►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 9/5/2017
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
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
send
its
recommendation
to
City
Council
Melissa.
Will
you
call
roll
please
Scott.
C
B
A
And
with
five
members
present
we
do
have
quorum
tonight.
Also
present
tonight
is
zoning
planner
Melissa
Klotz.
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
regarding
any
matter
on
the
agenda
will
have
the
opportunity
to
do
so
at
the
appropriate
time.
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.
A
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
and
opposing
testimony
and
statements
have
been
heard,
the
applicant
or
appellant
will
be
given
the
opportunity
for
rebuttal
or
a
closing
statement.
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.
A
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.
Any
matter
not
concluded
at
tonight's
hearing
will
be
continued
to
our
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
There
are
three
items
on
the
agenda:
do
we
have
to
be
official
about
the
fourth?
A
A
Second,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
aye
I
will
note
that
anybody
not
voting
was
not
at
that
meeting
all
right.
Next,
we
will
go
through
anybody
who
is
in
the
audience
who
is
planning
on
testifying
tonight.
If
I
can
have
you
raise
your
right
hand
and
do
you
swear
affirm
anybody
who's
going
to
talk?
A
B
Pascale
birth
of
new
potential
lessee
applies
for
a
special
use
permit
for
a
type
2
restaurant
cafe
Coralie
in
the
B
3
business
district
zoning
code,
section
6
943,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
makes
a
recommendation
to
City
Council
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
Documents
included
it
as
part
of
the
record
include
special
use.
Applications
submitted
August
4th
2017
standards,
form
plat
of
survey,
business,
summary,
sustainable
practices,
worksheet
interior
site
plan,
facade
examples,
image
of
property,
aerial
view
of
property,
zoning
map
of
property
and
a
per
meeting
minutes
excerpt
of
August
23rd
2000
17.
A
F
F
It's
really
a
mix
of
both,
and
you
know
in
the
country
from
where
I'm
from
it's
a
necessity
for
the
neighborhood,
but
I
see
it's
just
same
thing
here,
where
I
really
wanna
contribute
to
the
the
revival
of
Howard
Street
by
offering
a
daytime
destination
where
people
can
just
come
for
a
coffee,
baked,
baked,
baked
goods
or
both
and
also
a
place
for
people
to
just
you
know,
socialize,
and
it
would
be
open
from
7
a.m.
until
7
p.m.
F
F
F
F
So
obviously
there
will
be
older
what
we
call
the
Viennoiserie
product,
which
is
like
the
cross
on
the
chocolate
cross
on
the
rolls
that
you
know
these,
these
breakfast
items,
but
there
will
be
also
savory
items
like
quiches
sandwiches
or
more,
like
a
lunch,
fare
and
also
premium
pastry,
which
is
really
what
we
do,
because
if
you
ever
go
to
the
one
that
I
have
on
on
Davis,
there
is
no
cookies.
There
is
no
cupcakes
brownies
and
no
large
cake
either.
F
It's
all
like
individual
pastries
that
are
a
lot
more
composed
and
then
so
so
there's
like
an
macaron.
So
there's
like
if
I
may
say,
there's
four
four
different
things
that
we
do.
We
do
savory
items,
we
do
Viennoiserie
the
breakfast
goods,
we
do
the
premium
pastries
and
we
do
those
French
macaron,
which
are
our
most
colorful
gluten-free
cookies
per
se
yeah.
So
those
are
the
things
we
would
be
offering
and.
C
E
C
F
C
F
The
street
parking
on
Howard
and
I
will
just
only
mention
the
fact
that
if
you
ever
drive
there
during
the
daytime,
there
is
plenty
of
street
parking.
So,
in
my
mind,
can
possibly
an
issue
as
far
as
parking
goes.
I
know
that
this
is
something
that
is
very
important
to
neighbors
when
they
see
a
new
restaurant
opening
all
the
type
of
concept.
But
in
our
case,
there's
just
so
much
street
parking
that
myself
amazed
to
see
like
that.
Really
anyone
during
the
daytime.
F
F
C
G
G
F
E
F
That
I
wish
I
would
answer
the
question
by
telling
you
that
the
fleet
of
trucks
would
be
you
know
taking
off
from
the
shop.
But
it's
only
going
to
be
just
one
car
and
again
going
through
the
back
of
the
of
the
unit
loading
up
every
morning
very
early,
like
around
6:00
a.m.
and
going
to
the
existing
location
that
we
will
have
a
latest,
because
that
one
won't
produce
anything
anymore
from
there.
So.
E
F
We
only
would
only
be
providing
to
that
one
location.
We
have
one
being
wholesale
account
that
we've
had
for
a
while
in
which
is
the
peninsula
hotel.
We
provide
all
the
macaron
needs,
but
it's
you
know
just
one
key
account,
so
we
so
far
we
look
I
said
we
were
hoping
to
get
more
of
those
wholesale
accounts,
but
so
far
we
only
have
one
and.
E
F
F
I
can
assure
you
that
the
as
far
as
deliveries
it
will
have
to
be
through
the
back
I
could
not
see
an
operation
where,
like
you
know,
someone
will
be
rolling
a
card
on
the
dining
room
to
deliver.
Like
you
know,
theory
or
whatever
it
is,
you
will
have
to
be
to
the
back.
There
is
no
question
about
that.
Okay,.
F
F
Know
if
there
is
room
for
an
outdoor
seating,
we'll
have
to
be,
you
know
directly
in
front
of
the
of
the
the
facade
of
the
the
bakery,
and
that
would
only
hold
maybe,
like
you
know,
like
three
tables
of
to
something
in
the
neighborhood.
So
at
this
point
like,
if
I
can
have
one
I
will,
but
it
would,
he
would
be
purely
for
like
a
static,
modern,
like
trying
to
generate
any
kind
of
revenue.
I.
F
Think
like
the
the
idea
that
I
have
for
the
facade
is
obviously
very
different
than
a
police
outpost,
and
it's
again
it's
just
it's
mostly
cosmetic,
where
we're
gonna
apply
like
wood
paneling
throughout
the
whole,
facade
and
I
think
it
would
be
very
pretty
I.
Think
it'd
be
a
good
thing
for
the
neighborhood.
It
would
be
a
very
light
cream,
color,
like
color
tone,
and
so
like
I
said.
