►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 1/9/2018
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
the
decisions
of
the
Zoning
Administrator,
depending
on
the
type
of
matter.
This
board
will
either
make
a
final
determination
or
send
its
recommendation
to
City
Council
Melissa.
You
please
call
the
roll.
C
D
A
Five
members
present
we
do
have
a
quorum
tonight
also
present
tonight
our
zoning
planner
Melissa
Klotz
and
Planning
and
Zoning
Administrator
Scott
Mangum.
Oh
and
Mario
trot.
Oh
sorry,
assistant
city
attorney,
Mario
Tata.
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.
A
Our
procedure
is
to
hear
from
the
staff
on
the
documents
on
file
and
then
receive
testimony
and
other
evidence
from
the
applicant
or
appellant
next.
Persons
who
wish
to
make
a
statement
regarding
the
matter
may
do
so
at
that
time,
any
person
with
a
legal
interest
in
property
located
within
500
feet
of
the
subject.
Property
may
present
evidence
reasonably
question
witnesses
or
seek
a
continuance
of
the
hearing.
While
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
they
can
be
properly
recorded.
A
All
proceedings
are
subject
to
broadcast
at
allé,
and
he
mean
any
matter
not
concluded
at
tonight's
hearing
will
be
continued
to
our
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
There
are
three
items
on
the
agenda
tonight
and
I:
don't
have
an
agenda
handy
so
there's
1723,
Simpson
Street
is
that
applicant
here
awesome.
A
E
F
A
It's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye,
aye
opposed
and
the
minutes
are
approved.
Okay.
Next,
we
are
before
we
get
into
the
first
case.
I'm
gonna
ask
everyone
who
is
planning
on
testifying
tonight.
So
if
you're
coming
up
and
planning
on
speaking
need
you
to
raise
your
right
hand,
everybody
and
you
swear-
affirm
to
tell
the
truth
throughout
the
course
of
these
proceedings,
fantastic
all
right,
Melissa's,
going
to
we're
gonna
start
with
1720s,
all
right,
Scott's
gonna
start
with
1723
Simpson
Street.
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members.
The
board
members
of
the
public,
the
request
tonight
on
this
first
item
at
1723,
Simpson
Street,
is
for
a
special
use
permit
by
Robert
Creighton
potential
SC
for
a
type
two
restaurant
ruby's
within
the
b1
zoning
district.
This
is
an
item
where
the
Zoning
Board
makes
a
recommendation
to
the
City
Council,
whose
the
term
determining
body
the
design
and
project
review
committee
has
already
reviewed
and
made
a
recommendation
on
this
matter.
There
was
a
recommend
rotation
for
approval
subject
to
conditions.
G
Those
are
operations,
as
the
applicant
may
describe
where
there
would
be
more
than
10
occupants
in
the
building
which,
in
this
necessitates
the
requirement
for
the
two
accessible
restrooms,
the
Zoning
Board
may
consider,
enhancing
or
adding
conditions
or
clarifying
these
conditions.
Regarding
the
unobstructed
windows.
Specific
delivery
hours
that
would
be
permitted
and
interior
signage
relating
to
the
maximum
occupancy
without
a
second
accessible
restroom.
G
A
I
D
H
Project
is
its
non
1723
Simpson
we
took
abandoned
building
and
we
decided
to
open
the
restaurant
back
up.
That
was
there
before
also
was
a
grocery
store.
We
took
the
grocery
store
out
of
the
restaurant
and
that's
what
the
special
uses
for
we're
doing
it
in
two
different
phases.
The
first
phase
is
just
type
2
restaurant,
although
more
than
10
people
know
more
than
10
seats
at
a
time.
G
They
would
need
to
comply
with
everything
is
described
here,
so
if
they
describe
the
phase
two
and
they
provide
additional
seating
more
than
10
people
that
that's
where
that
second
accessible
restroom
would
come
in
about.
If
it's
described
here
as
having
special
events
in
the
application,
then
it
would
be
included.
As
part
of
this
is.
H
J
H
Phases
to
allow
us
to
have
more
than
10
people.
Basically,
we
can
only
have
10
people,
10
seats,
I'm,
sorry,
we're
gonna
have
10
seats,
but
without
using
a
phase
2-
and
that's
me,
that's
the
handicap-
set
accessible
washroom.
What
I'll
put
in
a
second
handicap
wash
so
this.
H
H
F
F
H
F
H
C
H
C
K
D
H
The
garbage
he
could
pull
in
the
back
well
he's
really
not
the
back
is
the
side
of
the
building.
The
curb
is
already
truck
and
pool
behind
the
building.
The
garbage
truck
will
pull
behind
a
building.
That's
what
he's
been
doing
for
the
grocery
store,
so
we're
gonna
continue
to
do
that.
We
plan
on
having
deliveries
after
school
hours.
Oh
I
know
that
was
one
of
the
stimulus
that
we
had.
We
couldn't
deliver
her
door.
I
know
when
the
buses
are
for
school.
L
H
H
A
H
D
A
Guess
is
backyard
really
means
pavement?
Yes,
but
there's
no
grass
there,
and
so
there
is
a
door
there.
So
it
seemed
logical
that
you
could
just
back
the
truck
up
there
and
to
do
all
deliveries.
Off-Street
yeah,
so
is
that
reasonable?
Is
that
a
reasonable
condition?
It's
better
for
us?
Yes,
fantastic?
So
we
can
take
on
street
side
deliveries
off
the
table.
Excellent.
When
I
look
at
this
floor
plan
I
see
things
like
fish,
fryers
and
chicken
fryers
right.
I
didn't
see
that
in
your
in
your
menu
of
what
you
were
posing
to
serve
yeah.
I
H
A
H
H
H
A
A
G
G
Checklist,
essentially
that
we
can
get
you,
there
are
a
number
of
items
on
there,
including
a
little
collection
plan,
recycling
of
materials,
the
type
of
whether
you're
serving
food.
You
know
if
it
were
to
be
sit-down
or
people
eating
there,
whether
that
would
be
provided
on
non-disposable,
the
materials.
Okay.
J
Don't
think
so
the
seating
so
to
me,
that
seems
like
a
compliance
issue
that
doesn't
really
necessitate
consideration
by
us.
It
has
to
be
a
if
we
were
to
grant
the
special
use.
The
use
has
to
be
ad
a
compliance
so
phase
one
or
phase
two.
If
he
doesn't
have
the
second
bathroom,
he
can't
have
more
than
ten
people
on
site,
whether
we
condition
it
or
not.
Right.
G
L
H
A
H
A
H
H
H
D
A
D
D
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you.
Is
there
anybody
here
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
project?
Anyone
anyone
all
right,
no
other
public
comments,
so
we're
gonna.
Take
that
as
being
the
end
of
mr.
Crichton's
presentation,
so
we
will
with
that
we
will
go
ahead
and
close
the
record
and
internal
deliberations
so
thoughts
from
the
board.
J
Reiterate
the
thought
I
don't
think
we
need
to
really
establish
a
condition
based
on
the
phase,
one
and
Phase
two
distinction,
because
I
think
that's
a
legal
compliance
issue
he's
either
going
to
have
the
second
bathroom
and
be
allowed
to
have
the
more
than
ten
people
on
site
or
he's
not.
But
that's
not
something
that
the
special
you
should
ride
on
one
way
or
the
other.
In
my
view.
J
L
F
Well,
I
applaud
the
applicant
for
his
desire
to
find
a
reuse
for
that
site.
I,
don't
know
how
long
that
site
has
been
vacant,
but
certainly
having
you
know,
having
a
use
that
service
of
community
would
be
a
positive
I'm.
Reviewing
the
the
dapper
conditions
that
I
wanted
to
clarify
a
couple
of
things.
So,
if
the,
if,
if
as
the
applicant
said
that
delivery
could
happen
on
the
side,
street
I
think
that's
Darrow
right
there,
the.
F
A
F
So
that's
even
better!
So
then
can
we
we
don't
have
to
I
think
we
could
strike
that
condition
where
we
would
be
coordinating
delivery
with
bus
pick-up
and
drop-off
times.
So
that's
I,
in
my
view,
taken
off
the
table
and
then
I'm
wondering
in
regards
to
the
windows
along
Simpson
Street
to
be
placed
with
transparent,
glass.
I
think
that's
an
important
matter.
A
A
I
happen
to
agree
with
all
of
you
about
this.
As
you
know,
I
was
a
fan
of
the
restaurant
down
the
street
and
I'm
a
fan
of
this
one
as
well.
I.
Think
revitalization
of
the
neighborhood
is
important
and
getting
people
to
to
be
in
these
buildings
and
and
and
to
use
them
as
an
important
facet
of
the
neighborhood.
So
I
love
the
redevelopment
of
this
property.
I
love
even
more
getting
rid
of
those
glass
block
windows
because
I
find
them
very
imposing
and
having
regular
glass.
A
There
will
be
great,
so
I
think
it's
a
I
think
it's
a
good
project,
I'm
eager
for
Phase
two,
so
I
hope
that
this
phase
one
is
very
successful
for
you.
So
with
that
we
are
gonna,
go
through
the
nine
standards
of
special
use
if
I
can
find
them.
Okay,
it
is
one
of
the
special
uses
specifically
listed
in
the
zoning
ordinance
and
a
type
1
type.
2
is
sorry
number
2
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
Certainly,
the
the
comprehensive
plan
is
geared
to
promote
growth
and
redevelopment
to
strengthen
the
overall
economic
base
of
Evanston,
and
certainly
by
providing
some
jobs
to
the
neighborhood
and
to
provide
a
place
for
the
neighborhood
to
go.
I
think
certainly
achieves
that
goal,
so
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
three:
it
will
not
cause
a
negative
cumulative
effect
when
its
effect
is
considered,
in
conjunction
with
the
cumulative
effect
of
various
special
uses
of
all
kinds,
types
on
the
immediate
neighbourhood
and
the
effect
of
the
proposed
type
of
special
use
upon
the
city
as
a
whole.
A
Walking-
and
this
is
one
special
use
in
a
neighborhood
that
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
special
uses,
but
I
do
think
that
that
that
use
of
a
restaurant
will
be
helpful
in
that
neighborhood.
So
I
do
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,
renovation
to
that
property
and
getting
that
property
have
inhabited
will
actually
give
more
vitality
to
the
street
and
increase
the
property
values
in
the
immediate
vicinity.
A
So
that
standard
has
been
met,
number
five:
it
can
be
adequately
served
by
public
facilities
and
services.
It
is
already
served
by
city
of
Evanston
services
and
facilities,
so
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
six.
It
does
not
cause
undue
traffic
congestion
again.
The
point
that
the
applicants
indicated
was
that
the
bulk
of
traffic
will
be
local
and
from
the
neighborhood,
so
we're
expecting
that
most
of
that
will
be
walking
or
biking
traffic,
and
so
I
do
not
believe
that
traffic
congestion
will
increase
so
that
standard
has
been
met.
A
Number
seven
preserves
significant
historical
and
architectural
resources,
although
not
historical.
There
are
architectural
resources
of
a
perfectly
good
building
that
could
use
a
little
a
little
attention
to
it,
and
so
I
think
that
that
standard
has
certainly
been
met.
Number
eight
preserves
significant
natural
and
environmental
features,
which
does
not
apply
and
nine
it
will
comply
with
all
other
applicable
regulations
of
the
district
and
which
is
located
and
other
applicable
ordinances.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met
too.
So
we
are
a
recommending
body
to
the
City
Council.
A
There
are
sorry,
can
I
have
that
back
for
a
second
things.
There
are
a
couple
of
conditions
right.
One
is
the
transparent
glass,
with
an
application
to
the
economic
board,
economic
development.
For
that
grant
to
that
delivery
is
now
off
street
and
in
fact
it's.
It
is
literally
off
street
three
that
employees
cannot
park
on
the
street
and
they
will
be
parking
elsewhere
hours.
So
the
hours
we
gave
to
the
restaurant
down
the
street
are
10:30
to
8:30.
That
seemed
correct.
A
A
J
C
A
G
To
a
couple
notes
or
suggestions
for
the
board
to
consider
regarding
conditions
with
the
transparent
windows
may
be
good
to
have
some
additional
details.
Sometimes
we
see
windows
going
to
become
tinted
or
obstructed
with
shelving
or
obstructed
with
blinds
or
other
methods
that
might
be
prudent
to
put
something
in
the
condition
about
about
not
having
those
windows
obstructed
to
consider.
Maybe
limiting
the
delivery
location
was
described,
but
maybe
the
hours
being
the
proximity
to
residential,
but.
G
Correct
so
that
that
was
another
one
and
then
I
understand
the
concern
about
the
occupancy
limitations
being
a
building
code
matter
for
enforcement.
But
sometimes
we
find
that
that
can
be
easier
enforced
if
there
was
maybe
signage
interior
that
limited
the
occupancy
of
that.
Just
to
kind
of
reinforce
that
you
know
months
or
years
in
the
future
that
there
is
that
limitation
there.
The
the
ten
occupants
doesn't.
A
J
A
A
J
F
That
deliveries
take
place
at
the
rear
of
the
building
and
off
street,
that
a
grant
application
has
been
received
by
the
appropriate
City
staff
in
committees
for
review
for
storefront
improvements,
that
operation
hours
be
limited
from
6:00
a.m.
to
10:00
p.m.
and
that
the
sustainability
plan
for
Evanston
be
signed
and
received,
as
required
by
staff,
and
that
all
testimony
and
documents
received
and
heard
here
this
evening
are
are
accurate.
I.
J
A
A
A
L
B
Rabbi:
Dov,
hello,
Klein
property
owner
applies
for
a
special
use
permit
for
the
expansion
of
a
religious
institution,
Lubavitch
Habad
of
Evanston
LLC
in
the
r1
single-family
residential
district
zoning
code,
section
6
8
to
4.
The
applicant
also
requests
major
zoning
relief
for
an
addition,
including
a
third
storey,
with
a
35
foot,
peak
height
and
exterior
knee
wall
above
three
feet
were
two
and
a
half
stories
with
a
peak
height
of
35
feet
and
a
maximum
3
foot.
B
Knee
wall
are
permitted:
zoning
code,
sections
6,
8
to
9
8
and
6
18
3,
a
5.4
foot,
north
interior
side,
yard
setback
and
9.5
foot
south
interior
side
yard
setback.
We're
15
feet
is
required
for
a
non-residential
structure
sown
in
code,
section
6,
8
to
8
B
3,
a
27
point,
3
foot,
front
yard
setback,
we're
34
feet
is
required:
zoning
code,
section,
6,
4,
1,
9,
a
3
and
a
24
point:
8
foot,
front
yard,
porch,
Eve
setback,
we're
twenty
seven
point.
Six
feet
is
required.
A
O
Name
is
rabbi:
Dolph,
Hillel,
Klein,
I
personally
live
at
twenty
nineteen
maple
Evanston
Illinois,
first
and
foremost,
I
wanna
wish
everyone
a
Happy,
New
Year's
I'm,
just
delighted
that
everyone's
willing
to
hear
our
case.
Forty
years
ago,
we
stood
before
this
commission
to
ask
for
zoning
variance
sold
in
a
place
of
worship,
a
synagogue
and
ministry
in
order
to
service
the
residents
in
the
city
of
Evanston,
as
well
as
Northwestern
University
students,
faculty
and
staff,
the
CBA
granted
the
various
zoning
variances.
O
Unfortunately,
the
city
of
evidence,
the
City
Council,
did
not
agree
and
refused
to
grant
us
a
special
use.
Permit
that
forced
our
parent
organization
to
take
the
city
to
court
for
being
discriminative
after
after
all,
after
all,
right
next
door
to
us
was
the
which
still
exists.
Till
this
day
was
the
Episcopalian
Center
down
the
block
was
a
Lutheran
Center
and
the
black
away
was
a
new
finished.
Dormitory
called
foster.
Walker,
complex
Chabad
won
that
case
for
the
city
kept
appealing
and
until
reached
the
Supreme
Court
of
the
United
States.
O
The
Supreme
Court
has
upheld
a
lower
court
decision
case
number
81
there,
six
three
three.
So
we
operate
today
based
on
the
court
ruling
and
the
CBA
special
use
provisions.
As
we
stand
before
you
today,
we
are
not
asking
them
to
change
those
provisions
but
to
keep
them
the
same
and
in
place.
Today
we
are
asking
for
other
variances,
so
we
can.
We
enhance
our
building,
make
it
more
useable,
presentable,
safer,
handicapped,
accessible
and
meet
all
the
a.da
requirements
and
the
Supreme
Court
granted
us
our
ability
to
open
our
doors.
O
I
was
hired
in
1985
32
years
ago.
I
feel
like
I'd,
been
here
forever
and
we
built
a
wonderful
community
and
we
have
had
wonderful
impact
on
thousands
of
young
adults
who
are
now
leaders
throughout
the
throughout
the
country
in
their
own
cities
and
towns.
Over
the
years
we
have
aided
and
new
students,
services,
fellowship
counseling
mentoring
and
a
variety
of
educational
programs.
We
have
a
small
but
very
close-knit
adult
community
who
join
us
daily
for
prayers
classes
and
holiday
celebrations.
O
We
also
have
a
Hebrew,
Club
and
programs
for
what
we
consider
in
the
more
secular
Jewish
community.
In
addition,
we
engage
in
a
variety
of
interfaith
programs
and
work
with
all
the
segments
of
the
city's
population.
I
had
the
privilege
to
create
and
I'm
still
very
active
in
the
police
clergy
program,
one
of
the
most
successful
programs
in
the
country
which
services
our
police
officers
and
our
citizens
and
times
of
crisis.
O
Over
the
past
eight
years,
we
have
had
the
opportunity
to
hire
two
additional
rabbis
and
their
wives,
whom
are
engaging
with
the
community
and
students
in
an
amazing
ways
throughout
Evanston.
That
being
said
for
the
past
25
years,
we
have
realized
that
we
need
to
redo
and
reshape
our
facility.
First
of
all,
we
need
to
be
handicap
accessible.
We
need
an
elevator
to
get
our
aging
members
on
to
the
additional
floors.
We
need
88
bathrooms
to
secure
the
dignity
of
our
participants.
