Design Review Board

Village of Winnetka Design Review Board/Sign Board of Appeals Regular Meeting November 20, 2025 at 7:00 PM Winnetka Police Department Classroom 410 Green Bay Road AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments 3. Approval of Minutes a. October 16, 2025, Regular Meeting Minutes 4. Continued Applications a. Case No. 25-19-DR: 560 Chestnut Street — Neapolitan LLC: A Certificate of Appropriateness to allow exterior painting of the storefront that does not match the shade of pink approved by the Design Review Board at its September 18, 2025, meeting. b. Case No. 25-20-DR: 986 Green Bay Road — Sit Still Kids Salon: A Sign Permit and Sign Code Variations to allow a new window, door, and wall signs. 5. New Applications a. Case No. 25-24-DR: 510 Winnetka Avenue — Oberweis Ice Cream and Dairy Store: A Sign Permit and Sign Code Variations to allow existing window signs (window decals, posters, and floating window signs) to remain. b. Case No. 25-25-DR: 490 Hibbard Road — Winnetka Park District / Winnetka Platform Tennis Club: A Certificate of Appropriateness to allow changes to the design of the previously approved addition to the existing paddle hut. 6. Other Business a. December 18, 2025, Regular Meeting - Quorum Check 7. Adjournment NOTICE Public comment is permitted on all agenda items at the meeting. If you wish to provide testimony or comments prior to the meeting, you may provide them one of two ways: (1) by sending an email to planning@winnetka.org; or by sending a letter to Community Development, Village of Winnetka, 510 Green Bay Road, Winnetka, IL 60093. All agenda materials are available at www.villageofwinnetka.org/agendacenter. The Village of Winnetka, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, requests that persons with disabilities, who require certain accommodations to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting or have questions about the accessibility of the meeting or facilities contact the Village ADA Coordinator at 510 Green Bay Road, Winnetka, Illinois 60093, (Telephone (847) 716-3543; T.D.D. (847) 501-6041). Page 1 of 157  1 Winnetka Design Review Board/Sign Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes 2 October 16, 2025 3 4 Members Present: Fritz Duda, Acting Chairperson 5 Chris Baggett 6 Wesley Barker 7 Peter Evanich 8 Colin Kennedy 9 10 Members Absent: Katie Moor 11 Heather Niehoff 12 13 Village Staff: Scott Mangum, Director of Community Development 14 Davorka Kirincic, Building and Code Enforcement Manager 15 16 Call to Order & Roll Call: 17 Acting Chairperson Duda called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll call was taken of the Board Members 18 present. 19 20 Public Comments: 21 No comments were made at this time. 22 23 Approval of Minutes: 24 Chairman Duda asked if there were any comments or corrections, or a motion to approve the September 18, 2025, 25 meeting minutes. A motion to approve the September 18, 2025, meeting minutes was made by Mr. Evanich and 26 seconded by Mr. Barker. A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 5 to 0: 27 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Kennedy 28 NAYS: None 29 30 New Applications: 31 a. Case No. 25-20-DR: 986 Green Bay Road — Sit Still Kids Salon: A Sign Permit and Sign Code Variations to 32 allow a new window, door, and illuminated wall sign at the storefront of the Subject Property. 33 Chairman Duda stated that the applicant requested the matter be deferred to a later meeting and asked for a 34 motion to continue it to the November 20, 2025, meeting. A motion to continue the matter to the November 20, 35 2025, meeting was made by Mr. Baggett and seconded by Mr. Kennedy. A vote was taken and the motion was 36 unanimously passed, 5 to 0: 37 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Kennedy 38 NAYS: None 39 40 b. Case No. 25-21-DR: 520 Green Bay Road — BMO Bank: A Certificate of Appropriateness to allow 41 replacement of landscaping with new plantings at the Subject Property. 42 Ms. Kirincic identified the property’s location, zoning classification, and property description. She also summarized 43 previous Certificate of Appropriateness approvals for building improvements. Ms. Kirincic described the proposed 44 landscaping improvements and stated that Village staff reviewed the request and referred to the appropriate 45 design guidelines and variations. She then asked if there were any questions. 46 47 Chairman Duda also asked if there were any questions. No questions were raised at this time. He then asked for 48 the applicant’s presentation. Jenn Epstein, Property Manager with Hoffman Commercial Real Estate, informed the 49 Board that they have budgeted for these improvements for a couple of years and have worked on other capital 50 improvements for the prominent building location. She stated the landscaping had deteriorated over the years and 51 that, although some variations are necessary for the landscape improvements, the proposed landscaping would 52 soften the entrance, the driveway area, and the bays. Ms. Epstein also described the damage caused by the lack of Page 2 of 157  Design Review Board October 16, 2025 Page 2 1 landscaping around the beds and by several instances in which areas she identified were accidentally driven over. 2 She stated that the proposed improvements would improve sight lines for vehicles navigating through this area. 3 4 Chairman Duda asked if there were any questions for the applicant. No questions were raised at this time. He then 5 asked if there were any comments from the Board. No comments were made at this time. Chairman Duda asked 6 for a motion to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the request as presented. A motion was made by Mr. 7 Bagget and seconded by Mr. Kennedy to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the request as presented. 8 A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 5 to 0: 9 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Kennedy 10 NAYS: None 11 12 c. Case No. 25-22-DR: 914 Green Bay Road — Sante Integrated Health and Wellness: A Sign Permit and 13 Sign Code Variations to allow six translucent decal signs at the 2nd-floor windows of their commercial space at 14 the Subject Property. 15 Ms. Kirincic summarized the request for window signs and their location on the second floor. She then identified 16 the property’s location, its zoning classification in the retail overlay district, and the applicant’s business located on 17 the second floor. Ms. Kirincic stated that the applicant is requesting a sign permit and a variation to install window 18 signage, as illustrated, along with the previous meeting blade and door window signs approvals. She identified the 19 wording for the proposed signs to be located on the second-floor glass, along with a frosted glass panel in the 20 middle for privacy concerns. Ms. Kirincic identified the 6-inch letter height and logo and explained the rationale for 21 the requested variation, the sign code requirements, and the areas of compliance. She referred to the variation 22 standards the Board is to consider and asked if there were any questions. 23 24 Chairman Duda asked staff how many times they had had these types of variations in the past and if there was any 25 precedent. Ms. Kirincic responded that, as far as she knew, they had not received any similar requests for second- 26 floor business signs. She added that it would have passed if the window had not been frosted, and that the 10% 27 coverage in connection with the lettering required Board, rather than administrative, approval. Ms. Kirincic 28 confirmed that there is no standard regarding frosted windows and provided additional information on 29 administrative approval requirements. No further questions were raised at this time. 30 31 Chairman Duda asked if the applicant was present, and Ms. Kirincic responded that they were not. Chairman Duda 32 wondered if there were any questions for the Board and stated that, without the applicant present, he would 33 recommend that the matter be continued. Mr. Bagget noted that he planned to vote against the request and 34 would like to provide the applicant with suggestions. Ms. Kirincic explained the applicant’s rationale for requesting 35 frosted glass on the second floor, citing privacy concerns. 36 37 Chairman Duda stated, for the applicant’s benefit, that he would suggest they consider it an entirely frosted pane 38 with a separate, conforming sign on top. The Board Members determined that the alternative would be worse. Ms. 39 Kirincic provided additional information to the Board on frosted window coverage and stated that a variation 40 would be required anyway. 41 42 Mr. Kennedy stated he had no issue with the request and that, if it were for the sign without the frosted window, it 43 would not have been considered, especially given privacy concerns. A Board Member agreed with the comments 44 and stated there is no precedent for it in Hubbard Woods, noting that it is being requested due to privacy 45 concerns. A Board Member described the request as more elegant than frosting across the entire window, which 46 could be done correctly. He stated that while there is less concern about being able to see into a second-floor 47 window, he noted the privacy concerns raised and alternatives such as screens, which would look worse. He 48 concluded by stating he would be in favor of it if the Board recommended deferral; that is fine. 49 50 Chairman Duda asked for a motion to approve the sign permit and sign code variations to allow six translucent 51 decal signs in the second-floor windows of the commercial space for the subject property. A motion, as stated by 52 Chairman Duda, was made by Mr. Baker and seconded by Mr. Kennedy. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 53 4 to 1: Page 3 of 157  Design Review Board October 16, 2025 Page 3 1 AYES: Duda, Barker, Evanich, Kennedy 2 NAYS: Baggett 3 4 d. Case No. 25-23-DR: 714-16, 718-732, 736-740 Elm Street and 511 & 515 Lincoln Avenue — One 5 Winnetka: A Certificate of Appropriateness to modify the exterior elevations of the approved One Winnetka 6 PUD. 7 Ms. Kirincic identified the property’s location and its zoning classification in the commercial overlay district. She 8 stated the property is currently under construction for the mixed-use building known as One Winnetka. Ms. 9 Kirincic described the storefront window and entry modifications in detail, which are being requested to 10 accommodate a future restaurant tenant better. She then referred to illustrations of various elevations. Ms. 11 Kirincic stated that the applicant is also proposing an alternative for the metal screen panels, which she described 12 to the Board. She then referred to illustrations of the proposed panels, with the same size, color, and location as 13 previously approved. 14 15 Chairman Duda asked if it would be located on the east wall facing the parking lot. Ms. Kirincic confirmed that is 16 correct. The applicant provided further clarification regarding the location. Ms. Kirincic referred the Board to the 17 design guidelines and the Certificate of Appropriateness for the Board to review the proposed exterior elevations 18 and modifications to ensure they follow the design guidelines. She then asked if there were any questions. 19 20 Chairman Duda asked for the applicant’s presentation. Deidre Klein, Murphy Real Estate Services, introduced 21 herself on behalf of the owner and developer of One Winnetka and addressed the proposed storefront changes for 22 the tenant, Ballyhoo Hospitality, which is opening a restaurant in the Village. She stated the tenant requested their 23 commercial address be on Lincoln Avenue, which is why there is a revolving door there, and described the 24 proposed use for the corner plaza space with tables. Ms. Klein stated that the Nano partition wall system would be 25 glass, match the storefront framing, and open in warm weather. She stated it is not necessary on the Elm Street 26 side. Ms. Klein said that, since the material is a custom-made piece, she was unable to provide a sample and 27 instead referred the Board to enlarged images, which she described. 28 29 Chairman Duda asked if the screens would be an architectural element. Ms. Klein confirmed that it is correct and 30 would have white brick framing. A Board Member asked whether the single door on the Elm Street side was a fire 31 exit. Ms. Klein confirmed that it is correct, that it is a servable room in that location, and that it would serve as a 32 private entrance. Another member of the applicant’s team confirmed the private door would partly swing into the 33 right-of-way by approximately 2.5 inches. 34 35 Chairman Duda asked if there were any other questions. No additional questions were raised at this time. He then 36 called the matter in for discussion. Mr. Evanich stated that the request is fine, except for the door swinging a 37 couple of inches into the right-of-way, which should be located inside the property line. Ms. Kirincic provided 38 additional information regarding the prior approval of a double door at another location. Chairman Duda indicated 39 it may be more of a zoning issue and can be addressed architecturally to set it in to clear any concerns. A Board 40 Member stated he had no issue with the door changes and asked for a better rendering of the sample screen. Ms. 41 Klein informed the Board it would take 12 weeks to get a sample from the contractor. Matt Schapen, OKW 42 Architects, agreed to provide a better rendering for the Board. Mr. Barker stated that the requested changes are 43 more functional than architectural, and because the screen would face east and south, he is not as concerned 44 about it. He agreed with Mr. Evanich’s comment regarding the couple of inches, which is not within the Board’s 45 purview, and stated he would support the request. 46 47 Chairman Duda asked for a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness to modify the exterior elevations 48 of the approved One Winnetka planned development. A motion, as stated by Chairman Duda, was made by Mr. 49 Baggett and seconded by Mr. Baker. A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 5 to 0: 50 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Kennedy 51 NAYS: None 52 53 Other Business. Page 4 of 157  Design Review Board October 16, 2025 Page 4 1 a. November 20, 2025 Meeting – Quorum Check. 2 The Board Members discussed their availability. 3 4 Adjournment: 5 Chairman Duda asked for a motion to adjourn. A motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Evanich and seconded by Mr. 6 Baker. A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 5 to 0: 7 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Kennedy 8 NAYS: None 9 The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. 10 11 Respectfully submitted, 12 13 Antionette Johnson 14 Recording Secretary 15 Page 5 of 157  MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD/SIGN BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: DAVORKA KIRINCIC, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2025 SUBJECT: 560 CHESTNUT STREET – NEAPOLITAN LLC.- CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR RECENT STOREFRONT PAINTING (AMENDED CASE NO. 25-19-DR) INTRODUCTION On November 20, 2025, the Design Review Board (DRB) is scheduled to consider a request submitted by Kelly Golden (the “Applicant”), the owner of Neapolitan, LLC. located at 560 Chestnut Street (the “Subject Property”) to allow recent painting on the portions of the exterior storefront that do not match the shade of pastel pink approved by the DRB at its September 18, 2025, meeting. SEPTEMBER 18, 2025, DRB MEETING On September 18, 2025, the DRB first considered the Applicant’s request to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow recent storefront painting changes. The staff report for the September meeting can be found in Attachment A2. After hearing from staff and the Applicant, the DRB discussed the proposed paint changes. Board members supported making paint changes to the storefront to align with store branding but expressed concern that the currently applied pink shade was too bright. It was noted that the elevation on the proposed rendering, which showed a pale/blush pink color, looked beautiful and elegant, but was a different shade of pink than the one currently applied at the storefront. It was decided that the Board will approve the application with the condition that a paint sample of the desired pale/blush pink color be applied to a portion of the façade, in a couple of areas with different materials (limestone, metal, fascia, and wood), to see how the paint takes to other materials. Also, it was concluded that staff will share by email a photo of a color paint sample applied to the storefront with Board members and get electronic approval of the color shade (in order to get back to the Applicant quickly and not postpone the project). After approval of the specific color shade, the Applicant would be able to proceed with painting the whole storefront. Ultimately, by vote of 6-0, the Board approved the Applicant's application, conditioned on approval of the specific color by staff and the Board, which will be conducted electronically in some fashion. A copy of the September 18 meeting approved minutes can be found in Attachment B. Page 6 of 157  Applicant’s storefront painting prior to the September 18th DRB meeting Applicant’s rendering with pastel pink paint approved by the DRB at its September 18th meeting Applicant’s business storefront painting following the September 18th DRB meeting Page 7 of 157 Proposed paint change In response to the conditions at the September 18 DRB meeting, the Applicant repainted a portion of the exterior storefront. Since the painted portion does not match the pastel pink shade approved by the DRB at its September 18, 2025, meeting, and the DRB members did not agree to approve (electronically) the painted changes, the applicant requested to return to the DRB to discuss the painted changes further. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CONSIDERATIONS As established by the Village Code, the Design Review Board is to consider the following four (4) factors in determining whether to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness: “(1) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with the character of the immediate neighborhood;” “(2) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with adopted Village plans for and improvements in the immediate neighborhood, and including both urban design and site arrangement considerations;” “(3) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are consistent with applicable Village design guidelines and such standards and criteria as may be adopted by the Board; and” “(4) the probable effect of the proposed external architectural features on the integrity of the immediate vicinity.” The Board must determine if the recent storefront paint color complies with the above standards and the following design guidelines. See Attachment B. DESIGN GUIDELINES ANALYSIS The Village’s Design Guidelines provide general guidance on the design and appearance of exterior façades on commercial buildings and additionally provide guidance on commercial storefront doors and window material and color selection, recommending that the selection be sympathetic to the overall building color palette and consider the adjacent building materials within the structure, immediately adjacent structures, structures within the same block, and structures across the street. SUMMARY The Applicant requests that the DRB find the recent storefront paint color changes on the portion of the front façade to be appropriate and compatible with the Design Guidelines and approve the Certificate of Appropriateness application as submitted. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A2: September 18, 2025, DRB Meeting Staff Report Attachment B2: September 18, 2025, DRB Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 157  ATTACHMENT A2 MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: DAVORKA KIRINCIC, AICP BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2025 SUBJECT: 560 CHESTNUT STREET - NEAPOLITAN - CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR RECENTLY STOREFRONT PAINTING CHANGES (CASE NO. 25-19-DR) INTRODUCTION On September 18, 2025, the Design Review Board (DRB) is scheduled to consider a Certificate of Appropriateness application submitted by Kelly Golden (the “Applicant”), the owner of Neapolitan, LLC located at 560 Chestnut Street (the “Subject Property”), requesting approval to paint portions of the exterior storefront. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located on the west side of Chestnut Street between Spruce Street and Elm Street in the Elm Street Business District. It is zoned C-2 General Retail Commercial and is located in the Commercial Overlay District. Figure 1 below identifies the location of the Subject property. On the next page, Figure 2 shows the entire front façade of the building with the Applicant’s business, as recently painted, and Figure 3 shows the Applicant’s business storefront prior to the recent painting. Location of the Subject Property Figure 1 – Subject Property – Location Map Page 9 of 157  Frontage of the 560 Chestnut Street - Neapolitan Figure 2 – Subject Property – View of the entire building from Chestnut Street Figure 3 - Subject Property - Applicant’s business storefront before the recent storefront painting changes CURRENT REQUEST The Applicant requests approval to allow recent painting of the storefront, including painting the entrance ceiling, limestone entrance walls, limestone front columns, door, door trim, windows trim, and transom, in pink color as shown in Figure 3 below and Figure 4 on the following page: Page 10 of 157  Figure 3 – Subject property – Storefront elevation with proposed paint changes Figure 4 – Proposed paint for storefront A copy of the application materials is included in Attachment A. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CONSIDERATIONS As established by the Village Code, the Design Review Board is to consider the following four (4) factors in determining whether to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness: “(1) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with the character of the immediate neighborhood;” “(2) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with adopted Village plans for and improvements in the Page 11 of 157  immediate neighborhood, and including both urban design and site arrangement considerations;” “(3) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are consistent with applicable Village design guidelines and such standards and criteria as may be adopted by the Board; and” “(4) the probable effect of the proposed external architectural features on the integrity of the immediate vicinity.” The Board must determine if the recent storefront paint color complies with the above standards and the following design guidelines. See Attachment B. DESIGN GUIDELINES ANALYSIS The Village’s Design Guidelines provide general guidance on the design and appearance of exterior façades on commercial buildings and additionally provide guidance on commercial storefront doors and window material and color selection, recommending that the selection be sympathetic to the overall building color palette and consider the adjacent building materials within the structure, immediately adjacent structures, structures within the same block, and structures across the street. SUMMARY The Applicant requests that the DRB find the recent storefront paint color changes on the front façade to be appropriate and compatible with the Design Guidelines and approve the Certificate of Appropriateness application as submitted. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Design Guidelines Excerpt Page 12 of 157  ATTACHMENT A Village of Winnetka CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION V I L L A G E O F W I N N E T K A, I L L I N O I S DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C,OA 2..0-i..-S- -9 °}Q CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION Project Address: ______::;µ�',_o__ c_·�_h_�...... s.::;.-·...1..+.J..1...l..1-=0�1- _________ t_-a_____, § Name of Business (es):___.__...._._�-'---f'--o _____l_1_·...... -"'---------,.,r.a;;;;;,--:;a;�=-=-::--::c=:-=- Application is hereby made for the following work (please check all that apply): E IVE Sign Sign Permit Application attached? c SE p O 2 2025 � Awning Awning Pennit App cation attached? lJ � BY:_______ Other (general description) _-'r7 ;_;;_.f.�, l ._. 1 ..._....._ l [ _,.__________ ________ _ / l Please provide a de�led description of the pro�sed �ork (attach additional info�ion such as material spe i!!ca\ions, photograJ?hs, etc.): � .,1 I'\ l • trtc;_ � , RI VV1 1 4 Do (S C{ htI �111 rJ� 6 r' C(l-.. A .1 (Yon1- l/We hp�by certi� that "r5 �/ e_, I I'"'( at G � lt1 ,t J t (Lessee/0wncx:Y of the property located ""\,? 0 C-n-fstt:ffi[ 1 (address), 1 am/we are authorized to submit plans for alterations of the subject property. I/We agree to perform the subject work in accordance with the conditions of approval by the Winnetka Design Review Board as well � all other applicable codes, rules, and regulations of the Village of Winnetka FOR QFFICE USE ONLY SIGNED COA applied for (date): c� PRlNTED NAME(S) . a I I ADDRESS COA Case Nwnber: PHONE NO. , , • . • ..., I COA Issued (date): EMAIL kJJ"!0 oe11pJ/4111 �hlr eeo( Pe� �$135 □ $575 PRIMARY DESIGN FIRM CONTACT NAME -�Pl M��1 �,.+,, U _::.w:=�Ji: 1,:jjc;=-·=r-=/=o-=-(:.,2:= ADDRESS PHONENO. EMAIL Page 4 of4 Page 13 of 157 iC:.----c. ---' �--'-c� - , --' _ ,__ --- - ·.- -- ,� Page 14 of 157 n11p I it111 Page 15 of 157 Page 16 of 157  ATTACHMENT B Architectural Series of Asphalt Shingles (3 ply) (See figure 49) Wood Shingles (Fire treated) Slate (See figure 48) Real Copper (No other metal roofs are allowed) Figure 46 Institutional only Flat roofs must be hidden by parapet on primary / secondary facades. Commercial and Multiple- Family Flat roof must not be visible from street, pedestrian, or open spaces. d. Door and Window Materials: Commercial, Mixed Use, Institutional, Multiple- Family Residential: Entry doors should be wood or aluminum stile and rail with varying degrees of glass. Public entry doors should be Figure 47 fully glazed whereas private and semi- private entries should be primarily solid panel doors. Storefront window units should be either paneled aluminum or brass. Many original storefronts, some with transom windows, remain in the districts. Efforts should be taken to repair and renovate these systems Figure 48 where feasible. Window frames should be wood, steel or aluminum. Vinyl windows are not acceptable. Muntin divisions should be real divided glass or simulated with spacer bars. Snap-in muntins are not acceptable. Color selection should be sympathetic with the overall building color palette and take into account the adjacent building materials within the structure, immediately adjacent structures, structures within the same block and Figure 49 structures across the street. Entry door hardware is to be exterior grade with weather-resistant finish. Hardware design and finish is to be appropriate with facade articulation, color palette and district character. Glazing should be clear glass without tint or film. 25 Building & Architecture Page 17 of 157  ATTACHMENT B2 Minutes Adopted October 16, 2025 1 Minutes Adopted September 18, 2025 2 3 Winnetka Design Review Board/Sign Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes 4 September 18, 2025 5 6 Members Present: Katie Moor, Chairperson 7 Chris Baggett 8 Wesley Barker 9 Fritz Duda 10 Peter Evanich 11 Heather Niehoff 12 13 Members Absent: Colin Kennedy 14 15 Village Staff: Davorka Kirincic, Building and Code Enforcement Manager 16 17 Call to Order & Roll Call: 18 Chairperson Moor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll call was taken of the Board Members present. 19 20 Public Comments: 21 No comments were made at this time. 22 23 Approval of Minutes: 24 Chairperson Moor asked if there were any comments or corrections or for a motion to approve the July 17, 2025 25 meeting minutes. A motion to approve the July 17, 2025 meeting minutes was made by Mr. Barker and seconded 26 by Mr. Baggett. A vote was taken and the motion unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 27 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 28 NAYS: None 29 30 New Applications: 31 a. Case No. 25-13-DR: 933 Green Bay Road - Visual Comfort & Co.: Sign Permit to allow a new wall and 32 double-faced projecting signs, all of which will be on the new building’s Green Bay Road elevation of the Subject 33 Property. 34 Ms. Kirincic summarized the application in detail for the Board, identifying the property’s location and zoning 35 classification. She also referred to the Village’s Sign Code as well as to Village Design Guidelines the Board is to 36 consider. 37 Chairperson Moor asked if there were any questions. Ms. Niehoff referred to the backlit lighting and questioned 38 how it would operate. Frank Lambert, representing the applicant from the design sign company, responded that it 39 would be halo or reverse backlit lighting. Ms. Niehoff also asked for the reasoning for the 18-inch size. Ms. Kirincic 40 explained in terms of the design guideline recommendations. Mr. Lambert explained the limitations of how the 41 letters are fabricated and noted the lower-case lettering would be smaller, with only a few letters measuring 18 42 inches. Ms. Niehoff described it as massive. Mr. Lambert estimated the smaller letter height to be 14 inches and 43 stated that samples were previously provided to the Board for their review. He also described the LED wattage 44 that would be used. Ms. Kirincic provided the Board with additional information. 45 46 Chairperson Moor asked if there were any other questions. She indicated the letter size appeared to be a 47 manufacturing issue. Ms. Niehoff commented that the letter size did not seem appropriate and referred to its scale 48 in relation to neighboring buildings. Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to approve the application as submitted 49 or for the applicant to conduct further investigation to determine whether the sign could be scaled to meet the 50 design guidelines, along with an alternative method of backlighting. A Board Member commented the sign is nice, 51 but the Board Members are wrestling with the width. Another Board Member agreed with the comments made 52 and added that it would embrace the Hubbard Woods business district. Another Board Member agreed with the 53 comments made and that the size should be reduced. Page 18 of 157  Design Review Board September 16, 2025 Page 2 1 2 Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to approve the request. A motion to approve the request was made by Mr. 3 Duda and seconded by Mr. Baggett. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5 to 1: 4 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor 5 NAYS: Niehoff 6 7 b. Case No. 25-14-DR: 191 Linden Street - Saints Faith Hope & Charity Parish: Certificate of 8 Appropriateness to allow the replacement of the existing roof on the south wing of the school at the Subject 9 Property. 10 Ms. Kirincic summarized the application in detail for the Board, identifying the property’s location and zoning 11 classification. She stated the applicant also provided site plans and referred to the Certificate of Appropriateness 12 Standards and Village Design Guidelines recommendations for the Board’s consideration. Chairperson Moor asked 13 Board members if there were any questions. No questions were raised at this time. 14 15 Chairperson Moor asked for the applicant’s presentation. Dennis Levin, the church’s general contractor, 16 introduced himself to the Board and explained the reasoning for not using clay tile for the roof replacement as 17 opposed to the metal roof used on other buildings in the surrounding area of the school campuses. Mr. Levin 18 explained the reasoning behind their selection, which included cost and the fact that the proposed roof would 19 match the other roof elements. Chairperson Moor asked if they had considered using different roofing materials. 