F
A
A
F
A
A
F
F
Is
something
I
need
to
talk
to
the
other
garbage
company?
Because
if
I'm
gonna
have
recycling,
then
at
that
point
you
would
have
to
be
two
bins
and
so
therefore,
maybe
less
pickup
done.
You
know
if
I
only
have
one
so
I'm,
not
sure,
not
quite
sure
the
answer
to
that
question,
but
I'll
look
into
it.
Okay,.
F
I
My
name
is
Matt
Rogers
I,
with
a-133
Clyde,
Avenue
I.
Think
most
of
you
know
me,
I
just
came
to
speak
tonight
in
favor
of
this
project.
I
live
about
a
half
block
off
Howard
and
about
a
block
down
from
this
current
location,
and
what
we
desperately
need
in
this
neighborhood
is
something
to
do.
During
the
day
we
have
kind
of
come
in
with
our
our
evening.
A
E
D
A
Excellent
I
happen
to
agree
that
it's
a
great
project
too
and
I
think
that
we
all
know
we're
trying
to
get
more
daytime
traffic
down
to
Howard,
and
so
everything
we
can
do
to
get.
That
would
be
a
great
thing
and
good
food
is
one
of
those
ways
to
do
that.
So
I
will
go
through
the
standards
for
special
uses.
A
One
of
the
purposes
and
policies,
certainly
among
many
of
them,
is
to
retain
and
enhance
a
diversity
of
business,
commercial
and
industrial
areas
also
to
promote
growth
and
redevelopment
and
adaptive
reuse,
and
this
certainly
takes
a
lot
of
the
boxes
for
for
the
things
that
are
advocated
for
in
the
comprehensive
general
plans.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
A
This
neighborhood
is
really
just
in
its
infancy,
and
so
it
is
one
of
the
few
special
uses
on
the
street
and
so
I.
Don't
think
that
the
addition
of
this
as
a
special
use
will
cause
any
undue
hardship
on
the
neighborhood.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
four:
it
does
not
interfere
with
or
diminish
the
value
of
the
property
in
the
neighborhood.
In
fact,
redevelopment
of
this
property
can
only
enhance
the
neighborhood
and
bring
more
higher
property
values
and
bring
more
people
to
the
street,
particularly
with
sugar.
A
So
I
think
that
that
standard
has
been
met,
number
five:
it
can
be
adequately
served
by
public
facilities
and
services,
it's
certainly
close
being
on
Howard
Street.
It
is
on
transportation
routes,
both
Metro
CTA
and
the
bus
lines,
and
the
minimal
use
of
the
dumpster
certainly
will
not
cause
a
strain
on
city
services.
From
that
perspective,
in
fact,
no
strain
because
it's
all
commercial,
so
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
six.
A
C
A
You
number
seven:
it
preserves
significant
historical
and
architectural
resources.
The
existing
building,
that's
replacing,
which
is
the
out
the
Evanston
outpost,
is
not
particularly
historical
or
architectural
significance.
So
I
don't
think
that
that
standard
applies
number
eight.
It
preserves
significant
natural
and
environmental
features.
I
do
not
think
that
that
standard
applies
either
here
number
nine.
It
complies
with
all
other
applicable
regulations
of
the
district
in
which
is
located
and
other
applicable
ordinances,
except
to
the
extent
that
such
regulations
have
been
modified
through
the
plan
development
process
or
the
grant
of
a
variation.
A
E
C
A
Gonna
make
that
longer,
given
that
it's
Howard
Street,
what
else
is
sorry
for
interrupting,
but
unless
so
what
else
is
on
the
street
I
mean
if
we're
talking
about
bakery,
backrest
and
bakery
and
people
walking
to
trains.
Do
we
want
to
go
like
6:00
to
midnight
since
it's
Howard
and
give
him
the
opportunity
to
expand
the
again,
don't
have
to
use
all
that
time?
You.
B
A
C
D
A
B
And
McGuire
architect
applies
for
major
zoning
relief
to
construct
a
one-story
roofed
entry
at
Beth
emit
the
free
synagogue
in
the
r1
single-family
residential
district.
The
applicant
requests
32.3%
building
lock
coverage
where
a
maximum
30%
is
permitted.
Zoning
code
section
six,
eight
to
seven
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
is
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
B
A
J
J
A
You
in
for
this
it's.
J
As
I
said,
we've
been
working
with
Beth
Emmet
for
about
five
years
to
enhance
their
facilities
in
a
multitude
of
ways.
One
very
important
issue
that
they've
been
dealing
with
with
that
building
for
a
long
time
is
that
the
main
entrances
to
the
building
are
a
major
entrance
on
the
north
side,
along
Dempster
to
their
sanctuary
and
a
secondary
entrance.
Also
on
the
north
side
that
enters
sort
of
their
office
and
school
area,
the
parking
is
all
on
the
west
side
of
the
building.
J
So
this
creates
a
condition
where,
for
small
children
or
handicapped
people
in
wheelchairs
to
get
into
that
entrance,
you
have
to
go
around
the
corner
of
the
building.
There's
no
particularly
direct
access
from
the
parking
into
the
building
itself.
So
there's
always
been
a
desire
to
increase
the
accessibility
into
the
building,
as
well
as
increase
their
ability
for
security
to
monitor
an
entrance
so
to
have
a
office
that
can
have
visual
access
to
through
glass
to
the
exterior
of
the
building.
So
they
can
see
who's
coming
in
the
building
and
let
them
in
right.
J
So,
as
I
said,
the
main
impetus
for
this
project
was
its
increased
accessibility.
The
synagogue
did
a
addition,
renovation
in
2001,
which
increased
the
build
built
area
of
the
lot
basically
to
the
maximum
to
30%
in
this
project.
We're
seeking
to
add,
as
you
can
see,
in
the
rendering,
a
stair
and
ramp
at
the
location
of
an
existing
kind
of
raised
concrete
platform,
looks
kind
of
like
a
loading
dock,
with
no
actual
function
as
a
loading
dock
and
to
so
to
create
a
wide
stair
and
a
it's
actually,
not
even
a
ramp.
J
A
A
J
A
J
J
J
J
Now
there
was
another
question:
actually
I
forgot
to
mention
that
from
the
dabber
meeting
about
parking
so
currently,
there's
60
spaces.