We
need
to
see
safe,
egress
to
exit
the
building
in
case
of
emergencies.
O
Today
we
have
a
winding,
staircase,
very
dangerous
god
forbid.
There
was
a
fire,
a
fire.
We
need
a
kitchen
that
can
prepare
meals
and
in
the
Jewish
community.
This
space
needs
to
be
large
enough
for
a
meat
kitchen,
a
dairy
kitchen
and
a
Passover
kitchen.
We
desperately
need
office
spaces
today.
There
is
none
to
be
able
to
sit
in
meet
with
a
congregate
and
have
a
private
conversation.
We
need
two
classrooms
for
our
Hebrew
club
and
study
groups.
O
We
need
a
meditation
space
and
a
place
to
network
and
just
have
the
ability
to
come
and
chill
in
an
appropriate
setting.
We
need
a
chapel
that
feels
comfortable
roomy
and
gives
off
a
pleasant
spiritual
vibe.
All
of
the
above
takes
up
space.
We
are
not
looking
to
increase
numbers.
Our
programs
are
very
staggered
in
time
we
have
been
operating
for
forty
years
after
these
renovations.
We
plan
to
remain
forever.
Our
primary
ministry
is
to
the
students
of
Northwestern
as
long
as
Northwestern
University
is
here.
O
We
will
be
here
and
as
far
as
I
know,
northwestern
has
no
plans
of
leaving
Evanston
and
neither
do
we.
As
I
said,
we
have
wanted
to
expand
for
the
past
25
years.
We
raised
enough
capital
funds
to
do
an
addition,
and
we
came
in
front
of
this
body
in
2010
to
add
a
30-foot
addition
onto
the
back
of
the
building.
O
Even
though
we
were
confident
that
we
would
succeed
and
win
the
approval,
the
opposition
from
some
of
the
neighbors
and
the
bulkiness
of
the
building,
we
decided
to
withdraw
our
application
and
figure
something
else
out.
Eight
years
later,
and
after
doubling
our
contributions,
we
came
up
with
the
idea.
Instead
of
going
backwards
to
go
upwards,
we
hired
our
architect
and
we
created
a
design
that
would
give
us
the
space
we
need
with
minimal
intrusion
and
the
neighborhood.
O
The
current
design
would
not
be
a
full
story
and
will
be
hidden
behind
existing
parapet
walls,
removing
part
of
the
front
facade
to
reduce
bulk
and
the
plannin
with
the
residential
environment.
Since
a
year
ago,
December
we
have
made
17
different
renderings
to
accommodate
most
of
the
needs
of
our
neighbors.
We
solicited
input
privately
from
neighbors,
as
well
as
many
interested
parties.
We
then
had
two
neighborhood
meetings.
We
presented
for
three
months
in
front
of
the
historical
preservation
committee
and
made
additional
changes
to
the
design
to
accommodate
all
their
needs.
O
It
passed
in
front
of
the
historical
district,
seven
to
one.
We
also
had
several
meetings
with
the
building
department
staff
throughout
the
process
and
last
week
that
were
approved
our
project
eight
to
zero.
At
this
time,
the
overwhelming
majority
of
the
neighbors
appreciate
what
Chabad
does
and
sees.
This
is
important
and
good
neighbors.
Their
concerns
have
been
in
the
look
and
shape
of
the
building.
They
wanted
it
to
be
more
residential,
look
and
we've
come
to
a
great
balance
of
a
residential
look
with
a
taste
of
a
synagogue.
There
are
other
concern.
O
Is
that
once
we
do
our
project
that
we
don't
leave,
which
we
do
not
plan
on
it?
In
addition,
all
of
the
concerns
neighbors
have
signed
off.
I
know
it's
moving
forward
and
getting
the
variances,
so
we
can
continue
with
the
project.
Therefore,
at
this
point
we
come
in
front
of
you
for
your
approval,
so
we
are
there
variances.
We
need
to
ask
you
for
our
already
grandfathered
in.
We
need
a
variance
from
the
commercial
side
setback
both
to
the
north
and
the
south.
Those
are
two
variances
existing
building
has
a
smaller.
O
Our
existing
building
has
a
smaller
setback,
a
front
setback
than
the
average
of
the
neighboring
residences,
even
though
the
two
homes
and
our
immediate
South,
also
at
the
same
smaller
front
setback
similar
to
ours.
In
addition,
we
decided
to
remove
several
feet
from
our
existing
building
on
the
second
floor.
By
doing
so,
this
will
take
away
the
bulkiness
of
the
building
and
visually.
O
It
will
feel
as
if
the
building
doesn't
go
out
so
far,
this
removal
of
part
of
the
building
will
help
give
a
much
more
residential
feel
the
top
of
our
building
will
not
exceed
35
feet.
Even
though
our
neighbors
to
the
immediate
north
is
40
feet,
others
are
42
and
48
feet
and
the
apartments
are
dorms
are
even
higher.
O
That
being
said,
in
order
to
have
a
usable
space,
we
are
asking
for
the
variance
that
the
knee
wall
begin
at
seven
and
a
half
feet
and
added
the
traditional
three
feet,
which
is
part
of
the
ordinance.
Another
variance
is
the
eave.
In
order
is
the
eave
in
front
of
the
building
in
order
to
look
and
fit
with
the
ieaves
on
and
the
entire
black
we
needed
to
extend
the
eave
another
two
and
a
half
feet
the
result
blends
the
character
of
the
of
our
synagogue
with
the
home
feeling
of
the
neighborhood
residential
environment.
O
O
O
We
have
not
removed
that
from
the
special
use,
because
in
case
of
emergency
we
want
to
make
sure
we're
able
to
operate.
You
know
if
there's
a
fire
there's
a
reason
that
one
of
our
three
rabbis
facility
goes
down.
I
want
them
to
be
able
to
have
a
temporary
place.
I
thought
it
was
a
great
accommodation.
Initially
many
synagogues
and
churches
throughout
Evanson
has
some
sort
of
parish
associated
with
it,
but
the
actual
space
for
the
living
drawing
has
been
removed
from
the
from
the
future
plans.
So
it's
not
it's
not
there.
Okay,.
C
O
The
footprint
is
saying
the
same:
no,
that
was
because
of
in
2010
the
the
strong
emphasis.
Also
from
some
of
the
members
on
this
commission
I
remember
was
like
a
no
going
back
for.
Therefore
we
can't
you
know
to
go
up
with
so
much
more
expensive,
but
it's
been
eight
years
and
we've
been
able
to
raise
those
funds,
so
we're
excited
about
being
able
now
to
go
up
and
really
make
it
happen.
Thank
you.
I.
J
J
F
O
I
I
mean
right
now
we
are
sending
up
taking
down
areas
right
now
we
don't
I
mean
the
main
reason
for
one
of
the
main
reasons
is
because
we
don't
have
88
bathroom,
so
we
don't
have
a
wheelchair
can't
get
into
the
building
and
if
it
got
into
the
building,
there's
no
way
for
it
to
go
down
the
hallways.
All
that
takes
up
a
lot
more
space.
So
so,
in
order
to
accommodate
that
and
to
be
able
to
have
some
office
space
I,
you
know
we
have
a
Hebrew
school
club.
O
You
know
with
you
know,
with
there's
15
young
children.
You
know
right
now,
they're
meeting
in
a
place,
that's
I
would
be
considered
like
your
dining
dining
room.
They
need
a
proper
classroom.
You
know
it's
for
education,
you
need
a
proper
classroom.
You
know
I
give
a
class
in
the
evening.
I
give
classes
most
evenings
you.
We
need
a
proper
classroom
in
order
to
be
able
to
give
those
classes,
and
today
we
don't
have
it.
So
this
would
really
enhance,
enhance
our
programming
qualitatively
and
that's
what
we're
looking
to
do.
O
We
again
I've
met
with
some
of
those
neighbors
privately.
By
going
all
the
way.
Back
to
a
year
ago,
then
we
had
public
meetings
to
include
more
more
members
of
the
community,
and
you
know
we've
kept
up
the
conversation
myself
and
them
and
amongst
themselves
they
spoke
amongst
themselves.
What
are
the
things
that
they're
really
interested
in
and
and
therefore
from
our
original
design,
which
was
a
lot
of
it,
was
look
more
of
a
synagogue
than
it
did
as
a
residence.
Today,
it
looks
more
like
a
residence
than
a
sinner
guy.
O
That
was,
there
was
important
to
them
and
we
wanted
to
meet
their
needs
because
we're
great
neighbors
and
we
love
them,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
they
were
happy,
and
you
know
we
were
trying
to
do
whatever
we
can
to
to
satisfy
them
and
yet
so
have
a
place.
That
really
feels
comfortable
for
people
to
come
to
I.
Think
what.
J
O
Did
not
make
any
concessions
but
well
I,
don't
the
concession
that
I
made,
which
is
not
really
a
concession
I
mean
I,
don't
like
the
word
concession.
The
conversation
back
and
forth
that
we
made
was
an
extra
paragraph,
there's
an
extra
paragraph
that
talks
about
not
using
as
a
daycare
center,
not
using
it
as
a
B&B,
not
using
it
as
a
hotel
space
or
something
of
that
nature.
O
I
don't
have
the
wording
in
front
of
me,
so
that's
being
added
which
it
wasn't
in
the
original
document
right
from
forty
years
ago,
but
that's
automatic
anyway
within
city.
So
it's
not
something
additional,
it's
something
that
we
would
be
abiding
by
anyway.
So
it
wasn't,
it
wasn't
a
compromise
in
any
shape
for
a
profession.
We
had
no
intention
of
turning
it
into
a
B&B
or
a
daycare
center
or
a
residential
center
for
for
other
people.
But
what's
important
I
think
is
that
our
neighbors
understand
that
we're
on
the
same
page
with
them.
J
A
A
Number
three,
as
a
standard
for
a
major
variation,
is
that
the
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
Those
are
the
reasons
there's
that's
a
reason
why
we
grant
variances,
because
there
is
a
hardship
that
makes
it
impossible
for
you
to
comply
with
zoning
requirements
and
that
that
hardship
be
unique
to
the
property.
So
if
a
hundred
properties
in
Evanston
all
have
the
same
difficulty,
it's
not
a
unique
situation,
so
I'm
asking
about
that
specifically
in
in
relationship
to
the
height
of
the
knee
wall.
On
the
third
floor,
what
is
right
beyond.
A
L
Specific
things
for
the
property
mainly
is
the
institutional
use
of
the
property,
and
that's
the
specific
thing
it.
It
was
once
built
as
a
residence
and
after
that,
converted
to
institution,
will
use
and
existed
in
such
status
for
about
forty
five
years.
So
the
special
the
special
use
requested
is
because
of
need
of
additional
space,
and
it
immediately
triggers
the
special
use
requirement.
A
So
my
concern
isn't
so
much
about
the
setbacks
right,
because
that's
something
we
typically
allow
right
is
which
you
to
go
above
the
existing
floor
plan.
It's
really
about
that
height
of
that
knee
wall.
So
even
if
this
was
new
construction
for
an
institutional
use
and
allowed
use
in
an
r1
district,
you
would
still
be
held
to
the
three-foot
knee
wall.
Correct.
L
L
If
you
speaking,
let's
say
only
architectural
the
parapet
wall,
as
defined
in
the
city
ordinance,
history
is
a
little
bit
feet
right
now,
and
it
is
the
same
one.
It
is
not
increased.
We're
adding
exterior
walls
that
are
photon,
I
have
pushed
back
from
the
parapet.
Walls
and
these
walls
are
seven
and
a
half
feet,
and
we
think
that
this
is
the
minimal
height
that
can
grant
the
owner
reasonable
interior
space,
and
it
is
almost
invisible
from
the
pedestrian
view,
because
it's
pushed
back,
that's
how
we
do
it.
Why
do
we
need
it?
L
L
A
L
We
started
this
project
with
the
concept
that
you
are
mentioning
now,
with
keeping
the
parapet,
walls
and
adding
dormers
and
adding
dormers
in
less
than
the
percentage
than
the
zoning
ordinance
allows.
The
moment
we
presented
it
one
of
the
first
meetings
with
the
staff.
They
consider
this
a
full
floor
that
we.
L
That
we
have
to
apply
for
zoning
variance
as
full-floor
and
we
then
we
decided
that
if
we
do
the
variance
for
full-floor,
then
we
can
apply
with
the
seven-foot
pushed
back
walls
so
that
we
give
the
reasonable
space
to
the
to
the
synagogue.
So
this
was
the
start
of
the
project
and
that's
why
we
are
playing
now
for
this
variance,
because
this
was
considered
a
floor.
Okay,.
B
The
first
proposal
that
we
saw
that
we
went
over
there
there
were
dormers
proposed,
but
by
zoning
definitions
they
were
not
considered
dormers.
We
consider
a
dormer
to
be
an
opening
to
accommodate
a
window
and
it
was
slightly
more
than
a
window.
So
in
order
to
actually
be
dormers
it
would
there
would
have
to
be
so
many
windows
occupying
it
that
are
then
blocked
by
the
parapet,
wall
that
it
doesn't
it's
not
really
feasible.
B
A
F
Can
I
ask
you
a
point
of
clarification
in
our
in
our
meeting
packet?
It
describes
that
the
three-foot
new
wall
was
intended
to
limit
bulk
above
the
first
two
floors
and
and
I
understood
from
the
packet
that
you
know
having
the
aesthetics
of
the
exterior
of
the
building.
Look
more
residential
nature
was
a
desire,
as
expressed
by
the
neighbors,
so
from
a
non
architect.
Point
of
view
help
me
understand
if
that's
one
of
the
intentions
of
that
new
wall,
and
if,
if
that's
what
you
think
you
have
achieved
by
using
that.
L
L
The
current
new
wall
is
more
than
four
feet
high,
so
we
decided
that
we
will
not
touch
the
new
wall
because
we
wanted
to
keep
the
building
the
part
of
the
building
that
we
can
keep
and
the
height
of
the
sides
of
the
building
at
the
same
level
that
they
are
now.
We
will
only
be
replacing
the
top
of
the
new
wall,
which
is
a
which
is
a
70s
cap,
and
we
will
replace
it
with
a
similar
one.
So
this
was
the
the
architectural
intent
and
we
kept
it.
L
That's
why
we
pushed
the
new
walls
of
the
third
level
inwards
about
foot
and
a
half
so
that
the
normal
view
from
the
street
going
up
cutting
to
the
parapet
wall.
It
hides
most
of
the
future
third
level
and
we
minimized
the
slope
of
the
roof
and
other
architectural
tricks
so
that
the
the
whole
building
looks
not
so
bulky
even
less
bulky
than
it
is
now,
because
now
we
have
a
second
floor
that
projects
full
facade
to
the
street,
we're
cutting
it
back
so
that
from
the
street
view
it
will
look
much
less
intrusive.
No.
F
Visually
from
from
what
was
included
in
the
packet,
I
would
agree
with
that.
It
definitely
appears
less
bulky
and
you
know
I
agree
with
that
statement.
Thank
you.
I.
A
Have
another
question
about
the
the
need
for
the
third
floor?
So
if
we're
not
increasing
the
intensity
of
use
of
the
space-
and
you
might
have
addressed
this
and
I
was
talking
about
something
else,
so
I
apologize
if
you've
already
spoken
to
this,
but
if
we're
not
increasing
the
intensity
of
use,
so
we're
not
putting
more
people
in
the
building
we're
not
adding
services,
we're
not
doing
any
of
those
things.
Why
do
we
go?
Why
do
we
need
to
go
from
two
offices
to
no
three
offices?
L
Will
add
a
little
bit
to
what
the
rabbi
thought
at
the
start,
the
besides
the
ABA
accessibility
issues
and
all
these
things
that
are
very
important
by
the
way
they
require
space
too,
because
currently
bathrooms
are
I,
don't
say
that,
but
they
really
not
compliant
with
anything
right,
even
with
the
usual
code,
so
488
we
do
not
speak.
So
this
is
one
it
requires
space,
then
what
they
do
currently
is
they're
using
one
and
the
same
space
for
different
purposes,
for
instance,
classes
festivities,
meditation
room
everything
takes
place
in
one
and
the
same
room.
L
So
in
order
to
accommodate
these
needs,
they
move
furniture
every
time
they
don't
have.
Storage
for
furniture,
so
chairs
stand
somewhere
in
the
corner,
while
they're
having
classes
and
when
they
have
service,
they
move
the
chairs
back.
So
this
is
a
chaotic
thing
over
the
arrant.
It
is
only
the
rabbi
with
his
helpers
and
it
is
really
really
bad
ain't
it.
Besides
everything
else,
it
brings
not
a
good
feeling
to
people
coming
there.
Sometimes
they
come
during
this
these
transitions,
and
it's
it's
a
you
think,
inside
a
serious
institution.
So
that's
why
this
is
important.
L
Besides
that
they
are
not
there,
they
have
some
services
that
are
out
of
the
synagogue,
but
they
have
new
rabbis
that
are
participating
in
these
services
and
this
these
robbers
they
need
to
have
an
office
currently
inside
the
building.
There
is
only
one
office
and
one
library,
so
they
need
two
other
offices
and
everything
else
that
I
told
you
about
classrooms.
It
needs
space.
Besides
the
current
that's
a
ritual
space,
it
is
packed
with
Church.
There
is
no
room
inside
for
anything.
It
needs
a
little
bit
of
enlargement.
L
A
A
L
L
A
D
L
Well,
no,
when
we
started
the
project,
the
front
was
at
the
the
facade
surface.
That
is
currently
there
and
it
was
much
more,
let's
say,
imposing
or
much
more
grandiose,
oh
I
would
say
it
was
definitely
not
looking
like
a
residence.
So,
in
the
course
of
the
project
we
scaled
down,
we
worked
with
the
neighbors.
We
worked
with
the
Preservation
Committee
to
came
up
with
what
is
currently
in
front
of
you.
L
A
All
right
so
I
have
a
list
of
lots
of
neighbors
and
unfortunately,
I,
don't
know
which
project
do
what
you
want
to
speak
on.
So
I
can't
call
you
by
name
so
how
many
people
are
there
who
are
interested
in
speaking
about
this
particular
project.
