Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

542010 City of Evanston Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA 10ZMJV-0015 by gdf57j


     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1                                                    CITY OF EVANSTON

2                                           ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

3    RE:         ZBA 10ZMJV-0015                         2010 Orrington Avenue

4    An application by Andrew J. Heindel on behalf of Bishop

5    & Trustees of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the

6    Diocese of Chicago, to gain zoning relief at 2010

7    Orrington Avenue in order to execute renovations of the

8    Canterbury House.

9                Transcribed Report of the Zoning Board of Appeals

10   of the City of Evanston, held May 4, 2010 at the

11   Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council

12   Chambers, Evanston, Illinois, at 7:30 p.m. and presided

13   over by Robert Creamer, Chairman.


15               R. CREAMER, Chairman

16               M. BERNS

17               L. SUMMERS

18               M. ROGERS

19               S. GINGOLD

20               B. MCLENNAN

21   STAFF:

22               B. DUNKLEY, Zoning Administrator

23               D. ARGUMEDO, Zoning Planner


            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1                            CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            I think we are ready.                                  Is

2    the audio/visual equipment ready?                                                   All right, then we

3    will begin.                    Good evening, everyone.                                     This is a Public

4    Hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of

5    Evanston.                 The Zoning Ordinance empowers this Board to

6    hear references from the City Council, applications for

7    variances and special uses, and appeals from decisions

8    of the Zoning Administrator.                                            Depending on the type of

9    matter, we will either make a final determination or

10   send a recommendation to the City Council.

11                                       Present tonight are Board Members, Mary

12   Beth Berns, Scott Gingold, Beth McLennan, Matthew

13   Rodgers and Lori Sutton.                                      I'm Robert Creamer -- excuse

14   me, Lori Summers.                            I beg your pardon.                              Lori Summers.

15   I'm Robert Creamer, the current Chair.                                                          We therefore

16   have a quorum.                        Also present tonight from the City Staff

17   are Bill Dunkley, the Zoning Administrator, and Dominick

18   Argumedo, the Zoning Planner.

19                                       We have one matter on the agenda tonight,

20   which is the 2010 Orrington matter.                                                     I see a group of

21   people in the audience, who appear by their dress, to be

22   affiliated with the 2010 Orrington Group, is that

23   correct?                Okay.           Is anyone else here to speak to us with

24   regard to 2010 Orrington?                                       I see.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1                                        Very well.                  With that, then, we will ask

2    to remind everyone that our procedure requires that

3    everyone testify under oath.                                            At the conclusion of the

4    presentation of the applicant and any comments from

5    members of the public or questions by property owners

6    within 100, or excuse me, within 500 feet of the subject

7    property, we will then close our record and then begin

8    our deliberations.

9                                        So when you testify, I believe now in our

10   new regime, you're supposed to go to the podium on my

11   right, your left, is that correct?

12                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Either, but if we stick with

13   that one, we'll be safe.

14                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            And we ask you to state

15   your name and address for the record, and also print

16   your name and address on the pad of paper that's

17   supposed to be there for that purpose.                                                          So with that,

18   I'll ask Dominick to call the first matter.

19                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       Thank you.                  Thank you, sir.

20   Our first case is 10ZMJV-0015, 2010 Orrington Avenue, an

21   application by Andrew Heindel on behalf of Bishop &

22   Trustees of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the

23   Diocese of Chicago, to gain zoning relief at 2010

24   Orrington Avenue in order to execute renovations of the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1    Canterbury House.                            The renovations include the addition

2    of a rear roofed porch and wheelchair access ramp and

3    terrace in the rear yard, and replacement of the front

4    stair and existing detached garage.                                                     the proposed rear

5    porch would have a side yard setback of 7.86 feet where

6    a 15 foot setback is required, and the total renovations

7    would result in an impervious surface of 47.5 percent

8    where a maximum of 45 percent is allowed.

9                                        Included in your case packets were a

10   staff report, a 2010 Orrington Avenue context map, the

11   proposal sheets, the zoning analysis review sheet, and

12   the major variance application, and the original

13   ordinance granting the use at this site, 110O69.                                                                        This

14   is, there was a revision past the notice point that

15   reduced the impervious surface request from 52 percent

16   to 47.5 percent.                           So, that is the reason there is some

17   dichotomy there, and that is due to the fact that the

18   pervious, the reduction for pervious, using pervious

19   materials was not incorporated originally by Staff,

20   which will be explained by the applicant.                                                              Thank you.

21                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Thank you.                   Before we swear

22   people in and ask for the applicant to come up, I have a

23   disclosure to make.                               I am a, I'm not sure the correct

24   ecclesiastical term, but I am a lapsed or former

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1    Episcopalian.                       I don't think that will affect my

2    discernment in this matter, but I did want to let people

3    know in case anyone had an issue.                                                   As I say, I don't

4    think it should be a matter of any significance.

5                            COMMISSIONER RODGERS:                                  Mr. Chairman, I will

6    also point out, I am going to recuse myself from this

7    case, since we do have a quorum of people, whereas I

8    don't think my professional relationship with the Bishop

9    and with the Diocese would cause a conflict.                                                                  I prefer

10   to remove myself so that no one can claim that there

11   would be a conflict.

12                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Thank you.                   Anyone else?

13   We have a quorum of five.                                       Thank you, Mat.                          And, we'll

14   then ask the Court Reporter to swear in the, any

15   witnesses for the applicant at this time.                                                              Anyone who

16   plans to speak or may speak?                                            All right.                  And the member

17   of the public as well.                                   Thank you.

18   Whereupon,


20   called as witnesses herein, having been first duly

21   sworn, testified as follows:

22                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Andrew Heindel, A-n-d-r-e-w, H-

23   e-i-n-d-e-l.

24                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Please speak into the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1    microphone.

2                            MS. HEINDEL:                     Melinda Heindel, M-e-l-i-n-d-a,

3    H-e-i-n-d-e-l.

4                            CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            All right, very good.                                  Mr.

5    Heindel, would you explain the project and tell us why

6    you need the variance and why we should grant it.

7                            MR. HEINDEL:                     My name is Andrew Heindel from

8    the Architecture Firm of Meli & Heindel Architects.                                                                            I'm

9    here with Melinda Meli Heindel from our firm, as well as

10   some representatives of our client, which is Canterbury

11   House at 2010 Orrington Avenue.                                                We have Reverend

12   Michael Kidd, who is the member of the Board of

13   Directors, Reverend Lee Vandermere, who is the Interim

14   Chaplain, and a student member of the Building

15   Committee, Andy Burrell.

16                                       We're here tonight to request two zoning

17   variations for the property at 2010 Orrington Avenue,

18   which is Canterbury House, the Episcopal Church's Campus

19   Ministry Adjunct to Northwestern University.                                                                    One

20   variation is for a relief from the side yard setback

21   requirements to the north property line, and the other

22   is for relief from the impermeable surfaces

23   restrictions.

24                                       Just a little bit of history, Canterbury

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1    House has been a religious counseling center for

2    Northwestern students and faculty at this location since

3    the early 1950's.                            They're housed in a sort of vintage

4    single family residential structure on the property,

5    which is in an R-1 residential district.                                                            In 1969, the

6    City Council granted special use status, as a religious

7    institution to Canterbury House to operate on the

8    property.

9                                        The use today is consistent with what it

10   was at the time that it was granted special use.

11   Canterbury House is staffed by a Chaplain and student

12   administrative assistance, and offers counseling

13   services as well as small group activities for students

14   and others of their community.

15                                       We, as architects, were hired and charged

16   with the task of renovating the building and the grounds

17   to better suit the building and the grounds, the mission

18   of Canterbury House, to help insure that they will be

19   able to operate on this property, at this property for

20   years to come.

21                                       The alterations include work on the

22   inside, include work to improve energy efficiency, to

23   deal with some maintenance issues that had not been

24   addressed over the years.                                       The grounds themselves are in

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1    a state of disrepair, and what we're attempting to do is

2    to bring them all back to a condition that they can

3    operate in and be proud of, and to also better suit the

4    grounds and the building to their, to their needs of

5    their mission.

6                                        The drawings in your packet described how

7    the project has developed, and the needs for the

8    variations grew out of the exterior improvements that

9    we're planning.                         If you refer to the site plan in your

10   packet, it's best summarizes the issues that we're

11   addressing.                    At the front of the property, we're making

12   some minimal improvements and replacing the front stair,

13   and the entry arrangement.                                         But the bulk of the exterior

14   work is in the rear yard, where we're proposing to

15   construct a roofed porch and a wheelchair accessibility

16   ramp down to grade and to rework the parking arrangement

17   on the property to provide a handicapped accessible

18   space, as well as a second space as required by the

19   ordinance, to maintain the two spaces that they have

20   now.

21                                       To achieve this, we're intending to

22   demolish the two-car garage that's in a state of

23   disrepair and replace it with a single car garage, which

24   will allow us to have enough space to accommodate the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

1    needs of the accessible parking space.

2                                        The other component to what we're

3    proposing, is to provide a small terrace for Canterbury

4    House's use for some exterior events and also to just

5    have a better sense of an inside/outside connection

6    between what's going on inside the house and out in the

7    yard.           Due to the extent of the renovations that we're

8    needing to do to the property, the Illinois

9    Accessibility Code requires that we provide an

10   accessible entrance to the structure, as well as

11   accessible parking.                               And so that generated the need to

12   consider providing the ramp.

13                                       Part of the issues that we've had to deal

14   with is that the existing house is located very close to

15   the north property line, and giving its present

16   configuration, we were unable to come up with a porch

17   design that gracefully achieved what we were intending

18   to achieve, that would respect the 15 foot setback that

19   would be required, due to the fact that it's a special

20   use in a residential district.

21                                       The fact that the lot is smallish in

22   size, it just barely meets the requirements of the

23   minimum size, combined with the need to provide the

24   parking that we have to provide, without any alley

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   access, leads us to have some problems with trying to

 2   maintain the impermeable surfaces requirements of the

 3   ordinance.                  And that's why we're here requesting relief.

 4                                       We did build a small model that kind of

 5   depicts what's going on at the back of the house, and

 6   have some photos, if you can submit those as an exhibit,

 7   and you can take a look at it.

 8                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Are these all the same?

 9                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yes.

10                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Okay, great.                      Just give one

11   to everyone.                     I'll give you mine, Dominick, for the

12   record.              So, we'll mark this as Applicant's Exhibit 1.