Today
55
standard
spaces
in
five
wheelchair
handicap
spaces
we
would
be
looking
to
restriped,
because
the
area
of
this
this
plaza
you
can
see
on
the
on
the
left
side
of
this
image,
would
be
in
the
location
of
some
of
those
spaces.
But
we
in
the
restriping
plan
we
end
up
with
60
spaces,
57
of
which
are
standard
and
three
of
which
are
wheelchair
spaces.
E
J
Their
safety
and
in
two
ways
one
is
the
security
of
being
able
to
monitor,
who
is
coming
to
the
building
and
yes
and
seeing
them
as
they
come
in
and
having
a
lockable
vestibule.
So
you
can
lock
them
in
the
vestibule
or
you
know
either
way.
There's
also
the
question
of
safety
of
this
wing
of
the
building
is
mostly
classroom.
So
there's
a
lot
of
you
know
two
three
four
or
five-year-old
kids,
so
safety
of
drop
off
and
pick
up
to
get
the
kids
and
and
create
a
space
for
them
to
wait
as
cars.
E
J
G
C
J
Currently,
the
handicapped
spaces
are
primarily
in
the
area
where
that
those
sort
of
diagonal
walkways
and
planters
are
so
we're
actually
taking
area
of
of
parking
and
turning
it
into
this
paving
area
and
part
of
the
safety
issues.
There's
not
enough
space
for
people
to
walk
in
front
of
this
building,
because
currently
cars
drive
or
park
basically
directly
up
to
the
building.
So
we
are
removing
I,
believe
seven
spaces
that
are
in
that
zone
and
we're
restriping
the
entire
parking
lot
so
with
paint
getting
enough
spots.
J
D
J
I
was
going
off
of
what
the
previous
special
permit,
which
I
think
is
from
the
1960s
and
where
I
believe,
which,
which
predates
the
requirement
for
handicapped
spots.
Okay,
so
I'm
not
100%
clear
on
what
what
that
agreement
was.
We
just
wanted
to
match
the
number
of
spaces
totaled
it.
You
currently
have
okay.
A
C
It
has
always
struck
me
that
it's
odd
that
you
dropped
someone
off
and
they
have
to
walk
around
the
building
to
go
in,
and
so
the
need
for
a
project
like
this
is
pretty
evident
and
I
also
understand
the
desire
to
have
more
both
more
accessible
space
and
sort
of
a
view
to
the
entrance
that
this
project
creates.
The
property
is
existing
non-conforming
with
respect
to
lot
coverage,
which
is
the
only
issue
I
think
we're
discussing.
I,
think
I
read
that
it's
31
points
something
and
it's
going
to
32
point
something.
C
So
the
change
is
fairly
minimal.
In
my
view,
and
while
I'm
not
really
sure
I
agree
that
the
roof
is
necessary
to
create
a
slip
free
surface
in
that
it
doesn't
extend
out
perpetually
I
think
that
the
design
element
in
a
space-
that's
largely
you,
know,
very
non-residential,
even
though
it's
a
in
a
residential
zoning
area
is
a
trade-off
that
makes
sense
home
and
so
I'm
in
favor
of
the
project,
as
proposed.
G
D
If
you
can
think
of
something
like
in
your
yard
drop
off,
it
will
benefit
the
street,
it's
not
very
often,
but
over
there
there
are
slowdowns,
because
people
are
waiting
to
get
into
the
parking
drop
of
their
kids
and
then
go
out,
and
this
takes
time
so
well
in
favor
of
this
project
think
a
little
bit
whether
you
could
improve
the
drop-off
in
peak
times.
This
is
my
only
note
otherwise
for
the
support,
including
the
the
awning,
because
this
is
really
important.
This
is
really
important.
D
C
With
that,
I
would
just
also
add
on
the
parking
part.
Part
of
the
issue,
I
think,
is
that
the
I'm
blanking
on
what
the
other
street
is,
but
there's
it's
a
one-way
street,
and
so
it's
it's
difficult
to
figure
out
where
you're
supposed
to
turn
in
and
out
whether
it's
from
dumpster
or
the
next
Street
up.
Thank
you
that,
as
Barry
paths,
you
know
on
the
next
street
west
pass
ridge,
so
I
do
think.
E
Like
the
project,
because
it
does
create
sort
of
like
a
public
plaza
on
the
residential
side
of
the
building
and
I,
think
that
that's
that's
good
for
an
institution
to
kind
of
blend
in
with
the
community
and
it
like
a
great
project,
because
it
is
going
to
increase
your
accessibility
for
handicapped
people.
So
I,
like
the
president,
I.
A
A
Think
getting
everybody
to
enter
the
building
in
the
same
place
is
a
key
is
a
key
element
to
to
the
equity,
conscious,
Evan,
stone,
Ian
population
I
also
appreciate
your
ability
to
reduce
the
impervious
surface
given
flooding
and
all
that
sort
of
thing
and
you've
made
a
trade-off
and
increased
building
coverage,
but
you've
reduced
impervious
surface,
which
we
appreciate
that
effort
on
to
make
that
to
make
that
reduction.
So
these
are
major
variations
and
we
are
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
So
I
will
go
through
these
seven
standards.
Four
major
variations.
A
The
first
is
the
request.
A
variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
As
we've
heard,
the
the
application
is
to
create
a
roof
and
to
create
a
better
entry
sequence
into
the
building
that
will
theoretically
move
traffic
off
of
and
drop-offs
off
of
the
major
streets
surrounding
it
into
the
parking
lot.
So
I
think
both
from
a
functional
standpoint
and
from
a
visual
standpoint.
This
will
certainly
increase
the
appearance
to
the
neighborhood.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
A
Number
two
then
requested
variation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
The
intent
is
to
provide
for
the
ability
to
meet
the
changing
needs
of
the
community
and
to
modernize
buildings,
as
they
are
necessary
from
time
to
time.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
A
This
is
an
existing
building
on
an
existing
piece
of
property
that
has
some
quirks
to
it,
not
the
least
of
which
is
that
it's
surrounded
by
three
very
busy
roads
and
so
getting
that
entrance
off
of
the
main
roads
into
the
parking
lot
is
certainly
going
to
help.
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
at
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
to
were
to
be
carried
out.