We
have
two
three,
okay
fabulous,
so
if
you
guys
want
to
come
up
and
state
your
name
and
address,
we
do
have
a
lot
of
stuff
to
get
to
tonight.
So
if
you
could,
please
limit
your
comments
to
about
three
minutes,
two
to
three
minutes
and
the
other
people.
A
P
You
for
your
attention.
My
name
is
Dave
Schoenfeld
I
live
at
2013,
I
Norrington,
so
less
than
a
block
north
of
the
proposed
project,
I've
been
involved
with
land-use
matters
in
this
neighborhood
for
more
than
20
years,
both
as
a
member
of
the
North
Western,
neighbors
homeowners
association
in
that
neighborhood,
and
also
as
a
member
of
the
City
University
committee
appointed
by
the
mayor,
how
to
serve
on
that
committee,
which
was
founded
under
a
consent
decree
with
northwestern
to
address
land-use
issues
involving
the
University
in
that
area
in
in
our
neighborhood.
P
And
so,
as
you
can
imagine,
we
are
very,
very
sensitive
in
this
neighborhood
to
two
things
in
particular.
One
is
the
preservation
of
the
residential
character
of
the
neighborhood.
It
is
a
historic
district.
It
is
a
neighborhood
and
that's
not
an
easy
thing
to
protect
when
you
have
a
major
institutional
land
user
right
in
your
backyard
hungry
for
property,
and
we've
worked
very
very
hard
to
protect
the
neighborhood
from
institutional
intrusion
with.
You
know
some
success
in
in
some
failure,
but
we
have
always
worked
to
preserve
these
two
interests.
P
When
we
look
at
this
project,
we
are
very
grateful
to
rabbi
Klein
and
his
colleagues
for
the
work
way
that
they
worked
with
us
to
try
to
reduce
the
institutional
character
of
this
project.
But
there
is
no
getting
around
the
fact
when
you
look
at
this
and
you
look
at
the
way
that
the
both
the
interior
and
the
exterior
of
the
property
are
being
remodeled
for
an
institutional
use
that
this
is
cementing
in
place.
P
The
institutional
character
of
this
property
in
this
residential
neighborhood-
and
it
is
not
the
same
as
a
church
in
the
sense
that
the
other
entities
that
have
properties
for
religious
purposes
on
or
inton,
are
using
Victorian
homes
that
are
preserved
in
that
character
for
their
purposes.
So
they're
not
they're,
not
building
churches
in
the
neighborhood.
This
is
an
this
is
a
different
character
of
institutional
use.
P
So,
as
a
consequence
when,
as
we've
worked
with
rabbi
Klein
and
his
colleagues
to
try
to
address
those
concerns,
we've
been
very
cognizant
of
the
fact
that
this
property
is
being
institutionalized
to
a
great,
still
greater
degree
than
it
already
was.
With
these,
some
of
the
intern
interior
changes
are
being
made,
as
well
as
some
of
the
exterior
changes,
and
that
has
heightened
our
concern
about
what
will
be
the
use
of
this
property
while
Habad
uses
it
and
in
the
event
that
they
choose
to
move
to
another
facility
or
another
location.
P
What
will
become
of
that
property
at
that
point,
because
it
is
being
converted
from
a
residential
character
to
a
much
more
institutional
character.
So,
in
order
to
swage
the
concerns
that
we've
got
with
us,
we
did
work
with
rabbi
Klein
on
a
set
of
proposed
conditions.
We
went
to
the
1978
special
use.
Ordinance
looked
at
that
thought
about
our
conversations
with
with
Rabbi
Clyde.
P
In
the
end,
the
others
about
their
intended
use
and
try
to
work
out,
something
that
would
be
acceptable
to
the
neighbors
would
be
acceptable
to
Habad
house,
and
so
we
made
a
proposal.
We
adjusted
it
at
mr.
head
rabbi,
Klein's
request
with
respect
to
whether
or
not
a
rabbi
and
his
family
or
her
family
could
live
in
the
property
we
took
that
out
and
as
a
as
a
condition.
But
there
are
a
couple
of
things
that
are
different
between
the
1978
ordinance
in
our
proposal
and
I.
P
Think
rabbi
Klein
mentioned
one
of
those,
and
that
is
the
list
of
additional
uses
that
will
not
be
permitted
there,
such
as
counseling
matters
and
bed-and-breakfast
and
so
forth
and
I
think
we're
all
on
the
same
page
that
those
are
not
intended
uses.
But
as
we
look
down
the
road,
we
want
to
ensure
that
this
property
cannot
be
used
for
those
purposes
without
review
by
the
City
Council
of
any
changes
to
the
special
use.
So
these
things
lucky
you're.
J
Lucky
in
that
regard,
because
they
can't
be
used
for
other
special
uses
without
permission
to
use
them
that
way,
so
a
granting
of
our
use
as
a
religious
institution
doesn't
permit
a
use
as
a
bed-and-breakfast.
So
in
40
years
should
someone
want
to
use
that
house
for
a
bed-and-breakfast?
They
would
need
to
make
application
for
that
special
use
for
their
purposes
and.
J
A
A
P
That
was
a
part
of
the
1978
ordinance
and,
and
we
have
a
clause
in
there
that
sort
of
beasts
that
up
a
little
bit
and
that
would
make
us
feel
more
comfortable.
So
those
are
the
things
that
we
have
requested,
but
I
want
to
emphasize.
Above
all,
we're
very
glad.
We've
been
ill
work
this
out,
but
these
conditions
are
essential
to
our
comfort.
With
this,
we
we
think
we've
got
a.
You
know
a
good
relationship
here,
but
we
can
support
this
request
as
neighbors.
P
Despite
the
concerns
we've
got
because
in
only
if
these
conditions
are
accepted.
Otherwise
you
know
our
concerns
are
not
being
met.
So
I
want
to
ask
that
these
be
taken
seriously,
even
though
they're
agreed
and
and
I
do
appreciate
your
attention
and
I
especially
want
to
say
again
that
we
appreciate
Rabbi,
Klein's
flexibility
and
willingness
to
work
with
us
both
on
the
design
and
on
these
uses
and
I.
Think
that
we've
reached
you
know
if
you'll
approve
the
conditions
we've
requested.
P
I
A
O
J
As
a
general
matter,
I'll
start
with
I
support
this
project
and
and
the
relief
requested
tonight,
because
I
think
it
meets
the
criteria
for
the
relief
requested
with
respect
to
the
special
use.
I,
as
I
said,
I
think
it's
lovely
that
the
rat,
the
Habad
house
and
the
neighbors
have
worked
together
on
the
on
the
conditions.
J
J
It
would
respect
to
the
condition
that
precludes
uses
that
are
not
covered
by
the
the
the
use
requested
if
it
keeps
the
neighbors
happy,
then
I'm,
all
in
favor,
of
including
it
in
a
recommendation
to
Council,
although
it's
really
an
extraneous
provision,
because
we
don't
need
to
for
the
reasons
I
pointed
out
to
mr.
Schoenfeld,
with
respect
to
the
variations
requested,
I
do
think,
there's
a
hardship
that
runs
with
this
property.
J
I
believe
that
the
standards
will
be
met
because,
frankly,
it's
the
institutional
nature
of
the
use,
combined
with
the
fact
that
it's
a
historic
that
it's
a
residential
neighborhood,
but
also
that
the
applicant
is
working
so
hard
to
preserve
the
residential
character
of
the
property
that
requires
that
solution.
As
opposed
to,
for
example,
the
bulkier
dormer
solution,
or
something
that
may
closer
comply
or
perhaps
require
less
consideration
from
the
board
in
terms
of
a
variation.
J
C
Actually,
as
I
look
at
the
project,
I
think
it's
a
great
project
for
the
community.
I
think
that
the
changes
will
be
in
keeping
with
the
surrounding
architectural,
especially
since
they've
kept
it
very
residential
in
the
front.
But
I
do
have
a
question.
I
just
am
not
sure
what
it
means
that
if
they
move
with
this
property
ever
go
back
to
residential.
Is
that
what
we
hope
that
it
would
be
I
mean
these
changes
are
that
are
being
made,
are
being
made
to
support
this
institutional
use
and
I?
C
J
J
I
think
they've
gone
to
great
lengths
to
preserve
the
residential
feel
of
the
property
and
by
doing
that
at
a
minimum,
I
think
this
institution
is
doing
what
it
can
to
preserve
the
possibility
of
residential
use,
while
still
needing
well,
while
still
working
with
the
space
they
have
and
purposing
it
for
their
own
uses.
I
think
it's
a
reasonable
concern
to
think
about.
I
understand.
F
Think,
on
balance,
it's
a
good
proposal
that
sort
of
meets
the
needs
as
I
understand
of
the
organization
for
them
to
continue
to
operate
out
of
a
space.
That's
become,
you
know,
outdated
and
not
functional
as
I
understand.
At
the
same
time,
it
sounds
like
the
applicant
has
gone
to
significant
lengths,
I
would
say
in
meeting
the
concerns
of
the
Preservation
Committee
and
doing
an
extensive
process
of
meeting
with
the
neighbors
and
addressing
neighborhood
concerns
to
my
untrained
architectural
eye.
F
A
So
this
is
this
is
a
tough
one
for
me,
because
I
am
I
struggle
with
the
the
hard
shipping
peculiar
to
the
property,
because
the
property
is
still
residential.
It
is
not
institutional,
the
use
may
be
institutional,
but
the
property
is
still
is
still
residential
and
I
would
feel
better.
Having
seen
the
original
sketches
of
what
that?
What
that
what
this
looked
like
with
the
dormers
on
the
sides
that
didn't
require
a
variance
for
that
purpose
again,
so
I
have
no
problems
with
all
the
other
variances,
though
truth
be
told
just
to
clarify
the
record.
A
They
are
expanding
the
footprint,
because
that
area,
that's
underneath
a
roof
in
the
back
that
is
technically
not
in
the
footprint
of
the
building
right.
They
now
have
to
add
no
new
foundation.
So
technically
they
are
increasing
the
footprint.
However
again
in
the
past,
and
what
we
have
done
as
a
board
is:
if
there
is
the
mass
there,
we
have
considered
that
to
be
part
of
the
building.
So
when
there
is
a
covered
roof,
we
generally
allow
people
to
enclose
it,
and
when
you
enclose
it,
you
have
to
put
in
a
foundation.
A
A
That
code
required
Headroom
without
having
that
taller
wall
and
I
have
been
up
against
this
problem.
Myself
and
I
know
it
is
brutal
and
you
go
through
18
revisions
to
try
and
figure
it
out
and
at
some
at
some
point
you
just
can't
do
it,
and
so
I
think
that
happens
for
me
happens
to
be
your
greatest
hardship.
Is
that
you
can't
meet
code
and
meeting
code
is
a
key
component
for
me
of
of
a
hardship
right.
If
you
can't
meet
code,
then
that's
not
a
good
thing.
So
with
that,
let's
go
to
sorry.
Can.
F
I
clarify
so
then
you
wound
up
in
a
different
place
than
I
thought.
You
were
starting,
it's
true,
okay,
so.
A
Q
We
can
revisit
with
respect
to
the
inquiry
whether
a
special
use
runs
with
Al
and
the
Cook
County
of
Cook
Remo
not
really
afford
the
opportunity
to
primarily
run
with
our
land,
but
there
are
certain
circumstances,
such
as
durational
requirements.
So
you
can
potentially
put
have
a
durational
limitation,
but
special
uses
do
run
with
with
the
land.
J
Q
A
A
J
B
D
A
A
All
right
so
I'm
gonna
run.
Thank
you
all
right,
I
appreciate
that,
let's
go
through
the
standards
for
special
uses,
there
are
nine
of
them
and
number
one.
It's
one
of
the
special
uses
specifically
listed
in
the
zoning
ordinance.
It's
a
religious
institution
which
is
certainly
allowed
so
that
standard
has
been
met,
number
two,
it's
in
keeping
with
the
purposes
and
policies
of
the
adopted,
comprehensive
general
plan
and
the
zoning
ordinance
as
amended
from
time
to
time.
A
One
of
the
one
of
the
purposes
is
to
retain
enhance
a
diversity
of
of
uses
within
a
certain
location
and
to
keep
his,
and
so
that
standard
has
certainly
been
mat
number
three.
It
will
not
cause
a
negative
cumulative
effect
when
its
effect
is
considered,
in
conjunction
with
the
cumulative
effect
of
various
special
uses
of
all
types
on
the
immediate
neighborhood
and
the
effect
of
the
proposed
type
of
special
use
upon
the
city
as
a
whole.
According
to
testimony,
there
is
actually
no
increase
in
intensity
of
use.
A
There
will
not
be
more
people
in
the
space
and
so
we're,
certainly
not
making
this
situation
we're
not
changing
the
the
way
that
this
particular
use
impacts.
The
neighborhood's
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.
A
The
special
use
is
already
there
it's
already
baked
in,
if
you
will
to
the
value
of
the
property
in
the
neighborhood
and
in
fact
some
of
the
changes
that
are
being
made
to
it
will
certainly
increase
the
value
of
properties
in
the
neighborhood.
Given
an
update
and
more
residential
exterior
to
the
property,
so
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met,
number
five:
it
can
be
adequately
served
by
public
facilities
and
services.
A
Again,
there's
no
change
in
use
here,
so
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met
and
number
six.
It
does
not
cause
undue
traffic
congestion.
This
goes
back
to
the
intensity
of
use
and
again
they're,
not
in
suggesting
that
they
have
indicated
that
there
will
be
no
more
people
using
the
space
than
was
ever
using
the
space
before
so
we
certainly
do
not
expect
more
traffic
to
the
location,
so
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number
seven.
It
preserves
significant
historical
and
architectural
resources.
A
Although
the
building
isn't
significant,
historically
or
architectural
II,
it
isn't
a
neighborhood
full
of
historical
and
architectural
resources,
and
by
making
some
modifications
to
that,
we
will
certainly
be
helping
to
enhance
that
historical
neighborhood.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met,
number
eight.
It
preserves
significant
natural
and
environmental
features
which
does
not
apply
and
number
nine.
It
complies
with
all
other
applicable
regulations
of
the
district
and
which
is
located
and
other
applicable
ordinances.
A
J
I
J
There
were
nine
conditions
listed
and
they
built
off
of
the
existing
conditions
for
the
existing
special
use.
So
I
would
recommend
that
we
grant
that
the
City
Council
grant
the
special
use
requested,
subject
to
the
condition
that
they
adopt
the
list
of
conditions
that
the
neighbors
and
the
applicant
came
to
together
with
the
following
recommended
amendments
and
I
have
marked
as
Exhibit
A
what
I
recommend
the
amendments
be
in
item
number
three
which
reads:
use
of
the
premises
will
exclude
other
uses
described
in
heaven
stands
owning
ordinance,
etc.
J
I
recommend
that
it's
a
special
uses,
described
in
Evanston
zoning
ordinance
and
I,
recommend
that
we
strike
condition
number
eight,
which
is
the
condition
that
the
special
use
apply
only
to
the
applicant,
because
I
believe
it's
I
believe
that
condition
is
not
permissible
and
I'll
pass
that
for
consideration.
I
guess
before
we
get
a
second
or
a
vote.
My
markup
yeah.
F
J
F
G
Maybe
just
that,
madam
chair,
a
clarification
or
something
consider
regarding
the
the
use
condition
there.
The
definition
of
religious
institution
does
include
an
accessory
use,
such
as
a
school
day
care
center
or
dwelling.
So
without
any
limitation
a
day
care
center,
school
or
dwelling
would
be
allowed
as
part
of
religious
institution.
J
As
an
accessory
used
to
a
religious
institution
correct
so
the
so
they
agreed
prohibition
on
as
amended
other
special
uses
would
apply
to
special
use
as
a
daycare
center.
That's
not
as
an
accessory
used
to
a
religious
institution.
In
my
view,
in
other
words,
a
religious
institution
would
still
be
permitted
to
use,
even
with
this
condition
would
be
permitted
to
the
extent
it
otherwise
could
under
the
ordinance
use
it
as
an
accessory
use
for
daycare.
H
G
J
Be
something
that
need
be
I,
don't
think.
That's
the
intent.
I
think
the
intent
is
that
the
premises
will
not
be
we're
not
granting
a
special
use
for
the
premises
to
be
used
as
a
daycare
center
quad
daycare
center.
However,
if
a
religious
institution
is
allowed
to
use
a
religious
institution
special
use
for
that
accessory
purpose,
then
the
condition
wouldn't
prohibit
that.
J
G
F
A
Right,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
and
with
a
vote
of
4
to
0,
you
had
a
special
City
Council,
with
a
recommendation
for
your
special
use
to
continue
your
special
use.
Okay,
now
we're
moving
on
to
the
standards
for
major
variations
dumped
cold,
yet
I
got
I,
got
a
whole
nother
half-hour
on
this
I
know
it
sounds
exciting,
but
this
is
good
stuff
come
on
now
my
fans
on
TV
love
this
all
right.
There
are
them
they're
out
there
all
right,
so
there
you
think
I'm
joking.
A
They
show
up
at
community
at
public
meetings.
Okay,
so
there
are
seven
standards.
Four
major
variations
and
number
one
is
the
requested.
Variation
will
not
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use,
enjoyment
or
property
values
of
adjoining
properties.
I
do
believe
that
standard
has
been
met.
The
the
additions
are
again
relatively
within
the
the
existing
bulk
of
the
building,
which
is
something
we
allow
all
the
time.
A
I
also
want
to
commend
the
applicant
for
doing
shadow
studies
which
again
show
that
there
is
a
negligible
effect
on
any
neighbor
form
from
a
light
and
a
an
air
use.
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.
The
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
is
to
allow
you
to
make
modifications
to
your
property,
as
are
needed
from
time
to
time,
to
update
it
in
keeping
with
needs
either
they
own
with
the
needs
of
the
owners.
A
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
matched
number
three.
The
alleged
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
is
peculiar
to
the
property.
I
do
believe
that,
given
the
located
the
the
size
of
the
the
size
of
the
footprint
and
the
necessary
planning
and
layout
of
the
first
and
second
floors
that
there
are
specific
locations
necessary
for
to
code
required
stairs
and
those
code
required
stairs
require
Headroom,
and
in
order
to
get
the
adequate
amount
of
headroom,
it
is
necessary
to
increase
the
height
of
those
new
walls.