13                                                               (Whereupon, Applicant's Exhibit

14                                                               No. 1 was marked for

15                                                               identification.)

16                           MR. HEINDEL:                     And we feel that the model

17   demonstrates that what we're proposing is fairly modest

18   in scale, and does not represent a large intrusion in

19   the yards, the yard of new bulk.                                                 We've, we tried

20   various approaches to making the entrance accessible,

21   and this was the solution that we all found to be most

22   acceptable.                    If we were to have to comply with the side

23   yard setback, we would basically only be able to build

24   about half the length of porch that we've shown, which

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   would really not permit us to connect the ramp in a

 2   graceful way to maintain, you know, proper entrance at

 3   the back as well as a safe intersection between the

 4   accessible entrance and the entrance from the stairs.

 5                                       We, as was mentioned, we did work with

 6   Zoning to refine the calculations a to the impermeable

 7   surfaces, and our first zoning analysis had it shown at

 8   about 52 percent, and we've refined the precise areas in

 9   meetings with them, and have gotten allowance for the

10   pervious paving that we're proposing, which gets us down

11   to about a 47.5 percent.                                      We're continuing to refine

12   things as some of the engineering work is done, and

13   seeing that we have little bits here and there that have

14   to be dealt with, and so we're basically at the point

15   where our cutoff to be able to achieve what we're trying

16   to achieve is about at the 47 percent line.

17                                       The other thing I wanted to just bring up

18   is that we are proposing a fully pervious paving system

19   that would really provide somewhere between 40 and 50

20   percent of perviousness in the paving and the ordinance

21   is set up so that you only really get credit for 20

22   percent.                So, if we were to get the full benefit of the

23   percentage of perviousness that we'd have, we would, you

24   know, easily meet the 45 percent requirement.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                                       Our responses to the various zoning

 2   standards are laid out in the applications that you

 3   have, so I know you'll discuss them, so I don't feel a

 4   need to go over all that.                                       We just feel that the need

 5   for the variations is demonstrated as legitimate and the

 6   request that we've made, we feel is reasonable.                                                                      The

 7   side yard intrusion by the porch will be, you know,

 8   barely noticeable, as bulk, giving the location of the

 9   house structure so close to the lot line, and we've, as

10   I said, we've worked at getting the impervious surfaces

11   coverage, the minimum needed to accomplish the

12   renovation successfully.

13                                       So, we just ask that you give due

14   consideration to our request.

15                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Anything else?

16                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Just one other note is that we

17   have presented it to both SPAARC and the Preservation

18   Commission in terms of the variance, and they

19   unanimously recommended for the variations, and the

20   Preservation Commission also has issued us the

21   Certificates of Appropriateness for all the work.                                                                         So,

22   the length of, that has to do more with the length of

23   the porch roof, just how we could get it to sit well on

24   a house in the historic district.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            And they've approved it as

 2   proposed in your Exhibit 1?

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Correct.

 4                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Yes, they have.

 5                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Are there any questions

 6   from the Board?

 7                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  First, just really

 8   quickly, Dominick, were you able to fine the staff

 9   detail calculations at all?

10                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       I do have the sheet that was

11   used by the Zoning Officer in this case.                                                            I'm not sure

12   if it matches up, and I've made copies.                                                           I'm not sure if

13   it's, I'll pass it out.

14                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Okay.            But that would

15   at least exhibit like what areas were given 20 percent

16   credit and things like that.

17                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       Right.             And Staff did, the

18   Zoning Officer did work with Mr. Heindel.                                                              So, as I have

19   a copy for the Zoning Board and Mr. Heindel, he can

20   perhaps talk that through.

21                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Okay, great.                     Mr.

22   Heindel, as you may or may not know, this Board is aware

23   that the general area that you guys are planning to work

24   in, does not have the most favorable perviousness, and

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   does have water issues.                                     So, I'm certain that I'm

 2   probably not the only one on this Board that is going to

 3   have concern overlooking at this issue very deeply.

 4                                       I guess I would start then with, if you

 5   could be more specific about the type of pervious

 6   pavement that you are proposing for the area.

 7                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, what we feel will

 8   accomplish with what we're proposing is that, you know,

 9   we're addressing the extent of paving that's there

10   already and the drainage patterns that exist.                                                                   And with

11   the work that we're doing, we're correcting some of the

12   drainage problems so that the on-site drainage works the

13   way it's supposed to in terms of bringing whatever

14   doesn't permeate down, you know, out to the street where

15   it needs to go.

16                                       We are providing a commercial type of

17   pervious paving that will have an open graded sub-base

18   that provides both perviousness as well as a detention

19   storage, storage of water for, you know, a certain

20   amount of time.                         The soil in the area is actually not

21   that bad for permeability.                                         It's a good mixture of sand

22   as well as some other things.                                             And so, we're fairly

23   confident that there will be a net effect of much less

24   ground water to contend with when, once the project is

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   implemented, than there is now.

 2                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  So the plan is to use

 3   an actual paver block system?

 4                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yes.           It's almost identical to

 5   the paving that was used over on the Clark Street Beach,

 6   new beach house over there.                                          There's an approach street

 7   there that has pervious paving.

 8                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Does it actually have

 9   voids or is it --

10                           MR. HEINDEL:                     The --

11                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I haven't seen that

12   exact installment, so --

13                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We initially intended to try

14   to use some of the paving systems that have block voids

15   of --

16                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Right.

17                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We were unable to really

18   incorporate those, just due to the accessibility

19   requirements of providing a smooth passage from the

20   parking lot to it, so we would have only had small areas

21   of that, and felt that it would just be too cut up to

22   make much sense.                           But it does, it is, what we're using

23   is a commercially acceptable pervious paving system that

24   has pavers that have nibs on the side that create a

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   certain space that's just about a half inch of, that is

 2   fine granite granules filling that, so it does, so water

 3   does percolate down there much, much more, it's much

 4   more absorbent than, you know, a standard pre-cast paver

 5   that you'd see in a residential setting.

 6                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I noticed that the

 7   terrace area that is up next to the building has, either

 8   it has a retaining wall, at least on the one, I guess

 9   that's the south side.                                   Is that whole area lifted, it is

10   at grade at the north side and just retained on the

11   south side?

12                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It's, what's happening is two

13   things.              One, the property, the slope of the property is

14   falling off from the garage to the house, and at the

15   same time, and so along the driveway, you know, if the

16   terrace is a level thing, the step up to it increases as

17   you go further east.                                The other thing that's happening

18   is that we're connecting with the parking surface, which

19   is at an elevated level, versus what grade is at the

20   house line, and gradually ramping up.

21                                       And so what we're trying to achieve is

22   that as the person in the wheelchair approaches the

23   first section of the ramp, they're brought to the

24   terrace level so that they can enjoy whatever activities

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   are going on there, as well as being able to continue up

 2   inside the, at house structure.                                                And so, the net results

 3   of that leaves the terrace level, once you get close to

 4   the house, I think we're at about 14 or 15 inches above

 5   the level of the driveway at the corner of the house.

 6                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  My concern there, just

 7   to kind of explain where I'm going with that, is that

 8   generally speaking, when you raise up an area like that,

 9   and you don't have the solid earth below you, you're

10   going to have to fill that, you're going to have to fill

11   that in with something, and you're probably going to

12   compact it fairly well to have a stable base upon which

13   to build from.                          And that doesn't seen to correlate very

14   well with providing a pervious base for those pavers.                                                                               I

15   wasn't sure if you'd considered doing a deck or

16   something there instead, or something --

17                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, it actually does work

18   pretty well with the pavers, because what we're

19   intending to do is, any of the fill will be a granular

20   fill, which will be a combination of, we're hoping to

21   break up and recycle a lot of the concrete and asphalt

22   that's on the property now, as an initial layer, and

23   that gets compacted and then anything else would be just

24   additional layers of the same pervious stone that will

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   be used as a bedding for, you know, the rest of the

 2   paving.              So, the net result is you'll end up with a

 3   deeper retention depth of stone beneath the paving than

 4   you'd have in the driveway area.

 5                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   How deep is that

 6   substrate?

 7                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It's several layers, but it ends

 8   up being about 16 inches deep.

 9                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Okay.            And is that the

10   same for the back paving pad, or pad as well?

11                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yes, yeah.

12                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I noticed in the

13   summary of the SPAARC Committee discussions, that Mr.

14   Dunkley had noted that the paved area between the

15   terrace and the garage was not to be used for parking.

16   Is that accurate?

17                           MR. HEINDEL:                     That's my understanding, yes.

18                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  So, I guess my question

19   is --

20                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Scott, can you turn on --

21                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I'm sorry.                   I guess my

22   question then is, is all of the pervious paving in

23   between the garage and the terrace necessary?

24                           MR. HEINDEL:                     The space in front of the garage

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   is 24 feet in width, which is the sort of required aisle

 2   width for 90 degree parking in the zoning ordinance, and

 3   so it's needed to access the garage parking space.

 4                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Oh, so the entrance to

 5   the garage is on the interior of the property?

 6                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It's on the short wall, yeah,

 7   the east wall of the garage.

 8                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  And is, can the, if the

 9   garage, the existing garage is being demolished and a

10   new single car garage being built, is it possible to

11   have the entrance to the garage come from the rear of

12   the property?

13                           MR. HEINDEL:                     No, there's no alley access.

14                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Okay.

15                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  What if we, what if the

16   new garage was turned 90 degrees and then you parked

17   next to it?

18                           MR. HEINDEL:                     That would violate the

19   ordinance, because all the surface parking has to be

20   within the rear, it's built at 30 feet or something, of

21   the lot.

22                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     It's within 30 feet of the rear

23   property line.                        That's for open parking spaces.

24                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  What's the current

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   wheelchair accessibility situation for the property?

 2                           MR. HEINDEL:                     There is none.

 3                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  None at all?

 4                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I appreciate the time

 5   that you guys took with the front porch, by taking away

 6   space for the covered entry.                                            So, I appreciate that.

 7   But now, I'm going to ask about some of your other

 8   options that you looked at for making the roof covering

 9   shorter, so that it can comply with the zoning.                                                                      And the

10   reason I ask primarily is because the house seems to be

11   asymmetrical from the back.                                          Is that correct?

12                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yes.

13                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               That the peak is not in

14   the center?

15                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Correct.

16                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, I'm not sure that

17   architecturally speaking, the roof needs to go, the

18   porch roof needs to go all the way across.