A
If
we
didn't
have,
if
we
didn't
approve
the
variance,
we
would
end
up
with
an
entry
that
would
not
have
any
cover,
which
I
think
is
a
hardship
in
an
area
where
we
have
ice
and
rain
and
all
all
the
four
seasons
and
I
think
giving
a
place
of
shelter
for
people
coming
out
going
into
and
coming
out
of.
Services
is
a
is
a
good
idea,
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
I,
don't
believe
that
the
the
owner
is
intending
to
sell
anytime
soon,
so
I,
don't
think
that
any
of
the
the
monetary
value
is.
The
incentive
here
I
believe
that
the
incentive
is
to
provide
for
a
safe
and
reasonable
access
to
the
building.
So
I
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
again
an
existing
building
on
an
existing
lot.
A
A
C
Move
in
the
matter
ZB
a
seventeen
zmj
V,
zero,
zero,
seven,
zero
there
back
to
the
property
at
12:24,
Dempster
Street
that
we
approve
the
major
zoning
relief
requested
subject
to
the
condition
that
the
property
be
developed
in
accordance
with
the
documents
and
testimony
that
have
been
submitted
so
good.
It's.
A
B
And
Candice
folks,
property
owners
apply
for
major
zoning
relief
to
split
one
zoning
lot
into
two
Zoning
Lots
in
the
our
two
single-family
residential
district.
The
applicant
requests,
a
3.1
foot,
west
interior
side
yard
setback
for
five
feet
is
required
for
a
principal
structure:
zoning
code,
section
6,
8,
3,
7,
a
3
and
a
3
point:
2
foot,
west
interior
side
yard
setback
where
4
point
5
feet
is
required
for
a
front:
porch
yard
obstruction,
zoning
code,
section
6,
4,
1
9b
for
the
East
zoning
lot.
B
The
applicant
also
requests
an
accessory
structure,
detached
garage
on
a
property
without
a
principal
structure.
Zoning
code,
section
6,
4
6
2
a
for
the
West
zoning
lat.
The
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
is
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
Documents
included
as
part
of
the
record
include
variation
application
submitted,
August,
2nd
2017
standards,
form
zoning
analysis.
Plaintiff
survey
proposed
plots
of
survey,
image
of
property,
aerial
view
of
property,
zoning
map
of
property
and
dapper
meeting
minutes,
excerpt
of
August
23rd
2017.
K
As
I
stated
in
the
last
meeting,
I
had
I
guess
you
call
it
the
damper
meeting
I
would
like
to
subdivide
my
property
reasons
for
that.
It
was
born
and
raised
in
Evanston,
been
here
64
years,
and
it's
getting
to
the
point
where
I'm
gonna
have
to
retire
sooner
than
later,
and
to
do
that,
I
need
to
pay
off
and
to
stay
in.
K
My
house,
I
think
I'll
need
to
sell
that
property
off
so
that
I
can
pay
all
my
debts
and
my
taxes
are
pretty
high
there
as
it
is
and
I'm
hoping
that
that
will
help
me
get
closer
to
retirement.
I
had
asked
them
if
I
had
as
far
as
splitting
the
property
I
was
more
than
willing
and
to
move
the
property
line
over
to
five
feet
to
meet
that
and
then,
when
I
got
past,
the
house
I
was
going
to
jog
in
two
feet
and
then
go
back
out.
K
They
said
there
was
no
zoning
regulations
against
that,
but
they
asked
me
that
I
kept
it
at
50
feet
each
a
lot
because
it
was
more
zoning
friendly
or
whatever,
so
that
that's
what
caused
that
problem.
As
far
as
the
garage
goes
to
tear
it
down
or
to
move
their
garage
would
be
a
financial
hardship
of
epic
proportions,
I
guess
you'd,
say
and
I
certainly
don't
want
to
tear
it
down.
It's
a
valuable
building.
K
Whoever
buys
it
that's
one
less
thing:
they
have
to
build
they'll,
be
able
to
use
that
garage
to
put
material
in
out
of
the
weather,
maybe
other
way
where
people
wouldn't
steal.
It
sometimes
happens
and
I
believe
that
by
splitting
a
24,000
plus
square
feet
into
two
over
12,000
square
feet
would
meet
as
far
as
building
codes,
Golf,
I
think
I
believe
it's
six
thousand
as
a
minimum.
K
We
need
to
build
on,
and
this
is
over
12,000
once
you
split
it
and
as
far
as
the
width
goes
I
believe
it's
35
feet
narrow
us
that
you
can
build
on
without
permission
and
I.
Think
I
meet
that
with
the
54th
and
I.
Do
believe
that
that
if
we
split
it
it
would
be
existing
non-conforming.
But
again
it
would
be
a
financial
burden
to
move
that
garage
or
tear
it
down.
I
do
have
a
contractor
coming
by
well,
he
came
by
tonight
he's
gonna.
K
Give
me
a
price
on
taking
out
the
driveway,
like
his
only
board
had
request,
or
the
damper
meeting
had
suggested,
along
with
the
apron
that
will
give
two
more
parking
spaces
on
South
Boulevard,
not
to
mention
whoever
builds
a
house
there.
That'll
increase
tax
values,
more
money
for
schools
and
everything
else
that
the
taxes
go
to
and
it
helped
me
to
so.
I
can
stay
in
my
house
in
Edison.
K
K
Done
anything
yet
because
I
don't
know
what
I'm
gonna
be
allowed
to
do.
Okay,
so
I
mean
I've
spent
a
lot
of
money
already
on
surveying
costs
and
Zoning
Board
and
the
office,
and
all
that
other
stuff.
So
I
really
don't
want
to
do
any
more
than
I
have
to
until
I
get
the
permission
to
do
it.
If
not,
then
I'll
have
to
I.
Don't
want
to
move
that
I.
Don't
want
to
move
in,
sell
a
house.
I
want
to
keep
my
house,
but
by
selling
us
empty
lot.
C
B
K
K
E
K
A
$2,000
mm
deposit
and
Chicago
garage
builders
to
put
a
structure
a
two
and
a
half
car
structure
in
back
of
my
house
now
again,
I'm
wait
until
I
get
the
okay,
so
that
I
can
tell
them
to
start
the
process.
I
believe
that
Melissa
said
that
they
had
started
the
permit
process
already.
So
it's
just
a
matter
of
getting
an
okay
and
then
I'll
call
them
up
if
I
get
the
okay
today,
I'll
call
them
tomorrow
and.
