The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutORDINANCES-1987-099-O-8710/20/87 1/15/88 2/22/88 Gj'II�II:�17 AN ORDINANCE Granting Variations at 319 Dempster Street • WHEREAS, the Evanston Zoning Board of Appeals conducted a public hearing on March 17,-1987 and again on May 19, 1987 upofi the application of Bernard Leviton and Nicholas A. Karris as beneficiaries under the American National Bank and Trust Co., of Chicago, Trust 43477, for variations from the use, lot area, off-street parking and nonconforming building structure and use regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit retention of a sixth dwelling unit and retention of the principal building and the nonconforming use thereof with six dwelling units and forty-five lodging rooms beyond the elimination date of December 8, 1986, or in the alternative, an appeal for a time extension to permit retention of the sixth dwelling unit, the principal building and the nonconforming use thereof with six dwelling units and forty-five lodging rooms during the present ownership of the property at 319 Dempster Street, Evanston, Illinois, property located in an R1 Single -Family Residence District; said hearings 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 a public meeting on October 26, 1987, based upon an analysis and review of the record of the Zoning Board of Appeals hearings, has recommended that 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 subject property: • A. There is a particular hardship in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations in this case, namely: 1. The property in question would be greatly reduced in a .. . value if the property were to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in that 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 and • thereafter the premises could be used only for single-family dwelling purposes. The testimony presented further demonstrates that this is the only such building and use within the city subject to the elimination provision of the Zoning Ordinance; .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 building now occupying the premises; C. The alleged hardship does not rest upon the particular personal financial situation of the applicant, but rests, instead, upon the fact that this is the only such building and use within the entire city that became subject to the amortization provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 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 it was unrealized at the time the amortization provisions were provided in the Zoning Ordinance that the subject structure would be classified as nonresidential, even though it contains six moderate income dwelling units. 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 subject building is the only building containing six dwelling units and forty-five lodging rooms within the entire City of Evanston that became subject to the amortization provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; b. The structure is categorized as nonresidential by the Zoning Ordinance, even though the subject building contains six (6) dwelling units; and C. The subject building is located in a mixed use area consisting of a mix of multiple -family dwellings, two-family dwellings and three-family dwellings with very few single-family dwellings in the immediate neighborhood, even though the area is classified R1 Single -Family Residence District. B. The variations, if granted, will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance, and: 1. Will not alter the essential character of the locality since no change in the use or structure is • now being contemplated and the building is being used for moderate income housing, which is consistent with the residential composition of the neighborhood. 2. The proposed variations will not be detrimental to -2- .. 0 . 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 is located in a mixed -use neighborhood, provides moderate income housing and j would probably not be developed with a single-family j dwelling if the building were removed as required by the elimination provisions. 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 otherwise endanger the public safety since the applicant is not seeking a change from the present condition, but only a preservation of the existing structure and use which is such that it has not adversely affected the supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increased the danger from fire or otherwise endangered public safety for the more than sixty years that the structure and use have existed. C. The extent of the variations granted herein is limited to the minimum change necessary to alleviate the particular hardship which has been found to affect the property.* NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION 1: That the application of Bernard Leviton and Nicholas A. Karris as beneficiaries under the American National Bank and Trust Co., of Chicago, Trust 43477, for variations from the use, lot area, off-street parking and nonconforming building structure and use regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit retention of a sixth dwelling unit and retention of the principal building and the nonconforming use thereof with six dwelling units and forty-five lodging rooms beyond the elimination date of December 8, 1986, for the property at 319 Dempster Street, Evanston, Illinois, property located in an R1 Single -Family Residence District, and legally described as follows: Lot 7 in Block 36 in Village of Evanston, in fractional Section 18, Township 41 North, Range 14, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois is granted, subject to compliance with all other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, other applicable laws and the following conditions: is1. The owners shall be subject to the following rent limitations through December 31, 1992: a. Current rental rates charged to tenants shall not be increased by more than four and 25/100 -3- 99-0-87 per cent (4.250) prior to July 1, 1988; b. On each January 1st (the "Comparison Date") after July 1, 1988 (the "Initial Comparison Date" which shall also be a Comparison Date for purposes of determining increases as of January 1, 1989) through and including January 1, 1992, rental rates for units in the building for the succeeding year (amortized proportionately to the rental rates for each of the • units in the building) shall not be increased by more than the sum of: (a) six and 00/100 per cent (6.00%) (cumulative from year to year) in excess of the rental rates chargeable for said units as of the prior Comparison Date; and (b) any increase in real estate taxes paid or incurred for the building in excess of the real estate taxes paid or incurred for the building for the annual period ending on the prior Comparison Date (for purposes of calculating real estate tax increases, January 1, 1988 shall be substituted in lieu of -July 1, 1988); C. In addition, if the operating expenses (excluding real estate taxes) for the building for an annual period ending on a Comparison Date exceed the operating expenses for the annual period ending on a prior Comparison Date by more than eight per cent (80), the owners may recover said additional operating expenses by increasing rental rates for units in the building for the succeeding year, amortized proportionately to the rental rates for each of the units in the building after exhibiting proof to the Building and Zoning Department of said expenses; and d. The terms of this subparagraph (d) shall be deemed to terminate, notwithstanding compliance with any other sections of this Ordinance, on the earlier • to occur of December 31, 1992 or the date the property is either substantially (more than fifty per cent (500) ) damaged by fire or other casualty or, if not substantially damaged by fire or other casualty, is not rebuilt by the owners. 2. Within thirty-one days of the end of each calendar year the property owner shall furnish the City Manager or his designee a report sufficient in scope to allow a determination of compliance or • noncompliance with the terms of conditions (a) through (c) of subparagraph 1 of Section 1 of this Ordinance to be made. 3. This Ordinance shall be binding upon the current owners of the property and their successors and assigns. 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, -4- • approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. Introduced: �,� 1988. Adopted: 2,Y) f7 1988. ATTEST: j City Clerk l App ve' as to f �� Corporation Ccunsel Approv / 1988. Mayor -5-