20 Mr. Levin responded that they did and explained their choice, which included the length of time the roof would 21 last. 22 23 A Board Member asked if there is a history regarding other metal roofs. Ms. Kirincic explained that the special use 24 previously requested for the Parish Center included specifications for a metal sheet roof. Chairperson Moor 25 referred to a 2005 GIS image, which showed a metal roof for the church and gym buildings. Ms. Niehoff agreed 26 with Chairperson Moor that it would be better to use higher-quality materials, while acknowledging the complexity 27 and budget concerns. She then stated consistency would be provided on the campus. A Board Member asked if it 28 would be prefinished metal and for the warranty information. Mr. Levin confirmed that it is correct and that it 29 would have a 25-year warranty. 30 31 Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to approve the request as presented. A motion to approve the request as 32 presented was made by Mr. Evanich and seconded by Ms. Niehoff. A vote was taken, and the motion was 33 unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 34 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 35 NAYS: None 36 37 c. Case No. 25-15-DR: 520 Green Bay Road - BMO Bank: Certificate of Appropriateness to allow exterior 38 building and landscaping alterations on the Subject Property. 39 Chairperson Moor noted that the applicant asked to withdraw. Ms. Kirincic confirmed that the applicant had 40 withdrawn the application and provided a summary of the request to the Board. 41 42 No vote was taken at this time. 43 44 d. Case No. 25-16-DR: 847 Elm Street - Little Elm: Sign Permit to install window and projecting signs, and 45 Certificate of Appropriateness to allow storefront improvements and removal of the existing awning and awning 46 valance sign from the previous business on the Subject Property. 47 Ms. Kirincic summarized the application in detail for the Board, identifying the property’s location and zoning 48 classification. She also referred to the Village’s Sign Code as well as to Village Design Guidelines that the Board is to 49 consider. Additionally, Ms. Kirincic brought to the Board’s attention that the PowerPoint Applicant submitted to be 50 present at the meeting includes additional door window signage, decal updates regarding (including a change of 51 the color), and a different entrance door color than submitted initially with their applications 52 Page 19 of 157  Design Review Board September 16, 2025 Page 3 1 Chairperson Moor asked for the applicant’s presentation. Kittie Brandtner introduced herself to the Board and 2 stated that they planned to have one large windowpane instead of two aluminum windows. She also mentioned a 3 side divert near the front door, where the logo decal would be placed, making it visible from the sidewalk. Ms. 4 Brandtner noted that there would be no logo on the main window to elevate the space and add charm. A Board 5 Member asked if the blade sign was fixed or on chains. Ms. Brandtner confirmed the blade sign is fixed. He then 6 referred to the design guidelines, which recommend against swinging signage. A Board Member questioned the 7 material to be used. Ms. Brandtner provided a sample to the Board for their review. She also referred to the 8 limestone, which would remain with the brick above. Ms. Brandtner then confirmed that the door would change, 9 along with the quartz on the bottom. 10 11 Ms. Niehoff commented that it looked great. Chairperson Moor agreed with Ms. Niehoff’s comments. Chairperson 12 Moor suggested that the Board approve the request, conditional upon the applicant resubmitting it with the decal 13 positioned on the side, featuring new text at the door window, and a different text and door color. 14 15 Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to approve the request with a condition. A motion was made by Mr. Baggett, 16 conditional upon the applicant's submission of a revised rendering that includes the decal and updates the 17 proposed signage materials with new text colors and door window signage, as presented in the meeting's 18 PowerPoint. Mr. Duda seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 19 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 20 NAYS: None 21 22 e. Case No. 25-17-DR: 555-557-559 Chestnut Street: Certificate of Appropriateness to enable the 23 sandblasting, tuckpointing, re-painting, and replacement of two existing windows on the alley elevation of the 24 Subject Property. 25 Chairperson Moor identified the property owner for the commercial building and stated the request is to allow 26 exterior repair and alterations to the existing structure and that the applicant is seeking approval to enable 27 sandblasting, tuckpointing, repainting, and replacement of two windows on the alley elevation. Ms. Kirincic 28 provided additional information to the Board. 29 30 Chairperson Moor stated that the two windows are shown on page 92. She then asked for a motion to approve the 31 request as presented. A motion to approve the request as presented was made by Mr. Baggett and seconded by 32 Mr. Barker. A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 33 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 34 NAYS: None 35 36 f. Case No. 25-18-DR: 914 Green Bay Road - Sante Integrated Health and Wellness: Sign Permit to install 37 door window and projecting signs at the first-floor entrance of the Subject Property. 38 Chairperson Moor stated the applicant is requesting that the Board consider a sign application as the commercial 39 space lessee as well as a proposed door window and projecting sign at the entrance. 40 Ms. Kirincic summarized the application in detail for the Board, identifying the property’s location and zoning 41 classification. She also referred to the Village’s Sign Code as well as to Village Design Guidelines that the Board is to 42 consider. 43 44 Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to approve the request as presented. A motion to approve the request as 45 presented was made by Ms. Niehoff and seconded by Mr. Barker. A vote was taken, and the motion was 46 unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 47 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 48 NAYS: None 49 50 g. Case No. 25-19-DR: 560 Chestnut Street - Neapolitan: Certificate of Appropriateness requesting 51 approval to paint portions of the exterior storefront on the Subject Property. 52 Chairperson Moor stated the applicant is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for recent storefront painting 53 changes. Ms. Kirincic summarized the application in detail for the Board, identifying the property’s location and Page 20 of 157  Design Review Board September 16, 2025 Page 4 1 zoning classification. She also referred to the Village’s Sign Code as well as to Village Design Guidelines that the 2 Board is to consider. 3 4 5 Chairperson Moor asked if there were any questions. Ms. Niehoff questioned the difference between the blush 6 and brighter pink colors. Ms. Kirincic explained to the Board and stated that the applicant was asked to provide 7 additional information. A Board Member noted that the rendering seemed to include more painted areas than the 8 current storefront photos, which reflect recent paint changes. Ms. Kirincic provided clarification to the Board. 9 10 Chairperson Moor asked for the applicant’s presentation. Kelly Golden, the owner, provided a paint sample to the 11 Board. She stated they intended to paint the metal, which she described as dark, along with the door entryway to 12 the pink color they use for their store branding. She referred to the attempts made regarding the paint having 13 different shades and asked if there were any questions. 14 15 Chairperson Moor described the color as very bright, and per the design guidelines, she read from the design 16 guidelines: “Colors shall be used with restraint. Excessive brightness should be avoided.” She commented that she 17 preferred the pale pink color, which would still complement the brand well. She noted that the elevation on the 18 rendering, which shows a pale/blush pink color, looks so beautiful and elegant. Ms. Niehoff asked if the color is 19 used throughout the store. Ms. Golden responded to the Board. She confirmed that the limestone and columns 20 would not be painted. Ms. Golden also stated that the color has been tested in terms of its appearance. The Board 21 Members then discussed the shade of pink colors and their intended uses in detail. They liked the pastel 22 pale/blush pink shade shown on the proposed renderings and directed the applicant to get as much of that shade 23 as they could on the storefront. Ms. Neihoff stated that with bright pink color and white limestone columns, the 24 overall appearance looks choppy. It was also concluded that board members would not mind all limestone 25 columns to be painted as shown on the rendering, as mentioned earlier, if the applicant can match that pale/blush 26 shade of pink. It would give a cohesive look to the storefront. 27 28 Ms. Niehoff suggested that if one bright shade of pink is vital to the applicant, it should only be done at the 29 entrance door and the recessed portion. She also stated it is essential to the building as a whole; a lighter 30 pale/blush pink color should be used in order to make it more contiguous. Chairperson Moor agreed with Ms. 31 Neihoff's suggestion and referred to several public comments she had received. Ms. Golden stated that she 32 appreciated the Board’s comments and is willing to return to the Board with a lighter pink color. The Chairperson 33 emphasized the importance of reviewing a paint sample before approval, noting that a photo of the paint does not 34 do justice. Mrs. Kirincic suggested that applicants can paint one smaller portion of the storefront to try to match 35 the preferred pastel pale/blush pink color and present it at the next DRB meeting for approval. The applicant 36 agreed to match the pale/blush pink color from the application material’s rendering as closely as possible. 37 However, she requested that the approval process be expedited to avoid a one-month delay in painting the 38 storefront. She is embarrassed by the storefront's current appearance and would like to paint it as soon as 39 possible. Members discussed how to expedite approval without waiting for next month's DRB meeting, while still 40 checking and approving a new shade of pale/blush pink that matches as closely as possible, as shown on the 41 application elevation rendering applied to the storefront. 42 43 It was decided that the Board will approve the application with the condition that a paint sample of the desired 44 pale/blush pink color be applied to a portion of the façade, in a couple of areas with different materials (limestone, 45 metal, fascia, and wood), to see how the paint takes to other materials. Also, it was concluded that staff will share 46 by e-mail a photo with a color paint sample applied on the storefront with Board members, get approval of the 47 color shade electronically (that way get back quickly to the Applicant and not postpone the project). After approval 48 of the specific color shade, the Applicant would be able to proceed with painting the whole storefront. 49 50 Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to approve the request with a condition. Mr. Duda moved to approve the 51 Applicant application, conditioned on approval of the specific color by staff and committee, which will be 52 conducted electronically in some fashion. Mr. Barker seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the motion was 53 unanimously passed, 6 to 0: Page 21 of 157  Design Review Board September 16, 2025 Page 5 1 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 2 NAYS: None 3 4 Other Business. 5 a. October 16, 2025, Meeting – Quorum Check. 6 The Board Members discussed their availability. 7 8 Adjournment: 9 Chairperson Moor asked for a motion to adjourn. A motion to adjourn was made by Ms. Niehoff and seconded by 10 Mr. Duda. A vote was taken, and the motion was unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 11 AYES: Baggett, Barker, Duda, Evanich, Moor, Niehoff 12 NAYS: None 13 The meeting was adjourned at 8:06 p.m. 14 15 Respectfully submitted, 16 17 Antionette Johnson 18 Recording Secretary Page 22 of 157  MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD/SIGN BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: DAVORKA KIRINCIC, AICP BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2025 SUBJECT: 986 GREEN BAY ROAD – SIT STILL KIDS SALON – NEW WINDOW, DOOR, AND WALL SIGN PERMIT AND SIGN CODE VARIATIONS (CASE NO. 25-20-DR) On November 20, 2025, the Design Review Board (DRB) is scheduled to consider a Sign Permit Application submitted by Sit Still Kids Salon (the “Applicant”), the current lessee of the commercial space located at 986 Green Bay Road (the “Subject Property”). The Applicant has submitted applications seeking the following approvals: 1. Sign Permit to allow installation of new wall, window, and door signs; and 2. Sign Code Variations to allow the following: a. Window signs that exceed 10% of their respective window area, and b. Decal window signs that are not die-cut and are not limited to individual letters and logos (i.e., do not have a background panel). PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located west of Green Bay Road between Scott Avenue and Merrill Street in the Hubbard Woods Business District. It is zoned C-2 General Retail Commercial and is located within the Commercial Overlay District. Figures 1 and Figure 2 on the following page identify the Subject Property. Figure 3 identifies the proposed wall sign's location on the building's exterior façade on Green Bay Road. Location of Subject Property Figure 1 – Subject Property – Location Map Page 23 of 157  Location of Sit Still Kids Salon Figure 2 – Subject Property- View from Green Bay Road Location of Proposed Back-lit Illuminated Wall Sign Figure 3 – Subject Property Sit Still Kids Salon – Storefront CURRENT REQUEST The Applicant seeks approval for new wall, window, and door signs to identify and promote their new Page 24 of 157 business location at the Subject Property. The proposed signs will feature the business name and its branding, as illustrated below: Proposed Signage at Green Bay Road Storefront Wall Sign • Three-dimensional channel, individually crafted letters in white; • Non-reflective metallic letters; • Letters mounted onto a railway backing painted brown to match the existing brick wall; • Non-illuminated letters 14 inches tall stating “Sit still.” and 4.0 inches tall stating “KIDS SALON”; • Located on the Green Bay Road exterior wall on the sign band above the storefront side window and entrance door; • Approximately 8.50 square feet of sign area; and • 9.0 feet above grade. Proposed Wall Sign Details Page 25 of 157  Wall Sign Letters Detail Windows Signs A) Window Sign • Individual text die-cut decals in white color; • 10 inches tall text stating “sit still”; • 3 inches tall text stating “Kids Salon”; • Confetti Elements up to 21.69 inches tall and have a background in different colors; • Sign area of the text is 3.94 square feet; • Text and graphic elements located 2/3 of the window height; • 11.50 square feet of the sign area; and • Signage occupies 13.70 % of the window area. B) Window Sign • Individual text die-cut decals in white and multi-color; • 5 inches tall text stating “A”, “MODERN”, “KIDS SALON”; • Text located at the bottom of the window height; • Sign area of the text is 2.6 square feet; and • Sign occupies 10 % of the window area. Proposed Window Signs at Subject Storefront Page 26 of 157 Door Window Signs: D) Window • Individual text die-cut decals in white color; • 1.00 inches tall text in white (Hours of Operation, Real Style, Real Fun); • 1.00 inches tall side profile in orange, located in the lower and middle portion of the door window; • Sign area is 2.37 square feet; and • Sign occupies 27.67 % of the door glass area. E) Door Transom Sign • Individual text die-cut decals in white color; • 1.00 inches tall text in white (stating “STYLE WITH US” and “NOW HIRING”); • Located in the lower portion of the transom window; • Sign area is 0.2126.52 square feet; and • Sign occupies 5.26 % of the transom glass area. Proposed Door Window & Transom Signs at Storefront A copy of the Applicant’s application materials is included in Attachment A. SIGN CODE ANALYSIS Section 15.60.120 of the Village Sign Code establishes standards for door and window signs in commercial districts. Window and door signs that meet the following standards can be administratively approved by staff. When the proposed signs do not comply with these standards, they require review by the Design Review Board as well as approval of Sign Code Variations, and it is stated in bold text. • Limited to 10% or less of the single windowpane and 50% of the door glass pane; o Proposed signage in the left window covers up 13.78% of the respective window area (Sign Variation required for Window A); • Limited letters and logos no taller than 8”, except one logo, and the first letter of each word may be up to no taller than 24”, and except store hours and contact information shall be limited to 2” in height. o Several text lines and graphic elements of the proposed window signs are 11.79-21.69 inches in height. The subject elements are not a logo or first letter; they are higher than 8 Page 27 of 157  inches and require Board approval; • The height of the sign should not exceed 1/3 of the height of the glass area and 90% of the glass width, and requires Board approval; • Decal window signs shall be die-cut and limited to individual letters and logos; o Several text lines and graphic elements of the proposed window signs are not die-cut, have a background, and need Board approval. (Sign Variation required for windows A and B). • Limited to two colors; o Proposed window signs have more than two colors and require Board approval; • Without reflective materials; • No window sign should be illuminated; • Located in the lower two-thirds of the window opening; • Shall not extend over or through architectural features/window muntin; • Comply with the following: for each street exposure, the total area of all wall signs, window signs, and awning signs other than exempt signs and permitted directional and incidental signs shall not exceed 15% of the street exposure. o The total sign area of signs on street exposure elevation does not exceed the allowed 15%. Window Maximum Maximum Proposed Sign Area Proposed Proposed Sign /Door Allowed Sign Allowed (sf) Sign Area as Area Area Sign Area % of Window (sf) (% of Window (sf) Area Area) A) Window 83.48 10% 8.35 11.50 13.78% B) Window 25.95 10% 2.60 2.67 10.00% C) Door Window 13.21 50% 6.1 3.64 27.55% D) Door Transom 3.99 50% 7.98 0.21 5.26% As mentioned above, the proposed door window and window signs do not meet all the Sign Code standards for window and door signs. Wall sign standards • Sign may only contain the business name, a three-word generic description of the types of products or services offered, and the occupant’s logo or trademark; • Sign may not exceed 70 square feet in area; • Shall be placed substantially parallel to the surface of the wall, and • Shall not be located above the second-floor windowsill level and shall not be higher than fourteen (14) feet above grade if there is no second-floor windowsill. The proposed wall sign meets all the above standards for wall signs. Signage Street Exposure Area Square Foot Percentage Green Bay Avenue Elevation Area 230.00 - Max Allowed per Sign Code 34.50 15.00% (15% of the Street Exposure) All Proposed Signs Counted Toward Street Exposure 26.52 11.53% The proposed signage complies with the maximum allowed sign area street exposure requirements. Page 28 of 157 SIGN CODE VARIATION REQUEST 1. The Applicant has applied for a Sign Code Variation from Section 15.60.120 [Commercial Signs] to allow a. Window signs that exceed 10% of their respective window area, and b. Window decal signs that are not die-cut and are not limited to individual letters and logos (i.e., do not have a background panel). The Design Review Board (also sitting as the Sign Board of Appeals) may grant relief from the Sign Code if it determines that the following standards set out in Section 15.60.250 [Variations] are met: 1. The variations would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter; 2. Given the design elements of the building or site on which the sign is located, the design of the sign is as compatible, if not more compatible, with the character of the business district than the standard sign regulations would otherwise allow; 3. For window signs, the design of the sign would not significantly inhibit the viewing of store products, activities, or services; 4. The variation will not alter the essential character of the locality; 5. The design of the sign is contextually appropriate for the type of business, and 6. The design of the sign exhibits a high degree of artistic embellishment. DESIGN GUIDELINES ANALYSIS When reviewing the design of any signs, the Board is to consider the following standards and criteria of Section 15.60.150(F) of the Sign Code. F. Standards and Criteria for Issuance. The following factors and characteristics relating to the safety and appearance of signage shall govern the Board’s evaluation of design submittals: 1. The sign area shall be in proportion and scale to the building or to other buildings or signs in the surrounding area; 2. A signage package for a business establishment that includes a number of signs and graphics shall have an overall plan that demonstrates the compatibility of the design and colors of all the signs that are part of that package; 3. The amount of text and graphics contained in or on any sign or group of signs shall be limited so that it results in a clear and readable design; 4. Signs and graphics shall have a harmonious relationship with nearby signs, buildings, and the neighborhood and shall be designed not to adversely affect adjacent structures. In this respect, the sign shall relate to its building, structure, and neighborhood in terms of size, shape, material, color, texture, lettering, location, arrangement, lighting, and the like; 5. Colors shall be used with restraint; excessive brightness shall be avoided; and 6. The additional provisions of this chapter, as specified in this chapter, shall be part of the criteria of the design review process. The Board should also consider the Village Design Guidelines for the proposed signage. See Attachment B. SUMMARY Page 29 of 157 The Applicant requests that the DRB find the proposed signs appropriate and compatible with the Design Guidelines and approve the application as proposed, including the two aforementioned sign variations. Should the DRB find the proposed improvements acceptable, the Applicant would first need to obtain the approved sign permit for the illuminated wall sign from the Community Development Department before installing it. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Design Guidelines Excerpt Page 30 of 157 Page 31 of 157  Village of Winnetka SIGN CODE VARIATION APPLICATION V I L L A G E O F W I N N E T K A, I L L I N O I S DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIGN CODE VARIATION APPLICATION Property Information 986 Green Bay Road, Winnetka, IL 60093 Site Address: _________________________________________________________________________________ Sit Still Kids Salon Name of Business: _____________________________________________________________________________ Parcel Identification Number(s) (PIN): 05-17-114-011-1027 _____________________________________________________________ Application is hereby made to the Village of Winnetka for a variation from Section(s) _______________________ of Chapter 15.60 Signs of the Village Code for the following work: _______________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Attach a separate written document that explains in detail how the requested variation complies with all of the following standards: 1. The requested variation is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Sign Code. 2. Given the design elements of the building or site on which the sign is located, the design is as compatible, if not more, with the character of the business district than the standard sign regulations allow. 3. For window signs, the design of the sign does not significantly inhibit the viewing of store products, activities, or services. 4. The design of the sign is contextually appropriate for the type of business. 5. The design of the sign exhibits a high degree of artistic embellishment. 6. The variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. Property Owner Information Applicant Information 986 Green Bay Road LLC Legal Name: __________________________________ McJordan LLC Legal Name:____________________________ _____________________________________________ dba Sit Still Kids Salon ______________________________________ Jenn Epstein Primary Contact:_______________________________ Chris Jordan Primary Contact: _________________________ 568 Lincoln Avenue Address:______________________________________ 2008 Bennett Avenue Address:________________________________ Winnetka, IL 60093 City, State, Zip: ________________________________ Evanston, IL 60201 City, State, Zip:___________________________ 847.512.3191 Phone No. ____________________________________ 248.470.5573 Phone No.______________________________ jepstein@hoffmanncre.com Email:________________________________________ chris.jordan@sitstillkids.com Email:__________________________________ Owner Signature:____ ______ Applicant Signature:__ Page 4 of 4 Page 32 of 157 Page 33 of 157 Page 34 of 157 Page 35 of 157 Page 36 of 157 Page 37 of 157 Wall Sign Measurements and Detail Construction Details – All in Compliance • Channel letters. Three-dimensional, individually crafted, metallic letters. • Non-reflective metallic letters. • Mounting: letters mounted onto a railway backing, painted brown to match brick background (approx. 8 holes total drilled into brick). • Non-illuminated. • 14” lettering height: “sit still.”. • 4” lettering height: “KIDS SALON sit still. 14 x 68 = 952 sq. in. 6.6 sq. ft KIDS SALON 4 x 44 = 176 sq. in. 1.2 sq. ft TOTAL WALL SIGN = 1,128 sq. in. 7.8 sq. ft. Street Frontage 120 x 276 = 33,120 sq. in. 230 sq. ft. Street Coverage 1,128 / 33,120 = 3.4% Page 38 of 157 Page 39 of 157  ATTACHMENT B G Building Signage Commercial signs should reflect the character of the building style, while expressing each store’s individuality. There are several prominent sign styles that are appropriateto Winnetka: surface mounted, pin-mounted, interior, decal and projecting blade signs. Sign materials are limited to painted wood, canvas, architectural glass and metal. Sign color must harmonize with the building upon which it is mounted and adjacent structures. Letteringcolor can be unique to the image of the retailer/user. Metal sign and plaque materialsuch as brushed bronze, antique bronze, aluminum, stainless steel and painted cast ironor similarly appearing materials are preferred. Highly reflective metallic signs are notallowed. Signs should be lit by marquee or spot lighting; neon lighting is not permitted.Spot lighting should be minimal and unobtrusive and, per the Village Code, the sourceof illumination shall not be visible from any street, sidewalk or dwelling. Simplifiedindustrial light fixtures are not permitted. Contextual solutions are recommended. Themajority of the signs will be mounted within the building’s sign band, defined as thewall area located above the ground floor storefront opening and below the second floorwindowsill, and is located a minimum of 8’-0” above grade anda maximum of 15’-0”above grade. 0&DPHQGHG Signs must comply with the general provisions of the Winnetka Sign Ordinance as well as design provisions contained within these Design Guidelines.  Surface mounted commercial signs are either fabricated from painted wood orcast metal plaques and are to be mounted within the sign band or within thestorefront transom. The height of the sign is restricted to 75% of the area of thesign band or 14 inches - whichever is less. The sign band of a building consists ofthe area located above the ground floor storefront opening and below the secondfloor windowsill, and is located a minimum of 8’-0” and a maximum of 15’-0”above grade. Refer to figures 28, 29, and 30 for location. Surface mounted orpin- mounted signs are not permitted on secondary elevations without a definedsign band. 2. Pin-mounted commercial signs consist of reverse channel, cast metal and flat cut metal letters mounted above the storefront in the masonry sign band or suspended in front of the storefront at the transom or recessed entry. The size of the lettering is restricted so that the height of the letters does not exceed 75% of the height of the sign band or 14 inches - whichever is less. The length of the lettering is to be Figure 38 contained within 75% of the length of the sign band. (See figure 38) 19 Building & Architecture Page 40 of 157  MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: DAVORKA KIRINCIC, AICP BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2025 SUBJECT: 510 WINNETKA AVENUE – OBERWEIS ICE CREAM AND DAIRY STORE - SIGN PERMIT AND SIGN CODE VARIATIONS (CASE NO. 25-24-DR) INTRODUCTION On November 20, 2025, the Design Review Board (DRB) is scheduled to consider a Sign Permit and Sign Code Variation application submitted by Hoffman Commercial Real Estate (the “Applicant”) as the owner of the Oberweis Ice Cream and Dairy Store space located at 510 Winnetka Avenue (the “Subject Property”). The Applicant has submitted applications seeking the following approvals: 1. Sign Permit to allow existing storefront window signs to remain on the Subject property. 2. The following Sign Code Variations to allow existing window signs to remain on the Subject property: a. A variation to allow existing window signs that exceed 10% of their respective window area; b. A variation to allow existing window signs that are not die-cut and are not limited to individual letters and logos, and c. A variation to allow the total area of all window signs, wall signs, and awning signs to exceed 15 percent (15%) of the total area of street exposure. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property (Parcel Index Number 05-28-102-023-0000), located at the southwest intersection of Green Bay Road and Winnetka Avenue, is zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial. The Oberweis Ice Cream and Dairy Store occupies a portion of the first floor of an existing three-story mixed-use building. Figure 1 below shows the site plan and location of the Applicant’s business. Figure 2 shows the entire front facade of the building and the location of the Applicant’s storefront. Page 41 of 157  Oberweis Ice Cream and Dairy Store Location Figure 1 – Subject Property Location of the Applicant’s business Store Frontage of the Oberweis Ice Cream and Dairy Store Figure 2 – Subject Property – Existing store frontage along Green Bay Road PREVIOUS APPROVALS The DRB recommended approval of a Sign Permit to recover the existing awning frames with new fabric, install new valance signs, a new wall sign identifying the business, and a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow exterior building alterations, including changes to the existing doors/windows and updating sconce lighting in April 2025. The Village Council approved the request on May 6, 2025. CURRENT REQUEST The Applicant is seeking approval to allow the additional window signs (storefront window decals, posters, and floating window signs) installed after Village Council approval in May 2025, to remain at the Subject Property. The additional signs’ photographic features, text, and colors are shown in the illustrations below: Page 42 of 157 A) Floating Window Sign, “Share Happiness” • Sign installed on the interior wall element that is within 5-feet of the storefront window; • Sign extends over the window muntin; • 43 inches spaced from the window; • 9.5 inches text in red stating “Share Happiness” and OBERWEIS with HF logo in the bottom right of the window; • Covering 100% of the window area; and • 70.13 square feet in area. B) Window Poster Sign, Ice Cream Sundae Image: • Printed vinyl and laminated; • Applied to the glass surface; • Sign extends over/through the window muntin; • Covering 100% of the window area; and • 42.89 square feet in area. Page 43 of 157 Decal Signs on Multiple Windows (B, C, D, E & F) • Decals applied to the glass; • Letters are 3.62 inches high, and the logo is 4.71 inches in red color; • Text on multiple windows: “SUNDAES”, “OBERWEIS”, ”ICE CREAM”, “MILK SHAKES”, “SOFT SERVE”, and “HF” logo. Floating Window Sign, Ice Cream Cone: • Back-lit illuminated ice cream cone installed on the wall in red tiles that is within 5-feet of the storefront window: • Ice cream cone sign is spaced 35.62 inches from the window; • Covering 100% of the window area; and • Ice cream cone sign area with red wall as background is 28.74 square feet. Page 44 of 157 A copy of the Applicant’s application materials is included in Attachment A. SIGN CODE ANALYSIS Section 15.60.120 of the Village Sign Code establishes commercial district window sign standards. Section 15.60.050 contains the following definition: "Window sign" means a sign, picture, symbol, or combination, applied or attached to the exterior or interior of a window, or located within five feet of the interior side of a window and displayed so that it is visible from the exterior of the window. For purposes of this code, displayed merchandise or products shall not be considered a window sign. Window signs that meet the following standards can be administratively approved by staff. Given the signage covers 100 percent of the window, the signage does not meet many of the following standards. Thus, the window signage requires review by the Design Review Board as well as approval of Sign Code Variations: • Limited to 10% or less of the single windowpane; o Existing signs in window A), B) and C) cover 100% of the respective window area (Sign variation required for each window); • Limited to 50% or less of a door window or transom; • Height of the sign to not exceed 1/3 of the height of the glass area and 90% of the glass width; o Existing signs in window A), B), and C) cover 100% of the respective window area and cannot be approved administratively. (Signs need DRB approval); • Limited letters and logos no taller than 8”, except one logo, and the first letter of each word may be up to no taller than 24” and except store hours and contact information shall be limited to 2” in height; • No window sign should be illuminated; o Ice cream cone sign is back-lit illuminated and does not comply with the Code; • Located in the lower two-thirds of the window opening; o Existing signs in window A), B) and C) cover 100% of the respective window area and cannot be approved administratively (Signs need DRB approval); Page 45 of 157  • Without reflective materials; • Limited to two colors; o Existing signs in window A), B) and C) have more than two colors and cannot be approved administratively (Signs need DRB approval); • Decal sign shall be die-cut and limited to individual letters and logos o A), B), and C) floating and poster signs are not die-cut and are not limited to individual letters and logos. (Sign Variation required for each window); • Shall not extend over or through architectural features/window muntin; o A), B), and C) floating and poster signs are extending through the muntin and cannot be approved administratively. (Signs need DRB approval), and • Comply with the following: for each street exposure, the total area of all wall signs, window signs, and awning signs other than exempt signs and permitted directional and incidental signs shall not exceed 15% of the street exposure. Sign Street Exposure Brier Street Elevation Signage Street Exposure Area Square Percentage Foot Brier Street Exposure 612 - Max Allowed per Sign Code 11.80 15% (15% of the Street Exposure) All Proposed Signs counted toward Brier Street 120.40 19.67% Exposure Green Bay Road Elevation Signage Street Exposure Area Square Percentage Foot Green Bay Road Avenue Exposure 285.88 - Max Allowed per Sign Code 42.88 15% (15% of the Street Exposure) All Proposed Signs counted toward Green Bay Road 13.95 4.87% Street Exposure Winnetka Avenue Elevation Signage Street Exposure Area Square Percentage Foot Winnetka Avenue Exposure 395.25 - Max Allowed per Sign Code 59.25 15% (15% of the Street Exposure) All Proposed Signs counted toward Winnetka 32.76 8.28% Avenue Street Exposure o The signs at Green Bay Road and Winnetka Avenue comply with the maximum allowed sign area exposure for each street, but the signs at the Brier Street elevation do not adhere to the maximum permitted sign area exposure (Sign Code Variation is required). SIGN CODE VARIATION REQUEST Page 46 of 157  1. The Applicant has applied for Sign Code Variations from Section 15.60.120 [Commercial Signs] a. To allow existing window signs that exceed 10% of their respective window area; b. To allow existing window signs that are not die-cut and are not limited to individual letters and logos, and c. To allow the total area of all window signs, wall signs, and awning signs to exceed 15 percent (15%) of the total area of street exposure. The Design Review Board (also sitting as the Sign Board of Appeals) may grant relief from the Sign Code if it determines that the following standards set out in Section 15.60.250 [Variations] are met: 1. The variations would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter; 2. Given the design elements of the building or site on which the sign is located, the design of the sign is as compatible, if not more compatible, with the character of the business district than the standard sign regulations would otherwise allow; 3. For window signs, the design of the sign would not significantly inhibit the viewing of store products, activities, or services; 4. The variation will not alter the essential character of the locality; 5. The design of the sign is contextually appropriate for the type of business; and 6. The design of the sign exhibits a high degree of artistic embellishment. DESIGN GUIDELINES ANALYSIS When reviewing the design of any signs, the Board is to consider the following standards and criteria of Section 15.60.150(F) of the Sign Code. F. Standards and Criteria for Issuance. The following factors and characteristics relating to the safety and appearance of signage shall govern the Board’s evaluation of design submittals: 1. The sign area shall be in proportion and scale to the building or to other buildings or signs in the surrounding area; 2. A signage package for a business establishment that includes a number of signs and graphics shall have an overall plan that demonstrates the compatibility of the design and colors of all the signs that are part of that package; 3. The amount of text and graphics contained in or on any sign or group of signs shall be limited so that it results in a clear and readable design; 4. Signs and graphics shall have a harmonious relationship with nearby signs, buildings, and the neighborhood and shall be designed not to adversely affect adjacent structures. In this respect, the sign shall relate to its building, structure, and neighborhood in terms of size, shape, material, color, texture, lettering, location, arrangement, lighting, and the like; 5. Colors shall be used with restraint; excessive brightness shall be avoided; and 6. The additional provisions of this chapter, as specified in this chapter, shall be part of the criteria of the design review process. The Board should also consider the Village Design Guidelines to approve additional signage to remain. See Page 47 of 157 Attachment B. SUMMARY The Applicant requests that the DRB find the additional installed window signs as appropriate and compatible with the Design Guidelines and approve the Sign Permit and Sign Code Variations as submitted. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Design Guidelines Excerpt Page 48 of 157  ATTACHMENT A Village of Winnetka SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION VILLAGE OF WINNETKA, ILLINOIS DEPAR1MENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION Tenant/Lessee Name of Business Primary contact name O'ca\))�'-$ Project Address ':3\D v.;\ • _� "',_.,.U,- , 'v'\ ..._� Sign Company Primary contact name ,$ � Street� \$ Property Owner Street Address: 5'5o> �\x\-AAe- �� � � �e���Ge.© Sign type(s): twindow graphics D wall-mounted sign D ground-mounted sign (check all that apply) D projecting sign � other______________ � Additional description of sign type and materials____________________ S:f_e �& OFFICE USE ONLY SIGN FEE: $80 NON-ILLUMINATED PER SIGN TYPE $___ $195 ILLUMINATED SIGN $.___ STAFF REVIEW FEE: $70 0 WAIVE FEE $ .___ TOTAL PERMIT FEE $__ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: _______________________ Page4of4 Page 49 of 157  Village of Winnetka SIGN CODE VARIATION APPLICATION VILLAGE OF WINNETKA, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIGN CODE VARIATION APPLICATION Property Information Site Address: s·ro V)l<"� � Name of Business: __ Ocl2t' ________________________ ""-"=--=-- -�- rS Parcel Identification Number(s) (PIN): __ ________ Application is hereby made to the Village of Winnetka for a variation from Section(s) '6.k{).��.o..,. of Chapter 15.60 Signs of the Village Code for the following work: \ 6IJO' �J f?-� Sf.� Ct�� (Q t,u� A'SQ� ee-�� �1'5"1C>-�0 ,t Attach a separate written document that explains in detail how the requested variation complies with all of the following standards: 1. The requested variation is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Sign Code. 2. Given the design elements of the building or site on which the sign is located, the design is as compatible, if not more, with the character of the business district than the standard sign regulations allow. 3. For window signs, the design of the sign does not significantly inhibit the viewing of store products, activities, or services. 4. The design of the sign is contextually appropriate for the type of business. 5. The design of the sign exhibits a high degree of artistic embellishment. 6. The variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. Property Owner Information Applicant Information Legal Name: �ll.X'\("'\ U?fl\� Legal Name: ��'("") �� �ou �-ooe ��, 1 l C .. Primary Contact: Gey\(\ �\{\ Primary Contact: �W\.,� Address: C3ct.8 L\V\.to\,\'\ � Address: '5 tO \j)N\� Phone No. Owner Signature: Applicant Signature· Page4 of4 Page 50 of 157 Ice Cream Cone The ice cream cone is currently not illuminated but we understand it's over 5 ft however it's not a sign it's an architectural feature. -The cone is currently unplugged. Will have electrical removed if needed. Enforcement officer noted so backlist or internal illumination. The architectural element (ice cream cone) is backlit (halo lit) which not listed as prohibited. Refer to section 15.600.050 Definitions. Section 15.60.060 Prohibited signs. No person shall display any sign of the following prohibited types, or in the following prohibited locations: /\, An1ma.ea s1·l rs and sions and d1spl,i.•s con'-istin g of a !>Iring. clusl<ir or �anes r-11.ghts. P.X('.Ppl lhN.<' pe,mitlPd in cornect,c.:n \\i·r1 civ 1c. patr:o :c; or religious holi:l.iys 1, accoalar:ce \�1111 Sectio, I 5.60.090(A;r3}, Sundae picture The sundae picture is covering the windows and blocks our office. The open window with the office showing is unsightly and a safety concern when our team is counting money etc. Page 51 of 157 Share Happiness Mannequin window graphic with the sprinkles is an example of a high degree of artistic embellishment. If not approved, would we be able to cover the window so we can use the space for storage. Page 52 of 157 INTERIOR WALL GRAPHIC SCOPE OF WORK DIGITAL PRINTED WALL GRAPHIC APPLIED TO INTERIOR WALL SPACING FROM GLASS JS 4311 OBERWEIS ADDRESS 510 WINNETKA AVE WINNETKA. IL INTERIOR WALL GRAPHIC EXTERIOR GLASS REPRESENTITIVE 43" Spacing from Window SUSAN BARNE I,. f " s re BRANDON ESPARZA PROJECT: ap IJteSS WINNETKA SIGNAGE ESTIMAlE / ORDER NUMBER DATE 9/18/202S PAGE ,. 1/3 REVISIONS: 1. 2, \ 3, 0 4, R_WEfS 5. 6. 7. inside side view THIS IS AN ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED DRAWING SUBMITTED IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT WE ARE PLANNING FOR YOU, THIS IS NOT TO BE COPIED, UNAUTHORIZED USE WILL INCUR A DESIGN CHARGE, Page 53 of 157 REPRODUCED, EXHIBITED OR SHOWN TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF YOUR ORGANIZATION WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ONE UP SIGNS. ARTWORK IS E X CLUSIVE PROPERTY O F ONE UP SIGNS, LLC. EXTERIOR WINDOW COVERING SCOPE OF WORK PRINTED VINYL AND LAMINATED GRAPHIC AREA: 38. 95 SF APPLIED TO FIRST SURFACE OBERWEIS ADDRESS 510 WINNETKA AVE WINNETKA. IL REPRESENTITIVE SUSAN BARNE BRANDON ESPARZA PROJECT: WINNETKA SIGNAGE ESTIMAlE / ORDER NUMBER DATE 9/18/2025 PAGE ,. 1/3 REVISIONS: 1. 2, 3, 4, 5. 6. 7. THIS IS AN ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED DRAWING SUBMITTED IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT WE ARE PLANNING FOR YOU, THIS IS NOT TO BE COPIED, UNAUTHORIZED USE WILL INCUR A DESIGN CHARGE, Page 54 of 157 REPRODUCED, EXHIBITED OR SHOWN TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF YOUR ORGANIZATION WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ONE UP SIGNS. ARTWORK IS E X CLUSIVE PROPERTY O F ONE UP SIGNS, LLC. lNTERlOR lCE CREAM CONE SCOPE OF WORK INTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT HIGH DENSITY URATHANE (OPAQUE) 3D ROUTED TO SHAPE STUD MOUNTED BACKLIT WITH LEDS (HALO UT) OBERWEIS SIDE VIEW ADDRESS 510 WINNETKA AVE WINNETKA. IL REPRESENTITIVE SUSAN BARNE LEDa power supply BRANDON ESPARZA PROJECT: WINNETKA SIGNAGE ESTIMAlE / ORDER NUMBER DATE 9/18/202S PAGE IF CE CREAM MILK SHAKES SUNDAE ,. 1/3 REVISIONS: 1. 2, 3, 4, 5. 6. 7. CONE AREA: 20.9 SF THIS IS AN ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED DRAWING SUBMITTED IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT WE ARE PLANNING FOR YOU, THIS IS NOT TO BE COPIED, UNAUTHORIZED USE WILL INCUR A DESIGN CHARGE, Page 55 of 157 REPRODUCED, EXHIBITED OR SHOWN TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF YOUR ORGANIZATION WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ONE UP SIGNS. ARTWORK IS E X CLUSIVE PROPERTY O F ONE UP SIGNS, LLC.  WINDOWS WEST BANK OFWINDOWS ZZ31 io OBERWEIS ADDRESS 510 WINNETKA AVE WINNETKA. IL SOFT SERVE 0 REPRESENTITIVE c__________________ SUSAN BARNE '\ \ OB R:WilfS ® WINDOW SIZES �n A WINDOW AREA 80.6 SF GRAPHICS ON WINDOW O SF BRANDON ESPARZA PROJECT: MAIN ENTRANCE WINNETKA SIGNAGE WINDOW AREA 73.3 SF FACING NW B GRAPHICS ON WINDOW 41.3 SF ESTIMAlE / ORDER NUMBER C WINDOW AREA 80.6 SF DATE 9/18/202S GRAPHICS ON WINDOW 2.3 SF PAGE 1, 1/3 D WINDOW AREA 100.65 SF GRAPHICS ON WINDOW 2.55 SF REVISIONS: 1. E GRAPHICS ON WINDOW 2.3 SF 2. NORTH BANK WINDOW AREA 80.3 SF 3, OFWINDOWS 4. 5. F GRAPHICS ON WINDOW 1.7 SF WINDOW AREA 80.3 SF 6. E ------------------ 7. THIS IS AN ORIGINAL. UNPUBLISHED DRAWING SUBMITTED IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT WE ARE PLANNING FOR YOU. THIS IS NOT TO BE COPIED, UNAUTHORIZED USE W I L L I N C U R A OESIGN CHARGE. Page 56 of 157 REPRODUCED, EXHIBITED OR SHOWN TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF YOUR ORGANIZATION WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ONE UP SIGNS. ARTWORK IS EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF ONE UP SIGNS, LLC.  