C
K
That
as
well,
no
it's
it's
a
50
foot
ladder.
It's
a
26
foot
wide
by
22
foot,
deep,
it's
quite
a
bit
smaller
than
the
structure
that
you're
looking
at
now
and
it's
going
to
be
five
foot
off
the
property
line
to
the
east
and
I'll
have
probably
a
good
14
here,
more
I
haven't
done
a
math.
Excuse
me,
but
there's
a
big
space
between
the
two
garages
does.
B
A
A
G
K
I
was
thinking
of
was
eventually
I
have
a
daughter
who
special
needs
and
I
was
gonna,
build
on
a
second
floor,
a
place
for
her
to
live,
but
I
didn't
know
or
I
didn't
go
farther
into
the
code
saying
that
it's
got
to
be
at
least
5
feet
off
the
property
line.
30
feet
from
the
back
lot
and
I
was
gonna,
build
a
house
in
front
of
that
and
sell
the
other
one.
So
I
could
still
stay
there
and
try
to
teach
her
how
to
live
on
her
own.
That's
not
feasible
anymore.
K
K
A
A
F
K
Well,
the
only
other
thing
is
if
I
move
the
garage
and
I
as
I
said
to
move
it
over
to
the
structure
and
be
financially
hardship
for
me.
Can
it
be
done
sure
they
move
houses?
They
move
one
up
on
crawford
and
on
the
edge
of
town
right,
so
it
can
be
done.
You
just
cost
me
a
boatload
of
money.
I
don't
have.
G
A
In
one
of
that
is
jog
and
I
have
asked
staff
a
couple
times
why
they
don't
care
for
that.
Jog
lot
line
and
I'm
I'm
not
satisfied
with
their
answer
that
it's
convenient,
but
one
of
the
options
obviously
would
be
to
tear
down
that
garage
yeah
so
that
that
would
so.
Then
you
would
have
your
lot
would
be
fully
compliant.
The
adjacent
lot
would
just
be
48
feet.
Yours
would
be
52
feet,
everybody
would
be
compliant
and
it
would
everything
would
be
grand
tell
me
why
that's
not
an
option.
Aside
from
a
financial
hardship,
I.
K
K
A
A
G
K
A
C
So
if
I
can
interject
sort
of
interactively,
while
you
still
have
the
mic,
what
I'm
hearing
from
the
chair
and
what
I
sort
of
agree
with
is
there's
a
feasible
way
to
do
this,
that
sometimes
these
things
require
a
little
give-and-take
and
it
it
seems
like
splitting.
Your
lot
is
a
perhaps
good
idea
and
is
ultimately
your
goal
right,
so
that
you
can
sell
second
lot
or.
C
C
K
G
K
The
problem
I
have
with
making
it's
smaller
to
48
feet
is
I
mean
I
I
walked
around
on
Monroe
and
they
built
a
brand
new
house
and
they've
got
three
foot
clearance
on
both
sides
and
I
thought
I'm.
Just
asking
for
two
feet:
it's
a
50
foot
lat
anybody
build
a
house.
They
don't
have
to
build
a
40
foot
house,
40
foot
wide.
That's
a
pretty
big
house
right.
K
I
have
to
move
the
garage,
I'll
move
the
garage,
but
making
the
other
lot
48
feet
as
I
stated
I.
Don't
know
why,
just
for
two
feet
that
I
couldn't
get
that
approved,
because
I
saw
a
brand-new
house
on
Monroe
still
being
worked
on,
that
have
offset
a
three
feet,
and
that
means
I'd
have
to
get
the
surveyors
back
out
again,
which
costs
me
more
to
subdivide
a
lot
even
more
well.
C
One
once
you
subdivide
a
lot
and
once
you
sell
the
lot,
it's
the
developers
issue
to
get
whatever
variations.
They
need
for
that
new
lot
to
build
whatever
it
is.
They
decide
they
want
to
build
on
it.
The
variation
you're
dealing
with
deals
with
the
existing
garage,
where
it
is
the
existing
house
where
it
is
right.
So
those
are
the
things
you're
dealing
with
on
your
side
of
the
lot,
assuming
you're
willing
to
move
the
garage.
So
the
developer
deals
with
fort
whether
it's
48
or
50
feet.
C
A
G
A
Be
one
of
those
trade-offs
that
gets
made
it's
hard
to
know,
but
I
think
for
either
similar
or
only
slightly
more.
You
can
get
that
same
that
you
can
move
that
garage
with
the
foundation,
be
completely
compliant
and
get
a
lot.
That's
free
and
clear,
with
no
no
variances
on
it.
That's
going
to
be
more
attractive
to
a
developer
that.
A
A
A
K
A
A
G
K
K
A
K
C
Gonna
ask
you
guys
to
I
just
add
for
you
I,
don't
it
sounds
from
the
questions
like
nobody
on
this
board
disagrees
that
it
seems
like
on
balance.
It
would
be
great
for
you,
it'd,
be
great
for
Evanston
and
it'd
be
great
for
the
neighborhood,
but
in
the
spirit
of
sort
of
the
give-and-take
of
it.
There's
a
way
to
do
it.
That's
different
from
what
you
proposed.
That
I
think
makes
more
sense,
even
though
you
may
not
see
every
last
dollar
of
that
way,
and
so
you
know
in
I
think
what
I
was
suggesting.
C
I
have
not
taken
a
straw
poll
of
the
rest
of
the
board
is,
if
you're
willing
to
be
a
little
bit
flexible.
It
strikes
me
that
you
can
leave
here,
probably
with
them
with
a
variation
that
gets
you
what
you
need,
but
if
you're,
if
you're
going
to
put
your
foot
down
and
say,
I've
put
the
proposal
before
you
that
I've
got
and
I'm
gonna
deal
with
whatever
it
is,
I'm,
not
sure
you're
gonna
leave
happy
well.
C
K
C
K
B
Staff
is
not
supportive
of
jogging
the
property
line
whenever
possible.
We
want
straight
property
lines.
It
stops
issues
from
happening
in
the
future
where
people
don't
know
where
their
property
lines
are.
Things
can
get
built
in
the
wrong
place,
neighbors
and
end
up
in
arguments
over
it
and
that
usually
ends
up
in
the
zoning
office.
So
staff.
