you've
got
the
full
backing
of
every
alderman
in
the
in
the
city,
so
that
was
an
overwhelming
choice
and
the
decision
to
make
that
allowable,
so
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three:
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
C
A
So
the
property
is
unique
in
Northwest
Evanston,
in
that
it
has
a
coach
house,
that's
already
built,
and
there
are
probably
a
handful
of
those
in
in
that
sixth
Ward,
and
so
it
is
unique
from
that
perspective
and
that
it
actually
is
already
built
out
with
a
second
floor
and
is
rentable.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
four:
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
A
If
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out
again
because
of
the
change
to
the
text,
amendment
that
was
given
the
ability
to
rent
out
all
of
these
units
to
every
other
coach
house,
I
think
it's
impractical,
and
that
is
a
hardship
if
this
one
does
not
is
not
allowed
to
be
rented
out.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
five.
The
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property.
A
Well,
it
is
to
to
to
extract
additional
income
either
via
rent
or
via
the
sales
price
of
the
property
and
the
potential
of
the
property.
However,
I
do
believe
that
there
is
a
public
benefit,
a
by
providing
smaller
housing
in
that
community,
which
doesn't
have
much
small
housing
and
also,
by
the
caveat
that
it
becomes
affordable
housing
I
do
believe
that
is
a
major
benefit
to
this
neighborhood
and
that
thing
will
get
snapped
up
in
a
heartbeat.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
A
Number
six,
the
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship,
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
any
interest
in
the
property.
The
owner
testified
that
she
purchased
the
property
with
the
coach-house
on
it
and
with
that
that
stipulation
on
the
variance
on
the
coach-house
already
in
place,
so
that
standard
has
been
met
and
number
seven.
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals,
and
there's
no
change
to
this
building.
There's
no
change
to
the
outside.
There's
no
change
to
the
inside.
A
J
I'll
go
ahead
and
make
a
motion
in
the
matter
of
2112
Ewing
Avenue
case
number,
one
8zm
JV
zero,
zero.
Five
one
I
move
that
we
we
grant
the
variation
to
allow
the
coach
house
to
be
legally
occupied
and
rented
by
persons
who
are
not
members
of
the
family
occupying
the
principal
dwelling
unit
and
to
uphold
staff's
recommendation
that
an
affordable
housing
allowance
be
in
place
for
ten
years
at
the
property.
Can.
J
J
C
A
D
I
B
Cooper
Karen's
property
owner
applies
for
major
zoning
relief
to
establish
a
third
dwelling
unit
in
an
existing
two
family
residence
in
the
are
four
general
residential
district.
The
applicant
requests
a
multiple
family
residence
on
a
lot
with
a
forty
feet
where
a
lot
with
the
50
feet
is
required.
Zoning
code
section
six
855
a
total
lot
size
of
two
thousand
three
hundred
and
fifty
eight
square
feet
were
a
lot
size
of
two
thousand
five
hundred
square
feet.
Per
dwelling
unit
is
required.
B
Zoning
code
section
six,
eight,
five,
four
and
the
addition
of
zero
parking
spaces
where
two
additional
parking
spaces
are
required.
Zoning
code
section
616
three
five,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals,
makes
a
recommendation
to
City
Council
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
Documents
included
as
part
of
the
record
include
variation
application,
submitted,
May,
24th,
2018,
affordable
unit
description,
plat
of
survey,
interior
site
plan
of
proposed
unit,
letter
of
objection,
image
of
property,
aerial
view
of
property,
zoning
map
of
property
and
Deffer
draft
meeting
minutes
excerpt
of
May
30th
2018.
V
Name
is
Cooper
Kearns
I'm,
an
owner
and
occupant
of
18:22
line
street
I'm,
looking
to
modify
my
existing
basement
into
a
third
legal
dwelling
with
the
caveat
of
making
it
an
affordable
unit
to
be
at
80
percent
area.
Medium
income
and
the
tenants
would
be
vetted
by
the
community
partners
for
affordable
housing
would
also
sign
the
10-year
contract
to
biess
that
set
80%
area
median
income.
V
So
I
purchased
the
property
in
November
of
2017
and
it
was
an
existing
finished
basement,
so
I
plan
to
use
it
as
a
storage
and
laundry
room
for
and
I
do,
rent
my
upstairs
unit
and
I
live
in
the
first
floor
unit,
so
I
was
gonna
use
it
as
storage
and
laundry
room
until
I
talked
to
Melissa
and
she
motioned
towards
the
notion
of
making
it
into
an
affordable
unit.
So
I
went
ahead
and
submitted
all
the
applications
and
variances,
so
that
is
essentially
where
I'm
at
and
I'm
working
right
now
with
Eric
Erickson.
V
V
A
V
V
V
There
is
just
street
parking,
obviously
this
is
probably
the
biggest
variable.
So
with
that
being
said,
every
every
morning
I
leave
and
I
come
back
around
7:00
p.m.
and
there's
parking
on
lines.
If
I
don't
have
parking
on
lines,
I
can
park
read
on
Darrow,
so
it
hasn't
been
an
issue
for
me
to
find
parking.
So.