19                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We actually feel the opposite.

20   The cost of the eccentricity of the elevation, the

21   simplicity of the porch going across is the simplest and

22   strongest statement.

23                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               And then before you

24   answer those questions, can I just get clarification

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   from Dominick, which is, what are we actually providing

 2   a variance for?                         Is it for the bulkhead?                                     Is it for the

 3   ramp?           Is it for the stairs?                                   Or, is it for the roof?

 4   Or, is it for any combination therein?

 5                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       The side yard setback for non-

 6   residential structures, interior side yard setback, is

 7   15 feet.

 8                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Right, but is the

 9   bulkhead allowed to encroach into that, this new

10   bulkhead that they're providing to the basement, is that

11   allowed to encroach based on zoning or is that part of

12   the variance they're requesting, is for that new

13   bulkhead down to the basement?

14                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       If it's below ground, it's not

15   part of it.

16                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Well, a bulkhead is

17   above.

18                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       Yeah, I'm sorry.                           This is also

19   my first meeting taking minutes, so I'm just flying

20   around.

21                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Sorry.

22                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       Yes, so the bulkhead to that

23   is, you see, on the site plan where it says 7.86?

24                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yes.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       That is what the variance is

 2   being provided to, that porch right there.

 3                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               But you see in that

 4   corner, where they have the arrow, and it says proposed

 5   bulkhead, 410 by 5 foot 5?                                         That's above grade.

 6                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       Right.

 7                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So that's part of the

 8   variance as well?

 9                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We were told that historically

10   they've been treated as open stairs in the yard, and so

11   we're not --

12                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Are you putting an

13   enclosure over it?

14                           MR. HEINDEL:                     There is an enclosure over it,

15   yes.

16                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               But even with an

17   enclosure, it's an open stair?

18                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       Is the enclosure shown on the

19   model?

20                           MR. HEINDEL:                     No, it's just in the drawings.

21                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               You can see it on their

22   first floor plan.                            You can see there are two doors.

23                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Are you looking at where it

24   says relocated basement entry?

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yes.          It also shows up on

 2   the west elevation.                               It goes up about three and a half

 3   feet.           Is that about right, I'm guessing?

 4                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yes.           It's actually a little

 5   less than that.

 6                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, it's to the left side

 7   of the ramp?                     See the pair of doors?

 8                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Good catch.

 9                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               That's my hawkishness.

10   In the meantime, while they're thinking, feel free to

11   explain your other options to me.

12                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, just to the bulkhead, we

13   didn't request one way or the other as to whether or not

14   that was included in the variance request.                                                               We just went

15   by what the zoning analysis stated.                                                     But, we were told

16   at the time, because I had the same question, and I was

17   told that historically, it's been treated as open

18   stairs, unless the whole thing is higher than the five

19   foot stair requirement.                                     So, that's why it wasn't

20   included.                 And that's actually consistent with what

21   we've known in the past, but I don't know if there's any

22   formal --

23                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Interpretation?

24                           MR. HEINDEL:                     -- interpretation, but, that was

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   our understanding of it.

 2                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Other options there, we did give

 4   serious consideration to doing a lift, electronic,

 5   mechanical lift rather than the ramp.                                                        There were a

 6   couple of reasons we moved away from it.                                                            One, it really

 7   didn't offer a substantial cost savings.                                                            Two, given the

 8   fact that there's really no maintenance staff or

 9   anything at Canterbury House, there would be nobody to

10   really have a current knowledge of how it operates from

11   day to day, and to maintain it and that.                                                            And then even

12   when we looked at how it would change the site plan, it

13   still didn't reduce the amount of paving that we would

14   have significantly.

15                                       As far as the pervious, part of the areas

16   that were credited as pervious paving, the ramp actually

17   is pervious in that it's a space board surfacing on it.

18   And so, without the ramp, we'd still have to have as

19   much paving accessing the lift, and we didn't feel it

20   would be graceful or in anybody's interest to have to

21   lift the, plop down there right at the door, that there

22   would still be the need to elongate the porch to have a,

23   you know, a graceful transition from coming off the lift

24   to getting to the door area.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                                       We looked at other ramp configurations.

 2   We looked at doing a ramp with the shortened porch, to

 3   comply with the setback, and basically, the length of

 4   the ramp needs to be so long that it would have to

 5   double back on itself again.                                            So, you would really have

 6   no opportunity for any kind of patio area or any usable,

 7   you know, exterior space for them.

 8                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  So, in terms of the

 9   lift, I mean, you've used a couple times tonight, you've

10   said, that you'd want it, you want it to gracefully

11   achieve what you're trying to design.                                                        But, as a

12   practical matter, if doing the, would doing the lift

13   instead of the ramp, allow you to shorten the terrace

14   such that you'd not be in violation of the impervious

15   space requirement?

16                           MR. HEINDEL:                     No, because the porch would, to

17   meet the requirement, we would lose almost half of the

18   porch.             And so everything would be crammed into that,

19   you know, the first half side of that back elevation,

20   and yes, I mean, you could jam everything in there and,

21   you know, get the lift and get a door in there, but it

22   wouldn't be, in my mind, you know, a graceful solution,

23   or an appropriate solution.

24                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               One of the things you

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   keep mentioning is a graceful solution, and I notice

 2   that there's a window to the powder room?

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Uh-hum.

 4                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Which is overlooking the

 5   deck?

 6                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Uh-hum.

 7                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Which isn't such a

 8   graceful solution either, particularly when you have to

 9   go past that on the ramp.                                       So, I'm not sure I'm

10   necessarily buying all of that.

11                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, the window is sort of a

12   necessary evil there, just to get daylight in, it, the

13   sill height is fairly high, so it's not anything that

14   you'd be walking past and looking in on anything.                                                                         And

15   certainly with a window treatment, it could be, you

16   know, taken out of play.

17                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, Dominick, have you

18   guys decided what all we're getting a variance on?

19                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Regarding the relocated

20   bulkhead, I believe that that is consistent with the way

21   that they've been, that has been treated in the past.

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Even when it's covered?

23                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     I will check on that.

24                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     We haven't actually had that

 2   much experience with new or relocated --

 3                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Bulkheads.

 4                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     -- basement stairs.

 5                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yeah.

 6                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     So, I will check on that and

 7   I'll talk with the Zoning Officer in the morning, but I

 8   believe it is consistent.

 9                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Does the ramp need, aside

10   from impervious surface coverage, does the ramp need a

11   variance?

12                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     The ramp has been treated at,

13   generally treated as open stairs.

14                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  As long as it's, the

15   code says up to four, is it four feet, four feet is the

16   right dimension?

17                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Four feet vertically?

18                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Yeah.

19                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yeah.

20                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Then it's not a

21   variance, but if it's over that, then it is.

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.            And what's the

23   elevation of the top of the stairs, the landing?

24                           MR. HEINDEL:                     The question, the answer has to

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   do with from which point?

 2                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I know, right, because

 3   grade drops.                     So, let's go with average.

 4                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yeah, it's 23 inches from the

 5   terrace level.

 6                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               And you said the terrace

 7   was 16 out?

 8                           MR. HEINDEL:                     So it's 39, something like that.

 9                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.            So, from the side

10   yard setback, just to confirm, they're only, the

11   variance they're asking for is for this open porch

12   thing-a-ma-jig?

13                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     That's correct.

14                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.            And the thing that

15   looks like a trellis here, doesn't need a variance, in

16   the picture, in the model?

17                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     If it's a trellis, it doesn't

18   need a variance.                           I believe that they're intending to

19   grow plant material?

20                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Correct.

21                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Then it's a trellis.

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, if you grow plant

23   material up, you don't need a variance?

24                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     If it's a trellis, you don't

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   need a variance.

 2                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.

 3                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     And one way we check is by

 4   making sure that plant material does grow on it.

 5                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.

 6                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Is it possible to

 7   design this so that the ramp runs straight along the

 8   south side of the terrace, as opposed to all the way

 9   around the west and north sides?

10                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Probably need run

11   length, right?

12                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I think he's thinking

13   more like an inverted L.                                      So, if the bulk of it was

14   along the south side, and then if you needed additional

15   length, you'd turn north, rather than starting south,

16   going north and then going east.

17                           MR. HEINDEL:                     If you could turn and run north,

18   yeah, you could probably fit it in, but you'd be

19   requiring the person coming out of an accessible parking

20   space, would have to go all the way up to the north end

21   to enter, so we were trying to come up with a, and the

22   most reasonable entry point from both the street and the

23   accessible parking spot.

24                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               It seems like you could

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   do it.

 2                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Well, we also didn't want the --

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It also would, you'd have the

 4   wheelchair arrival, you know, smack right in front of

 5   the door then.

 6                           MS. HEINDEL:                     We were trying to use the ramp,

 7   architecturally, to kind of create a quote, unquote,

 8   back walls, you know, just a boundary for the terrace,

 9   just so it would not feel like something that was just

10   there as a ramp because it had to be there for code.                                                                             We

11   really wanted it to feel like it was just part of the

12   project, and it was just another way to get up the

13   stairs, and would therefore be welcoming and because of

14   the, just the site configuration and everything else, it

15   seemed to make the most sense to bring it in up on that

16   north side.

17                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Architecturally, I

18   understand what you're saying, but --

19                           MS. HEINDEL:                     And just also so it wouldn't be

20   a barrier between the terrace and the driveway.

21                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Sure.            So, I understand

22   what you're saying and I can appreciate it from a design

23   standpoint.                    However, we don't get, I don' make

24   decisions based on design.                                         It's about, if there is

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   another option that can comply and there's not

 2   necessarily a hardship that prevents you from doing it

 3   in a way that complies, then that's the way it should be

 4   done.

 5                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Well, I do think --

 6                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, maybe you guys can

 7   explain more about your hardship, about why you can't

 8   put it the other, aside from a design perspective.

 9                           MS. HEINDEL:                     I think it's a functional

10   perspective, I mean, that's the place where the back

11   door out to the terrace needs to be, just because of

12   where the multi-purpose area in the house is.                                                                   And

13   bringing the ramp in, right smack where there's going to

14   be, you know, ambulatory traffic or whatever, back and

15   forth, just doesn't, I mean, it's just not good

16   circulation.                     It also, the fact that we have no alley

17   access and we've, and I think is our hardship on this

18   and that, because it is a special use and we're, we've,

19   you know, we've just really bent over backwards to get

20   that impermeable surfaces down as much as we can.                                                                         And I

21   don't think moving the ramp around really changes that

22   impermeable surfaces, unless you're looking at it as

23   taking space away from the terrace.                                                     Is that what you're

24   asking?

