HomeMy WebLinkAboutORDINANCES-1988-051-O-887/29/88
8/02/88
8/10/88
AN ORDINANCE
Granting Variations at 1218 Sherman Avenue
WHEREAS, the Evanston Zoning Board of Appeals
r ,
• conducted a public hearing on April 19, 1988 upon the
application of David A. Brock and Kathryn Brock for variations
from the general requirements for residential districts, lot
area, conversion provisions and nonconforming building and use
regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit retention of the
rearmost two-story brick building on the premises, which was
subject to elimination on September 25, 1987, and conversion of
said building from a manufacturing use into one second
residential building on the premises by converting the first
floor:of said building into accessory off-street parking and
storage, and the second floor into one dwelling unit on the
property located at 1218 Sherman Avenue, property located in an
R3 Two -Family Residence District; said public hearing having
been conducted pursuant to notice and publication thereof in
• the manner prescribed by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Committee of
the City Council at public meetings conducted on May 9, 1988,
May 23, 1988, June 27, 1988 and August 8, 1988, based upon an
analysis and review of the records of the Zoning Board of
Appeals hearing, the applicants' proposed revisions to the plan
which include, but are not limited to, the demolition of the
1941 addition to the subject building, use of a portion of the
first floor for the proposed dwelling unit, and the acceptance
by said applicant of the conditions embodied in this ordinance,
has recommended the application for said variations be granted;
and
WHEREAS, BASED UPON THE APPLICATION AND THE TESTIMONY
AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED, THE City Council of the City of
• Evanston finds that, as to the variations requested for the
subject property:
A. There is a particular hardship in the way of carrying out
an
.-I
the strict letter of the regulations in this case, namely:
1. The property in question would be greatly reduced in
value if the property were to be used only under the
conditions allowed by the regulations in the zone, in
that:
A. The property owner would suffer a particular
hardship as distinguished from a mere inconvenience,
• if the strict letter of the regulations were to be
carried out, since the testimony demonstrates that
the existing building would have to be razed, even
though it is a substantial structure that the
testimony indicates can be converted to residential
use, provided the variations requested herein are
granted;
b. The purpose of the variation is not based
exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of
the property, but rather to retain the value inherent
in the portion of the rear building that would remain
after the demolition of the 1941 addition thereto
occurs;
c. The alleged hardship does not rest upon the
particular personal financial situation, but rests,
instead, upon the fact that the applicant wishes to
convert the building which is eminently suitable for
such purpose to residential purposes which will be
more in harmony with neighboring properties than the
previous manufacturing use which had existed on the
premises;
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been
created by any person presently having an interest in
the property, but rather was created by the fact that
the applicants, in conjunction with the amortization
• provisions, have already removed a large metal
building which had been subject to elimination and is
also willing to wreck the 1941 addition to the
subject building in order to maintain the remainder
of the building for residential purposes.
2. The plight of the owner is due to unique
circumstances which are not applicable generally to
other property within the same zoning classification,
in that:
a. The initial construction of the rear building was
well before the 1921 Zoning Ordinance, the metal clad
building, which had been located to the east of the
subject building, has already been removed from the
premises, and the applicant stands ready to remove
the 1941 addition from the subject rear building,
thereby diminishing the size of thisprevious
manufacturing building substantially.
B. The variations, if granted, will be in harmony with the
general-purpose and intent of the ordinance, and:
1. Will not alter the essential character of the
locality since even with the conversion of the
subject building to a second dwelling unit, there
will still only be a total of two dwelling units on
• the lot in this R3 Two -Family Residence District and
the removal of the metal clad building and the 1941
addition will substantially reduce the size of the
-2-
51-0-88
building that will be left remaining;
2. The proposed variations will not be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to or depreciate the
value of other property or improvements in the
neighborhood in which the property is located, since
the subject building will be substantially diminished
from its original size and will be used for
residential purposes in a residential zoning
• district, and the exterior renovations depicted in
the plans submitted to the Planning and Development
Committee on August 8, 1988, will be in keeping with
the residential character of the area.