A
J
A
You
number
five:
the
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
up
sorry
number.
Four,
the
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
At
this
trick.
The
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
be
carried
out
again.
This
gets
back
to
that
that
idea
of
the
the
egress
and
stairs
and
Headroom
and
all
of
that
being
required,
and
that
is
a
hardship
when
you
cannot
meet
egress,
because
it
means
that
you
can't
do
anything
so
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
Number.
J
One
add
to
that
one:
sorry
that
we're
talking
about
a
use
forty
years
later,
of
a
building
that
was
purposed
forty
years
ago
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
hardship
rather
than
a
mere
inconvenience,
to
force
them
to
continue
to
use
that
space.
Now
in
the
2010s
and
almost
2020s
as
it
was
purposed
forty
years
ago,
I.
A
Green,
thank
you
number.
Five.
The
purpose
of
the
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
upon
the
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property,
or
there
is
a
public
benefit.
I,
don't
believe
that
their
desire,
their
their
reason
for
improving
the
property,
is
to
extract
income,
but
I
think
the
primary
thing
here
is
that
there
is
a
public
benefit
and
that
benefit
is
to
take
a
outdated
elevation
that
it
clearly
does
not
fit
within
the
neighborhood
and
try
to
make
something
that
fits
a
little
bit
more
into
the
neighborhood.
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
again
that
the
building
is
old,
my
guess
is
1920s
or
older,
and
so
it
was
been
there
for
a
long
time
longer
than
the
current
owner.
So
I
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met
and
number
seven.
A
The
requested
variation
requires
a
least
deviation
from
the
applicable
regulation
among
the
feasible
options
identified
before
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
and
again
this
gets
back
to
that
whole
idea
of
headroom
and
code
required
headroom,
and
the
amount
of
that
that
knee
wall
is
being
increased
is
really
limited
to
an
amount
of
headroom
necessary
for
those
stairs.
So
I
do
believe
that
that
standard
has
been
met.
I.
J
J
A
J
So,
with
respect
to
the
variations
requested,
is
there
a
reason
that,
because
this
is
packaged
with
special
use
that
we're
recommending
on
this
also
okay,
so
I
move
that
with
respect,
in
the
same
case
that
we
recommend
the
City
Council
grant
the
variations
requested
subject
to
the
condition
that
the
property
be
developed
in
accordance
with
the
plans
and
testimony
submitted
tonight.
I
second.
C
R
A
And
with
voted
4
to
0,
you
go
to
City
Council,
with
a
recommendation
for
approval
of
your
special
sorry,
your
major
variations
as
well.
Good
luck
with
your
project.
You
can
always
all
right
board.
Does
anybody
need
to
take
a
break
before
we
start
the
next
case?
Everybody
good
everybody
good
help
all
right
and
with
that
we're
gonna
welcome
Carol
back
all
right!
B
B
Zoning
code,
section
6,
4,
1,
9
b1,
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
is
the
determining
body
for
this
case.
Documents
included
as
part
of
the
record
include
variation
application,
submitted,
August,
29th,
2017
zoning
analysis,
plat
of
survey,
site
plans,
revised
November,
28th,
2017,
privations
landscape
plan,
letters
of
opposition
image,
a
property
aerial
view
of
property,
zoning
map
of
property.
Dapper
meeting
minutes
of
september
20th
2017
as
well
as
one
letter
that
I'm
about
to
hand
out
and.
A
A
B
A
S
A
S
S
A
S
S
I
do
have
a
rather
extensive
presentation,
somewhat
technical,
have
really
endeavored
to
make
the
strongest
case
possible
for
the
merits
of
these
variances
I
just
want
to
say
that
you
know
I
appreciate
the
efforts
of
staff
and
nothing
in
this
presentation
would
call
into
question
the
common
competency
of
staff
and
and
now
they've
been
very
professional
and
conscientious.
All
the
way
through
you
know,
but
I
am
going
to
talk
about
the
ordinance
in
some
interpretations.
S
So
with
that
this
is
the
organization
of
my
presentation.
I,
think
all
of
these
components
are
important
and
essential,
and
so
the
first
component
would
be
my
background
and
qualifications.
There
are
two
parts
to
this.
First
is
the
home
builder
part,
so
I
have
built
22
houses
in
Evanston,
and
you
see
a
selection
of
them
here.
I
started
out
in
South,
Evanston
and
I.
Guess
it's
the
ninth
award
and
the
rain
and
rain
news
Ward
and
got
a
chance
to
speak
with
her.
S
He
has
her
to
stick
around
and
say
a
few
words
on
my
behalf,
but
you
know
she
had
to
leave
if
she,
if
she
had
stayed
I'm
sure
she
would
have
given
me
credit
for
contributions
to
the
neighborhood
as
time
went
on
and
opportunities
have
presented
themselves.
I've
moved
outside
to
other
parts
of
Evanston.
S
In
addition
to
a
home
builder,
I'm
also
a
Planning
and
Zoning
expert,
so
I'm
a
partner
in
the
firm
Camaros
limited,
not
sure
if
you've
heard
of
it
or
not,
but
we
have
done
dozens
of
the
zoning
ordinance
I
say
when
I
say
done
them
we've
written
zoning
ordinances
for
many
many
communities.
We
have
two
categories:
national
zoning
ordinances
for
bigger
cities
and
then
local
zoning
ordinances
for
communities
in
the
metro
area
and
I
have
authored
many
of
Camaros.
S
S
Think
it's
important
to
talk
about
what
I
call
the
basis
for
the
variance
request.
Why
I'm
here?
Why
I
decided
to
do
this?
So
obviously
I
was
approached
by
the
former
owner
of
the
property
who
wanted
to
get
out
and
offered
to
sell
to
me
and
in
considering
this
I
perform
due
diligence
and
I
approached
the
city
to
ask
very
plainly:
you
know
this
is
a
non-conforming
lot.
I
know:
there's
neighbor
opposition
to
this,
whether
it's
written
or
unwritten
is
the
city's
policy
that
lots
like
this
should
not
be
built
on
that.
S
S
I
was
told
very
clearly
that
if
you
meet
the
standards
for
variance
the
CBA
would
Granth
appearances
okay
and
that
the
request
for
variance
would
be
decided
on
their
technical
merit.
Yes,
the
neighbors
would
be
heard
and,
to
the
extent
of
the
neighbors
speak
to
the
technical
merits
of
the
application,
then
that
mature
would
be
considered,
but
the
mere
opposition
by
neighbors
would
not
be
the
deciding
factor
in
denying
requests
for
variance.
So
those
were
two
key
considerations
in
my
decision
move
forward.
S
The
third
is
that
I
looked
at
the
prior
application,
which
application
for
variances
that
was
put
on
a
hearing
docket,
but
that
the
owner
withdrew
because
they
decided
to
get
out
and
that
application
had
was
a
much
larger
house
and
required
much
greater
degrees
of
variance,
then
I
thought
I
could
achieve,
and
so
I
thought.
Well.
A
You
don't
mind
me
interrupting
just
for
a
minute,
I
think
I'm.
The
only
clarification
I
want
to
make
is
the
dapper
technically
does
not
follow
standards
for
variations.
So,
although
they
may
give
you
a
a
positive
recommendation,
they're
not
basing
that
necessarily
on
those
recommend
on
those
and
three
endures:
four
variations
right:
they.
S
Did
discuss
the
variations
and,
and
they
did
recommend
a
favor
whether
or
not
they
the
recommendation
is
based
on
the
standards
you
know.
I
can
see
that
it
may
they
may
not,
may
not
have
been
okay,
so
I
the
additional
building
coverage
reduction
was
difficult,
but
I
did
it
I'm
prepared
to
live
with
it
and,
last
but
not
least,
I
think.
The
hardship
for
this
property
is
very
clear.
The
city
of
Evanston
approved
this
subdivision
that
created
a
lot
and
created
the
zoning
regulations
that
made
development
on
a
lot
impossible
without
variations.
S
So
I
think
the
city
very
much
has
a
hand
in
the
creation
of
this
hardship
and
that,
frankly,
should
be
some
consideration
in
terms
of
an
obligation
to
grant
the
variances.
That
is
my
opinion.
Okay,
so
I
want
to
present
the
plans
for
the
house
and
to
provide
some
background
on
how
I
approach
the
design
of
the
house
so
first
and
foremost
was
compatibility
with
the
neighborhood
to
look
at
other
homes
in
the
neighborhood.
S
Look
at
how
they're
positioned
on
the
lot
look
at
the
yards,
look
at
the
style
of
architecture
and
to
try
to
make
this
a
steam,
a
seamless
addition
to
the
neighborhood
and
so
in
terms
of
scale
massing
and
and
all
of
that
a
key
factor
in
the
design
approach
was
to
minimize
the
perception
of
bulk
and
mass.
This
isn't
non-conforming
Lots
a
25
foot
wide
lot
and
I
want
to
do
everything
I
could
to
make
the
mass
that
goes
with
the
house
received
as
much
as
possible.
Okay
and
ways
that
I
have
sought
to
do.
S
This
would
be
what
I
call
facade
articulation,
which
was
to
break
up
the
mass
of
the
house
into
different
parts.
So
the
addition
of
a
bay
window
here
in
the
front
helps
break
up
that
front
elevation.
The
side
elevation
is
broken
up
into
three
building
masses.
The
middle
part
is
recessed,
the
other
two
ends
stick
out,
and
so
the
breaking
up
of
this
mass
will
help
reduce
the
scale
perception
of
a
bulk
for
the
house.
The
roofline
is
also
broken
up
into
different
components,
which
I
think
will
also
help
reduce
the
mass.
S
You
can
see
that
there
are
some
big
trees,
fortunately
in
the
parkway,
which
I
think
provides
scale
and
will
be
much
taller
than
this
house
and
also
helped
to
provide
scale
for
the
house.
I
wanted
to
make
the
ours
comparable
to
other
houses
in
the
surrounding
area
and
I
wanted
I
wanted
the
style
of
the
house
to
be
traditional,
which
is
what
most
of
the
houses
in
that
area
are.
I
didn't
want
to
come
up.
I'll
propose
a
very
modern
house,
for
example,
that
would
be
in
stark
contrast
to
the
other
houses
in
the
area.
S
S
Replicates
us
based
on
houses
from
75
years
ago.
Okay,
so
I
wanted,
for
example,
three
bedrooms
and
two
baths
all
on
the
second
level.
That
I
think
is
a
basic
program
standard
for
new
homes.
Today,
also
I
really
wanted
to
minimize
the
degree
of
variance
requested,
both
the
number
of
variances
and
the
degree
of
variance
said
that
I
was
asking
for
I,
think
I've
done
that
and
obviously
to
meet
the
variance
standards.
S
Toward
the
east
of
the
lot,
this
is
Rhys.
This
is
Herzl
staff
determined
that
the
average
wealth
at
the
required
front
yard
based
on
the
average
of
front
yards
on
this
on
the
street,
would
be
19
feet.
6
inches,
so
I
brought
the
house
right
up
to
that.
The
big
window
is
an
allowable
projection
into
that
yard.
You
can
see
the
the
different
spaces
amassing
of
these
three
different
components
of
the
floorplan.
S
S
So
really,
what
has
focused
on
is
the
exterior
dimensions
of
of
the
house.
Okay,
so
the
house
is
16
feet
wide,
so
the
living
room,
if
you,
if
you
take
off
half
a
foot
for
the
exterior
wall
on
each
side
right,
then
the
living
room
is
going
to
be
15
feet
by
I,
haven't
actually
dimensioned
it
here,
but
it
looks
like
something
like
14
feet:
okay,.
S
S
S
I
S
The
two-car
garage
is
actually
smaller
than
a
standard
two-car
garage,
so
25
20.
This
is
19
by
20.
So
what
I
wanted
to
do
here
again
is
to
minimize
the
number
of
variances
that
I've
asked
for
so
there
was
no
way
that
I
would
avoid
a
street
side
yard
variance
of
15
feet,
but
by
positioning
the
house
more
toward
the
sweet
side
yard
and
away
from
the
interior
side
yard.
I
was
able
to
provide
a
five-foot
yard
and
not
need
a
variance
on
the
interior
side
yard.
Likewise,
with
the
two-car
garage,
there
was
no
way.
S
I
was
going
to
avoid
a
street
side
yard
variance
for
the
garage,
but
by
making
the
garage
only
19
feet
wide
and
having
an
equal
yard
and
each
side.
I
meet
the
interior
side
yard
for
an
accessory
structure
of
three
feet
and
I
have
a
oniony
variance
for
the
three
foot
street
side
yard
for
the
garage.
So
in
that
way,
I've
minimized
the
variances
that
that
I've
needed
here.
So
the
building
coverage
is
37.9%.
I
want
to
point
out
that
the
thresholds
for
a
minor
variation
in
this
situation
is
40.5%,
so
I'm.
Well.
J
S
I'm
glad
you
brought
that
up,
so
what
what
I
am?
What
I'm
asking
for
here
is
merely
a
stoop
in
front
of
the
front
door:
okay,
I,
eight
inches
above
the
ground,
a
concrete
stoop,
three
feet
wide.
I
dimension
that
at
nine
foot,
six
you
know
rather
than
having
to
extend
the
sidewalk
right
up
to
the
door.
I
just
want
a
little
stoop.
Okay-
and
this
is
you
know
very
common
within
the
neighborhood
and
I'll-
show
you
examples
of
these
things.
So
you
know
I.
S
Well,
what's
common
is
obstructions
like
this
in
the
required
yard,
so
I'll
show
you
example
of
stairs
that
are
in
the
choir
yard
that
are
multiple
stairs
in
the
courtyard.
You
know,
and
I
said,
as
I
said,
I'm
asking
just
for
an
8-inch
stoop
in
front
of
the
front
door
and
I'm
not
sure
if
I
was
actually
surprised
that
that
there
was
a
variance
for
a
porch
one
foot
from
the
property
line.
S
Iii
thought
I
had
the
need
for
a
obstruction
variance
for
the
canopy
which
I'll
show
you,
but
we
can
certainly
come
back
to
this
I
think
the
elevations
will
help
show
what
I'm
talking
about
second
floor
plan
works.
It
has
three
bedrooms
two
baths.
None
of
these
are
our
big
rooms.
I
think
that
they're
serviceable-
and
you
know
like
I,
said
I
think
I
can
live
with
this.
The
basement
I
consider
to
be
bonus
space.
It
doesn't
add
to
the
bulk
of
the
building.
S
S
Now
this
is
that
one
mass
of
the
building,
the
middle
mass,
which
is
which
is
recessed
and
then
the
end
where
the
kitchen
is
at
that
comes
back
back
out
to
16
feet
wide.
Another
aspect
of
the
design
is
to
use
some
mix
of
materials
again
to
break
up
the
space
visually.
Add
some
different
color
make
it
more
decorative
the
this
is
the
front
canopy
it
only
projects
18
inches.
You
know
it.
I
didn't
consider
this
to
be
a
porch.
S
S
S
S
And
that's
not
go
back
to
the
you
see
there.
There
is
this
sidewalk
here.
This
is
really
an
osteon
public
property,
mostly
on
the
right-of-way
and
so
and
then
the
the
raised
portion
of
the
concrete
would
be
one
foot
away
from
the
property
line
and
I
have
no
second
step
there.
So
this
this
elevation
here
actually
is
incorrect,
that
this
would
all
be
lowered,
and
there
would
only
be
one
step
up
to
the
the
stoop
of
the
house
and.
A
S
S
Of
the
South
elevation,
the
Beebe
interior
elevation
and
the
same
treatment
would
be
accorded
to
this
elevation
in
terms
of
the
mix
of
materials,
the
quality
quality
of
materials.
These
are
fancy
cut,
a
seat
of
shingles
that
be
painted.
This
would
be
pre
painted
how
your
board
siding
the
trim
around
the
windows
would
all
be
a
Zek
or
equal
tines
of
kinds
of
trim
for
for
really
zero
maintenance
over
the
life
of
the
life
of
the
house,
architectural
shingles,
on
the
roof.
This
portion
of
the
facade
would
be
set
back
an
additional
two
feet.
S
S
And
then
the
west
and
east
elevations,
the
West
elevation
would
face
the
rear
yard.
It's
a
nice
elevation
really
comparable
to
a
lot
of
front
elevations.
You
see
the
the
entry
canopy
here,
one
foot
six
inches
as
I
said,
the
decorative
column
could
be
eliminated.
I
could
put
just
a
decorative
bracket
here
instead
and
then
this
again
is
incorrect.
As
there's
one
step,
it
would
just
be
one
step
up
to
the
up
to
the
stoop.
S
S
I
always
do
a
nice
job
of
landscaping,
my
houses,
you
know,
in
addition
to
being
a
home
builder
and
a
planners
owner
I'm,
a
registered
Landscape
Architect
I
like
to
do
this
part
of
the
house
and
I
would
commit
to
doing
landscaping
on
this
house.
According
to
this
plan,
yeah
I
would
I
would
landscape
the
full
perimeter
of
the
house.
You
know
the
existence
of
large
street
trees.
You
know
provides
like
I,
said
a
nice
scale.
I
don't
need
to
to
provide
large
trees
on
the
lot
rather
more
ornamental
trees
and
shrubs
groundcovers
flower
beds.
S
That
kind
of
thing-
and
all
of
that
is
provided
for
on
the
plan-
and
you
can
see
ground
cover
beds,
flower
beds
and
other
things
that
would
really
make
this
an
attractive
landscape.
You
know
for
the
neighborhood
and
and
people
would
enjoy
walking
by
this,
and
especially
with
accent
night
lighting.
It
would
be
it
would
be
very
nice.
S
So
now
that
was
the
plan
as
I'm
proposing
and
now
I
would
like
to
talk
about
the
city,
zoning
policy
and
neighborhood
characteristics.
I
think
the
two
things
are
tied
up
together
when
you
look
at
the
zoning
regulations
are
applied
to
this
area
versus
what
conditions
actually
exist.
I
think
the
two
things
need
to
be
talked
about
hand-in-hand
so
Oh,
like
I,
said
we
do
a
lot
of
zoning
ordinances
for
all
kinds
of
communities.