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I think they're looking

 2   at it, correct me if I'm wrong, is in terms of if the

 3   ramp doesn't end at the far end, then the porch doesn't

 4   have to go over that far.                                       Would that be a correct

 5   interpretation of what you're trying to say?

 6                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yes, that would be

 7   correct.

 8                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Okay.

 9                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Well, that was just --

10                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  So, it's not, well,

11   their point is unrelated to imperviousness, however, my

12   point related to hardship is related to imperviousness

13   in terms of understand, in terms of, I think we're like

14   looking at the numbers here.                                            I think we're like 183

15   square feet away, apart in terms of what's required and

16   what you're proposing, and I'm having trouble

17   understanding the hardship to need all that extra, to

18   need that amount of space back there.                                                        And maybe there's

19   a more, I don't know, maybe there's a more efficient

20   configuration that gets you space but doesn't put you

21   over the requirement.

22                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Part of putting the ramp in the

23   back and to the back edge of the patio was also, you

24   know, related to historic district things.                                                               I don't know

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   whether that counts.                                That's not a hardship, it's just

 2   where the property is.                                   But we were trying to, you know,

 3   not have its physical presence, you know, declaring

 4   itself.              It's, you know, that part of the yard is

 5   visible from the street.                                      We feel strongly about the

 6   fact that the landing for the ramp should be sheltered

 7   from the weather, the same way the entrance to the back

 8   door is sheltered from the weather with the porch.

 9                                       In terms of, you know, our job as

10   architects, we were just trying to integrate all of the

11   various requirements, and this seemed the best solution

12   to that, and I think that, you know, the minimum lot

13   size and the fact that we are complying with commercial

14   requirements for accessibility is a hardship.                                                                   That the

15   2.5 percent, you know, granted I wish we didn't have to

16   ask for it, but that's, in terms of juggling cost as

17   another factor, the pervious pavers are two or three

18   times more expensive than regular paving, and our owners

19   have, you know, already, you know, we're trying to just

20   balance cost with design with the practicality and with

21   the zoning, because we agree about the need for

22   pervious, you know, for perviousness.

23                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            For what it's worth, for my

24   colleagues, it seems to me that being in a historic

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   district, should count as a hardship, because it's an

 2   unusual situation that ordinarily people wouldn't have

 3   to deal with.                       I am also concerned about --

 4                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Can I interrupt for just

 5   a second.                 Would you mind explaining that, because I

 6   don't understand what hardship, what additional hardship

 7   a historic district is providing and what, based on what

 8   they're asking.

 9                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  On this specific case.

10                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yes, in this specific

11   case.

12                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Well, in this specific

13   case, well, I think --

14                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Sorry.

15                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Well, I think it, let me go

16   general and then specific.                                         I think in general, being in

17   a historic district, cuts down the number of options

18   that you can pursue in design.                                              In this specific case,

19   it seems to me that they would have a problem with

20   putting, first of all, the ramp in the front, or on the

21   south side of the building, and I was greatly relieved

22   when I opened my packet and read what they were planning

23   to do, and I thought, oh my God, they're going to put it

24   in the front.                       But they didn't.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                                       And so I think it is a hardship in the

 2   sense that they need to put this ramp in the back.                                                                          And

 3   I think all of us are struggling with, is there a better

 4   way to put this ramp in the back that takes up less

 5   impervious surface, and also may work a little better.

 6   And that's what I mean about, I think it should be

 7   considered a hardship in this, in general and in this

 8   particular case.                           Hope that's useful to you.

 9                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     There is precedent for using

10   location in a historic district as a practical

11   difficulty, and I think that if you've ever owned a

12   property in a historic district, in Evanston, it's

13   immediately apparent that what a practical difficulty it

14   can be.              And I would agree with what the Chair has said,

15   that those, that reasoning has been used in cases in the

16   past.

17                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  What's the practical

18   hardship created by the historic district here?                                                                      That's,

19   I guess that's what I'm struggling with.                                                            I understand

20   that it can be, in come circumstances, a hardship, so, I

21   guess my question to you, sir, is what's the particular

22   hardship caused by being in a historic district in this

23   case?

24                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It is that we had to take a

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   holistic view of the whole project, and to try to

 2   integrate whatever we're doing into the property in a

 3   manner that would be acceptable to the Preservation

 4   Commission and to us as, you know, as something that we

 5   could be proud of.                              And therefore, one thing I didn't

 6   mention is one of the options is, we did look at trying

 7   to do the ramp in front but immediately ruled that out

 8   because it just would not be suitable for the

 9   neighborhood.

10                                       And then the other overriding concern is

11   something that always comes up with the preservation is

12   what's really visible from the street and how does it

13   interact with the rest of the district.                                                           And so, that's

14   why we felt strongly that using the ramp, that the

15   combination of using the ramp as a sort of backdrop for

16   the terrace, that sort of wrapped around towards the

17   north, where it was sort of hidden by most of the

18   building, was a good solution, from that standpoint as

19   well as how it would connect with the parking

20   arrangement and with somebody arriving up the driveway

21   from the street.

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Can I just clarify that.

23   When you're talking about things being visible from the

24   street, you're really talking about things being visible

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   across the corner property, and being visible across the

 2   corner property into the backyard.

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Correct.

 4                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So not from the street

 5   perspective.                     So, not from the street perspective this

 6   way, but across this way, into the backyard.

 7                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Did you discuss with

 8   the Preservation Commission, any of the other options

 9   we've been discussing here, for example, having a lift

10   or locating the ramp on a different part of the terrace?

11                           MR. HEINDEL:                     I think we discussed both of

12   those, briefly, I mean, we didn't dwell upon it nor were

13   there any questions about it.

14                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  So, did the

15   Preservation Commission express opinion one way or

16   another as to how it would view those options?

17                           MR. HEINDEL:                     They did not.                       As I said, nobody

18   questioned it and they seemed to be enthusiastic about

19   what we had proposed, and approved it.

20                           MS. HEINDEL:                     I think they generally liked the

21   fact that the ramp wasn't, you know, staring and was

22   integrated into the design of the whole back and the

23   landscape so that it, you know, it was just part of the

24   environment.                     That's what, you know, we were after.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                                       I don't know, I think another point to be

 2   made, when we were trying to refine the impermeable

 3   surface calculations, if we didn't have to provide a 16

 4   by 18 foot parking, accessible parking space in the

 5   backyard, we would conform to the 45 percent, as well.

 6   So I think that's another practical difficulty that goes

 7   back to the fact that, you know, it's a special use

 8   property.

 9                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Can I just comment on

10   that, because I want to know if anybody else thinks I'm

11   right and if my thinking is logical on this.                                                                  But, given

12   that it's a special use, it seems to me that it's like a

13   created hardship.                            They asked for the special use,

14   therefore, it's not really a hardship that they have to

15   comply with commercial standards because they asked to

16   be considered that way.

17                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I'd just add to that in

18   saying I don't think it would set a good precedent to

19   start granting variations to the Zoning Ordinance, or

20   the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, just because a

21   property qualifies for, or has applied for a special

22   use.

23                           MS. HEINDEL:                     This special use has been in

24   place since 1969.                            This is not --

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               No, we understand that,

 2   but --

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     No, I mean, the only other point

 4   I would add to that is the percentage that was worked

 5   out as the pervious restriction for an R-1 District, has

 6   in mind, you know, it's a typical residential use, which

 7   would not have this kind of parking requirement.                                                                        So, I

 8   think that's the matter in which we think of it as being

 9   something that's imposed due to the special use.

10                           MS. HEINDEL:                     I don't know whether, I mean,

11   the reason that, if this were not a special use, the

12   degree of variation that we're requesting for

13   impermeable surfaces would be eligible for

14   administrative review.                                   I mean, I don't know, I just, I

15   don't know, we have a variation process, and I just want

16   you to know, we're not trying to take advantage of the

17   fact that there is a variation process.                                                           We have been

18   diligent in trying to meet the code.                                                       And so, you know,

19   that's it.                  And again, the 15 foot side yard, with a lot

20   that's, you know, 52 feet, that gives us a 22 foot strip

21   down the center where we could build within and comply

22   to the side yard restrictions.

23                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     If I could add here, I believe

24   it is the side yard setback that makes this a major

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   variance.                 It's not the impervious surface coverage.

 2   And I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I would

 3   like to call your attention to the fact that an existing

 4   condition of the property is that there is an existing,

 5   very large encroachment into what would be the required

 6   side yard setback for a non-residential use in this

 7   district, that is currently at under a foot.                                                                  So, the

 8   house is under a foot from the property line on the

 9   north side.

10                                       We have to, of course, require a

11   variance, if they're building anywhere within that 15

12   foot side yard.                         But, I believe it's important to take

13   into account that if this were a new site or a vacant

14   site that was being built upon, we wouldn't want that 15

15   feet to be encroached upon, because it's next, well,

16   it's next door residential, it's in a residential

17   district.                 However, it is encroached upon by probably

18   the main bulk of the improvements.

19                                       So, that looked at versus what the

20   additional encroachment is, being the ramp, I think is

21   important.                  But that is, we would look at that as, or

22   suggest that be looked at as a hardship or practical

23   difficulty of the site.

24                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Do you have any, how

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   do the neighbors feel about the project?                                                            Do you have

 2   any input or comments from --

 3                           MR. HEINDEL:                     The Chaplain spoke with the

 4   immediate neighbors.                                I don't believe there was any

 5   concern or objection.

 6                           MS. HEINDEL:                     The property to the north is a,

 7   excuse me, is another chaplain, it's Chaplain C Special

 8   Use within the residential neighborhood, right?

 9                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     It's the Habbad House.

10                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Normally I might not

11   get too into this, but since we're talking about

12   holistic approached, why not.                                             Help me out, I mean, the

13   guys have been talking about the ramp, and I'm more

14   concerned about the impervious.                                                But, if we're going to

15   talk about the ramp, why is it so quirky?                                                              Like, why

16   doesn't it just go, even if you leave it in the general

17   location that it is, why doesn't it just head towards

18   the house, turn north and then head back?

19                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, it essentially does that.

20   It just --

21                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  But it goes, you've got

22   this simple historic structure that we're talking about,

23   and we're talking about making a simple statement across

24   the back, and then we're running all over the place with

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   our ramp.