ATTACHMENT B d. Building Signage Commercial signs should reflect the character of the building style, while expressing each store’s individuality. There are several prominent sign styles that are appropriate to Winnetka: surface mounted, pin-mounted, interior, decal and projecting blade signs. Sign materials are limited to painted wood, canvas, architectural glass and metal. Sign color must harmonize with the building upon which it is mounted and adjacent structures. Lettering color can be unique to the image of the retailer/user. Metal sign and plaque material such as brushed bronze, antique bronze, aluminum, stainless steel and painted cast iron or similarly appearing materials are preferred. Highly reflective metallic signs are not allowed. Signs should be lit by marquee or spot lighting; neon lighting is not permitted. Spot lighting should be minimal and unobtrusive and, per the Village Code, the source of illumination shall not be visible from any street, sidewalk or dwelling. Simplified industrial light fixtures are not permitted. Contextual solutions are recommended. The majority of the signs will be mounted within the building’s sign band, defined as the wall area located above the ground floor storefront opening and below the second floor windowsill, and is located a minimum of 8’-0” above grade and a maximum of 15’-0” above grade. (MC-01-2023, amended, 01/17/2023) Signs must comply with the general provisions of the Winnetka Sign Ordinance as well as design provisions contained within these Design Guidelines. 1. Surface mounted commercial signs are either fabricated from painted wood or cast metal plaques and are to be mounted within the sign band or within the storefront transom. The height of the sign is restricted to 75% of the area of the sign band or 14 inches - whichever is less. The sign band of a building consists of the area located above the ground floor storefront opening and below the second floor windowsill, and is located a minimum of 8’-0” and a maximum of 15’-0” above grade. Refer to figures 28, 29, and 30 for location. Surface mounted or pin- mounted signs are not permitted on secondary elevations without a defined sign band. 2. Pin-mounted commercial signs consist of reverse channel, cast metal and flat cut metal letters mounted above the storefront in the masonry sign band or suspended in front of the storefront at the transom or recessed entry. The size of the lettering is restricted so that the height of the letters does not exceed 75% of the height of the sign band or 14 inches - whichever is less. The length of the lettering is to be Figure 38 contained within 75% of the length of the sign band. (See figure 38) 19 Building & Architecture Page 57 of 157  MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: ANN KLAASSEN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2025 SUBJECT: 490 HIBBARD ROAD WINNETKA PARK DISTRCIT / WINNETKA PLATFORM TENNIS CLUB CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (CASE NO. 25-25-DR) INTRODUCTION On November 20, 2025, the Design Review Board (DRB) is scheduled to hold a public hearing on an application submitted by the Winnetka Platform Tennis Club (the “Applicant”), with the consent of the Winnetka Park District, the owner of the property located at 490 Hibbard Road, (the “Subject Property”). The Applicant is proposing changes to the design of the previously approved addition to the existing paddle hut on the Subject Property and requests approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness. A mail notice was sent to property owners within 250 feet of the Subject Property, in compliance with the Village Code. As of the date of this memo, staff has not received any written comments from the public regarding this application. The Applicant has also submitted an application for a Minor Change to a special use permit to allow changes to the previously approved paddle hut additions and decking on the Subject Property. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, a Minor Change in a special use may be approved by the Village Manager. On October 22, 2025, the Village Manger approved the requested Minor Change to the Special Use subject to the DRB’s approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness; hence, the Applicant has submitted the application currently before the DRB (Attachment B). PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property, which is 162.91 acres in size, is located on the west side of Hibbard Road, between Cherry and Pine Streets and contains the Winnetka Park District Campus (see Figure 1). The location of the eight (8) existing platform tennis courts and paddle tennis hut are located immediately west of the tennis courts (see Figure 2). Page 1 Page 58 of 157  Subject A.C. Nielsen Property Tennis Center Platform Tennis Courts & Paddle Hut Ice Arena Figure 1 – Aerial Map of Subject Property Hibbard Road Existing Platform Tennis Courts & Paddle Hut Figure 2 – Up-Close Aerial Map The Subject Property is zoned R-2 Single Family Residential. The Zoning Ordinance allows nonessential public uses, such as public parks and library facilities, by Special Use Permit in all zoning districts. PROPERTY HISTORY AND PREVIOUS ZONING APPROVALS The Winnetka Park District has been operating on the Subject Property for many years. The facilities and activities offered over the years have expanded several times and site improvements have been made. There are ten (10) previous zoning cases on file for the Subject Property, three of which are related to the existing platform tennis courts and paddle hut: 1. Ordinance M-15-2004 was adopted in April 2004 by the Village Council, granting an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit to allow construction of what is now the existing paddle tennis hut; Page 2 Page 59 of 157  2. Ordinance M-12-2007 was adopted in August 2007 by the Village Council, granting an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit to allow construction of two additional platform tennis courts; and 3. Ordinance M-18-2021 was adopted in November 2021 by the Village Council, granting an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit to allow construction of two additional platform tennis courts and additions to the existing paddle hut. Ordinances M-15-2004, M-12-2007, and M-18-2021 are included in this report as Attachment C. The two additional platform tennis courts approved in 2021 have been constructed. However, the additions to the paddle hut and the expansion of the decking surrounding the hut have not yet been constructed. As specified in Section 4: Conditions of Ordinance M-18-2021, construction of the additions to the hut and the expansion of the surrounding decking is to commence no later than January 17, 2027. Figure 3 below is a current photo of the south elevation of the existing paddle hut and platform tennis courts. Location of Proposed Addition to Paddle Hut & Elevated Deck Location of Proposed Covered Outdoor Area Figure 3 – Existing Paddle Hut and Courts (South Elevation) Page 3 Page 60 of 157 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The Applicant is now ready to proceed with construction of the paddle hut additions and the associated elevated deck expansion surrounding the paddle hut. Since the amendment to the Special Use Permit was approved in 2021, the Applicant’s plans for the paddle hut additions have changed. The improvements approved in 2021 included an addition on the south side of the existing paddle hut that measured 832 square feet and an addition on the northwest corner of the hut that measured 338 square feet. As explained in more detail below, the amended design represents a reduction in the overall size of the addition. The purpose of the proposed hut addition is to provide additional lounge space and a viewing area that would face the two additional courts that were recently constructed on the west side of the existing paddle hut. This addition would measure 749 square feet. The redesign of the proposed improvements also includes a covered outdoor gathering area measuring 451 square feet. The elevated deck expansion provides access from the two new courts to the paddle hut. In summary, the amended design represents a decrease of 451 square feet of gross floor area and 856 square feet of impermeable lot coverage from the 2021 approval. The roofed lot coverage remains the same. The necessary permit applications for the proposed improvements have not been submitted to date. However, a preliminary zoning review of the proposed improvements has been completed to verify that what is being represented complies with all zoning regulations. Images on the following pages compare some of the plans approved in 2021 with the current amended plans (Figures 4 through 15). The complete set of plans is provided in the attached application materials (Attachment A). Page 4 Page 61 of 157  Previously Approved Additions to Paddle Hut New Courts (installed) Previously Approved Deck Expansion Figure 4 – 2021 Approved Site Plan Proposed Addition to Paddle Hut Proposed Elevated Deck Proposed Covered Outdoor Area Figure 5 – Amended Site Plan Page 5 Page 62 of 157 Figure 6 – 2021 Approved Paddle Hut Floor Plan Figure 7 – Amended Floor Plan Page 6 Page 63 of 157 Figure 8 – 2021 Approved South Elevation of Paddle Hut Figure 9 – Amended South Elevation Page 7 Page 64 of 157 Figure 10 – 2021 Approved East Elevation of Paddle Hut Figure 11 – Amended East Elevation Page 8 Page 65 of 157 Figure 12 – 2021 Approved North Elevation of Paddle Hut Figure 13 – Amended North Elevation Page 9 Page 66 of 157  Figure 14 – 2021 Approved West Elevation of Paddle Hut Figure 15 – Amended West Elevation Any future expansion of the paddle hut or additional courts would require approval of a Major Change to a special use permit by following the same procedures required to obtain the initial special use permit. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CONSIDERATIONS As established by the Village Code, the DRB is to consider the following four (4) factors in determining whether to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness: “(1) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with the character of the immediate neighborhood;” “(2) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with adopted Village plans for and improvements in the immediate neighborhood, and including both urban design and site arrangement considerations;” “(3) whether the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are consistent with applicable Village design guidelines and such standards and criteria as may be adopted by the Board; and” “(4) the probable effect of the proposed external architectural features on the integrity of the immediate vicinity.” The Board will need to determine if the proposed changes to the design of the addition to the existing paddle hut, comply with the above standards. Page 10 Page 67 of 157 RECOMMENDATION At the November 20, 2025, DRB meeting, the Board is scheduled to consider the amended design of the previously approved addition to the existing paddle hut and elevated decking on the Subject Property. After hearing from the Applicant and the public, the Board may decide to take action on one or two options: 1) Continue further review of the application to a date specific in order to provide the Applicant and/or staff additional time to address questions and comments from the Board; or 2) Adopt a motion to approve or a motion to deny a certificate of appropriateness for the amended design of the previously approved addition to the existing paddle hut and elevated decking. If the Board wishes to adopt a motion to approve or deny, a Board member will want to make a motion such as the following: Move to approve [deny] of a certificate of appropriateness for the amended design of the previously approved addition to the existing paddle hut and elevated decking for the Winnetka Park District and Winnetka Platform Tennis Club at 490 Hibbard Road, subject to the following conditions: A. [If the Board chooses to place conditions as part of its approval, it will want to include the conditions here.] The Board’s findings are based on evidence in the record, or a public document, and upon the following findings of fact: (1) the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with the character of the immediate neighborhood; (2) the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are appropriate to and compatible with adopted Village plans for and improvements in the immediate neighborhood, and including both urban design and site arrangement considerations; (3) the proposed external architectural features and site improvements are consistent with applicable Village design guidelines and such standards and criteria as may be adopted by the Board; and (4) the probable effect of the proposed external architectural features on the integrity of the immediate vicinity. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Special Use Permit – Minor Change Written Order of Approval, approved October 22, 2025 Attachment C: Ordinance M-15-2004, adopted April 20, 2004, Ordinance M-12-2007, adopted August 7, 2007, and Ordinance M-18-2021, adopted November 2, 2021. Page 11 Page 68 of 157  ATTACHMENT A Costa Kutulas Director of Parks and Maintenance Winnetka Park District 1380 Willow Road Winnetka Illinois 60093 October 29, 2025 Ann Klaassen Assistant Director of Community Development Village of Winnetka Winnetka Illinois 60093 Dear Ann, I am submitting this letter in support of the Certificate of Appropriateness for a minor change to the approved Special Use Permit (M-18-2021), which authorized the installation of two new platform tennis courts and an addition to the existing paddle hut. With the Village Manager’s support, based on the written order of approval, we look forward to presenting this project to the Design Review Board to obtain approval for the proposed minor change. As discussed, the Park District is working in partnership with the Winnetka Platform Tennis Club on this project. Securing the amended Special Use Permit is the first step in the process. If approved, we will proceed with the subsequent steps required for permitting with the Village of Winnetka. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out. We would be happy to provide any additional information or clarification needed. We look forward to presenting to the Design Review Board on November 20. Sincerely, Costa Kutulas Director of Parks and Maintenance Winnetka Park District 540 Hibbard Road, Winnetka, IL 60093 (847) 501-2040 www.winpark.org Fax: (847) 501-5779 Page 69 of 157 Page 70 of 157 Village of Winnetka and Design Review Board Community Development Department 510 Green Bay Road First Floor Winnetka, IL 60093 November 20, 2025 Subject: Certificate of Appropriateness for Exterior Modifications in Regards to Regarding Ordinance No. M-18-2021 Special Use Permit Additional Platform Tennis Courts and Additions to a Paddle Hut 11-2-2021 To Whom it May Concern, I am writing to you on behalf of the Winnetka Platform Tennis Club Board regarding the expansion of the Platform Tennis Hut at 490 B Hibbard Rd, Winnetka, IL 60093. The Winnetka Park District received a Special Use Permit, referenced above in the subject line, in November of 2021. Since then, portions of this Special Use Permit have been executed, in particular, the adding of two additional platform tennis courts. However, the hut expansion has yet to come to fruition. Expansion of the existing building and adding additional elevated deck surfaces to access the building and the current courts are now ready to proceed. Since the time the original Special Use Permit was approved, the expansion to the existing hut has been given additional thought and a solution that better serves the paddle tennis community has been approved by the WPTC board. While this new architectural solution has changed from that approved in the original Special Use Permit, it has been redesigned in a way that is less impactful from a lot coverage perspective while improving on its overall functionality and maintaining an aesthetic quality that is in line with the original proposal and the current language of the existing structure. The village staff is currently reviewing this project as a “minor change” under the original special use permit. Due to the changes mentioned above we have been asked to fill out the attached Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) and present our changes to the Design Review Board for review and approval. We believe that the design we have proposed meets the criteria of the Design Guidelines for the Village of Winnetka and is considered a Secondary Façade that does not have any street facing or pedestrian open space elevation. The building is located within the interior of Skokie Playfield grounds