C
C
You
know
offloading
something,
and
so
there
was,
but
but
I
would
say
that
the
parking
is
an
issue
and
I
don't
know
if
we
can
just
get
beyond
that
for
the
sake
of
the
affordable
unit,
because
we're
we're
of
course,
always
happy
to
get
an
affordable
unit.
But
there
is
no
question
that
that
adding
density
and
more
cars
to
that
neighborhood
is
not
good
and.
E
I
agree
that
the
parking
on
Alliance
is
always
crazy.
I
live
on
Darrell
and
I
will
honestly
tell
you
that
it's
hard
to
park
even
in
front
of
my
house,
because
we
have
a
building
next
to
us
where
they
just
take
all
the
parking.
Is
there
any
way
to
have
parking
in
the
back
of
your
place?
No
way
at
all?
No
just
asking
you.
E
E
J
V
K
J
J
A
P
Carla
Sutton
1821
Darryl
residents
of
the
neighborhood
for
68
years.
It's
encouraging
to
know
that
this
is
an
owner
occupied
residence
and
that's
as
far
as
I
can
go.
There
is
a
basement
apartment
to
the
west
of
this
unit,
that's
currently
being
used,
but
we
have
three
Evanston
affordable
buildings
within
this
500
radius.
Already
one
is
very
problematic.
We
have
another
four
flat
that
is
rented
out
to
basically
people
from
an
absentee
landlord
that
is
problematic
parking
is
the
nightmare.
P
I
have
a
driveway
and
I've
come
home,
many
nights
and
people
have
parked
in
my
driveway
or
blocking
it
and
with
the
property
taxes
I'm
paying
I'm,
livid
I'll,
just
be
very
honest
with
you
did
not
want
to
call
to
have
the
cars
towed
because
of
the
first.
The
city
took
the
sign
down.
There
was
a
sign
there
for
years,
saying
no
parking
with
an
8
foot
of
a
driveway.
P
P
The
rent
is
a
market
value,
but
we
try
to
keep
rent
and
our
block
substantially
below
market
value
because
we're
very,
very
concerned
of
gentrification
there's
one
house
in
the
next
block:
that's
already
being
listed
for
300,000,
our
taxes
have
doubled
for
us,
elderly
people
have
been
in
the
community
we're
now
living
on
the
edge.
We
don't
want
to
have
to
sell
and
move
out
and
we're
encouraged
to
see
young
people
moving
in.
P
A
A
V
Just
one
statement
or
I
should
say
a
report
on
the
parking
situation.
I
believe
that
the
parking
situation
after
living
there
for
our
on
seven
months
is
a
combination
of
residents
from
Emerson
that
lived
tenants
and
residents
on
Emerson
Street
that
live
on
their
that
Park,
because
there's
no
permanent
parking
on
liens,
which
they
we
me
and
my
next-door
neighbor
Carlos.
We
took
account
of
tally
of
war.
V
A
E
It's
very
dark
over
there
on
Lyons,
very
dark
I
will
not
go
down
that
street
after
dark,
because
the
parking,
and
because
there
are
people
standing
in
the
street
just
stand-in
there
like
that,
permit
parking
is
hard
to
come
by
it's
a
low-income
community
and
every
time
you
go
to
the
alderman
and
ask
for
some
relief.
They
say.
Is
everybody
on
your
block
prepared
to
pay
for
that
and
that's
just
another
expense
of
the
people
over
there.
So
those
are
my
thoughts
on
it.
Violetta.
C
E
C
Notwithstanding
the
some
of
the
social
problems
that
we
have
experienced
in
that
neighborhood
I
am
really
happy
to
see
an
owner-occupied
as
Carla
says.
That's
everything
you
know,
hands-on
management
of
buildings
is,
is
key
to
their
being
viable
good
buildings
in
the
neighborhood,
I
really
hate
to
add
to
add
more
density
without
any
parking.
But
clearly
you
have
no
choice.
A
Asked
that
question
it's
got
to
and
since
this
is
just
a
recommendation
to
City
Council,
because
it's
a
parking
issue,
we
can
throw
it
in
there
and
let
them
deal
with
it.
But
I
think
I.
Think
it's
an
interesting
proposition
because,
as
mr.
Sutton
said,
you've
got
fewer
problems
when
there
is
a
an
owner-occupied
because
they
can
maintain,
manage
and
know.
A
What's
going
on
so
I
think
that
there's
a
real
benefit
to
that
and
in
exchange
for
the
benefit
of
getting
that
third
unit,
which
seems
to
be
more
the
benefit
that
then
the
city
gets
sort
of
a
owner-occupied
unit
which
I
think
will
help
the
neighborhood
as
well.
So
I'm
I'm.
All
for
throwing
that
in
there
and
see
if
it'll
stick
with
City
Council.
C
D
In
support
of
the
project,
definitely
whatever
we
can
do,
though,
to
resolve
some
of
these
issues
that
were
mentioned
here,
we
may
suggest
certain
things
to
the
City
Council,
whether
it
will
be
the
permitted
parking
or
anything
else.