 2                           MR. HEINDEL:                     But it goes the distance from

 3   point A to point B to deal with for certain drop,

 4   certain length of drop.

 5                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Yeah, I'm just, if I

 6   turn that ramp that 18/6, so it's straight and make a 90

 7   degree turn --

 8                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Then we're losing run, and we're

 9   trying to do it so that the end of the ramp doesn't jut

10   out into the required parking access.

11                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  You lost a lot of

12   efficiency by like these curves and by the 45 and stuff

13   like that, so I think there is more than enough room to

14   get your required --

15                           MR. HEINDEL:                     You don't actually lose that

16   much efficiency because of the requirements, the spacial

17   requirement of the code at the turning points.                                                                     It might

18   look excessive, but the requirements of the code are

19   pretty, not excessive, but you know, they're necessary,

20   but they're large.                              We looked at many ways to figure it,

21   configure it, and a lot of them just didn't fit to get

22   us down to the level that we needed to get down to, as

23   well as being able to maintain a direct ramp up to the

24   terrace level for, you know, the use of the terrace

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   itself.

 2                           MS. HEINDEL:                     I don't know if this would help,

 3   what were trying to do is just make the bulk of the

 4   porch that was at the floor level of the existing house

 5   as small and as compact as possible, but work                                                                   well for

 6   the circulation.                           So, we elevated the terrace, so it's

 7   kind of half-way between that and grade.                                                            We didn't want

 8   the terrace to be a deck that was 42 inches up in the

 9   air with just a, and we didn't want it to be all the way

10   down on grade, and so we chose that to be at a half-way

11   point and then the ramp is designed so that someone in a

12   wheelchair could get the terrace as well as, you know,

13   inside.              Be able to spend place, spend time in both

14   places, because both will be used as, you know, for

15   small meetings and things.                                         And so the idea was to kind

16   of gently cascade off the back of the house, which does

17   involved, you know, the turns that are there and just

18   trying to keep it so not one thing was left sticking up

19   high in the air or way down on grade.

20                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  It just feels like that

21   ramp was pushed out to make the terrace bigger.

22                           MS. HEINDEL:                     No, it's actually, that's not --

23                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  It's just, I --

24                           MR. HEINDEL:                     There's two factors.                                 One is

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   just achieving the length that we need, but the other

 2   is, is that there's a very large tree there that we're

 3   also working around.

 4                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I mean, you have 18

 5   foot 6 of run, 6 feet of run at the other end, and is

 6   that 8 feet of run in the middle?

 7                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Correct.

 8                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Okay.            How far away is

 9   the, how far away is the deck from the house, your

10   proposed deck from, I mean, your proposed deck from the

11   pervious paving area?                                  It looks to be about double the

12   18 foot.

13                           MS. HEINDEL:                     I don't follow --

14                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Like if I go from your

15   pervious paver, if I, just to start with, if I go from

16   your pervious paving area to your proposed deck, how --

17                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Right.             It's about, it's yes.

18                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  How far away is that?

19                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It's probably a little less than

20   twice the 18/6.

21                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  So?

22                           MR. HEINDEL:                     So you could have a straight run

23   coming directly out of the door, arriving where it does

24   not.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  So I've got, so that's

 2   30 feet or so.

 3                           MS. HEINDEL:                     But you'd have to have a

 4   landing.

 5                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  So, if you, so that's a

 6   straight run, gets you a good distance of the way, so

 7   what do we have here, we have 14, and the 18/6, so 32/6

 8   is what your run is, and you have 30 feet if you go

 9   straight.                 So, all you need is one 6, you know, one, to

10   turn and have, go 6 feet north or whatever, and to turn

11   back.           So, stretching that far north is definitely just

12   visually and by now going further into the math, not the

13   minimum that you need to make this run.                                                           It's not.

14                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We looked at it, but I mean, you

15   have to, whenever you're making the turns, you have to

16   account for landings, the 5 by 5 landings.

17                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Then take your 5 by 5

18   foot landings and go 6 feet north and take another 5 by

19   5 foot landing.                         You still won't end up, all the way

20   across the --

21                           MS. HEINDEL:                     But you've still got it on the

22   south side of the property.

23                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I was saying, for sake

24   of argument, assume that the general path is the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   direction that you're using, it's still, I'm still

 2   illustrate, actually I'm still trying to illustrate that

 3   even if you take the general path that you're trying to

 4   use, your design is exceeding the minimum requirement

 5   that you need to make that accessibility work.                                                                     It has

 6   to be.

 7                           MR. HEINDEL:                     I can't agree with you, no.                                           I

 8   mean, we've laid it out and the ramp ended up, you know,

 9   several feet into the parking access.

10                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I mean, I'm sure it

11   would if you ran a straight run, but I'm, but if you

12   give the allowance of still turning like you do, but, in

13   an orthogonal manner --

14                           MS. HEINDEL:                     But then they wouldn't be able

15   to get onto the terrace, basically.

16                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  No, go straight up

17   along the south side of the terrace, having your

18   landing, get onto the terrace, make a left-hand turn

19   north, go your 6 feet, or whatever you need to do, have

20   another landing, and then turn back towards the house.

21                           MR. HEINDEL:                     The two would overlap.

22                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Lori --

23                           MR. HEINDEL:                     If you bring the 14 feet --

24                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   -- could I get some

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   clarification, because I'm having a little bit of

 2   trouble visualizing what Member Summers is proposing

 3   here.

 4                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Sorry.

 5                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   What would be achieved

 6   by doing what you're talking about?                                                     Like, what would be

 7   saved, you know, in terms of surface and setback and all

 8   of that.

 9                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Basically, what I'm

10   trying to illustrate is, in order to meet the minimum

11   requirements that they need to meet for accessibility,

12   they don't necessarily need to go, the ramp doesn't need

13   to be all the way at the far end necessarily.                                                                   But for,

14   certainly most of all, the ramp doesn't have to extend

15   in such an arcing fashion, way out into the property,

16   and it can be pulled back in a more orthogonal manner,

17   which produces less terrace space, and therefore, brings

18   them within their requirements.

19                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Could I comment?                           It would bring

20   you less terrace space, not a significant amount of less

21   terrace space.                        It would not bring us up to the

22   requirement.                     And if you're rotating that so that that 8

23   foot and 5 foot landing are now orthogonal, that 14 feet

24   that you're coming off an orthogonal relationship to the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   end of the porch, you're running out of room to make a

 2   turn and have the remaining ramp not intrude into the

 3   driveway.

 4                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     If I could make a clarifying,

 5   hopefully a simplifying statement, please keep in mind

 6   it's not the ramp that is intruding into --

 7                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I understand that, I

 8   understand that the ramp is not really an issue in terms

 9   of the imperviousness or in terms of the --

10                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Side yard setback.

11                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  -- standards for the

12   side yard.                  What I'm trying to illustrate is that, you

13   know, it seemed to be that the argument was that the

14   ramp needed to kind of take this fashion and then that

15   kind of created this terrace space, and that's how it

16   all came about.                         But, I don't think the ramp needs to do

17   that, if that's the reasoning for why the terrace is so

18   large, I think --

19                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Would you guys be

20   willing --

21                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  -- there could be a

22   smaller space.

23                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               What if the terrace was

24   smaller?                What if they introduce a 3 foot wide planting

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   strip along the north side of the terrace, and took away

 2   the square footage they needed.

 3                           MS. HEINDEL:                     You mean to the south of the

 4   ramp?

 5                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               No, north side.

 6                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We're actually doing that.

 7   We're refining things --

 8                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               North of the terrace,

 9   south side of the ramp, north of the terrace.                                                                   The north

10   side of the terrace, south side of the ramp.

11                           MR. HEINDEL:                     We now are planning a planting

12   strip in there, because we're --

13                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Show me in the site plan,

14   because it doesn't show up that way.

15                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It does not show in the site

16   plan.

17                           MS. HEINDEL:                     That's because we had to do this

18   site plan a few months ago.

19                           MR. HEINDEL:                     As I said, we've been refining

20   the requirements, small things have changed, some things

21   have been added, some things have been taken away, so

22   we're trying to --

23                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, can you draw for me

24   what you guys are now proposing, because I think that

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   may be the resolution.

 2                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I'm trying to back out

 3   of this square footage.

 4                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It's, you know, a green area

 5   there which is going to help us, because we're going to

 6   sort of gently ramp slope down there, and not have a

 7   retaining wall on that side.                                            But --

 8                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, how wide is that?

 9   That's like 3 feet?

10                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yeah, about 30 inches, something

11   like that.

12                           MS. HEINDEL:                     No, it wasn't that much in, we

13   had it closer to 18.

14                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, once you do that,

15   what's the effective width of your terrace?

16                           MR. HEINDEL:                     It's probably 14 --

17                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Could you --

18                           MR. HEINDEL:                     I'm sorry, about 12 feet,

19   something like that.

20                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               About 12 feet.

21                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            All right.                   At some point,

22   I'm going to ask somebody to draw on a copy of Exhibit 1

23   what you just drew, so that we have it for the record.

24                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I guess I would just

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   ask, is there an updated site plan drawing?

 2                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, there's not really.                                        I

 3   mean, we're still managing things, as I said, with the

 4   engineering coming in for certain levels, the lower ramp

 5   has to extend a little further, and so we're trying to

 6   just, what we're trying to do is working under the

 7   umbrella of needing about the 47 and trying to make that

 8   work, and we're not able to.                                            And so, we've taken out

 9   some of that, we're taken out a couple other little bits

10   and pieces where we can.

11                           MS. HEINDEL:                     The things we've done is the

12   concrete --

13                           MR. HEINDEL:                     But we were just unable to get

14   to the 45.

15                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Let me interrupt and say

16   that, and report for the record, that Mary Beth has

17   drawn for me the 30 inch strip along the north side of

18   the proposed terrace in Applicant Exhibit 1.                                                                  So, I'll

19   show that to the other members so we're all on the same

20   proverbial page.                           Thank you.

21                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  If that's what you're

22   going to go off of as evidence, I think we ought to

23   probably get the architects to confirm that's what they

24   meant.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Fair enough.

 2                           MR. HEINDEL:                     That is what we meant.

 3                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            All right.                   Well, you

 4   haven't seen it.

 5                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Okay.            I visualized it.

 6                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Rest assured, we speak

 7   the same language.

 8                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            So, I'm standing by the

 9   microphone, I'm asking you if that's an accurate

10   representation of what you intended to tell us about the

11   30 inch strip?