A
B
A
K
K
A
K
G
A
C
K
K
G
A
K
I
didn't
if
I
didn't
offset
the
property
again,
I
can
sell
a
property
as
a
buildable
I'd
to
somebody,
and
they
can
put
a
garage
if
I
have
to
move
the
garage.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
grad,
but
then
now
you're
talking
about
pulling
out
a
perfectly
good
foundation.
That
would
make
a
nice
garage
for
that
person.
That
buys
a
lot
which
would
improve
the
property.
I
mean
again
I'm,
not
trying
to
argue
with
you.
No.
K
E
C
D
A
D
Well,
I,
I,
don't
start
for
me.
The
best
solution
is
Joe
Devine.
But
if
this
you
know
this
is
the
staff
does
not
accept
this.
My
second
will
be
to
approve,
as
they
requested
it,
because
any
other
solution
for
me
is
a
kind
of
a
worse
than
what
they
are
suggesting.
50/50
with
the
garage
and
with
the
variances
is
a
much
better
solution
than
moving
the
garage
or.
D
Demo,
the
garage
with
all
the
things
think
about
the
future
of
these
Lots
they're
beautiful
Lots,
and
here
somebody
may
decide
to
tear
down
the
garage.
Then
all
our
concerns
go
away.
Somebody
may
continue
to
use
the
garage
they
will
be
variance
to
the
load
line.
Yeah
I
understand
that
it
is
a
little
bit
tight
for
the
existing
building
15.
D
H
H
C
C
Know
I
I
agree
with
that
and
so
yeah
all
I'm
envisioning
in
my
head
is
a
jigsaw
shaped
property
where
the
next
owner
has
to
come
in
because
there's
a
jut
into
their
line.
That
requires
a
variation
that
they
do
something
because
they
want
to
build
too
close
to
their
property
line.
Having
long
rectangular
Lots
is
the
standard,
and
these
are
extra
wide
lots,
no
matter
whether
we
request
that
the
line
be
drawn
at
48
feet,
50
feet
or
some
other
jogged
arrangement.
C
The
only
issue,
in
my
view
that
we're
facing
here
is
that
this
is
entirely
by
its
own
by
the
applicants
own
testimony.
It's
entirely
driven
by
desire
to
recognize
income
from
a
hundred
foot
wide
lot
right
and
that's
fine.
It's
fine
to
have
that
as
their
motivation.
But
then
I
don't
have
a
problem
saying
you
know
what
you
should
bear
the
expense
of
moving
that
garage.
You
are
looking
to
make
a
windfall
from
the
extra
large
property
that
you
bought
in
1999
for
zoning
sense.
C
C
If
you
don't
remove
it,
but
either
way,
why
not
just
divide
the
line
at
48
feet
without
requiring
the
jog
without
requiring
the
variation
for
his
house
to
be
3
feet
instead
of
5
feet
and
then
we're
just
looking
at
a
new
subdivided
lot
that
gets
the
owner
the
ability
to
make
the
income
off
that
wide
property
he
wants
and
to
make
a
decision
about
how
much
of
a
profit
he's
willing
to
protect
by
moving
that
garage.
But
even
if
he.
H
H
H
H
H
A
E
What
I
was
gonna
say
was
that
it
is
our
job
here
to
take
these
non-compliant
Lots
and
make
them
into
rectangular
lot
so
that
from
now
on
we
can
have
compliant
zoning
I
mean
I
would
like
to
see
a
situation
where
both
sides
made
a
little
compromise
so
that
this
could
happen.
This
man
can
get
what
he
wants,
but
if
not,
if
it's
like
you
know,
the
proposal
stands,
it
is
go
or
you
know
bolt
this
in
or
just
turn
me
down.
Then
I'm
gonna
have
to
say
no.
A
Okay,
so
I
have
to
scott,
has
elucidated
most
of
my
arguments
for
this
case,
so
I
will
keep
them
to
that.
I.
Do
honestly
believe
that
the
cost
of
either
moving
the
garage,
if
that's,
what
the
owner
wants
to
do
or
tearing
it
down,
is
only
marginally
more
than
building
the
new
garage
he's
already
going
to
build
so
I,
don't
think
that
that
is
quite
the
financial
hardship.
That
is
that
that
the
perception
is
that
there
is
so
with
that
we're
gonna
go
through
standards
for
all.
C
Right,
let
me
ask
a
procedural
question
and
Melissa
first,
so
the
proposal
is
what
it
is
and
it
seems
from
comment
like
the
writing's
on
the
wall.
It's
not
going
to
get
approved
as
is,
and
so
my
question
is:
did
we
have
the
authority
to
approve
something
he
hasn't
asked
for,
with
whatever
conditions
we've
had
or
what
happens
next?
If
we
just
turned
the
proposal
down.
B
Would
have
to
reassess
or
demolishing
the
garage
and
creating
a
new
property
line
that
is
not
jogged,
which
would
require
City
Council
approval
as
well.
On
the
other
hand,
if
you
find
a
middle
ground
that
either
reduces
the
variances
as
noticed
or
requires
a
new
variance,
but
is
done
so
by
by
the
board,
then
that
is
fine
to
proceed
so.
C
B
C
C
A
So
as
we
go
through
the
standards
for
variations,
those
of
you
who
disagree
with
my
assessment
will
need
to
say
what
your
reasoning
is
for
disagreeing
all
right,
so
the
seven
standards
for
variation,
the
first,
the
requested
variation-
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
I
think
this
standard
has
been
met,
because
this
is
a
particularly
wide
lot,
particularly
deep
as
well
and
I.
Don't
think
that
a
these
these
variations
would
have
any
impact
on
any
of
the
adjacent
properties.
A
A
A
It's
so
one
of
the
intents
of
the
zoning
ordinance
is
to
increase
the
tax
base
in
this
city
and
to
allow
people
to
make
modifications
to
their
property
as
they
need
from
time
to
time.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three,
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty-
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
I,
don't
find
this
to
be
peculiar
to
this
particular
property.
There
are
many
properties
in
Evanston.
A
C
D
But
we
have
here
existing
structure,
I,
somehow
and
once
again,
I
am
putting
my
arguments.
I,
don't
find
the
arguments
about
moving
the
garage
or
demolishing
the
garage
kind
of
a
valuable
in
this
case,
just
because
it
is
a
it
is
a
solid
structure.