One
of
the
things
we
do
when
we
start
is
to
look
at
existing
conditions
on
the
ground.
Look
at
lot
sizes.
S
Look
at
yards,
look
at
all
these
things
compared
them
to
the
regulations
of
the
applicable
zoning,
district
and
I.
Did
that
here
and
found
that
the
zone,
zoning
regulations
for
this
area
very,
very
little
relationship
to
the
existing
form
and
character
of
this
portion
of
Edmiston
City
has
two
single-family
districts
are
one
is
for
larger
Lots.
Seventy
to
a
hundred
square
feet
and
50
feet
of
lot
width
and
the
other
single-family
district
is
the
r2
intended
for
lots
at
least
5,000
square
feet
in
size
and
lot
widths
of
35
feet.
S
S
The
blue
color
identifies
lots
that
are
conforming
with
respect
to
lot
area
required
lot
area,
the
ID
7200
square
feet
or
more,
and
the
pink
color
designates
all
the
Lots
that
are
non
conforming
with
respect
to
lot
area.
So
what
we
see
is
that
overwhelmingly
this
area
does
not
conform
to
the
r1
regulations.
With
respect
to
lot
area.
Excuse.
F
Me
can
you
locate
the
subject
property
on
that
map?
Yes,.
S
I
wanted
to
take
an
area,
and
this
gray
line
here
is
the
study
area
that
I
looked
at.
I
wanted
to
go
north
of
the
Central
Street
frontage
and
to
take
in
an
area
that
appeared
to
have
similar
characteristics
to
to
each
other
within
the
neighborhood,
so
I
mean
clearly.
This
is
not
actually
an
r1
area
in
terms
of
a
lot
area.
S
A
S
A
S
D
S
Really
to
ask
the
question:
why
was
this
area
zoned
r1
if
it
doesn't
meet
if
it
doesn't
meet,
if
the
preponderance
of
Lots
don't
meet
the
area
requirement
for
r1
and
I
will
go
into
other
characteristics
as
well?
Why
was
it?
Why
is
it
zone
I
one,
because
if
it
were
zoned,
r2
I
wouldn't
need
to
have
a
variance
for
building
coverage?
Okay,
because
building
coverage
in
r2
is
40
percent.
A
S
S
S
Based
on
the
city's
GIS
and
through
visual
reconnaissance
of
of
the
corner,
Lots
in
this
area,
I
have
determined
that
over
half
of
the
corner
Lots
do
not
need
the
street
side
yard
requirement
of
the
r1
okay.
So
there
is
a
wide
degree
of
nonconformity
with
respect
to
corner
side
yards
in
this
in
this
area
did.
S
A
S
What
I
will
say
is
that,
because
I
was
working
with
your
GIS
information,
basically
using
for
proportional
scaling
where
it
was
close,
I
classified
it
as
as
conforming
okay.
So
if
it's
really
marginal,
some
of
the
conforming
loss
actually
could
be
non-conforming,
but
I.
Think
none
of
the
non-conforming
Lots
designated
here
are
are
conforming.
Okay,
you
can
just
tell
by
the
size
of
the
various
Lots
here.
So
this
is
a
25
foot
wide
lot.
Okay,
this
is
25
foot
wide
like
this.
Might
this
is
less
than
30.
S
These
look
like
they're,
very
close
to
between
25
and
30
feet
wide.
So
there
are
a
number
of
Lots
here
that
are
substantially
under
even
the
35
foot
lot,
with
let
alone
the
50
foot
a
lot
width,
which
is
the
r1
standard,
so
vr1
Stan
they're,
probably
very
few
lots
here
that
conform
to
the
50-foot
lot
with
standard
of
r1.
S
Well,
it
contributes
to
the
to
the
to
the
non-conforming
situation,
because
if
your
lot
is
not
wide
enough,
you
will
have
difficulty
meeting
the
corner.
Side
yard
requirement.
Okay,
so
it
is
it
plays
into
it.
Okay,
it
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
you
can't
meet
it.
If
you,
for
example,
have
a
30-foot
lot
with
you
may
still
I
suppose
be
able
be
able
to
meet
it
or
like
30
feet
is,
is,
is,
is
pretty
minimal,
see
a
lot
of
of
these
houses
have
non-conforming
interior
yards
as
well.
S
So,
whereas,
if
you
conform
the
Jordans,
you
have
a
5-foot
interior
side
yard.
If
you're
on
a
corner
a
lot,
you
have
a
15-foot
corner
side
yard
that
takes
up
20
feet
of
your
lot
area.
If
you
have
a
a
30-foot
wide
lot,
you
can't
really
build
a
house.
If
you
have
a
35
foot
wide
lot,
you
really
can't
build
a
house
okay.
S
So,
even
if
you
meet
the
ordinance
requirement
of
the
35
foot
wide
lot
within
your
on
a
corner
lot
chances,
are
you
really
can't
build
a
house
so
I
think
applying
these
particular
district
regulations
to
this
area
and
in
particular
the
subject
property
in
question?
Really
it
creates
a
hardship?
Yes,
but
it
really
is
I
think
not
good
zoning
policy
as
well.
It
doesn't
relate
to
conditions
that
you
have
on
the
ground.
S
I,
looked
at
building
coverage
for
the
immediate
lots
surrounding
the
property.
You
know,
calculating
light
coverage
is
more
tedious
and
I
thought
it
was
more
important
to
look
at
the
nearby
Lots
so
again
by
using
the
je
s.
Information
proportional
scaling,
I've
determined
that
the
property
to
the
south
has,
by
coincidence
a
37.9%
building
coverage.
The
one
further
to
the
south
is
36.
This
is
41.6.
This
is
thirty
four
point
one
you
can
tell
just
by
eyeballing,
or
it
appears
that
in
some
of
these
Lots
would
have
really
you
know
quite
high
building
coverage.
S
So
I
think
even
more
important
than
the
material
I
presented
is
the
fact
that
there
are
a
number
of
existing
corner
lot
houses
that
are
already
built.
That
would
be
similar
to
this
house
and
in
fact
this
house
is,
would
provide
a
greater
degree
of
conforming
a
conformance
than
many
of
these
houses.
I'm
going
to
show
you.
So
this
is
the
twenty
nine
ten
part
place
house
there's,
especially
when
you
consider
that
the
lot
line
is
probably
at
least
a
foot
inside
the
sidewalk.
A
S
S
S
Some
more
3,000
ther,
2705
Lincolnwood,
this
property
here
at
26:58
ewing,
I
think,
is
notable.
It
has
a
little
bit
more
corner,
so
definitely
doesn't
meet
the
standard
of
15
feet,
but
it
looks
like
there
was
a
very
substantial
second-story
addition
put
on
to
that
house,
which
would
constitute
and
banshan
of
a
non-conforming
structure,
and
this
would
have
to
have
been
proved
by
by
the
city.
So
it
appears
like
there
is
some
recognition
of
this
kind
of
hardship
and
allowing
increased
development
on
property
like
that.
S
I'm
not
asking
for
an
interior
side
yard
variance,
but
I
wanted
you
to
note
that
yards
on
this
particular
block
are
quite
tight.
A
lot
of
the
yards
are
either
3
foot
or
less
than
3
foot.
I
know
from
my
survey
that
the
house
to
the
south,
his
interior
side
yard,
adjacent
to
our
common
lot
line,
is
less
than
3
feet.
So
the
arts
here
are
very
tight
and
frankly,
I
managed
to
create
a
proposal
where
I
meet
the
interior
side
yard
of
5
feet.
S
The
non-conforming
garage
do
two
corner
side:
yard
is
another
thing
I
wanted
to
point
out.
There
are
a
lot
of
garages
in
the
neighborhood
that
do
not
have
the
15
foot
corner
side
yard
for
the
garage.
This
exists
in
many
places
in
the
neighborhood,
and
you
know
my
proposal
would
not
be
any
different
or
any
more
egregious
than
these
proposed
these
existing
houses.
S
So
now
I
want
to
talk
about
neighbor
outreach
staff
recommended
and
I
certainly
wholeheartedly
agreed
to
conduct
outreach
to
the
neighbors
and
see
if
we
could
find
a
design
that
would
be
acceptable
to
both
me
in
to
them.
I
started
by
mailing
copies
of
preliminary
plans
to
all
properties
from
within
the
notice
area,
asked
for
feedback,
email
feedback
and
I
would
follow
up
with
them.
I
received
a
mix
of
supportive
and
negative
responses.
S
I
held
a
meeting
with
the
neighbors
those
who
wanted
to
attend
the
meeting,
obviously
on
the
22nd
of
June
in
2016,
and
presented
three
alternative
designs
and
you
have
a
packet
there
that
shows
the
ideas
that
I
presented.
So
these
were
ideas.
You
know
and
the
the
the
thought
was,
let's
talk
about
three
different
ways
of
organizing
a
house
on
that
lot
and
see
if
one
of
these
ideas
was
more
preferable
than
the
others,
okay,
and
so.
S
The
negative
side
was
that,
in
order
to
create
really
a
two-car
garage,
we
have
to
push
that
to
the
interior
of
the
lot
and
come
close
to
the
interior
side
yard
of
the
property
to
the
south
closer
than
three
feet
frankly,
and
so
that
was
a
negative,
for
this
also
may
be
subjected
to
having
a
driveway
off
of
Hartzell.
You
know
that
there's
traffic
could
be
a
traffic
problem,
backing
out
on
the
Hartzell
and
so
forth.
S
S
S
You
can
see
that
this
proposal,
which
is
kind
of
what
I
was
starting
out
with
this
western
portion
of
the
building
the
16-foot
wide
portion
of
the
building,
is
pretty
much
equal
with
the
back
of
the
house
to
the
and
the
proposal
that
you
have,
probably
only
the
back
of
the
house,
sticks
out
only
four
or
five
feet,
probably
from
that
house
to
the
south.
So
there
was
substantial
reduction
in
the
size
of
the
house
from
the
very
early
concept.
It
actually
required
fewer
variances
than
the
attached
garage
concept,
which
was
certainly
important
to
me.
S
I
also
looked
at
and
again
I
forgot
to
change
the
label
here.
This
is
the
two
and
a
half
story
concept,
I
thought:
okay,
what
if
I
put
one
bedroom?
Two
baths
on
the
second
floor,
put
a
third
bedroom
on
the
half
story.
Above
you
know,
it
shrunk
the
floor
plate
of
the
house
a
little
bit.
Would
that
be?
You
know
preferable
to
having
a
longer
house
only
two
floors-
and
this
was
probably
the
least
well-received
house
of
of
the
three
okay.
S
Now
the
result
of
the
meeting
was
essentially
a
unified
position.
This
is
my
interpretation,
a
unified
position
on
the
part
of
the
opposing
neighbors
that
no
design
would
be
acceptable
that
this
house
should
never
have
a
house
on
it,
certainly
not
a
house
on
this
lot
alone,
and
so
there
was
really
no
point
of
kind
of
discussion
or
compromise
or
working
anything
out,
because
their
position
was
and
know
how
should
be
built
here.
S
I
want
to
say
that
there
are
some
neighbors
who
support
the
proposal.
This
is
a
redacted
email
from
a
neighbor
early
on.
There
was
much
more
I
guess
positive
support,
then,
after
the
opposition
really
got
organized
and
kind
of
made
it
known,
probably
that
if
you
support
something
like
this
you're
gonna,
you
know
not
be
looked
at
with
favor
by
the
opposition.
Frankly,
so
this
neighbor,
like
others
in
the
neighborhood
thought
it
would
be
much
better
to
have
a
nice
attractive
house
on
the
property
than
a
vacant
lot.
S
S
You
know
I
cut
the
grass
myself
at
the
at
the
property
and
a
couple
walking
their
dog
stopped
me.
While
I
was
kind
of
grass
and
said
you
owned,
the
property
said
yes,
I
do,
and
they
said
we
just
want
you
to
know
that
we
would
like
to
see
a
house
built
here.
You
know
rather
than
this
making
a
lot
you
know
being
here
forever.
S
So
when
people
go
out
of
their
way
to
stop
me
when
they
see
me
and
and
and
tell
me
that
they
would
like
to
see
a
nice
house
built
on
the
lot
I
think
there
are
frankly
more
people
like
that
in
the
neighborhood.
I
did
not
go
out
and
try
to
drum
up
support
which
would
effectively
Pit
one
group
of
neighbors
against
another.
S
Frankly,
I,
don't
know
didn't
see
in
the
Whorton
is
where
neighbor
objection
is
part
of
the
the
the
the
rationale
for
deciding
a
variance,
so
I
thought
I.
Would
let
the
merits
of
the
proposal
speak
for
themselves
and
to
let
you
know
that
there
are
probably
a
lot
of
neighbors
who
actually
would
support
the
building
of
a
house.
Here,
this
house
has
been
there's.
S
A
lot
has
been
vacant
for
many
years
and
many
opportunities
for
other
people
to
buy
it,
including
the
neighbor
to
this
or
somebody
else
who
would
buy
it
and
combine
it
with
the
house
to
the
south.
That
hasn't
happened.
I,
don't
think
that's
going
to
happen
and
I
think
this
is
the
best
option
for
getting
a
productive
use
on
that
lot
in
a
nice
house.
S
S
S
S
That
property
has
a
comparable
level
of
building
coverage
to
to
this
property.
Now,
obviously,
this
is
a
vacant
lot
and
that
property
one
enjoys
you
know,
whatever
benefits,
are
cool
to
having
a
vacant
lot
next
to
next
to
next
remand,
and
that
would
be
very
nice
to
have.
But
I
think
that
is
not
an
impact
because
he
hasn't
no
entitlement
to
enjoy
or
to
have
that
lot
be
preserved
in
open
space
forever.
S
Number
two:
the
property
owner,
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship
or
practical
difficulties
ingress
from
a
mere
inconvenience.
If
the
strict
letter
of
the
regulations
were
to
carried
out,
obviously
I'm
saying
that
you
cannot
build
a
house
here
without
some
relief
in
building
coverage,
and
so
it
would
be
a
major
hardship,
not
an
inconvenience
if
this
parents
were
denied.
The
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
on
our
desire
to
extract
additional
income.
I
think
I've
done
straighted
that
my
proposal
is
not
based
on
maximizing
income,
not
maximizing
profit.
S
S
In
fact,
the
hardship
was
created
by
the
subdivision
of
land,
creating
this
lot
in
the
establishment
of
zoning
regulations
that
make
it
infeasible
to
develop
a
lot
without
relief
from
the
building
coverage
requirement.
Have
other
alternatives
been
considered,
and
why
will
they
not
work?
So
I
have
done
I've
point
out
the
three
other
alternatives
that
I've
that
I've
talked
about.
In
addition,
I've
made
substantial
revisions
to
the
plan
that
you
have
to
shrink
it
down
to
its
current
size,
so
I
have
really
minimized.
Building
coverage
I
believe
as
much
as
possible.
S
Will
this
have
a
substantial
adverse
impact
on
the
use
of
enjoyment
of
the
adjacent
property?
Well,
the
street
side
yard
is
on
the
opposite
side
from
the
adjacent
property.
It's
on
the
north
side
of
my
lot
and
he's
to
the
south
side,
so
I
think
by
virtue
of
that
alone,
the
reduction
in
the
street
side
yard
will
not
have
an
adverse
impact
on
that
adjacent
property
owner
one
can
talk
about.
Will
it
have
impact
on
people
across
the
street
or
whatever
them?
S
S
J
S
S
Yes,
I
can't
address
it
so,
both
with
respect
to
building
coverage
and
with
respect
to
street
side
yard
I
do
not
see
this
having
an
adverse
impact
on
property
values
for
for
two
reasons.
First
of
all,
frankly,
I
think
the
property
I'm
building
will
be
a
much
higher
value
than
the
adjacent
property
is,
and
secondly,
if
this
property
would
diminish
property
values
for
the
adjacent
property,
other
properties,
similarly
to
developed
on
a
corner
Lots
with
various
ranges
of
nonconformity
would
also
have
diminished
property
value.
S
With
respect
to
the
standard
number
two,
without
relief
from
the
streets,
I
Drive
requirement,
no
house
can
be
built
here,
15
foot,
corner
side.
That
requirement
renders
this
a
lot
absolutely
unbuildable.
A
variation
is
not
based
exclusively
on
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income.
So
again,
I've
pursued
a
very
balanced
approach
to
minimize
variations
and
the
degree
variation
needed
if
I
were
trying
to
maximize
I
would
be
coming
do
with
frankly,
a
larger
house,
but
with
more
amenities
than
what
I'm
doing
see.
F
B
S
F
S
Know
I
looked
at
the
former
project,
I
didn't
come
prepared
to
to
speak.
To
that
I
mean
it
never
made
its
way.
You
know
right
to
the
CBA.
I
know
that
it
was
much
bigger.
It
was
this
person's
dream
house,
and
you
know
they
liked
the
neighborhood.
They
they
found
a
way
to
buy
the
lot,
and
you
know
I
thought
they
designed
the
dream
house
and
then
tried
to
put
it
on
the
lot
rather
than
so
so
the
person
actually
went
to
Glenview
bought
a
much
bigger
lot
and
built
the
same
house
in
Glenview.
B
S
A
S
Well,
it
may
be
on
the
legal
description
on
my
survey.
However,
its
state
law
that
municipalities
approve
every
subdivision,
so
every
subdivision
of
land
I've
read
something
about.
We
subdivide,
Atlanta
and
Evanston.
It
always
goes
before
the
Planning
Commission
and
gets
on
the
City,
Council
John
sure.
I
S
What's
I'm
not
sure
what
the
difference
is,
it's
still
a
subdivision
we're
creating
land
in
these
shapes
and
sizes,
and
the
city
is
responsible
for
promoting
the
orderly
development
of
land
in
the
community
and
so
and
there
may
have
been
different
standards
at
that
time.
But
the
city
still
approved
the
subdivision
of
land
in
this
shape
and
size
created
this
25
a
lot
as
well
as
other
25-foot
Lots.
S
S
The
property
to
the
south
I
am
maintaining
the
required
3-foot
interior
side
yard
for
an
accessory
structure
on
that
property
line,
adjacent
to
that
property,
and
so
I,
don't
see
that
this
will
impact
his
use
and
enjoyment
and
I
do
not
believe
will
have
an
adverse
impact
on
property
values,
because
there
are
numerous
other
garages
positioned,
like
mine
will
be
within
the
neighborhood
and
so
whatever
condition
exists.