3. The proposed variations will not impair an adequate
supply of light and air to adjacent property or
substantially increase the danger of fire or other
otherwise endanger the public safety since the
applicant is reducing the size of the building
previously existing and converting it from
manufacturing to residential use in this residential
district in which the property is located.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION 1: That, based upon the evidence and
testimony presented at the hearing, and
upon deliberations and findings of fact contained in the
transcript bf the Zoning Board of Appeals Case No. 88-5-V(R),
and upon the testimony presented at the Planning and
• Development Committee meetings and upon the deliberations and
findings of fact of the Planning and Development Committee, the
application of David A. Brock and Kathryn Brock for variations
from the general requirements for residential districts, lot
area, conversion provisions and nonconforming building and use
regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit retention of the
rearmost two-story brick building on the premises, which was
subject to elimination on September 25, 1987, and conversion of
said building from a manufacturing use into a second
residential building on the premises by converting a portion of
the first floor of said building into accessory off-street
parking and storage, and a portion of the first floor and all
of the second floor into one dwelling unit on the property
located at 1218 Sherman Avenue, property located in an R3
• Two -Family Residence District and legally described as follows:
-3-
The South 20.0 feet of Lot 7 and the North 20.0 feet of
Lot 8, in Block 1 in 0. HUSE'S ADDITION TO EVANSTON, a
subdivision of that part of the North half of the
Northeast quarter of the North-west quarter of section 19,
Township 41 North, Range 14 East of the Third Principal
Meridian, lying West of the Railroad, in Cook.County,
Illinois.
• Excepting therefrom that part of said Lot 8 desdribed as
follows:
Beginning on the West line of Lot 8, 32.15 feet North of
the Southwest corner thereof; thence South along said West
line, 32.15 feet to the North line of the South 30.0 feet
of Lot 8; thence East along the North line of said South
30.0 feet, a distance of 61.92 feet; thence North at right
angles to the Northline of said South 30.0 feet, a
distance of 1.10 feet; thence Westerly in a straight line
61.92 feet to point of beginning.
Excepting therefrom that part of said Lot 8 described as
follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the North line of the
South 30.0 feet of Lot 8 with the East line of Lot 8;
thence West along the North line of said South 30.0 feet,
27.25 feet to the point of beginning; thence North at
right angles to the North line of said South 30.0 feet, a
distance of 1.40 feet; thence West parallel to the North
line of said South 30.0 feet, a distance of 41.34 feet;
thence South at right angles to the North line -of said
South 30.0 feet, a distance of 1.40 feet to the North line
of said South 30.0 feet; thence East along the North line
of the'South 30.0 feet of Lot 8, a distance of 41.34 feet
to the point of beginning.
• is granted, subject to compliance with all other provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance, other applicable laws and the following
conditions:
1. Demolition of the westerly one third of the subject
building (the 1941 addition), including removal of
the concrete floor and foundation, as indicated on
the site plan submitted to the Planning and
Development Committee of the City Council on August
8, 1988, including installation of a new concrete
driveway to serve the proposed parking spaces on the
ground floor of the subject building;
2. The existing tar and gravel roof shall be removed and
a new flat top, heat seamed, rubber roof shall be
installed;
3. All existing windows and doors shall be replaced with
double hung, double glazed, vinyl clad windows and
new doors to be installed shall be of insulated steel
or wood;
4. All four sides of the building will be tuckpointed
and then chemically cleaned;
5. The renovations to the building exterior shall be in
• strict compliance with the elevation drawings
submitted to the Planning and Development Committee
of the City Council on August 8, 1988, except for
-4-
•
•
•
subsequent modifications thereto approved by the Site
Plan Review Committee of the City;
6. Conditions 1 though 5 inclusive, contained herein
shall be met within eighteen (18) months of the
adoption of this ordinance or all variations granted
herein shall terminate.and said building shall be
r'emoved from the premises within 180 days thereafter;
r
and
7. A covenant of agreement to the above terms and
conditions shall be prepared by the applicants for
review by the City Law Department, and upon approval,
shall be executed and recorded by the applicants and
a copy of said recorded covenant shall be furnished
to the City Department of Building and Zoning.
SECTION 2: The Director of Building and Zoning is
hereby directed to issue such permits pursuant
to the terms of this ordinance.
SECTION 3: All ordinances or parts of ordinances
in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be in full force
and effect from and after its passage,
approval, and publication in the manner provided by law.
Introduced: ,
Adopted: S��,� Yl27 l,3
ATTEST:
` Cite Clerk
Ap .-oved tc =orm:
N
Co Porakibn Co sel
Appro d: �� '/ 7 1988.
/i Mayor
9612