It
is
a
waste
of
resources
to
do
something.
Well,
it
could
be
resolved
in
a
very,
very
proper
way,
so,
but
I
think
that
this
this
standard
could
be
really
concluded
as
met,
because
you
have
this
structure
the
back,
discourage.
That
is
a
massive
structure
and
is
it?
D
C
Thinking
I
understand
that
my
thought
about
that
is
to
the
extent
the
location
or
size
of
the
garage
is
a
hardship
it's
entirely
been
created
by
this
owner
who
built
it
himself,
six
years
after
he
bought
the
property.
So
to
not
have
the
foresight
that
you
may
one
day
want
to
try
to
subdivide
these
two
Lots
is
on
the
owner,
in
my
view
and
frankly,
to
Mary
Beth's
point
earlier.
C
If
there
is
a
cost
associated
with
moving
the
garage
in
order
to
keep
it
it's
effectively
a
wash
in
terms
of
the
cost
of
building
a
new
garage
which
he's
going
to
do
anyway.
So,
yes,
it's
a
hardship
perhaps,
but
it's
going
to
cost
him
the
same
amount
of
money,
one
way
or
another
whether
he
wants
to
keep
the
garage
or
build
a
new
one.
A
Thank
you.
Moving
on
to
number
four,
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
If
destructive
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
too
carried
out,
I
do
think
that
it
is
unfortunately
reduced
to
a
mere
inconvenience
to
have
to
be
able
to
relocate
the
garage
or
demolish
the
garage
when,
when
that
is
taken
as
compared
to
the
value
of
that
vacant
property,
so
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
not
been
met.
Well,.
A
Number
five:
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property,
or
there
is
a
public
benefit.
I
do
believe
that
in
this
case
that
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
specifically
based
upon
and
exclusively
a
desire
to
extract
income,
the
public
benefit
standards
don't
necessarily
apply
here,
because
the
the
owners
house
is
a
very
nice
house
in
nice
condition
and
it's
not
a
blight
on
the
neighborhood,
we're
not
getting
rid
of
a
a
property
that
is
in
disrepair
and
I.
A
Think
the
property
is
very
nice
and
a
very
nice
location.
So
I
do
not
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
six,
the
alleged
hardship
or
alleged
difficulty
or
hardship
has
not
been
created
by
any
person
having
an
interest
in
the
property,
given
that
the
owner
is
the
one
creating
the
property
line
which
is
causing
the
need
for
variances
both
on
the
East
property,
on
the
bond
up
on
the
proposed
East
propert
lot
and
on
the
proposed
West
lot.
A
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
not
done
Matt
because
he's
it's
very
clear
for
me
that
that's
created
being
created
by
the
owner
and
number
seven.
The
request
of
variation
requires
the
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals.
A
A
H
G
K
Again,
you
guys
are
gonna,
do
what
you're
gonna
do
and
I
understand
that,
and
you
seem
to
think
that
I'm
gonna
get
a
lot
of
money
for
a
lot
I,
don't
know
how
much
I'm
gonna
get
for
a
lot,
but
I
was
talking
to
Melissa
and
she
said
that
I'd
have
to
build
a
garage
behind
my
house.
I
agree
to
that.
She
said:
you'd
have
to
tear
out
the
driveway
and
and
and
fix
the
curb
line
and
the
apron
I
agreed
to
that.
K
You
say
that
I
don't
want
to
cause
a
hardship.
Well,
I'm
gonna
say
this
I'm
the
reason
why
I'm
selling
a
property
isn't
to
become
a
millionaire
or
make
a
lot
of
money.
I've
got
bills
to
pay.
I
want
to
pay
him
before
I
retire,
I'm
trying
to
make
it
so
that
I
can
stay
in
Evanston
and
pay
these
high
taxes
I,
don't
mind
paying
for
the
taxes
for
schools,
I
sent
mine
to
private
school
and
I
paid
for
the
taxes
for
the
public
schools
as
well.
K
My
family's
been
in
this
town
for
a
long
time
again.
That
probably
means
nothing
to
anybody,
but
I
want
to
stay
in
town.
If
that's
not
feasible,
then
I'll
sell
the
whole
property
as
it
is
and
move
out
of
Evanston,
but
I
don't
want
to
do
that.
That
would
be
another
hardship.
You
say
it'd
be
easy
to
move
the
garage
over
and
tear
out
the
foundation.
K
All
those
things
you're
asking
me
to
do.
Cost
money
cost
a
lot
of
money
to
have
some
guy
come
in
with
a
bulldozer
or
whatever
they
use
to
take
that
out.
Sure
I
can
move
the
garage
over
and
put
out
a
new
foundation,
but
then
you're
telling
me
I
have
to
move
the
the
foundation
for
that
garage,
want
it
to
be
used
by
somebody
else
to
build
what
other
graduate
want.
K
You
stated
a
good
fact:
if
I
sell
it
I'm
not
going
to
get
as
much
money
if
I
tear
out
the
garage
and
the
foundation
and
stuff
again
I,
don't
know
what
to
say:
I
mean
you
know.
You
say
that
I
caused
the
hardships.
Well,
maybe
it's
the
taxes
I
pay
in
this
town
that
caused
the
hardships
I'm
just
saying
you
know,
I'm
not
trying
to
be
mean
or
nothing
but
I
paid
a
lot
of
taxes
over
the
years
and
I
paid
what
I
had
and
they
said.
Well,
you
got
a
nice
house.
Well.
K
Nice,
you
know
nobody
else
from
the
City
Council
anybody
was
was
hammered
the
nails
and
doing
things
for
me
and
I.
Get
that
you
know
all
I'm
asking
for
is
a
two-foot
variance
and
let
me
keep
the
garage.
That's
all
I'm
asking
for
I
was
asked
to
build
a
garage
behind
the
house
to
take
care
of
the
two-car
rule
that
you've
got
no
problem.
I
said
I'd.
Do
that,
so
I
did
give
a
lot.
What's.
C
K
Gonna
cost
fourteen
thousand
to
move
the
garage
or
fifteen
thousand.
They
said
then
I'm
gonna
have
to
put
a
foundation
in
there.
Then
I'm
gonna
have
to
have
somebody
come
out
and
dig
up
the
foundation
just
so
that
you
can
make
it
a
48-foot
lot
instead
of
a
50-foot
lot.