It's
already
had
its
effect
on
property
values.
S
This
would
be
a
particular
hardship,
as
opposed
to
practical,
difficult,
practical
difficulty
as
distinguished
from
a
mere
inconvenience
if
the
letter
of
the
regulations
would
be
carried
out.
So
a
two-car
garage
is
impossible
on
this
lot.
Without
relief
from
the
street
side
yard
requirement,
I
actually
investigated
building
a
one
car
garage
with
a
parking
pad
next
to
it,
and
it
turns
out
that
I
would
need
a
slew
of
variances
for
the
parking
pad
next
to
the
garage.
I
would
need
more
variances,
for
that
than
I
would
for
a
two-car
garage.
S
F
S
Yeah,
this
is
not
basically
exclusive
owners,
I
retract
additional
income.
Frankly,
the
karai's
two-car
garage
is
standard
part
of
the
program.
It's
it's
not
extravagant.
It
is
not.
The
crust
is
not
based
on
a
desire
to
extract
additional
income.
The
alleged
hardship
of
practically
all
was
not
self
created.
Going
back
to
the
statement
made
before
that,
the
creation
of
the
lot
and
the
zoning
regulations
that
applied
to
it
have
created
the
hardship.
Not
not
me
and
other
alternates
have
been
considered.
S
So
I
apologized
first
I'm
going
to
be
spending
an
abnormal
amount
of
time
on
this
porch,
because
when
I
investigated,
it
kind
of
led
me
to
some
things
that
I
found
very,
very
peculiar.
So,
as
I
said,
I
didn't
know,
I
had
a
variance
of
one,
a
variance
for
a
porch
one
foot
off
the
property
on
I
thought.
I
had
this
projection
for
the
canopy
18
inch
projection
were
only
five
inches
would
be
allowed.
S
So
I
looked
into
the
ordinance
and
said:
look
for
the
definition
of
a
porch
and
found
this
I
think
the
substantive
portion
of
the
definition
is
area
attached
to
the
building
and
located
between
the
exterior
wall
of
the
building
in
the
right-of-way.
So
this
is
a
screenshot
of
the
definition
of
a
porch
from
the
Evanston
zoning
ordinance.
So
you
know,
I
have
an
image
of
what
a
porch
looks
like
in
my
mind,
I
can't
kind
of
reconcile
it
with
what
this
definition
says
and
frankly,
you
could
construe
this
to.
S
S
Also
thought
was
curious.
Other
references
into
in
the
zoning
ordinance
for
porch
references
identified
this
as
linked
it
with
roof
permanently
roofed
over
terraces
or
porches.
So
this
seems
suggest
that
of
porches
are
roofed
over
a
roof
over
structure,
but
these
are
little
idiosyncrasies
of
Zoning.
So
what
I'm
really
looking
for?
Is
this
front
door?
Canopy
projecting
18
inches
from
the
face
of
the
building?
That's
nine
feet.
S
Six
inches
wide
I
think
is
very
important
to
have
a
an
accentuation
of
the
entrance
of
the
building
and
the
most
minimal
of
overhead
cover
for
somebody
entering
the
building.
If
you're
fumbling
for
your
keys
in
the
rain,
you
should
have
a
little
bit
of
overhead
protection.
I.
Think
it's
nice
to
provide
a
decorative
feature
for
the
house
as
well
and
I.
Think
18
inches
is
really
a
minimal
obstruction
to
accomplish
that.
I
want
just
a
single
front
door
suit.
No
more
than
eight
inches
high
three
feet
wide
and
nine
feet.
S
Six
inches
long,
the
post
extending
from
the
canopy
to
the
stoop
can
be
eliminated.
If
that
I
think
you
didn't
get
a
chance
to
reply
to
my
email
but
I'm
not
sure
what
really
makes
the
reports,
but
if
those
ports
post
coming
down
to
to
the
stupa,
make
it
a
porch
I
can
eliminate
those
a
minor
thing,
but
you
know
I'm
willing
to
do
what
I
can,
and
this
is
the
I
think
the
last
O'neil
I
saw
that
I
received,
which
was
talked
about
this
this
obstruction.
S
S
These
are
the
examples
of
what
could
be
similar
obstructions
that
exist
in
other
houses,
so
these
are
all
non-conforming,
either
front
yards
or
corner
side
yards,
and
they
have
steps
that
extend
down
whether
they're,
1
foot
away
from
I
mean
I.
Think
this
one
is
probably
right
at
the
lot
line
here.
This
one
is
right
at
the
lot
line.
This
might
be
a
couple
feet
away,
but
these
exist
in
many
instances
throughout
the
neighborhood.
So
what
I'm
asking
for
here
is
actually
less
of
an
obstruction
than
what
exists
in
many
other
houses
within
this
area.
S
So,
just
going
with
the
proposal
as
it
is,
this
variance
request
will
not
have
the
National
adverse
impact
on
the
Eastern
German
of
adjacent
property
or
property
values.
This
is
really
a
a
pertinence
to
the
building.
It's
it's
that
it's
not
substantial.
It's
not
going
to
have
a
material
effect,
either
way
on
the
use,
enjoyment
of
other
people's
property
or
property
values,
it's
very
comparable
to
other
existing
pertinence,
azan
houses
in
the
area,
and
so
it
will
not
have
an
adverse
impact.
The
property
owner
would
suffer
a
particular
hardship.
S
If
the
strict
letter
of
the
orange
would
be
carried
out
could
I
have
the
stoop
can
I
have
the
canopy
of
the
canopy
go
on
I
think
both
the
stoop
and
the
canopy
frankly
are
necessary.
Consider
somebody
buying
a
house
and
there's
absolutely
no
everything.
No
overhead
articulation
of
the
facade
at
the
entrance.
There's
no
step
up
from
the
sidewalk.
The
sidewalk
is
four
feet
away
from
from
your
house,
and
you
don't
even
have
a
step
up
to
get
to
your
front
door,
so
I
think
those
are
significant.
You
know
hardships
and
practical
difficulties.
S
If
the
strict
letter,
the
regular
regulations,
would
be
carried
out,
it's
not
based
on
a
desire
to
affect
additional
income
is
just
basic
good
house
design,
and
this
is
something
that
would
be
standard
on
any
of
the
house
that
you
see
the
hardship
has
not
been
self
created.
Well,
the
hardship
goes
back
to
the
size
of
the
lot
and
the
street
side
yard
requirement.
That
makes
anything
in
front
of
that
house
and
obstruction.
S
Okay,
so
I
can't
it
couldn't
really
do
anything
without
violating
this
aspect
of
the
ordinance
have
other
alternatives
been
considered
so
I
mentioned
removing
the
porch
posts.
If
that
makes
a
difference,
I
suppose
it
would
be
possible
not
to
have
a
front
stoop
not
to
have
any
kind
of
canopy
over
the
the
front
door.
I
think
that
is
unacceptable.
S
I'd
rather
not
go
there
and
I
think
this
is
the
most
minor
of
the
variations
anyway,
if
you're
inclined
to
approve
the
other
variations,
I
think
you'd
approve
this
one
and
I
think
for
my
summary.
So
I
would
like
to
impress
with
the
fact
I
mean
everybody
else.
I
have
to
hawk
do
besides
the
zoning
for
other
people
in
the
zoning
business
say
you're
going
in
for
a
variance
of
what's
your
hardship,
all
that
it's
a
non-conforming
lot
25
feet
wide.
They,
oh
yeah,
you
definitely
got
a
hardship.
S
I
mean
that
I
think
if
you
ask
10
zoning
experts,
if
this
is
a
hardship,
this
is
a
hardship.
Okay,
I,
very
much
think
that
this
proposal
represents
a
balanced
approach
and,
frankly,
you
can
see
the
progression
of
the
house
design
from
the
very
beginning
to
where
it
is
now
and
it
has
been
substantially
reduced
and
other
alternatives
have
been
considered
to
both
minimize
the
number
of
variances
requested
and
the
degree
of
variances
requested
for
those
that
have
been
requested.
S
It
seeks
a
much
lower
degree
variance
than
that
filed
by
the
former
owner,
which
received
a
favorable,
dapper
committee
review.
I,
do
think
the
classification
of
the
area
as
r1
is
not
consistent
with
existing
lot
and
yard
conditions.
Far
more
consistent
with
our.
If
I
had
our
I'd
need
no
building
coverage
variation.
S
And
some
has
no
stated
policy
that
lots
such
as
this
subject:
property
aren't
buildable.
If
the
city
had
told
me
now,
you're
never
going
to
get
a
variance,
don't
don't
you
know,
don't
bother
with
this
or
it's
not
written,
but
you
know
this
is
unbuildable.
I
would
not
have
pursued
this.
So
I
think
it
is
incumbent
on
frankly,
the
CBA
to
to
recognize
that
this
is
the
city's
policy
and
that
this
is
a
consideration.
You
do
deliberations.
S
So
obviously,
neighbors
have
and
my
meeting
with
them
raised
several
objections
and,
and
you
sure
you're
going
to
hear
them
as
I
see
it.
These
objections
have
nothing
to
do
with
the
standards
for
variance
in
the
zoning
ordinance
one
property
owners.
Several
lots
of
ways
said:
well,
you
can
increase
flooding
on
my
property.
I
know
they
said.
Well,
they
it's.
J
S
S
This
idea
of
combining
the
subject
property
with
a
lot
of
the
South
really
is
not
a
viable
option.
I,
don't
think
it
should
be
part
of
deliberations,
I
think
it's
really
subterfuge
and
if
it
were
viable,
it
would
have
been
done
before
the
standards
of
variance
do
not
require
a
perfect
design.
A
perfect
proposal
I
think
there
is
probably
no
such
thing
in
this
instance.
One
person
may
think
well,
yeah
I
think
it
should
be.
S
You
know
a
little
smaller,
a
little
less
less
tall
or
you
know,
I'd
like
to
pay
window
or
the
entrance
could
be
better
any
number
of
things,
but
that's
really
not
again
part
of
the
standards.
I
think
this
is,
you
know,
a
balanced
approach
and
it
is
a
viable
approach
for
building
on
this
lot.
The
older
homes
in
the
air
do
not
rear
for
represent
a
standard
for
denying
the
request.
So
the
idea
that
well
I
neighbors
have
two
bedroom
houses.
For
example,
you
should
have
a
two
bedroom
house.
S
Well,
I
would
say
that
it
makes
no
sense
to
spend
two
thousand
and
eighteen
dollars
creating
a
house
that
is
to
a
standard
of
75
years
ago,
and
you
know
I
wouldn't
do
that.
It
would
not
be
marketable.
It
would
not
be
a
wise
use
of
funds
and
I.
Don't
think
that
has
anything
to
do
with
the
request
that
I'm
making.
S
S
This
proposal
would
do
that
new
moderately
priced
homes
are
needed
in
Evanston,
you
know,
I
build
new
homes
and,
frankly,
the
first
one
I
sold
for
three
hundred
twenty
five
thousand
dollars
some
twenty
five
years
ago,
didn't
make
any
money
on
it,
but
no
new
home
is
is,
is
is
priced
at
that
at
that
level
anymore.
So
it
would
be
great
to
get
a
nice
new
home
at
a
more
moderate
price
in
this
part
of
Atlas
done
and.
F
S
F
S
S
But
I
I
would
guess
that
this
house
will
sell
for
between
five
and
six
hundred
thousand
dollars.
I
would
love
it
if
it
was
at
the
higher
end
of
the
range.
This
house
is
not
going
to
have
all
the
bells
and
whistles
not
going
to
have
all
the
amenities
that
a
lot
of
buyers
will
be
looking
for.
It's
going
to
be
a
compromise
house
both
in
terms
of
dollar
and
in
terms
of
features
so
I,
don't
think
I'll
get
top
dollar
for
this
house,
and
you
know
I'm
willing
to
live
with
that.
S
A
J
S
The
money
to
the
first
house
that
I
built
I've
lived
in
I
still
live
in
it.
Okay,
I
live
in
Evanston,
I
live
in
Evanston,
yes,
and
the
other
22
houses
I
have
built
and
sold
and
I
think
frankly,
building
this
as
a
spec
house
is
the
better
approach
rather
than
a
custom
house,
because
you
build
what
can
be
common
in
a
lot.
S
What
will
the
zoning
standards
and
then
you
find
a
buyer
who
likes
that
house
who
loves
that
house,
and
so
that's
what
I
think
is
the
right
approach
to
the
building
on
this
lot,
rather
than
designing
it
to
live
in
it
or
designing
it
as
a
custom
home
for
somebody
else.
The
prior
owner
was
a
custom
home
buyer
occupant
and
that
did
not
work
at
all.
F
S
So,
with
respect
to
construction
related
impacts
on
the
on
the
property
to
the
south,
so
number
one
I'm
conforming
to
all
of
the
requirements
adjacent
to
that
property,
just
like
any
other
home
builder,
would
have
to
comply
with
so
the
variations
I'm
requesting
have
no
direct
impact
on
construction
impacts
on
that
adjacent
property.
Secondly,
I
will
abide
by
all
city
best
practices
for
construction
and
minimizing
a
damage,
for
example,
shoring
and
and
providing
engineering
calculations
so
that
there
is
no
subsidence
on
the
adjacent
property.
S
You
know
a
grading
plan
is
required
for
every
new
house
constructed
and
that
grading
plan
has
to
factor
in
the
location
of
downspouts
and
the
direction
of
drainage
and
to
drain
my
runoff
away
from
the
adjacent
property.
Given
that
this
is
a
corner
lot,
I
see
absolutely
no
difficulty
in
draining
all
of
the
runoff
to
either
street
or
the
alley,
and
so
there
should
be
no
runoff
going
to
the
south.
F
Other
concerns
that
were
outlined
and
I'm
not
sure
that
I
totally
understand
this
issue.
Yet
so
perhaps
you
can
help
me
understand
I,
understand,
there's
a
safety
concern
as
the
way
the
garage
relates
to
the
sidewalk
I
believe
is
it
for
pedestrian
safety,
and
then
there
was
also
a
concern
in
terms
of
how
the
the
alley
is
used.
Is
it
used
by
commercial
traffic
right
now
from
Central
Street
I?
Don't.
S
Alley
tees
into
the
alley
behind
Central
Street
I
would
hope
that
there
is
not
commercial
traffic
going
down
this
segment
of
the
alley.
I
wouldn't
want
to
have
that,
as
as
a
condition
I
have
to
contend
with
when
I
sell
the
house,
you
know
I'd
be
surprised
if
that's
the
case,
but
I
don't
know,
I
think
with
respect
to
the
garage
I
think
it's
the
question
of
sight,
distance
and
yeah
say:
we'd
have
more
sight
distance
if
there
were
15
foot
setback.
S
As
I
said,
there
are
numerous
other
garages
that
don't
have
a
15
foot
setback
on
the
street
and
if
we
were
going
to
have
pedestrian
accidents,
no
vehicles
running
into
cars
because
of
that
I
think
you
would
have
seen
it
happen
and,
and
there
would
be
a
track
record
of
these
kinds
of
accidents,
because
these
other
garages
are
similarly
located.
So
I
don't
see
that
as
really
a
viable
objection.
If
anything
is
possible
by
that,
there
is
not,
to
my
knowledge,
the
track
record
of
that
kind
of
a
situation
having
occurred
from
the
existing
garages.
F
S
There
are
what
I
would
consider
volunteer
and
weed
trees,
mulberries,
and
you
know
I'm
not
sure
exactly
you
know
what
else
under
underbrush
yeah
and
frankly,
that
stuff
should
be
eliminated.
I
didn't
in
all
the
time,
I've
got
the
grass
and
I,
don't
think.
There's
one
tree
that
merits
saving
in
fact,
I
would
add,
as
Sean
financed
a
plan.
I
would
add
quality
trees
into
the
yard
and
and
take
out
the
volunteer
trees
that
really
are
not
attractive.
I.
L
S
S
And
a
half
so
Mike
I
didn't
develop
a
plan
because
I
thought
it
was
actually
completely
infeasible
I,
don't
know
where
you
would
put
three
bedrooms
and
two
baths
on
the
same
level
on
a
half
story,
given
the
width
that
I
have
16
feet
now,
if
you
were
to
go
20
feet
wide,
maybe
you
could
do
it,
okay
or
even
more
but
I-
think
in
deference
to
minimizing
the
variances,
for
example,
maintaining
that
an
interior
side
yard
2
to
5
feet,
I
think
that
is
frankly,
more
important
than
I
mean
I,
asking
for
a
variance
for
height.
S
L
S
I
know
nothing
about
the
grading
of
the
site.
It
looks
pretty
flat
to
me
if
there's
a
line
on
one
of
those
concepts.
It
is
not
a
grading
line,
it
is
not
a
topo
line.
I
don't
have
topo
for
the
site.
I
have
an
order
topo
for
the
site.
It
wasn't
part
of
my
survey,
so
I
don't
believe
that
is
a
grading
line
and
finally,.
S
I,
look
at
it
first
in
terms
of
what's
a
viable
product,
I
think
I
can
mark
it,
and
I've
made
a
lot
of
compromises
on
this
already
I
would
love
a
mud
room
in
this
house.
I
don't
have
space
for
mud
room,
okay,
I
had
it
on
other
plans.
I
had
to
take
it
off
to
achieve
the
additional
reduction
in
building
coverage
that
gapper
requested
I
would
like
all
the
bedrooms
to
be
at
least
ten
feet
wide
I
got
one
at
nine.
S
Frankly,
the
other
one
might
not
even
be
ten
feet
wide,
so
those
are
compromises
that
have
been
made.
The
closet
space
has
been
compromised.
Other
things
like
that,
I,
like
a
little
more
space
in
front
of
the
stairs
I
reduced.
That
portion
of
the
building
the
13
feet
wide
again
to
meet
the
reduction
in
building
covers
that
dapper
requested.
So
I
don't
see
how
I
could
get
10
more
square
feet
off
that
and
still
preserve
the
program
that
is
really
marketable.
Thank.