and its only neighboring buildings within 50 feet are the Tennis Shack and the Winnetka Golf Club Building. At the end of this letter we have provided a verbal description of the intended exterior materials that correspond to additional documents listed below under enclosures that will graphically communicate the intent of the new design. Site work and landscaping have already been reviewed as part of the original Special Use Permit and, therefore, are not included as part of this COA, but will be consistent with the standards of previous Park District projects and complement the existing grounds that boarder the Platform Tennis Hut. We are asking the Design Review Board (DRB) to review our submittal documents with what was originally approved in the hopes of approving the new design in order to proceed under the original Special Use Permit already granted for this project. Thank you for your consideration. Page 71 of 157 Sincerely, Bryan Berto Midwest Architecture Studio, Inc. 269 Market Square, Suite A Lake Forest, IL 60045 Mobile: 224-430-4190 Office: 847-604-8599 bryan@masismore.com Enclosures: COA application, Material cut sheets, Existing Building Photographs, Neighboring Building Photographs, Architectural Drawings A0-0, A0-2, A1-0, A1-1, A3-0, A3-1 Exterior Material List/Descriptions Corresponding to Elevations & Provide Cut-sheets: Roofing – Current roofing material is asphalt shingle. The proposed material is a synthetic cedar shake product that will have a current color profile of the existing roof, but will better complement the architectural style of the proposed building. This product will have a longer product lifecycle and lower maintenance costs than a natural cedar product or asphalt shingles Siding – The proposed siding is straight natural red western cedar shingle with an opaque stain/painted finish similar to what is on the existing building. Given all of the viewing glazing there are limited areas where this siding is needed. Trim – Eaves, fascia, window and door trim, & exterior soffit beadboard will be Boral Truexterior that is a composite product made of 70% recycled material. This product is low maintenance, has the same installation and workability as wood, and resists rot and moisture. The product has a wood grain and smooth side and will have a painted finish. Exterior Windows & Doors – The exterior windows will be large picture windows with direct set insulated and tempered glazing with extruded aluminum exterior cladding that protects wood windows, mimics the profiles of wood, and provides superior durability. The interior finish will be pre-primed pine wood to receive a painted finish. Exterior doors will be selected to match the window package & have the same specifications for inside and out. Exterior Lighting – Exposed exterior lighting fixture mounted to the building will be minimized due to the amount of viewing glazing around the buildings perimeter and distraction that can be caused to players. Instead, exterior soffit and ceiling recessed mounted cans will be installed to provide down lighting to covered patio and entry areas. Miscellaneous Exterior – There will be decorative brackets & beams in a natural cedar to receive a stained finish. An outdoor prefabricated kitchen made of weather-resistant aluminum framework and hardware In a lightweight, modular design that has outdoor-rated powder coat finishes will create an area to install a grill for cooking and an area to serve prepared meals. Stone veneer to match the existing interior Platform Tennis Hut stone fireplace surround will be used to create a chimney element on the exterior that will vent an exterior sealed gas fireplace through copper chimney pots above Page 72 of 157 Page 73 of 157 Page 74 of 157 Page 75 of 157 Page 76 of 157 Page 77 of 157 Page 78 of 157 Page 79 of 157 Page 80 of 157 Page 81 of 157 Page 82 of 157 Page 83 of 157 Page 84 of 157 Page 85 of 157 Enviroshake® MasterFormat Number 07 31 34 This technical data sheet is based upon the CSC Manu-Data© format. January 2018 4. Technical Data Copies of test procedures and results are available upon request. Canadian Construction Materials Centre International Conference of Building Officials Building Materials Evaluation (CCMC) Technical Guide Master Format (ICC) Acceptance Criteria for Special Roofing Commission (BMEC) Dec. 1999 Re-evaluated October 2017 Systems- Protocol AC07 Testing Procedure Standard Testing Procedure Standard Testing Procedure Standard 1. Weatherometer ASTM G23 ASTM D2794 A. Physical and Mechanical Properties ASTM G26 ASTM D790 1. Impact Testing 1. Density ASTM D792 2. Roof classification 2. Water Absorption ASTM D570 2. Impact Izod ASTM D256 -fire retardant UBC Standard 15-2 3. Wind Resistance ASTM D3161 (Method A (1)) ICBO 4.9 3. Dimensional CGSB-37.58-M86 Accelerated weathering UBC Standard 26-6 4. Tear Strength/Nail ASTM D1037 Stability and ignition/burning rate UBC Standard 26-7 Head Resistance tests ICBO 4.9 4. Water Absorption 3. Wind Uplift Any test (dynamic, 5. UV Exposure ASTM G-53 CCMC 6.4.1 static and structural calculations) 5. Strain Energy ASTM D5147, 4. Wind-Driven Rain ICBO 4.3 6. Freeze Thaw ASTM C666 CCMC 64.3 6. Modulus of 5. Uplift-Bend ICBO 4.4 rupture (static ASTM D1037 bending) 7. Ozone resistance ASTM D1149 6. Penetration ICBO 4.2 B. Performance Roofing System 7. Temperature-cycling ICBO 4.8 1. Uplift bend CCMC 64.4 8. Flexural strength ICBO 3.5.2 UBC Standard 15-5 2. Traffic load ASTM E661, DADE PA 100-95 3. Wind uplift DADE PA 100-95 4. Dynamic pressure DADE PA 100-95 water infiltration 5. Nail pull-through ASTM D1037 6. Accelerated ASTM G155, CCMC weathering 6.4.7 Enviroshake used in commercial 7. Heat ageing CCMC 6.4.8 application 8. Freeze thaw CCMC 6.4.9 Page 86 of 157 Page 87 of 157 Page 88 of 157 Page 89 of 157 Page 90 of 157 Page 91 of 157 Page 92 of 157 Page 93 of 157 Page 94 of 157 Page 95 of 157 Page 96 of 157 Page 97 of 157 Page 98 of 157 Page 99 of 157 Page 100 of 157 Page 101 of 157 Page 102 of 157 Page 103 of 157 Page 104 of 157 Page 105 of 157 Page 106 of 157 Page 107 of 157 Page 108 of 157 Page 109 of 157  Installation & User Guide Installer please leave this with homeowner Outdoor Kitchens & Carts Assembly & Installation Page 110 of 157 Thank You! Thank you for purchasing a Stoll Outdoor Kitchen! We are confident this quality product will last you for years to come. If you need further help or additional information regarding installation, please reach out to your local dealer for assistance. Included Parts & Tools The following parts and tools are included with your outdoor kitchen. Leveling Legs: 4 Storm Tie-down Straps: 4 Photos of Completed Products We would love to see pictures of your finished and installed project! Please send images to photos@stollindustries.com. High quality images will likely be featured on our social media or website! Page 111 of 157 Shell Construction Your kitchen should arrive pre-assembled, however large kitchens may arrive in multiple sections. If your kitchen contains multiple sections please see the following instructions. Otherwise, skip to page 4. The primary fastening mechanism is a slot and cleat system that is laser cut in the supports and panels. The vertical supports will have slots cut in them that correspond with cleats that are cut in the front and back panels. Connect your kitchen sections by sliding the cleat system of each section into the corresponding slots of the adjoining section. Using a rubber mallet, ensure cleats are fully seated. Vertical Support Page 112 of 157 Shell Construction Continued Although your kitchen design and layout may vary, always follow the same process for each adjoining section. Repeat this process until all sections are connected. Using the provided screws, fasten each Support and Panel together in the corners of each section. Page 113 of 157 Leveling System Each unit will come with an adjustable leveling kit. If desired, adjust with the included allen wrench as needed to achieve level. Using the leveling feet will be at the discretion of the installer, Stoll Industries does not require that the feet be used to elevate the product. If desired, insert included storm tie-down straps over leveling legs, and secure in place with the appropriate fasteners (not included). Component Installation Stoll Components will come pre-installed. If you purchased 3rd party Components, please follow the manufacturer instructions for installation. Typically, the component will be fastened to the formed return in each opening. Page 114 of 157 Countertop Installation If your countertop has multiple sections, fasten them together with the provided screws. Each section has pre-drilled holes corresponding with the next section. Lower the countertop into place on top of the kitchen. The countertop should cover the top of the kitchen shell, and overlap downwards several inches on all sides. Glue or silicone may be used to secure the countertop, but will make it very difficult to remove in the future to replace panels or disassemble the kitchen. Page 115 of 157 Grill Installation Your countertop will be pre-cut to the specifications provided for your specific grill. Please trim the provided Gasket as needed for your application. Following any specific instruction provided by the manufacturer, install your Grill into the countertop. Completion Install any remaining components, and enjoy! Page 116 of 157 Operation & Maintenance To ensure a lifetime of use, and extend the longevity and beauty of your product, we recommend regular care and cleaning of your Outdoor Kitchen. Routine cleaning can be accomplished by rinsing away dirt and debris, and then gently wiping with a damp, non-abrasive cloth or sponge using warm water. Towel drying will help prevent water spotting. If additional cleaning is necessary, mild household cleaners can be used. The use of solvents or abrasive cleaners may damage the product’s finish, always test any cleaning solution in an inconspicuous area before applying to the entire product. Storing objects on the surface for extended periods of time may trap moisture and debris, and dis-color or damage the finish. Placing hot items directly on any surface of your outdoor kitchen may damage the finish. Hot ashes and exposure to ash debris over long periods of time may also cause damage. Appliance and stainless steel cleaning solvents should never come in contact with your outdoor kitchen surface. Spray the solvent onto a cloth and wipe only on the appliance surface to help eliminate overspray. Light or superficial scratches to the finish are likely to occur during normal use and do not affect the integrity of the product. Using your outdoor kitchen surfaces as a cutting board for food, or sliding items such as grilling tools, utensils, and abrasive or ceramic items across the surface may also cause wear and tear. Warranty Your Stoll Products are covered by a 7 year limited warranty. For more information, please visit www.stollindustries.com/resources. All warranty claims must be placed through your local dealer. This product can expose you to chemicals including Carbon Black, which is known to the state of California to cause Cancer. For more information go to www.P65Warnings.ca.gov Page 117 of 157 012312345ÿ01704ÿ89 ÿÿ ÿ 722 2 2 Page 118 of 157 02 012312345ÿ01704ÿ89 ÿÿ ÿ 722 2 2 Page 119 of 157 32 Page 120 of 157 Page 121 of 157 Page 122 of 157 Page 123 of 157 Page 124 of 157 Page 125 of 157 ATTACHMENT B Page 126 of 157 Page 127 of 157 ORDINANCE NO. M-15-2004 ATTACHMENT C AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOR THE WINNETKA PARK DISTRICT (490 Hibbard) WHEREAS, the Winnetka Park District is the owner of the following described real estate (the “Subject Property”): The South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 42 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principle Meridian in the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois commonly known as 490 Hibbard, Winnetka, Illinois, which is located in the R-2 Single-Family Residential Zoning District provided in Winnetka Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Winnetka Village Code; and WHEREAS, Subject Property is a 135-acre parcel that is part of the Skokie Play Fields, and is improved, in part, with a paddle hut located behind the A.C. Nielsen Tennis Center, which is on the west side of Hibbard Road north of Oak Street; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.56.010 of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance, the Winnetka Park District has applied for an amendment to its existing special use permit, to allow the construction of a new paddle tennis hut that will have a larger footprint and will be located just to the west of the existing hut; and WHEREAS, the proposed new paddle hut will replace the existing 496-square foot paddle tennis hut with a 1,439-square foot building that will include a meeting and viewing room, a kitchen, a fireplace, and men’s and women’s restrooms that comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act; and WHEREAS, the proposed new facility will also include a 1,550-square foot deck around the building, replacing an existing 680- square foot deck; and WHEREAS, on March 29, 2004, pursuant to due notice thereof, the Zoning Board of Appeals conducted a public hearing on the requested special use and, by the unanimous vote of the six members of the Board then present, has reported to the Council, recommending that the requested special use be granted; and WHEREAS, the proceedings of the Zoning Board of appeals complied with all applicable procedural requirements, including allowing the cross-examination of witnesses by interested parties, as provided in the rules of the Zoning Board of Appeals; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2004, on due notice thereof, the Design Review Board considered the proposed building plans and issued favorable comment on the proposed design; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2004, pursuant to due notice thereof, the Plan Commission considered the special use application and, by the favorable vote of seven of the nine members then present, with one member opposed and one member abstaining, found that the proposed special use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Winnetka 2020; and WHEREAS, although the Plan Commission made favorable findings, the members expressed some concern about the impact of the expanded building on parking and suggested that further information be gathered regarding parking demands and the adequacy of the existing parking facilities; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s goals of preserving or expanding the quantity, quality and distribution of open space and recreational opportunities, and of protecting the Village’s natural features and environmental resources; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the Winnetka Comprehensive Plan’s Village Character and Appearance Objective of encouraging organizations in their efforts to beautify the Village and of using high quality design materials when constructing public improvements; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the Winnetka Comprehensive Plan’s Village Parks, Open Space, Recreation and Environment Objective of supporting the development of recreational facilities to meet the needs of residents of all ages; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the recommendation stated in Section 4.3.6 of the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that proposals do not have an adverse impact on the residential character of the surrounding residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the recommendation stated in Section 4.3.6 of the Comprehensive Plan to cooperate with the Winnetka Park District in achieving the District’s goal of providing Village residents with high quality recreational programs and open space; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the recommendation stated in Section 4.3.6 of the Comprehensive Plan to work with the Park District to minimize the impact of existing programs on adjacent neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the recommendation stated in