It's
it's
not
bad
to
put
some
initiatives
here
so
that
we
have
a
better
city,
so
whatever
we
can
do
it
support
it.
Just
note:
I
am
really
pushing
for
a
better
plan
on
this
unit.
D
You
cannot
have
a
good,
affordable
unit
with
this
plan,
so
think
it
over
once
again.
Have
your
architect
work
with
you.
Well,
it's
two
bedroom
or
one
bedroom,
whether
it
will
have
a
better
living
space,
but
you
have
to
make
it
really
nice
if
you
want
to
to
have
people
living
over
there
84
square
feet
of
a
room
in
this
outline,
it's
close
to
four
it.
You
cannot
some
worry
to
different
such
a
room
and
you
don't
actually
have
a
living
space
anyway.
D
A
Yeah
man,
I'm
gonna,
second,
that
vote
from
Carroll
that
living
room
I,
don't
know
how
you're
gonna
furnish
that
that's
either.
That's
neither
here
nor
there.
It's
just
our
helpful
2
cents
if
you
want
to
take
it
for
that.
So
I
agree
with
all
that's
been
said:
I
like
the
idea
of
again
some
some
more
affordable
housing
in
the
neighborhood
I
like
that
it
is
owner
occupied.
We
are.
It
is
a
unique
piece
of
property
that
doesn't
have
somehow
it's
some
some
parking
on
it
and
doesn't
have
the
ability
to
get
any
parking
on
it.
E
U
E
I
J
C
I,
don't
know
that
it
is
realistic
to
ask
the
young
couple
to
stay
in
an
apartment
for
ten
years
they
might
want
to
have
children.
I
mean
you
know,
I'm
just
I,
don't
think
that
that's
a
real,
feasible
option
I
think
that
we
can
ask
that
it
remain
owner-occupied,
for
maybe
a
period
of
I,
don't
I
just
I.
Just
don't
really
know
how
you
how
you
I,
don't
think
that
that's
a
feasible
thing
to
do
there
there
are.
There
are
ways
to
because.
C
C
E
I
agree
because,
as
long
as
it's
owner-occupied,
that's
how
we
keep
the
drug
problem
down,
it's
the
buildings
on
liens
that
are
the
owner
does
not
live
there.
Where
we
have
the
most
problems,
we
have
a
hard
time
contacting
the
owners.
We
have
a
hard
time.
Shutting
you
know
getting
those
tenants
out
that
are
non-productive
for
the
community.
So
after
the
community
fights
that
a
couple
of
times
we
just
really
like
to
be
able
to
have
the
owner
there
to
share
the
burden
of.
What's
going
on
right.
A
A
A
I
think
that
the
there's
the
building
is
already
a
too
flat,
and
so
what
we're
talking
about
is
making
the
the
basement
occupiable
and
I,
don't
think
that
that
will
have
any
effect
on
the
neighborhood
on
the
on
the
neighbors
per
se,
because
we're
not
adding
any
bulk
or
volume
or
any
other
change
to
the
outside
of
the
building.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
two:
the
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
and
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
is
certainly
to
allow
for
the.
A
Allow
for
the
sorry
I'm
on
the
wrong
one
yep.
Oh
sorry,
sorry
sorry
sorry
is
to
allow
for
zoning
relief
when
a
public
benefits
such
as
the
affordable
housing
unit
is
provided.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
This
is
a
weird
one,
because
there
aren't
very
many
properties
in
Evanston
that
are
completely
landlocked
and
do
not
have
access
to
either
an
alley
or
have
a
driveway
off
the
street
or
have
any
land
to
have
that
driveway.
A
So
I
do
believe
that
that
is
unique
to
Evanston.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
four:
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
If
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out
without
this
requested
zoning
relief,
the
property
can
only
feature
a
two
family
residence
which
would
not
fully
utilize
the
potential
of
the
building
and
provide
the
public
benefit
of
an
affordable
housing
unit.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
five.
A
The
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
and
from
the
property,
but
there
is
a
public
benefit,
as
we've
discussed.
Clearly,
rent
additional
rent
form
an
additional
unit
provide
is
a
financial
benefit,
but
the
city
is
getting
a
benefit
also
of
having
that
affordable
out
in
that
affordable
unit
in
the
neighborhood
and
as
one
of
the
neighbors
testified
that
keeping
the
rents
at
a
lower
rate
in
the
neighborhood
is
going
to
be
helpful
to
everyone,
including
the
people
who
own
their
homes.
A
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
six,
the
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship,
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property,
the
owners
purchases,
the
last
fall
and
the
plat.
The
lot
was
plaited
and
the
house
was
built
long
before
he
purchased
the
property,
so
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
seven.
The
requested
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals.
A
E
Okay,
in
a
matter
of
1822
line
street
zoning
case,
18
cm
JV
0
0
4
7
I
motion
that
we
make
a
positive
recommendation
to
City
Council
to
establish
a
third
dwelling
unit
in
the
existing
family,
residence
of
1822
Alliance,
with
the
condition
that
the
additional
dwelling
unit
beef,
affordable
as
proposed
and
that
it
be
owner
occupied
for
the
length
of
the
affordable
housing
clause.
Okay,.