L
A
Any
other
questions:
okay,
alright,
we're
gonna,
give
you
a
break.
You're
gonna
have
a
seat.
I
just
want
to
throw
this
out.
It's
10:15.
We
have
not
heard
from
neighbors.
Do
we
feel
like
continuing
with
this
or
continuing
this
this
this
meeting
to
add
into
a
date
certain
kidding,
hey?
Please
know
you
can't
talk
without
I
I.
F
F
That
could
be
agreeable
to
the
board
so
that
we
can
hear
at
the
very
least,
hear
everyone
that
has
come
out
tonight
and
then,
if
we
think
they're
I
don't
know
if
we
think
there's
going
to
be
a
lengthy
discussion
period,
we
could
break
at
that
point
because
we
have
heard
testimony
testimony
from
those
that
have
come
out
this
evening.
I
agree.
C
J
I
U
A
You
so
then,
the
vote
from
the
board
is
that
we
continue
and
we
allow
the
residents
the
neighbors
to
have
their
chance
to
comment
and
then
at
that
point
we
continue
to
a
date.
Certain
now
Melissa
just
told
me
that
the
next
meeting
Jim
packed,
so
we
would
need
to
continue
it
to
a
special
meeting.
Let's.
A
All
right
so
now
we
are
open
for
our
neighborhood
neighbor
comment.
I,
don't
really
want
to
go
through
the
list,
because
I
can't
barely
read
your
handwriting
so
in
in
orderly
fashion,
feel
free
to
come
up.
Give
me
your
name
and
address
Marybeth
in
a
perfect
world.
We
would
keep
the
comments
to
three
minutes
and
if
you
agree,
it's
okay
to
just
come
up
and
say:
I
agree
with
everything
that
person
said
all.
V
Right,
first
of
all,
I
am
Richard
horse.
Ting
I
am
the
person
that
lives
the
south
of
this
property
to
make
a
long
story
short
this
hot.
This
property
was
owned
by
the
wells
family
for
over
70
years.
I
am
I,
have
3
grandparents
that
are
the
oldest
family
members
in
Evanston
and
Wilmette
Glen
vo.
My
grandmother,
who
lived
in
this
house
for
45
years
as
part
of
the
Wagner
farm
family,
dissented
from
1850
loboc,
her
husband
from
1860
and
bauer,
my
mother's
or
my
father's
family
from
1860,
so
I
defy
anybody
to
say
anything.
V
I've
owned
the
house,
my
my
grandmother's
family
built
the
house
in
1926.
They
lost
it,
a
fam,
my
family,
its
relatives
built
the
house
in
1926.
They
lost
it
during
the
Depression
and
my
grandmother
and
grandfather
were
proud
enough
to
buy
it
on
d-day
1944.
She
lived
there
for
40
years
for
40
years.
She
fought
the
Welch
family
that
owned
this
corner
a
lot.
The
Welch
family
approached
me
at
least
40
times
in
the
31
years.
V
I'd
been
her
trying
to
get
me
to
sell
my
house,
so
they
could
tear
it
down
and
build
a
house
when
I
asked
him.
If
I'd
get
my
money
back,
they
said
no,
not
really,
but
we'll
make
a
profit.
I
certainly
want
to
state
that
I
want
to
give
mr.
James
the
truth
and
sent
us
some
of
these
things
that
he's
been
talking
about,
because
I've
never
been
approached.
My
attorney
was
approached
about
possibly
selling
never
directly.
To
me
is
there
any
way.
I
can
give
you
everybody
a
copy
of
this
here.
Yes,.
W
V
Is
a
picture
from
2000
showing
the
house
the
lot
that
I
took
care
of
for
30
years
and
cut
the
yard
and
if
I
may
say
something
mr.
James
has
cut
the
yard
only
twice
in
the
last
year
and
a
half
and
he
had
not
shoveled
the
snow
for
the
last
month
and
a
half
and
less
that
little
bit
he
did
this
week
was
evident.
V
J
V
V
J
V
But
if
you
look
at
that
front,
porch,
that's
grandfather,
non-conforming,
it's
not
heated!
Mr.
James
proposes
that
not
only
get
project
this
well
in
front
of
what
zoning
laws
allow,
but
please
take
a
look
at
the
real
picture
here
that
I'm
going
to
present
to
you
how
much
that
goes
in
back.
In
my
yard,
the
encroachment
and
there's
over
40%
of
my
back
yard.
You.
V
A
V
Also
I
want
to
let
people
know
that
interior
wall
to
interior
wall
to
my
house,
and
you
can
see
how
small
my
house
is
prior
to
his
a
knowledge,
it's
only
seven
hundred
and
forty
square
feet.
So
when
you
take
that
and
a
two
hundred
square
foot
garage
and
you
divide
nine
hundred
square
feet
and
a
thirty
three
hundred
and
I'm
well
under
thirty
percent.
V
So
when
he's
saying
that
my
house
is
taking
up
the
thirty
eight
percent
his
and
say
it
couldn't
be
further
from
the
truth,
the
thing
that
disturbs
me,
the
most
is
this
house,
my
house,
from
inside
wall
to
inside
walls,
eighteen
for
eighteen
feet,
four
inches
wide:
that's
from
the
interior
livingroom
wall
to
the
interior
living
room
law.
What
he
proposes
his
house
is
only
sixteen
feet
wide
and
he
admitted
that
it's
going
to
be
fourteen
feet,
interior,
wise!
That's
going
to
be
sixteen
foot
wide
thirty
feet
tall
forty
feet,
long
down
the
block
it!
V
It's
just
beyond
belief
that
anybody
would
even
attempt
to
try
and
build
a
house
on
that
over
the
years,
there's
been
numerous
times
that
people
of
trying
to
build
their.
No
one's
ever
been
allowed
to
do
it.
My
home
was
grandfathered
non-conforming.
So
as
my
neighbors
to
the
south
of
me,
they're,
both
on
twenty
five
foot
Lots,
the
neighbors
to
the
south
of
these
house,
was
built
in
1940
and
they
were
not
allowed
to
build
a
garage.
V
As
for
my
grandmother,
told
me
because
of
the
problems
they
would
have
in
excavating
too
close
to
my
house
and
next
to
the
house
to
the
south
of
them.
So
they
have
a
beautiful
home
which
sold
for
a
lot
of
money
gorgeous
neighborhood.
But
now
this
gentleman,
who
really
didn't
have
any
facts
ready
for
you
and
has
deceptively
showed
wrong
stuff
on
the
screen
is
a
little
bit
disconcerting
to
me.
One
final
thing:
I'm
going
to
say
here:
this
is
a
survey
and
not
a
survey.
V
This
is
a
permit
approved
by
the
city
of
Evanston
exactly
20
years
ago
for
the
front
porch
that
I
built
I
had
the
inspector
you
can
see
the
approvals
I
had
the
inspector
give
me
such
grief
in
1998,
4,
4,
inches
4
inches
to
the
south
of
me.
I
wanted
to
pour
the
piers
and
build
the
steps
when
he
came
out
to
do
the
inspection
he
demanded.
I
moved
it
over.
V
I
didn't
apply
for
a
variance,
but
this
is
just
shocking
to
me
that
when
I'm
having
a
permit
and
I
went
to
apply
for
it,
that
inspector
would
give
me
total
grief
on
4
inches
when
we're
asking
for
a
person
here
to
build
an
entire
home
and
if
I
may
something
it
may
say,
one
thing
you
guys
and
I'm
gonna
stop
all
the
homes
that
he
showed
here
were
grandfathered
non-conforming,
none
of
its
new
construction.
This
is
unheard
of.
V
If
you
follow
the
rules
of
the
zoning
regulations
and
I
have
built
personally
five
homes
myself
from
ground
up,
not
through
death
through
other
builders.
That
LAT
means
that
house
could
only
be
5
feet
wide
15
feet
from
the
sidewalk
5
feet
from
mine.
That
means
that's
a
5
foot
strip
that
he's
asking
for
variances
that
I
have
never
heard
of
I
didn't
bring
my
attorney
tonight.
He
said.
If
this
ever
got
extended,
he
will
be
glad
to
be
there
he's
Carl
udel
in
Northfield
Illinois.
V
He
sat
on
the
Northbridge
zoning
in
the
Northfield
zoning
for
over
20
years,
I've
known
him
for
60
years
and
he
would
really
enjoy
having
a
talk
with
everybody
here.
That's
all
I
have
to
say
take
in
mind
that
my
family's
been
here
for
91
years
at
that
location
and
my
myself
I
lived
there
31
years
to
make
a
long
story,
short
I'm,
the
outdoor
power
equipment
manager
at
a
huge
local
building,
store
up
in
Northbrook
Illinois
and
one
of
the
things
I
tell
everybody
all
the
time
is.
V
Does
anybody
know
what
the
difference
is
between
a
house
and
a
home?
And
everybody
comes
up
with
a
bunch
of
different
answers
and
they
go
well?
You
know
it's
house,
I
say
no.
The
difference
is
at
the
end
of
the
long
day
of
work.
You
don't
say:
I'm
going
house,
you
say:
I'm
going
home,
I
live
in
a
home,
my
neighbors
all
live
in
a
home
this
man's
trying
to
build
a
house.
Thank
you.
F
V
V
V
Yes,
yes,
but
yes,
I
been
offered
it
from
the
wellses
only
at
the
end,
because
they
were
going
in
a
tax
foreclosure
and
that's
how
the
person
the
first
owner
bought
it.
He
came
and
literally
threatened
me
at
night
to
say
he
needed
to
talk
to
me
at
nine
o'clock
at
night.
No,
and
he
didn't
have
a
chance
to
bill.
He
sold
it
to
the
next
couple,
who
also
had
such
opposition.
They
backed
out
of
any
they
backed
out
three
hours
before
this
meeting.
Then
mr.
James
purchased
the
property
knowing
full.
V
Well,
the
hardships
he's
going
to
have
trying
to
even
build
anything
on
it
because
there
isn't
a
neighbor
surrounding
that
property.
That
I
know
of
I
will
not
speak
for
them.
That's
in
that
wants
to
have
anything
built
on
that
lot.
I
would
be
in
position
to
it,
but
if
you
think
I'm
gonna
get
a
what
he
he's
gonna
be
asking
for.
It's
not
going
to
happen,
so
anybody
else.
A
X
Name
is
my
name:
is
David
Louis
II,
2644
Lincoln
would
drive.
It's
been
a
very
interesting
evening,
just
listening
to
everything
what's
going
on
and
we
have
a
bigger
problem
just
beside
this
lot,
as
the
gentleman
has
showed
us.
The
way
our
neighborhood
was
made
over
years
ago
was
very
bizarre
at
best.
We
are
living
that
nightmare
now,
because
we
have
a
lot
of
homes.
I've
been
here
20
years
and
in
my
neighborhood
homes
are
either
coming
down
and
being
rebuilt
or
they're
renovating.
X
It's
spending
a
tremendous
amount
of
money,
because
we
want
to
stay
here
because
it's
a
great
town,
but
these
little
houses
on
these
small
blocks
are
an
issue,
and
it's
just
not
going
to
be
this
one.
It's
going
to
be
the
ones
that
he
pointed
around.
I
have
two
or
three
on
my
block,
and
maybe
this
is
something
new
folks.
At
a
later
time
can
start
talking
about
zoning
changes
of
saying.
If
you're
gonna
build
a
house
here,
it's
got
to
be
the
size
of
what
it
is
now
this
gentleman
over
here.
X
His
house
is
a
small
house
and
the
house
next
to
it
is
a
small
house.
Then
the
rest
of
the
house
is
a
two-story
brick,
so
think
about
that
house
and
to
me
this
house
looks
like
a
row
house:
if
those
two
houses
next
door
to
this
side
of
the
houses
were
taken
down,
they
would
virtually
look
like
row
row
row
and
that's
what
I'm
afraid
is
going
to
happen,
and
we
don't
have
this
in
our
neighborhood
and
I.
Don't
want
apartments
sales,
you
know
houses
and
I
appreciate
what
you've
done
with
the
design.
X
I
think
the
design
isn't
bad,
but
the
regardless
is
it's
18
feet
20
feet
wide.
It
looks
like
a
roll
house,
so
all
I
encourage
you.
Folks
is
whatever
the
decision
is
with
this.
We
have
to
think
about.
What's
going
to
happen
next
week
next
year.
One
of
these
other
folks
that
have
lived
there
a
long
time
want
to
sell
their
lives.
Now
that
I
might
value.
My
home
is
worth
a
lot
of
money.
I
have
a
home
across
the
street
that
went
up.
X
X
It
might
not
affect
him,
but
it's
going
to
affect
me
because,
right
now
we
don't
have
the
type
of
house
that
I
have
and
it's
difficult
to
try
to
figure
out
exactly
how
much
it's
worth
and
they
need
more
two-story
houses
that
look
like
mine,
but
when
you
have
something
like
like
that,
people
aren't
going
to
know
it.
They're
just
going
to
throw
it
in
realtors
are
good
to
grab
five
or
six
houses
and
said
well.
This
is
the
average,
so
all
I
say
is
in
the
future.
Please
we
need
to
look
at
this.
I
Y
Kirkpatrick
2904
Hartzell
Street
I'm
the
house
right
off
the
alley,
and
while
there
were
a
number
of
things
that
the
applicant
said
that
are
concerning
particularly
the
fact
that
there
was
not
neighborhood
or
that
he
didn't
feel
like
it
was
important
or
even
relevant
to
have
neighborhood
impact.
I
think
it
is
very
important
and
relevant
and
I
think
he
was
quite
clear
about
that.
Y
The
other
thing
I
would
say
is
that
one
thing
this
has
done
is
galvanized
our
neighborhood
and
to
stand
together
for
our
neighbor,
particularly
mr.
orsic,
but,
more
importantly,
to
make
sure
that
there's
reasonable
development,
and
so
it's
upon
reasonable
development
that
I'd
like
to
talk
about
quickly
as
the
code
states.
The
variation
should
not
be
based
exclusively
upon
the
desire
to
extract
additional
income
from
the
property,
the
applicant
States
and
his
applicant
application.
Y
You
asked
a
question
about
the
cost
of
his
house,
so
you
know
in
our
in
our
meeting
he
told
us
he
hoped
to
sell
for
200
$200
a
square
foot,
and
so,
if
you
build
it
for
150,
you
know
he
was
trying
to
make
about
150
thousand
dollars
on
it.
Okay,
we
know
from
public
records
that
the
prior
owner
paid
forty
five
thousand
dollars
for
this
parcel
and
for
some
reason,
18
months
afterwards,
he
paid
75
thousand
again
public
record.
Y
So
the
question
is:
if
he
doesn't
intend
to
generate
income
from
this
property
from
these
variances,
why
would
he
spend
thirty
thousand
dollars
more
than
market
value,
for
the
property?
I
would
contend
his
exclusive
purpose
of
building.
This
is
to
extract
additional
income.
He
was
not
forced
to
buy
this
property.
He
did
not
own
this
property.
He
bought
it
exclusively
to
generated
income
for
himself,
and
my
understanding
of
the
variance
is
that
major
variances
should
not
be
granted.
In
that
case,.
A
There
is
obviously
we
we
grant
variances
to
developers
all
the
time,
it's
not
specifically
against
the
rules
for
a
very
progressing,
a
variance
to
allow
someone
to
make
a
profit.
However,
when
there
is
a
profit
that
is
being
made,
there
must
be
a
public
benefit,
and
so
the
burden
falls
on
him
to
prove
what
a
public
benefit
is
and.
Y
N
Your
name
and
address
please
Coleen
Barkley
I'm
at
26
22
Reese,
which
is
two
Lots
down
from
the
petitioner
and
next
to
Deadhorse
Dean.
So
this
isn't
easy
for
all
of
us
and
it's
not
easy
for
the
petitioner
for
the
board
and
us
and
I
just
want
to
make
my
points
more
clarity
to
some
of
the
things.
I
heard
wrong
on
behalf
of
the
petitioners
presentation,
as
written
in
the
Planning
and
Zoning
mission
statement,
the
daily
focus
of
the
division
is
improving
and
protecting
the
quality
of
life
of
evidence
and
residents.
N
My
concerns
with
this
petition
relate
to
the
safety
which
we've
had
much
discussion
about
the
garage
he
had.
Two
slides
up
that
had
two
property
addresses:
3003
Park
Place
and
2910
Park
Place,
3003,
Park,
Place
I've,
measured
it
last
night
because
I'm
as
well
a
rush
registered
Landscape
Architect.
So
I
love
my
measuring
tape.
That
garage
is
set
back
10
feet
from
the
sidewalk
29:10
per
place.
N
So
I,
just
I
can't
understand
how
a
two-car
garage
can
be
allowed
on
the
alley
that
I
exit
daily
without
being
encroaching
the
the
sidewalk
to
see
to
pass
into
the
street.
Secondly,
stormwater
management,
which
was
touched
on
in
questions.
We
all
know,
we've
experiences
the
increase
in
100-year
floods
and
I
just
can't
understand
how
allowing
the
amount
of
more
impervious
surface
based
on
the
proposal
to
be
approved.
Our
yard
we've
lived
there
18
months
now
and
it
turns
into
a
pond
every
hard
rain
fall.
N
It's
a
pond
and
by
allowing
more
impervious
service
on
the
small
green
space
would
push
more
water.
He
says
that
the
downspouts
would
be
directed
to
the
alley
under
the
street.
Well,
I
know
from
practicing
Landscape
Architecture
in
Evanston.
It's
not
allowed
to
connect
to
a
street,
and
it's
also
code
reference
10304
0.71.
It
requires
10
feet,
distance
for
them
to
splash
or
to
be
popped
up
on
landscape.
N
A
my
concern
with
this
is
the
multiple
freeze-thaw
cycles
that
we
have
in
our
lovely
Chicago
and
whether
that
should
be
a
safety
on
the
public
walk
because
it
won't
get
to
the
street
without
crossing
the
sidewalk.
Also,
the
alley
right
now
as
it
stands
without
building
on
this
lot
is
flooded
as
well
in
heavy
rainfalls
with
the
two
storms
that
are
there
from
just
the
Overland
flow.
N
The
third
point
that
I'd
like
to
make
is,
as
part
of
the
zoning
code
681
5.