Section 4.3.6 of the Comprehensive Plan to coordinate planning for any new facilities and programs to balance recreational needs of the community with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the recommendation stated in Section 4.3.6 of the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that street and parking infrastructure are adequate and that other ancillary effects such as artificial lighting, noise and water run-off are held to acceptable levels, subject to the concerns expressed by the Plan Commission about potential negative impacts on the parking; and Page 128 of 157  WHEREAS, the proposed paddle hut will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, morals or general welfare of the Village, in that the proposed tennis hut is necessary to the operation of the Winnetka Park District and the provision of services to Winnetka residents, and the expanded, improved tennis hut will enable the paddle tennis program to continue, while providing ADA- compliant multi-purpose facilities; and WHEREAS, the proposed paddle hut will not be substantially injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, nor will it substantially diminish or impair property values in the immediate vicinity, as the proposed addition will not alter the existing use of the Subject Property and will be located along the west side of the A. C. Nielsen Tennis Center, set well back from Hibbard Road and from the nearest residential property line; and WHEREAS, the proposed paddle hut will not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of other property in the immediate vicinity for uses permitted under applicable zoning regulations in that: (a) the size of the hut is small in relation to both the size of the Skokie Play Fields and to the established Park District facilities on the Subject Property; (b) the proposed paddle hut is consistent with the established use of the Subject Property; and (c) the proposed paddle hut is not in close proximity to any residential properties; and WHEREAS, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Section 3 of this ordinance, there is adequate parking on the Subject Property for the proposed paddle hut; and WHEREAS, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Section 3 of this ordinance, the proposed paddle hut will not alter the amount of parking on or the ingress or egress to the Subject Property, nor will it have a negative impact to vehicular or pedestrian traffic on the surrounding street system, in that the facility will be used from September 15 through April and thus will not coincide with the golf season, which ends at the end of September; and WHEREAS, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other facilities necessary to the existing special use already exist on the Subject Property, and the proposed tennis hut will not require any additions to such facilities, as they will be attached to the A. C. Nielsen Tennis Center; and WHEREAS, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Section 3 of this ordinance, the special use will, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of this and other Village ordinances and codes. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the Village of Winnetka do ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated as the findings of the Council of the Village of Winnetka, as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: Pursuant to Section 17.56.010 of the Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Winnetka Village Code, the special use permit for the Subject Property, which is located in the R-2 Single-Family Residential Zoning District provided in said Zoning Ordinance, and is commonly known as 490 Hibbard Road, is hereby amended to permit the Winnetka Park District to replace the existing paddle hut with an enlarged tennis hut that will be located just to the west of the existing hut, near the rear of the A. C. Nielsen Tennis Center building, in accordance with the site plans and elevations submitted with the application for special use permit. SECTION 3: The amended special use permit granted by this Ordinance is subject to the following terms conditions: A. The construction of the paddle hut shall commence within 12 months after the date of the adoption of this Ordinance. B. The parking for the enlarged paddle hut shall be re-evaluated by the Village Council in one year to determine whether it is adequate for the additional uses proposed for the paddle hut. C. The Park District shall monitor parking related to all uses of the paddle tennis hut through one complete season and shall report its findings to the Village Council. The report shall identify (i) any increases in parking demand resulting from the enlarged and enhanced use of the paddle hut and (ii) any conflicting demands for parking between the enlarged and enhance paddle hut and other activities on the Subject Property. SECTION 4: Pursuant to Section 17.56.010(G) of the Zoning Ordinance, all stipulations, conditions and restrictions set forth in this Ordinance as part of the terms under which the special use is granted, may be modified or revised from time to time by the Village Council following public notice and hearing, using the same procedures set forth in the Zoning Ordinance or processing the original special use application. SECTION 5: This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage, approval and posting. ADOPTED this ___20th____ day of _______April__________, 2004, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: Trustees Abell, Eilers, Greenough, Ritchell and Tucker NAYS: None ABSENT: Trustee Webster APPROVED this 20th day of April, 2004. Signed: //s//Michael F. Duhl Village President Countersigned: Page 129 of 157 //s//Douglas G. Williams Village Clerk Introduced: Waived Posted: Passed and Approved: April 20, 2004 Posted: April 21, 2004 Page 130 of 157 ORDINANCE NO. M-12-2007 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE WINNETKA PARK DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT TWO ADDITIONAL PLATFORM TENNIS COURTS (490 Hibbard) WHEREAS, the Village of Winnetka is a home rule municipality in accordance with Article VII, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois of 1970, pursuant to which it has the authority, except as limited by said Section 6 of Article VII, to exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to the government and affairs of the Village; and WHEREAS, the Council of the Village of Winnetka (“Village Council”) find that establishing and applying standards for the use and development of lands and buildings within the Village are matters pertaining to the affairs of the Village; and WHEREAS, the Winnetka Park District is the beneficial owner of the following described real estate (the “Subject Property”), which is commonly known as 490 Hibbard, Winnetka, Illinois: The South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 42 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principal Meridian in the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois; and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located in the R-2 Single-Family Residential District provided in Chapter 17.24 of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Winnetka Village Code; and WHEREAS, the Winnetka Park District is a body corporate and politic of the State of Illinois and operates a tennis complex on the Subject Property, which is a 135-acre parcel that is part of the Skokie Play Fields, and is improved, in part, with a paddle hut and four platform tennis courts that are located north of Oak Street on the west side of Hibbard Road and behind the A.C. Nielsen Tennis Center; and WHEREAS, park facilities are permitted as special uses in the R-2 Single-Family Residential District, subject to the conditions and requirements pertaining to special uses, as set forth in Chapter 17.56 of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Winnetka Park District (“Applicant”) has filed an application for an amendment to its existing special use permit pursuant to Section 17.56.010 (I) of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance, to allow the construction of two additional platform tennis courts to the north and west of the existing four-court complex at Skokie Playfield; and WHEREAS, the proposed addition to the platform tennis facilities will add a total of 3,996 square feet of lot coverage, consisting of 1,800 square feet for each of the two new courts, 376 square foot for a new elevated pathway and 20 square feet of access steps between the two new courts; and WHEREAS, the small area to be covered by the proposed new facilities is not immediately in the public view and is located in a part of the Subject Property that has little other use, thereby preserving larger, more visible expanses of open space; and WHEREAS, on May 17, 2007, on due notice thereof, the Design Review Board considered the design of the proposed improvements and the four members then present issued favorable comment on the design of the additional courts and suggested minor changes to the landscaping plan; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2007, on due notice thereof, the Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing to consider the amendment to the special use permit for the proposed new platform tennis courts, and by the unanimous vote of the Board’s seven members, has recommended that the requested special use permit be granted; and WHEREAS, no owners of property located within 250 feet of the Subject Property have filed written objections to the special use application; and WHEREAS, on June 27, 2007, on due notice thereof, the Plan Commission convened to consider the proposed additional facilities, at which time 10 members of the Plan Commission were present; and WHEREAS, the Applicant’s representative member of the Plan Commission recused himself from the consideration of the application, whereupon the remaining nine members considered the requested special use and, by the favorable vote of eight of the nine participating members, found the proposed special use to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Winnetka 2020, and have reported to the Council recommending that the special use be granted; and WHEREAS, the proposed special use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s objective to ensure that commercial, institutional and residential development is appropriate to the character of, and minimizes the adverse impact on, its surrounding neighborhood, in that the additional courts are set away from the street and away from the single family residential properties in the neighborhood, and the design of the new facilities is consistent with the design of the existing platform tennis court facilities; and WHEREAS, the proposed special use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s objective to use high quality design and materials when constructing public improvements; and WHEREAS, the proposed special use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s objective to support the development of recreational facilities to meet the needs of residents of all ages, in that the new courts will increase the number of platform tennis courts by 50%; and WHEREAS, the proposed special use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s objective to engage in a public process that balances institutional goals and minimizes any adverse impact to the character of the adjacent residential neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the proposed special use is consistent with the objective to foster greater cooperation among all institutions in the joint use of their recreational facilities; and WHEREAS, the Village Council accepts the Plan Commission’s finding that the proposed special use is consistent with the recommendations stated in Section 4.3.6 of the Comprehensive Plan to cooperate with the Winnetka Park District in achieving the Page 131 of 157 District’s goal of providing Village residents with high quality recreational programs and open space, to work with the Park District to minimize the impact of existing programs on adjacent neighborhoods, and to coordinate planning for new facilities and programs to balance recreational needs of the community with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the proposal to construct two new platform tennis courts and related walkway and stairs is consistent, overall, with the Comprehensive Plan, Winnetka 2020; and WHEREAS, the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the immediate vicinity for uses permitted by right in the zoning district, nor will it substantially diminish or impair property values in the immediate vicinity, as the proposed new platform tennis courts will not alter the existing use of the Subject Property and are not in close proximity to any of the single family residential uses in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, adequate parking, utilities, access roads, drainage and other facilities necessary for the operation of the special use either exist or will be provided, in that the Subject Property is served by all utilities, the new courts have been designed to address current usage needs and the parking and site access will remain the same; and WHEREAS, the proposed new platform tennis courts will not be substantially injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, in that the Park District is an established presence in the neighborhood, the proposed new tennis courts will alleviate crowded conditions at the platform tennis court facility, and the expanded facilities will not be in close proximity to any of the single family residential uses in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the special use in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulations of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance and other Village ordinances and codes; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the Village of Winnetka do ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated as the findings of the Council of the Village of Winnetka, as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: That, pursuant to Sections 17.56.010 of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Winnetka Village Code, a special use permit is hereby granted with respect to the Subject Property, which is located in the R-2 Single-Family Residential Zoning District, to allow the construction of two new platform tennis courts to the north and west of the existing four-court complex at Skokie Playfield. SECTION 3: That, pursuant to Section 17.56.010 (G) of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance, all stipulations, conditions and restrictions set forth in this Ordinance as part of the terms under which the special use is granted, may be modified or revised from time to time by the Village Council following public notice and hearing, using the same procedures set forth in the Zoning Ordinance for processing the original special use application. SECTION 4: This Ordinance is passed by the Council of the Village of Winnetka in the exercise of its home rule powers pursuant to Section 6 of Article VII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970. SECTION 5: This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage, approval and posting as provided by law. PASSED this 7th day of August, 2007, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: Trustees Behles, Berger, Eilers, Poor, Ritchell, Tucker NAYS: None ABSENT: None APPROVED this 7th day of August, 2007. Signed: //s//Edmund C. Woodbury Village President Countersigned: //s//Douglas G. Williams Village Clerk Introduced: July 17, 2007 Posted: July 18, 2007 Passed and Approved: August 7, 2007 Posted: August 9, 2007 Page 132 of 157 Page 133 of 157 Page 134 of 157 Page 135 of 157 Page 136 of 157 Page 137 of 157 Page 138 of 157 Page 139 of 157 Page 140 of 157 Page 141 of 157 Page 142 of 157 Page 143 of 157 Page 144 of 157 Page 145 of 157 Page 146 of 157 Page 147 of 157 Page 148 of 157 Page 149 of 157 Page 150 of 157 Page 151 of 157 Page 152 of 157 Page 153 of 157 Page 154 of 157 Page 155 of 157 Page 156 of 157 Page 157 of 157