12                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Yes.           The sketch as shown is.

13                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Thank you, very much.

14                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I'm sorry.                   I have, I'm

15   going to complicate this a little more.                                                           I think it's

16   just my own obstinacy.                                   So, when I originally asked the

17   question, I guess what I was thinking was, why can't the

18   ramp run up, just up the south side of the terrace,

19   rather than snake all the way around the terrace, when

20   it would lead, apparently, right up to the back door,

21   the new back door that's being built?

22                           MR. HEINDEL:                     Well, as we mentioned, we're

23   just trying to gracefully incorporate what's going on

24   outside with inside.                                And so, we're trying to

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   accommodate an entrance for people who are not

 2   wheelchair bound, to be able to come and go gracefully

 3   in a group setting, as well as trying to incorporate a

 4   wheelchair access and trying to do it in a manner where

 5   the two don't really collide in a single point.

 6                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Not to trivialize it, but if you

 7   had a family room and you had a deck outside, and you

 8   waned that sense of freedom, just visually and spatially

 9   coming and going, you know, for a gathering, that's why

10   we're trying to facilitate.                                          And putting the ramp on the

11   south side or coming right smack up to the background,

12   denies us that.

13                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  But people have to come

14   in that door one way or another, right?

15                           MR. HEINDEL:                     But part of the complication

16   that issue is what's going on inside the house as well.

17     It's a very small house and we've got to provide an

18   accessible toilet room in an arrangement that works well

19   with the overall flow of the plan.                                                    And so, the only

20   reasonable spot to put that is in that, would probably

21   be the northwest corner of that mass that the porch

22   aligns with.                     And so it again, reduces that sort of

23   target area for the entrance door, you know, to a

24   shorter run.                     And we just felt having the, right, the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   ramp just to arrive right in front of the door would not

 2   be the best approach.                                  That and you're just creating

 3   this barrier running along the south edge of the usable

 4   yard space along the driveway that everybody would have

 5   to contend with.

 6                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Yeah, I'd have to say

 7   I agree with the applicants on this point.                                                               When you see

 8   ramps, especially on the front of houses, I don't see

 9   that many on backyards, but the straight ramps are

10   particularly obtrusive, large, I mean, you're going to

11   have such a mass, I think, if it did go straight up, I

12   think it would, as you're saying, kind of just build

13   this wall and really be pretty unattractive and

14   certainly not welcoming.                                      And I'm not sure, would that,

15   you're saying do that to get them within the setback or

16   to --

17                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I'm just guessing,

18   because I'm just going based off of the look, but it

19   looks like it achieve not only the setback, but also the

20   impervious space issue.                                     And in terms of a barrier, it's

21   a barrier to the paved driveway, if anything.                                                                   And

22   there's, on the site plan anyway, a proposed planting

23   bed there, so there's not an issue of waling across to

24   the yard from there anyway, unless people are planning

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   on walking through the planting bed.

 2                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Yeah, but wouldn't it

 3   be -- well, I see a planting bed as a welcoming

 4   improvement and the ramp is just sort of a, kind of a

 5   wall.

 6                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               But I think you could

 7   leave the planter.                              You could leave the 2 foot, or 3, 30

 8   inch planting strip and then put the ramp along side of

 9   that.           And so you could still --

10                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   On the south of --

11                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Yeah, yeah, yeah, so you

12   could still keep it, have it be welcoming, reduce the

13   bulk --

14                           MS. HEINDEL:                     May I make a point?

15                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Sure.

16                           MS. HEINDEL:                     On the ramps --

17                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Please talk in the

18   microphone.

19                           MS. HEINDEL:                     If the ramp is on that south

20   side, along that whole south edge of the ramp, there

21   will have to be a 42 inch high railing there, because

22   that's the code for the ramp.                                             And so that means that

23   the top of the railing would be, you know, at the top of

24   the ramp is going to be close to eight feet, off grade.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   And it's a railing, you know with 4 inch balusters.                                                                            The

 2   way we, that was the other reason to have the terrace

 3   be halfway between, we wouldn't need that guardrail and

 4   we --

 5                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  You have the guardrail,

 6   though, it's just on the other side of the property.

 7                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Let me finish.                         We don't have

 8   the handrail --

 9                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I apologize, I thought

10   you were --

11                           MS. HEINDEL:                     -- that you need to have, so

12   someone can use it to pull themselves up.                                                              The trellis

13   will act as a guardrail for where we get, so that the

14   ramp is more than 30 inches above grade, just to avoid

15   having that 8 foot, that, you know, you've seen the

16   ramps, you know, just that railing that goes right along

17   the whole side of the, you know, the ramp surface.

18                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I'm not sure that changes

19   anything though, because at the top of the landing,

20   don't, and the handrail for the steps, you will have to

21   be the balusters at 4 inches on center.

22                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Right, so we've tried to keep it

23   just at the top of the porch, you see?

24                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Right.             But you have to

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   keep it where's it's at it's most egregious.                                                                  So, that

 2   sort of negates your argument.                                              Where it's tallest is

 3   where it has to be, regardless of what solution you

 4   choose.

 5                           MS. HEINDEL:                     But wouldn't you agree that a 5

 6   foot section of that is preferable to a 25 foot section

 7   of it?

 8                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I might, but that's not a

 9   hardship for granting a variance, and that's my

10   struggle.

11                           MS. HEINDEL:                     Well, you know, that's your

12   call, but I mean, we're just trying to explain to you

13   how we've tried to integrate all the requirements for

14   Preservation Commission, the accessibility code, our

15   client's functional purposes and the zoning.                                                                  And this

16   is, we think, a very good solution that these variances

17   that will not cause adverse effect to neighbors, I don't

18   think the 2 2 percent additional paving, and as we

19   pointed out, the material we are using will actually

20   probably in the way it functions -- I'm not saying this.

21   Let's see.

22                                       As we pointed out, the pervious pavers

23   that we are using will actually be more pervious than

24   what zoning has, the calculations by ordinance give us.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   So, we are complying with zoning, I think, to the intent

 2   of the zoning ordinance.                                      I don't think we're violating

 3   the intent.                    We may be violating a specific, you know,

 4   requirement of the ordinance, but that's what the

 5   variation process is all about.                                                I mean, so it's your

 6   call, but we have given it a lot of thought.                                                                  This is

 7   not a, I can't think of the right words.                                                            It's not an

 8   idle request, not, you know, one that's not thought

 9   through, and one that we have great respect for the

10   ordinance itself.

11                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Any other questions?                                 Do

12   you have something, Lori?                                       I see you're drawing away

13   there.

14                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I have nothing further.

15   I'm just trying to validate my hypothesis.

16                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Oh, all right.                         Well, at

17   this point then, we'll ask if there's anyone else who

18   wishes to address us, please come up and, you were

19   already sworn, weren't you, sir?

20                           MR. KALMAN SEGAL:                            Yes, I was.

21                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Yes.           And I know we've seen

22   you before, but I apologize for not remembering your

23   name.           So, you'll have to give it to us again.

24                           MR. KALMAN SEGAL:                            My name is Marc Kalman

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   Segal, and I'm a neighbor.                                         I reside at 201 Orrington,

 2   on the corner of Foster and Orrington.                                                          You may remember

 3   me because I'm also an architect, and I was before you

 4   regarding the matter of the Habbad House.                                                              But, I'm not

 5   here in that capacity this evening.

 6                                       But as an architect also, I can empathize

 7   with these people and what they've had to go through,

 8   because I've had to go through it as well. And I feel

 9   that the solution they had for the ramp, which you might

10   feel is inefficient, I think is a more desirable design

11   element than a straight ramp or a ramp that doubles

12   back.           And on the north side of the property, it's less

13   obtrusive an provides that opening for their terrace,

14   which I think is a very important part of their design.

15                                       So, on that issue, I'm somewhat favorable

16   to that.                As far as the impervious surfaces, I think

17   you're splitting hairs.                                     They are providing material

18   which is better than asphalt, at a cost which I know is

19   three times as much, which is a hardship for that type

20   of organization.                           And I think they are making a very

21   good effort on that behalf.                                          And I don't feel that that

22   should be something that prevents them from getting

23   approval.

24                                       So, therefore, I'm here as a neighbor to

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   say that I voice my support for their project, to be

 2   granted the reduction on the side yard variance, and

 3   also the small allowance that they're over on the

 4   impervious surfaces.                                Would you have any questions?

 5                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Any questions for Mr.

 6   Segal?             Thank you, very much.

 7                                       At this point, the applicant has one more

 8   opportunity to sum up, if they would like to.

 9                           MR. HEINDEL:                     I think we've covered most

10   things in enough detail.                                      So, we will just leave it at

11   that.

12                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            All right.                   Is there anyone

13   else present who has anything to say to us with regard

14   to 2010 Orrington?                              I see none, so we will close the

15   record and begin our deliberations.                                                     Any comments?

16   Well, I'll start then.

17                                       This is a difficult case, as the

18   applicants are well aware.                                         I too, am emotionally a hawk

19   on minimum change and hardship.                                                In this case, although

20   it's a close one, I do see a hardship with the need to

21   place a ramp in this space and take care of the

22   accessible parking.                               And also, and there may be

23   disagreement about this, and also do it in a way that

24   isn't obtrusive and ugly.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                                       And I think that the applicants, by their

 2   defense of some good questions from my colleagues, have

 3   demonstrated to me that they've given this a lot of

 4   thought, and come up with a solution that is, I think,

 5   within the minimum change necessary because as someone

 6   who was in the neighborhood on Orrington from time to

 7   time, I was just there literally this afternoon,

 8   attending an event at a nearby educational institution,

 9   and I walked by this property, and it seemed to me that

10   I take their point of not wanting to put a ramp all 25

11   feet or so of the required railing, along the south side

12   of the property, next to the two or three million dollar

13   home, which I guess is still unsold, has been built on

14   the southwest corner, yeah, southwest corner of that

15   block.

16                                       So, although I grant you it's a close

17   case, and I'm just not sure there's any better way to do

18   this.           And so I think this is the minimum change.                                                                And

19   again, I also think, as I said earlier, that being in a

20   historic district is a bit of a hardship generally, and

21   in this particular case, I think it's a hardship.                                                                         I

22   think if the Preservation folks were here, they would

23   not be pleased to hear that we were thinking of putting

24   this ramp along the south side of the terrace.                                                                     So, I

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   think that's a consideration that I think we should be

 2   sensitive to.                       So, those are my reasons.