When
there's
no
rules
against
Jagan
2-foot
jag
and
it's
not
going
to
be
a
jigsaw
puzzle,
it'll
basically
be
I,
can
move
the
line
two
feet
from
the
house.
K
K
G
K
Know
I
work
for
Evanston
for
25
years
and
went
to
Skokie
I'm
a
cold
guy
out
there
I
understand
what
the
codes
are
for
and
why
why
they
apply?
What
I'm
just
saying
is
you're
saying
this
hardship
was
caused
by
me.
Well,
it
may
have
or
may
not
have
I
mean
I'm
making
this
move
not
to
make
money
I'm
making
this
move
so
I
can
stay
in
Evanston,
I.
C
Mean
let
me
clarify
for
you
just
because
I'm
not
sure
you're
appreciating
that
heart
when
we
say
hardship,
we're
talking
about,
inter
as
a
term
of
art,
as
it's
used
in
in
the
zoning
ordinance
we're
talking.
What
we're
talking
about
it's
a
hardship
is
not
the
financial
hardship
to
you.
What
we're
talking
about
is
the
hardship
is
what
is
it?
That's
causing
you
to
seek
zoning
relief
for
that
garage
and
to
the
extent
the
garage
is
located
where
it
is
and
that's
the
hardship,
that's
why
you
need
zoning
relief.
C
K
K
K
I
did,
but
you
know
it
just
seemed
like
you
were
saying
that
I'm
gonna
make
all
this
money
and
and
again,
if
I
had
to
take
out
the
foundation
to
the
garage
moving.
The
garage
is
one
thing
on
to
another
foundation,
but
then
tearing
out
that
foundation
from
their
garage
tearing
out
the
driveway
turn
out
the
apron
fixing
the
curb
on
the
street
side.
That's
that's
all
financial
burden
on
my
part
and
I
guess
I
did,
if
you
put
in
those
terms,
I
caused
it
myself.
You
know
what.
K
D
A
Okay,
so
now
I'm
gonna
close
the
record
again
we're
gonna
go
back
to
where
we
were,
which
are
the
standards
I've
gone
through
the
standards,
if
okay,
so
two
a
couple
of
things,
the
first
is
right.
The
motion
should
be
in
the
affirmative
because
that's
how
we
do
things
right
motion
in
the
affirmative,
if
you're
against
it,
you
just
vote
nay.
Secondly,
because
we've
had
problems
in
the
past
with
other
projects
where
the
front
curb
cut
does
not
get
removed.
A
C
A
G
C
Okay,
with
the
variation
with
respect
to
where
that
house
sits
the
three
and
a
half
feet
variation,
because
that,
in
my
view,
is
not
a
hardship
created
by
this
owner.
That
house
was
built
where
it
was
when
he
bought
it.
However,
I'm
completely
against
the
variation
with
respect
to
the
garage
and
I'm
completely
against
approving
a
blanket
accessory
structure
on
a
lot
that
this
owner
is
going
to
sell.
C
So
I
I
would
vote
in
favor
of
a
variation
at
a
50
foot
lot
line
for
the
variation
on
the
east
lot
with
respect
to
where
the
house
sits,
but
I
would
not
vote
in
favor
of
any
variation
with
respect
to
the
accessory
use
or
where
the
garage
sits.
In
other
words,
I
would
require
a
condition
that
the
garage
be
taken
down
and
in
and
either
moved
or
just
taken
down
altogether
and
and
that
west
lot
be
quote
unquote,
clean
right.
H
E
D
B
B
B
D
C
You're,
probably
right
in
terms
of
the
the
letter
of
the
ordinance,
but
in
in
terms
of
the
spirit
of
what
we're
doing
the
owner
is
looking
to
split
his
lot
and
sell
half
of
it
and
regardless
of
the
accessory
structure
issue,
there's
still
the
variation
issue
for
how
close
that
garage
sits
to
the
property
line,
and,
in
my
view
this
is
an
owner
created
problem.
No.
G
D
C
A
A
G
E
A
Moving
it
over
two
feet:
two
feet
yeah,
but
in
this
case
we
would
say
you
wouldn't
even
move
you'd,
give
on
the
house
to
get
the
garage
down
so
that
the
new
lot
is
clean
and
pristine.
And
you
can
you
give
you,
you
exchange
a
pristine
lot,
a
pristine
zoning
lot
for
a
side
yard,
variance
on
the
house
with.
A
B
I
would
advise
against
allowing
the
foundation
to
remain
for
one.
It
likely
could
not
be
reused.
We
are
on
a
different
set
of
building
codes
than
we
were
when
the
when
the
structure
was
built,
so
it
likely
wouldn't
be
feasible
to
reuse
it.
But,
more
importantly,
it's
it's
problematic
it.
It
could
lead
to
property
standards,
issues.
B
C
C
The
thing
if
we
grant
it,
if
we
grant
the
East
yard
setback
variation
and
we
deny
the
garage
related
variations,
the
owner
will
have
a
choice
to
make
right
whether
to
go
through
with
the
project
and
sell
half
the
property,
because
it
makes
economic
sense
or
not
we're
giving
the
owner
that
option
and
that's
something
the
owner
can
evaluate
and
will
be
something
either
to
capitalize
on
or
you
may
disorder.
He
may
decide
economically,
it's
not
a
feasible
project.
C
B
A
C
Removing
the
garage
removing
or
moving,
however,
removing
the
problem
that
the
garage
creates
and
the
foundation,
because
that
really
gives
the
owner.
It
creates
a
condition
that
gives
the
owner
the
choice
to
move
forward
with
that.
But
it
also
says:
if
you
don't
move
forward
with
it.
This
variation
is
not
going
to
carry
with
the
property,
in
other
words,
if
he
sells
the
subdivided
lot
that
we've
effectively
granted
and
says
to
a
developer.
A
A
E
D
C
A
G
A
E
L
B
B
A
C
So
I
make
another
motion
the
respect
to
the
request
that
post
splitting
of
the
two
Lots
that
the
west
of
the
two
Lots
be
permitted
to
have
an
accessory
structure,
which
is
the
existing
garage
where
no
principal
structure
would
be
located
on
the
lot
and
I
move
that
we
approve.
That
request
for
a
variation
subject
to
no
further
condition.