2106 LOMBARD AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

Deceinber 3, 1973 (cont'd) ` NIr. IIale had applied for a variance on this property previously on September t 10, 1973 at which time his request was denied. � + The minutes of the SeptemUer 10, 1973 meeting were read and approved as � read. ; Mr. Shockey, Board Secretary, read the following documents: j 1. A petition for reconsideration for Hale Constrnction Company by NIr. NIueller, �l�Ir. Iiales attorney and an affidavit declaring the multiple resident use oF the building in the past years. The affidavit was signed by l�Irs. Vollmer, owner of the residence ' at 2106 Lombard from 1953 to 1965. � 2. An affidavit signed by iVir. Knutsen, a resident at 2101 Lombard for thirty-three (33) years saying the house at 2106 Lombard had been used as a duplex most of the time. ; 3. An affidavit signed by Mrs. Droddy, a daughter of Z�Irs. Vollmer, ; varifying the use of the residence as a duplex. ' 4. A letter from NIr. Root of Pidelity Mutual Savings Bank giving the details of the loan Mr. I-Iale had acquired for the completion of � � the proposed duplex at 210G Lombard. 5. A petition signed by twenty-seven (27) of the residences of the area ; requesting approval of the proposed duplex. 6. A letter from Mr. Knutsen, 2101 Lombard, addressed to Mr. Shockey _. expressing his and the neighbors' concern over the blight of the neighborhood and that ll4r. Hale, the contractor, could help rectify some of that blight if the Boar.d ��ould grant a variance for the continuation of construction. The attorney, Mr. Mueller, then spolce to the Board varifying the above statements. Mr. NIueller pointed out that ::e thought there had been a misunderstanding between his cl.ient and the City and that Mr. Hale's property rights �vould be damaged if the variance is not granted. Also, there will be a definite upgrading of the area and the proposed duplex will not affect the comprehensive land use plan. ' There was then a brief question and anstiver pez:od bet�veen the Board, the attorney, and the audience. After visually viewing the subject property and considering all the Facts and ' testimony, it was moved by Mr. Baird, seconded by Il�Tr. Ingram, and unanimously carried to grant thc applicant's request for the folloti*✓ing reasons: -2-