It
says
it
must
comply
with
chapter
16
landscaping
and
screening
and
I
appreciate
the
plan
that
the
petitioner
presented,
but
part
of
the
code
states
that
it's
intended
to
help
preserve,
protect
the
appearance,
character
and
general
health
well-being
of
the
safety
of
the
city
by
ensuring
the
compatibility
of
different
land
uses.
There
are
actually
two
heritage
trees,
one
on
my
neighbor's
property,
dick
that
actually
would
be
the
critical
root
zone
would
be
impacted
by
the
proposed
garage.
N
N
This
to
me
doesn't
comply
with
with
the
statement
that
is
outlined
in
Chapter
17.
Secondly,
in
that
landscape
plan,
I
have
a
issue
with
some
of
the
plants.
I
think
it's
lovely
that
he's
soft
me
of
appearance,
but
there
are
plants,
particularly
along
the
shared
proper
way
to
the
South
that
are
invasive
species.
N
I
think
those
are
all
my
points,
I
hoped
I.
Did
it
fast
enough,
but
the
most
important
thing
is
my
husband:
I
bought
this
home,
a
two-bedroom
house
and
yes,
where
I
guess
maybe
are
the
minority,
but
it
didn't
feel
that
day
we
were
in
a
competitive
bid
situation
for
a
two-bedroom
house.
There
is
a
need
for
two-bedroom
houses
and
Evanston.
Not
everybody
can
hop
into
a
3
or
4-bedroom
house
and
there's
a
need
for
starter
homes
in
the
area,
and
we
found
this
one.
N
E
I'm
short,
so
I'll
bring
this
down.
My
name
is
Alison
Stark
I
live
at
26
20,
with
my
husband
and
two
small
children.
I'm
located
three
doors
down
from
this
property
I
have
to
agree
with
the
issues
with
the
commercial
ally.
So
what
I
was
one
of
the
people
who
mentioned
that
we
have
a
lot
of
commercial
traffic
from
Sky
Nails
employees
from
Evanston
glass,
not
so
much
from
Hartigan's
Brian's
garage,
sometimes,
and
when
Rosa's
was
there,
we
would
have
a
lot
of
people
use
our
alley.
E
We'd
also
have
a
lot
of
pedestrian
walking
to
and
from
work
at
those
locations.
So
I
often
see
clusters
of
the
women,
especially
from
Sky
nails,
walking
up
and
down
our
alleyway
I'm
very
concerned
about
when
I
exit,
my
alleyway
to
take
my
son
to
alert
and
my
other
child
to
preschool
of
not
being
able
to
see
the
sidewalk.
There
are
many
times
when
I'm
coming
this
way
and
sky
nails.
E
Our
employees
are
crossing
me
because
we
kind
of
I
leave
when
they
kind
of
come
and
then
you've
got
kids
walking
and
all
of
those
things.
So
that's
a
significant
concern
for
me
and
I
feel
like
it
must
be
taken
into
account.
A
two
guard
garage
just
I,
just
don't
see
how
it
can
be
placed
on
the
property
safely
and
the
second
is
in
regards
to
the
drainage.
I
won't
go
into
that
I.
E
Think
Colleen
has
done
a
wonderful
job
to
talk
about
that
and
finally,
I
think
this
is
my
most
pressing
point
is
that
the
this
proposal
does
not
represent
the
minimum
extent
of
variances
that
are
needed
to
build
this
home
this
you
know
he
talks
about
wanting
to
market
to
families.
On
the
one
hand,
there's
this
argument
that
he
shouldn't
be.
You
know
the
standards
of
75
years
ago
should
not
be
used
for
him.
Now
he
should
be
able
to
build
up
to
the
sidewalk.
E
He
should
be
able
to
have
all
of
these
variances,
because
this
was
appropriate
75
years
ago,
but
he
should
build
a
house,
that's
appropriate
for
now,
so
he
wants
the
best
of
both
worlds
and
I.
Think
that's
what's
the
hardest
for
me
to
understand
and
agree
with.
This
is
a
four-bedroom
house.
It
has
three
bathrooms.
It
has
a
walk-in
master
closet,
it
has
a
walk-in
laundry
room,
I,
don't
have
a
walk-in
laundry
room,
it
has
a
dining
room,
it
has
a
rec
room.
This
is
a
huge
house
and
I
think
you
know.
E
I
looked
also
at
the
17
property
properties
surrounding
this
area
and
most
of
the
homes
are
between
1500
and
1800
square
feet.
This
is
about
a
2,800
square
foot
home
at
least
and
I'm.
Obviously,
not
an
expert
and
I
might
not
have
you
know
calculated
that
correctly,
but
this
is
a
huge
home.
There
are
only
two
other
homes
in
the
17
that
are
surrounding
that
are
above
2,000
square
feet
and
their
Lots
are
6000
square
feet,
so
the
two
homes
immediately
Jason
are,
as
mentioned
760
to
1547
and
mine
that
1,700
square
feet.
E
There
is
a
market
for
homes
that
are
reasonably
sized,
I,
don't
understand
the
the
number
of
variances.
The
extent
of
the
variances
that
he
is
requesting
is
hard
for
me
to
understand,
because
there
is
a
market
for
smaller
homes.
I
asked
the
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
to
design
to
deny
mr.
James
current
application
for
zoning
relief.
I
am
not
opposed
to
a
home
on
this
property.
E
F
That
last
point,
because
it
it
was
suggested
earlier
that
no
proposal
would
be
supported
by
the
neighbors.
So
I
appreciate
you
articulating
that
last
point
that
the
neighborhood
is
not
necessarily
just
looking
for
this
lot
to
remain
green
space,
but
it
is
in
perhaps
looking
for
a
smaller
size
house
is
what
I'm
understanding
from
you
is
that
correct?
That
is
correct
and
I.
W
I'm
sorry,
you've
been
here,
I'm
mark
Newman,
I
live
at
28,
33
Hartzell
I
live
across
the
street,
I've
been
there
for
35
years.
I'm
gonna
make
this
real
brief.
The
real
key
here
is
fit
and
I'm
going
to
suggest
to
you
that
this
hasn't
been
built
on,
because
it's
not
really
economically
feasible
to
build
a
house
to
make
the
profit
that's
being
talked
about
on
this
small
lot.
That's
why
nobody's
done
it!
That's
why
it's
the
only
one!
That's
why
even
mr.
W
James
says
the
property
is
a
lot
that
is
legal
and
non-conforming
due
to
a
lot.
Arian
lot
with
these
characteristics
preclude
the
use
of
the
lot
for
a
residential
dwelling,
which
is
why
he
wants
to
get
all
these
variances
and
I.
Think
that's
the
problem,
but
many
of
us
have
talked
about
exactly
what
you're
looking
at
and
that's
a
our
house,
a
house
that
would
be
a
starter
house
for
people,
which
is
what
we
used
to
him
in
the
area
before
it
got
so
I,
don't
know
it's
so
expensive.
I
couldn't
afford
to
live
here.
W
I
think
that's
a
very
important
part.
I
think
the
hardships
he's
talking
about
you
have
nothing
to
do
with
a
lot
if
he
has
to
do
with
his
building.
I
think
that's
what's
important.
I
would
absolutely
love
'el
and
a
two-bedroom
house,
something
like
that.
We've
talked
about
how
to
use
this.
We
don't
want
it
to
be
a
vacant
lot.
What
we
prefer
is
to
use
it
some
some
well
we've
talked
about
a
tight
lot.
We've
talked
about
a
community
garden
and
I
think
if
there
was
a
reasonable
proposal
that
you
wouldn't
see
everybody
here.
I
T
Good
evening
my
name
is
John:
Walsh
I
live
at
27,
36
Hartzell,
which
is
one
block
to
the
east
of
the
corner
of
recent
Hartzell.
Have
my
family
and
I've
lived
in
that
house?
For
thirty
years,
we've
lived
in
the
Central
Street
neighborhood
for
42
years
I'm,
a
founding
member
of
the
Central
Street
neighbors
Association,
and
the
immediate
past-president,
but
I
don't
come
tonight
on
behalf
of
the
Central
Street
neighbors
Association,
but
as
a
resident
of
the
neighborhood
who
has
lived
a
block
to
the
east.
T
Mr.
James
said
that
he
has
met
people
walking
their
dogs
past
the
light
who
said
it
sure
would
be
nice.
If
there's
a
house
here
and
I
can
tell
you
in
the
hundreds
of
times
that
I've
walked
past,
that
corner
in
30
years
to
go
to
Hartigan's
or
to
go
to
Harold
hardware
store
or
to
Mike's
a
shoe
repair
or
any
of
the
other
stores
on
Central
Street
I've
thought
to
myself.
T
Issue
would
be
nice
to
have
a
house
here,
but
then
we
have
the
issue
of
density
and
height
and
cheek-by-jowl
proximity
to
the
property
lines
that
mr.
James
suggests.
He
has
obviously
worked
hard
with
his
proposal
and
I
commend
him
for
his
hard
work,
but
this
is
not
the
proposal
that
should
be
on
that
last
I
joined
in
the
comments
of
the
other
neighbors
to
that
effect
and
I
will
end
my
comments
with
that.
I
think
that
something
better
can
be
done
for
the
LAT
than
what
is
being
proposed
here
tonight.
Thank
you
very
much.
T
I
Z
I'm
Kathy,
Miller
and
I
live
at
28
31
Hartzell
directly
across
the
street
from
the
subject.
Property
I
have
also
one
of
the
organizers
of
the
neighborhood,
so
I
feel,
like
we've
been
mischaracterized
in
a
number
of
ways,
but
I
want
you
to
know
neighbors
who
could
not
be
here
this
evening
or
could
not
stay
that
you
are
being
heard.
We
had
28
people
who
had
originally
signed
petitions
witnessed
and
for
the
previous
short-term
owner
of
the
property,
and
she
went
through
three
hours
beforehand.
Z
You
rescheduled
last
month.
People
are
still
committed
to
having
the
right
thing
on
this
property.
Now,
one
of
the
reasons
and
I've
been
a
builder
also
in
Wilmette
and
Winnetka.
So
I
have
some
of
the
experience
with
this
too
and
when
I
met
the
Builder.
The
first
thing
I
said
was
this
is
unfeasible
feasible
and
well.
He
didn't
like
hearing
that
he
made
a
bad
business
decision
and
it's
not
our
fault,
but
organized
neighbors.
Z
Z
I
still
have
concerns
about
the
building.
You
have
a
building
in
the
pictures
that,
on
the
south
side,
you
know
schnitz
back,
but
you
still
have
window
Wells
and
they
go
into
the
other
towards
the
other
person's
property.
With
a
very
old
basement.
The
house
that
I
would
be
across
from
is
now
going
to
be
built
up
three
feet
from
the
sidewalk
one.
With
a
with
the
step.
Z
That's
going
to
be
a
fifty
eight
foot,
long
wall
for
us
and
one
of
our
concerns
and
I'm
so
glad
Colleen
addressed.
It
are
the
trees,
but
we
cannot
afford
to
lose
any
more
trees
in
North
Evanston.
So
I
want
to
say
that
our
neighbors
are
organized.
Our
alderman
actually
had
walked
this
property
in
2015.
Z
Looked
at
it
and,
as
Tom
said,
he
took
a
pass.
He
knew
that
it
was
not
a
place
he
would
build
on,
and
so,
if
somebody
else
is
making
the
stake
doesn't
mean
that
we
have
to
pay
for
that.
So
thank
you
for
letting
the
neighbors
be
heard,
because
we
stuck
it
out
through
all
these
other
tests
and
we
still
have
a
few
more
people
that
need
to
get
to
have
their
their
participation
in
city
government.
Z
I
AA
My
name
is
Joseph
Paradis
I
reside
at
2,
9:07
Hartzell,
Street
kitty-corner
from
the
subject
property.
The
purpose
and
objective
of
the
zoning
process
is
to
achieve
the
right
balance
between
the
interests
of
property
owner
the
city
of
Evanston
and
the
neighbors.
We
see
this
in
the
process
that
the
city
follows,
including
the
notification
of
neighbors
and
this
public
hearing,
but
also
in
the
rules
set
forth
in
section
3
6
3
8
on
standards
used
to
decide
on
requests
for
a
major
variance.
In
this
case.
The
interests
of
the
applicant
are
very
clear.
AA
They
are
exclusively
to
maximize
the
profit
on
this
development.
The
applicant
is
not
a
homeowner
wanting
to
build
a
larger
kitchen
or
replace
a
garage
with
a
larger
one.
The
application
is
from
a
speculator
who
purchased
a
property
with
well-known
restrictions
who
wants
to
make
money
through
an
excessive
series
of
major
variances.
The
applicant
was
not
forced
to
buy
this
property.
He
made
a
bet
that
he
could
violate
enough
rules
to
make
a
good
profit.
AA
This
is
in
direct
conflict
with
rule
6,
3
8
12
E
item
5,
as
the
applicant
has
shown
no
public
benefit
under
Section
6
3,
6
3
as
required.
This
is
a
neighborhood
that
is
not
objected
to
any
and
all
requests
for
variances
and
has
been
supportive
of
both
minor
and
major
variances
in
the
past,
where
those
requests
were
appropriate.
AA
This
application
does
not
meet
the
standard
of
rule
6,
3,
8,
12
E
item
1,
as
the
proposed
building
is
significantly
larger
than
any
other
house
on
that
block
with
a
similar
lot
size
and
even
the
applicant
fails
to
cite
any
evidence
that
will
not
negatively
impact
the
property
values
of
the
neighbors.
The
zoning
rules
and
the
variance
process
can
be
summarized
as
a
focus
on
ensuring
that
building
within
the
city
is
both
safe
and
suitable.
AA
The
zoning
rules
for
setbacks
from
both
the
street
and
the
adjoining
property
are
aimed
to
ensure
safety
and
the
rules
for
lot
coverage
and
impervious
coverage
are
aimed
at
ensuring
suitability
of
the
proposed
development.
Any
application
that
shows
such
blatant
disregard
for
a
significant
number
of
the
zoning
rules
is
not
quote
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
end
of
quote.
AA
This
application
is
in
direct
conflict
with
rule
6,
3
8,
12
e
items,
2
&
7,
the
requested
variations
are
by
no
means
quote
limited
to
the
minimum
change
necessary
end
of
quote,
since
a
much
smaller
house
would
clearly
be
possible
to
build
on
this
lot.
For
the
zoning
hearing,
guidelines
quote
the
applicant
bears
the
burden
to
demonstrate
that
the
proposal
meets
each
of
the
standards
applicable
end
of
quote
in
this
case,
as
I
have
detailed
and,
as
others
have
detail,
the
applicant
has
not
demonstrated
that
the
request
meets
the
standards
of
zoning
code.
AA
I
AB
AC
A
AC
AC
A
AD
Previously
we
lived
at
26
22
reefs
everything
that
that
dick
said
about
the
property
being
sought
after
by
mr.
Welsh
by
the
previous
owner
and
by
mr.
James,
is
true
that
the
only
way
that
that
property
is
going
to
be
developed
is
if
they
control
26:24
mr.
Hurston's
residence.
To
my
knowledge,
dick,
isn't
isn't
about
to
sell
his
house
right
now,
but
that's
that's
the
only
way.
It's
gonna
work,
I.
AD
Think
I'd
like
to
also
underline
what
somebody
said
before
that
that
every
example
that
mr.
James
used
basically
was
in
comparison
to
preexisting
non-conforming
problems,
and
the
last
thing
I'd
like
to
say
is
something
I
mentioned
in
a
letter.
It's
it
just
seems
to
me
that
that
mr.
James
isn't
really
asking
for
variances
the
scope
of
what
he's
asking
for
is
so
large
that
it's
really
not
a
variance.
AD
He
would
like
to
rewrite
city
code,
and
tonight
he
also
stated
that
not
only
that
the
code
needs
to
be
changed,
but
the
area
needs
to
be
changed
from
r1
to
r2.
You
know
all
these
things,
maybe
they
should
happen.
Maybe
they
shouldn't.
Maybe
the
the
variances
should
be
loosened
up
a
little
bit,
but
not
to
the
extent
that
he
wants
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that
a
meeting
like
this
is
a
proper
place
to
make
those
changes
or
even
to
discuss
them.
I
M
I
R
Good
evening
very
late
evening,
my
name
is
Enrico.
D
Clark
I
came
with
him
as
longtime
residents
of
the
neighborhood
I
have
to
say.
Sorry,
what's
your
address?
Please
pardon
me.
Sorry,
what's
your
address,
please
28:15
Hartzell!
Oh
thank
you.
It's
longtime
residents
of
the
neighborhood
we've
seen
about
everything
but
I
have
to
say.
I
have
never
seen
a
group
of
people
like
this
one
come
together
and
I've
never
felt
the
sense
of
a
neighborhood
that
I
do
tonight
and
have
recently
and
of
course,
I
agree
with
the
vast
majority
of
what's
been
said.
A
Anyone
else
last
call
last
call
okay,
so
I'm
gonna
take
a
minute
to
address
the
to
talk
to
my
my
fellow
board
members
and
it's
11
o'clock,
and
we
certainly
allow
the
applicant
a
chance
to
respond
to
all
of
the
comments
that
have
been
made
and
to
answer
all
those
sorts
of
things.
So
my
guess
is
this
is
gonna
continue
for
a
while?
F
F
F
And
then
we
would
deliberate
on
that
future
date
yeah
and
then,
if
other
board
members
are
present
on
that
future
date
that
weren't
present
here,
then
it
would
be
their
role
to
read
the
record,
read
all
testimony
and
then
they
would
be
voting
as
well.
Yes,
correct,
that's
correct
I
would
support
that.
So.
C
A
I
A
B
A
A
G
J
J
A
C
C
A
So
because
so
what
would
happen
at
that
meeting
is?
We
would
allow
additional
neighborhood
comment
if
they
wanted,
then
we
would
allow
the
developer
the
applicant
sorry
to
rebut
come
up
with
other
evidence,
all
that
sort
of
stuff
answer
your
questions,
all
that
good
stuff.
We
would
potentially
have
questions
for
the
applicant
as
well,
and
then
at
that
point
we
would
close
the
record
and
then
we
would
deliberate
and
make
a
decision.