 3                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Lori, I just wanted to

 4   add real quick, because this will just take a second,

 5   you could not have, you voiced my opinion on it exactly,

 6   so, for what that's worth.

 7                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Thanks.              I would agree

 8   with the Chairman in terms of the need for us to be

 9   sensitive to the ramp location in a residential district

10   and the Zoning Ordinance does need to be, does need to

11   take the fact that it is in a residential district into

12   consideration, and be sensitive in allowing its

13   allowance and location.

14                                       I also think that given different

15   circumstances, assuming this was a single family home,

16   the extension of the roof coverage to the existing point

17   of the structure would be within our normal realm of

18   acceptability, and so in that I think it's, I think it's

19   in within keeping, keeping with out previous

20   interpretations and trying to work with some of the

21   existing structures that are in place.

22                                       I think as I previously made it clear, I

23   am concerned about the impervious surface, particularly

24   in this neighborhood, which we do understand to have

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   issues.              I don't think that the terrace is designed to

 2   be the minimum necessary to meet the needs.                                                                 I think

 3   that it appears that say an 11 by 12 2 foot or so

 4   terrace could be provided, ample space to put a grill, a

 5   table, that sort of thing, and have a small gathering on

 6   it, similar to the size one might have as a large deck

 7   in a single family residential area, could be provided

 8   at the bottom of your deck that you're, your raised deck

 9   that you're proposing, and then a ramp provided around

10   that, and that that would be in compliance.                                                                 So, I would

11   ask that if it be favorable, we break those motions

12   apart.

13                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Do you not give any merit

14   to the fact that the pavers are more pervious than the

15   allowance?

16                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  No, because I have not

17   been given a specific paver system that I can tie into

18   the ordinance, so I have nothing to rely on for that.

19                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Can't you make it a

20   requirement of the ordinance that they comply with that?

21                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I think that would be

22   difficult.                  We'd have to, well, we'd have to come up

23   with some sort of calculation.                                              I mean, basically, we'd

24   have to come up with some sort of calculation that

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   essentially made it meet.

 2                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               So, okay.                 One of the

 3   options on right is to, if that's a sticking point, is

 4   to continue and allow them to present a specification.

 5                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I suppose.                   I don't

 6   know, honestly, I don't know if it would greatly change

 7   my opinion.                    These paving systems are all fine and well,

 8   and they do provide a greater level of porosity, but

 9   it's all in the installation and the maintenance, and I

10   think that it's not a very good exact science to rely

11   on.

12                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Because I think where

13   they ended up in the width of the terrace is about 12

14   feet.           So they're at their minimum for the terrace,

15   because it's 14 and some change wide, and they're going

16   to take some 30 inches out of it for some ground cover

17   or a planting strip or whatever.                                                 So, they're already at

18   12.         So, you're really just asking them to decrease the

19   length of it, and then at that point, how much square

20   footage are you actually getting back?

21                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  The 183 square feet

22   that they're over.

23                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               But I don't think you're

24   going to get 183 square feet.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Well part of that is --

 2                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               If you just ask them to

 3   reduce to a minimum --

 4                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Part of that is from

 5   the 30 inches, which the 183 is based on the piece of

 6   paper we have in front of us.                                             So, the 30 inches that we

 7   talked about comes off the 183, and then the distance

 8   comes off.                  And in order to get to the 183, it's about,

 9   it looks to me to be about like an 11 by

10   12-2 foot terrace, give or take, which seems to me,

11   ample enough space to have a small gathering and a table

12   and that sort of thing.

13                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Just to weigh in, I

14   sort of, I come out on the other side of most of the

15   comments.                 To me it seems that, while there may be

16   hardships created by being in a historic district, I

17   haven't heard testimony that makes the historic

18   district, in this case, the creator of any hardship.                                                                             To

19   me it seems like the only hardships that have been

20   discussed, are a result of design choices and an attempt

21   to gracefully achieve those design choices.

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Can I just interject,

23   because there was testimony given, and the fact is that

24   historic district doesn't want to see this thing from

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   the street, and they're going to see it across that

 2   corner property.                             And so that is what they were saying

 3   their hardship was from historic.

 4                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  The only testimony on

 5   that point, that I recall, was that the Preservation

 6   Commission had not considered it one way or the other.

 7   And the only testimony I heard on that point was

 8   Chairman Creamer's opinion as to how the Preservation

 9   Commission might view having the railing moved to the

10   other side of the terrace.                                         And that's, to me, not

11   evidence and I'm not sure, you know, we heard some

12   testimony about a lift, and why a lift wasn't considered

13   instead of a ramp, and the reasons given were , because

14   there wasn't any cost savings.                                              Mind you, not that it

15   was more expensive, but that there were no cost savings

16   and that there wasn't a knowledgeable person to maintain

17   it, at present.

18                                       And to me it seems like when the

19   hardships are caused by design, and not by the property

20   specifically, or in this case, its location in a

21   historic district, specifically, that that's not a cause

22   for us to veer from the letter of the ordinance.                                                                        That's

23   my two cents.

24                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  In regards to trying to

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   force the overall location of the ramp though, are you

 2   getting, I mean, since that doesn't affect the

 3   imperviousness or the, going straight doesn't affect the

 4   imperviousness or the side yard setback, are you

 5   implying that as a result of that, you would not do the

 6   side yard setback?                              I mean, where does that take you in

 7   regards to our two issues.

 8                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  To me it looks like it

 9   affects both issues.                                The ramp, as I understand the

10   testimony, is impervious.

11                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  No, it's pervious

12   because it's --

13                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Oh, exactly.                     So the

14   ramp is counting against the impervious space.

15                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  No, no.              The ramp is

16   pervious, meaning that it has, it's a slatted board

17   system, which in Evanston counts as allowing water

18   through.                So the ramp itself is not counting --

19                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Okay, I've got you.

20                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  -- towards that area,

21   so --

22                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Still moving it

23   addresses the side yard setback issue, and I think

24   combined with design comments about the size of the

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   terrace, there's a way to achieve all of this without

 2   necessarily having to vary from the ordinance.

 3                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Excuse me, if I could raise a

 4   point you may not have considered, and that is a change

 5   to the plan would require re-review by the Preservation

 6   Commission, which is a schedule, has schedule

 7   implications.                       Preservation meets once a month in this

 8   capacity.                 So, we are talking about a not insignificant

 9   cost.           And I'd urge you to keep that in mind with, in

10   terms of what is the reasonableness of what the

11   applicant is asking for.                                      And that, by the way, has a

12   tendency to go on and on, even as changes may be

13   smaller.                So, there may be a diminishment in returns

14   from that process.

15                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I guess I'll just sum up

16   then where I am, which is, you know, I'm generally the

17   biggest hawk on this Board, right?                                                    It's always the

18   minimum, it's always that stuff.                                                 And so, to that end, I

19   appreciate some of the things that they've done to keep

20   it within the footprint of the house, to not extend the

21   house, and to do those sorts of things.

22                                       I also think that at the end of the day,

23   the amount of square footage we're asking them to take

24   off for the 2-2 percent, isn't really significant enough

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   to make a difference, and I know that there are other

 2   cases that we have heard where the general consensus is

 3   oh, we'll let them go over this percentage, or it's a

 4   small percentage that they're over on, so it's okay.

 5                                       And so, that's sort of where I'm ending

 6   up now, is that we've had that precedent, and so based

 7   on that precedent, that's sort of where I'm leaning in

 8   approving the impervious surface, as well as improving

 9   the side yard setback.

10                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Scott, I just wanted to get

11   back to you.                     I agree with your characterization of the

12   testimony, and I would also regretfully, but truthfully

13   admit that my opinion is in evidence.                                                        But it is a

14   strongly held opinion, and I think, and if we, as Bill

15   says, if we had to go back to Preservation, I think they

16   would not approve it.                                  But your point is well taken.

17                                       I do disagree with you on the choice of a

18   ramp versus a lift.                               And this isn't something that we've

19   talked about very much, because I don't think we've had

20   that issue raised as starkly, if you will, as we have

21   here.           So, I take your point about it being a design

22   change, or a design choice, but it seems to me that it's

23   a reasonable choice.                                And I think the kind of an

24   institution that it is, plays in in that.                                                              If this were

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   a commercial institution that had a full-time

 2   maintenance staff and somebody there to train people and

 3   plug it in and all of that, it would be far different.

 4                                       And I do remember when I was an

 5   Episcopalian, my parish and I suspect Chaplain C here,

 6   well, my parish didn't have two nickels to rub together,

 7   but I mean, the cost of maintenance and the cost of

 8   having somebody on site, to me makes it not a very

 9   reasonable choice.                              I can see where you might say it was

10   a design change, and I was a little bit surprised by

11   their response about the cost.

12                                       But just given the type of organization

13   that we're talking about, that doesn't have a full-time

14   staff, or doesn't have somebody there all the time who

15   can run something like a ramp, which can be a contrary

16   critter, excuse me, a lift, to me it is a reasonable

17   choice and here I go again giving my opinion, but

18   without evidence, but it won't stop me, makes more sense

19   in this setting.                           In fact, I would have been surprised

20   if they'd gone the other way.

21                                       Beth, you had a comment?

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Just re the lift versus

23   the ramp.                 I also found the applicant's arguments

24   against the lift compelling, and they didn't bring this

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   up, but I'd just like to put out there, if we're

 2   obviously concerned about pervious and impervious

 3   surfaces, and one of the reasons we are is because of

 4   concern for the environment.                                            So, if we can avoid a

 5   mechanical solution that sucks electricity, and in favor

 6   of a structural solutions, I'd say we should go for the

 7   structural solution every time.                                                So, for what that's

 8   worth.

 9                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  And I would just add

10   that I agree on the lift thing, I think mostly because

11   they end up becoming rusty --

12                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Eyesores?

13                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  -- yeah, rusty eyesores

14   that aren't usable to anyone pretty quickly, especially

15   outdoors.                 So, in that sense, they're rarely the

16   practical and best solution, even inside a building.

17   And with regard to kind of the, the just general aspect

18   of considering it, I think it's not always based on the

19   testimony, but just in our consideration of what might

20   be in the best public interest in terms of what we are

21   or aren't seeing, and what other effects any proposal

22   might have.

23                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Well, I mean, to that

24   end, what might be in the best public interest would be

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   not having a terrace at all, but having a grass area

 2   where people could congregate.                                              There are a lot of ways

 3   that we could speculate that the project could be

 4   designed differently or designed in the public interest,

 5   but I think it's our task to look at the project, and

 6   see whether or not there's a hardship that's created by

 7   the property, or whether it's one that's being created

 8   by the project itself or decisions.                                                     And I'm just not

 9   seeing a hardship created by the property here.

10                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               But I think it's

11   reasonable to say that the terrace, if you're going to

12   make the whole building accessible, handicapped

13   accessible, the terrace needs to be handicapped

14   accessible as well.                               And there's an argument that grass

15   isn't that, and that by making it a paved surface,

16   you're making it accessible to everyone.                                                            And so from

17   that perspective, it's not just a design decision, it's

18   an accessibility decision.                                         Not that I want to argue

19   their points for them.

20                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  It's a fair point.

21                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Anything else?

22                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     If I could make a suggestion,

23   the Board might consider, as a condition on the variance

24   for impervious surface coverage, the requirement, that

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   the applicant maintain the product, after it's

 2   installed, according with the recommendations of the

 3   material.                 I realize it's somewhat unenforceable, but

 4   it's very important in terms of how well it maintains

 5   its voracity.

 6                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Of course we can enforce

 7   it.         And you will.                       All right.                  Lori suggested that we

 8   take this in two motions, and I think that's a good idea

 9   because we do have two separate issues, the side yard

10   setback and the impervious surface, and there may be

11   different votes on that.                                      So, do I have a motion on the

12   side yard setback?                              Lori.

13                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Mr. Chairman, I move

14   that we approve the variation for the side yard setback

15   for the construction or a covered open porch at the rear

16   of the subject property at 2010 Orrington Avenue.

17   Actually, is the front, the front porch?                                                            Is that part

18   of this too?                     And for the renovations to the front

19   porch, which although not thoroughly discussed in our

20   review, is certainly outlined in the materials that have

21   been provided to us on file in connection with the case.

22   And so, doing that condition would be on, would be on

23   the condition that the construction of those pieces be

24   in substantial compliance with the information that has

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   been put on file in the case and presented here this

 2   evening.

 3                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Okay.            Is there a second?

 4                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Second.

 5                                                               (Motion moved and seconded.)

 6                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            It's been moved and

 7   seconded to approve the application for variation to the

 8   side yard setback requirement.                                              Is there any further

 9   discussion?

10                                       All in favor, say aye?

11                                                               (Chorus of ayes.)

12                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Any opposed?

13                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Nay.

14                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            That's four ayes and one

15   nay on the side yard setback.                                             So, do I have a motion on

16   the impervious surface?

17                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Sure.            I move in the

18   case of 2010 Orrington Avenue, that the Board approve an

19   overage of impervious surface of approximately 2-2

20   percent, which apparently is to be completely determined

21   at a later date, as opposed to the 45 that's allowed.

22                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Bill, do you have a

23   suggestion here?                           Should we make it not to exceed 47 2

24   percent or something like that?

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     I believe it, I guess I really

 2   don't understand the to be determined at a later date.

 3                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Because they already

 4   changed the plan from when they submitted.                                                               They've

 5   already reduced 30 inches by 20-some odd feet.

 6               MR. DUNKLEY:                     Yes, I would, it is a variance that's

 7   approved here, is not to exceed by definition.

 8                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Okay.

 9                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            So, not to exceed, is that

10   what you needed Beth?                                  Not to exceed 47 2 percent?

11                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Sure.            Let me change that

12   not to exceed 47-2 percent, with the condition that it

13   be maintained in substantial compliance with the

14   manufacturer's recommended installation.

15                           COMMISSIONER MCLENNAN:                                   Yes.           And that the

16   approval is subject to the construction and use of the

17   development being in compliance with all the other

18   testimony and documents on file in connection with this

19   case.

20                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Okay.            It's been moved.                           Is

21   there a second?

22                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               Second.

23                                                               (Motion moved and seconded.)

24                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            It's been moved and

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   seconded.                 Any further discussion?

 2                                       All in favor say aye?

 3                                                               (Chorus of ayes.)

 4                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Opposed?

 5                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Nay.

 6                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Nay.

 7                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            So, we have three ayes and

 8   two nays to approve the impervious surface requirement,

 9   or variation.

10                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     I believe we need a point of

11   clarification.

12                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Yes?

13                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     The code, in discussing the

14   manner in which a combined variance is to be decided,

15   specifies that if a minor variance is submitted with a

16   major variance, that the entire package shall be

17   considered in accordance with the standards and

18   procedures for major variance.                                              I believe the act of

19   separating those two, brings a question into play as to

20   once you've separated them, one then becomes a minor

21   variance, which the applicant may in fact, if that were

22   the case, could have submitted it for an administrative

23   approval on.

24                                       I believe they do have to be considered

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   together, as a single application.

 2                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Couldn't one argue that

 3   we have considered it as a single application, however,

 4   to benefit the applicant, we have voted singly on the

 5   specific motions.                            However, we considered them as an

 6   entire project.

 7                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  Would they even be

 8   eligible for a minor variance, because they're not a

 9   residential property?

10                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     I believe I stand corrected.

11   Mr. Argumedo is absolutely correct.                                                     A minor variance is

12   not eligible for this, for the request.

13                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Okay.            Well then having

14   been clarified, let me advise the applicant of our

15   procedure in this kind of situation.                                                       We have one member

16   who's recused himself.                                   That means that we have six

17   eligible voters.                           The five who are in attendance tonight

18   are split, three to two, which means that our --

19                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  On one of the issues.

20                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            -- on one of the issues,

21   and under Illinois Statute, and the Zoning Ordinance and

22   our rules, it takes four votes to approve a variation.

23   So, what we do in that situation is that our absent

24   member, Mr. Sutton, will be given probably the video, if

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   there is one.

 2                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Both will be existing --

 3                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            The video and the, you can

 4   see my excitement over the video.

 5                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     I believe we'll withhold the

 6   transcript unless it's absolutely necessary.                                                                  That's the

 7   point.             However, it's also possible that the very same

 8   condition exists with our other member who has recused

 9   himself voluntarily, he's not required to, and based on

10   the rules and could vote in this matter, I believe.

11                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            I'm not sure I follow you,

12   Bill.           Are you saying that Mr. Sutton may not be able to

13   vote?

14                           COMMISSIONER GINGOLD:                                  I think what he's

15   saying is that Mat Rodgers recused himself while saying

16   he didn't have a conflict of interest, but chose to

17   recuse himself.

18                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Well, if we need his vote,

19   then we'll go get it, if we need it.                                                       But, in the

20   meantime, we'll provide Mr. Sutton with the record of

21   this matter and then the procedure is that at the next

22   open meeting, which will be when?

23                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       It will be June 1st.

24                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            On June the 1st, if Mr.

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   Sutton is here, he will announce his vote, and then that

 2   will, that may decide the matter, and if we need to --

 3                           MR. ARGUMEDO:                       I'm sorry, I stand corrected on

 4   that.

 5                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     We have no new cases for the

 6   second meeting in May, however, we do now have an

 7   existing case for the second meeting in May.                                                                  It is a

 8   scheduled meeting, and therefore, we should meet on that

 9   date to consider the remaining votes on this

10   application.

11                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Okay.            So that is May 18 at

12   7:30.           And so, Mr. Sutton will be asked to review the

13   record and announce his vote at that time.

14                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  I don't know if it's

15   been clear by all this discussion, but the side yard for

16   the applicant, but the side yard section was approved.

17                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            Approved, yes.

18                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  And all of this

19   aftermath is only regarding the impervious surface

20   issue.

21                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     And should the applicants have

22   any questions about what just went on here, please all

23   us in the morning, and we'll walk you through it.

24                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            But as, thank you, Lori for

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   that reminder.                        But yes, we have approved the side yard

 2   and hopefully, the matter of the impervious surface

 3   variation will be decided on May 18th.

 4                                       Okay, so that concludes what we can do

 5   tonight with regard to 2010 Orrington.                                                          Is there any

 6   other business?

 7                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     I do have one announcement, and

 8   it's a call for any requests for updates to the ZBA

 9   rules.             At our next meeting, we'll ve presenting a

10   proposal to change three of the items in the rules

11   regarding the production of verbatim transcripts and it

12   may be a good opportunity to clean up a few other items

13   I think that are kind of somewhat outdated.

14                           COMMISSIONER BERNS:                               I thought, yeah, we

15   talked about this I think last time, and you guys were

16   going to provide us with the PDF of the rules.

17                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Oh, that's, my apologies.                                        We

18   will make sure that happens right away.                                                           And we do have

19   to, according to the rules, to change the rules, we need

20   a quorum vote, a four member vote, and it does not have

21   to be, it can be at one meeting.                                                 So, it just has to be

22   presented in writing.                                  So, we will have to have

23   suggestions for changes in advance before the packets go

24   out.          So, within the next week or so, if you could just

            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
     5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                            Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                      ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

 1   peruse through the rules, which we will send you first

 2   thing in the morning, I think there should be no problem

 3   with everyone finding one or two spots that really would

 4   benefit from some cleanup.

 5                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  So, in our packets

 6   we'll get the stuff so that we can read over it, so

 7   there is actually a potential to discuss and vote on it

 8   at that meeting.

 9                           MR. DUNKLEY:                     Yes.           So, any suggestions should

10   be sent, send them to Dominick during this week, or

11   during the next week, if you can.

12                           COMMISSIONER SUMMERS:                                  Okay.

13                           CHAIRMAN CREAMER:                            All right.                   Thank you very

14   much.           Anything else?                         Seeing none, we are adjourned.

15   Thank you.

16                                                               (Whereupon, the meeting was

17                                                               concluded at 9:19 p.m.)







            LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389
5/4/2010                                        City of Evanston

                                       Zoning Board of Appeals

                                                 ZBA 10ZMJV-0015

STATE OF ILLINOIS                                      )
                                                       )      SS.
COUNTY OF C O O K                                      )

                            I, TONI BURRESS, depose and

say that I am a direct record court reporter doing

business in the State of Illinois; that I reported

verbatim the foregoing proceedings and that the

foregoing is a true and correct transcript to the

best of my knowledge and ability.

                            TONI BURRESS


BEFORE ME THIS                                                     DAY OF

                                                           , A.D. 2010.


       LeGRAND REPORTING & VIDEO SERVICES                                                    (630) 894-9389

To top