Village Council

Village of Winnetka Village Council Regular Meeting May 5, 2026 at 7:00 PM Village Hall 510 Green Bay Road AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Village Clerk's Report: Election Results 4. Village Clerk to Administer Oath of Office to Trustee Robert Apatoff, Trustee Kristina Dalman, and Trustee Kimberly Handler 5. Quorum a. May 12, 2026 Special Study Session b. May 19, 2026 Regular Meeting c. June 2, 2026 Regular Meeting 6. Presentations a. Presentation by New Trier Township Supervisor Gail Eisenberg 7. Public Comments 8. Reports 9. Establishment of Consent Agenda 10. Approval of Consent Agenda a. Approval of Village Council Minutes i. April 7, 2026 Regular Meeting ii. April 14, 2026 Special Study Session b. Approval of Warrant List Dated April 17, 2026 - April 30, 2026 c. Ordinance No. M-06-2026: Approving a Final Plat of Subdivision and Granting Variations from the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance (829 and 833 Foxdale Avenue) (Introduction/Adoption) d. Resolution No. R-42-2026: Approving Reimbursement to the Village of Kenilworth for Green Bay Road Streetscape Design Services for Phase I Engineering Study (Adoption) NOTICE Village Council meetings are video recorded. All agenda materials are available at villageofwinnetka.org (Governance > Agendas & Minutes); the Reference Desk at the Winnetka Library; or in the Manager’s Office at Village Hall (2nd floor). The Village of Winnetka, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, requests that all 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, 510 Green Bay Road, Winnetka, Illinois 60093, 847-716- 3543; T.D.D. 847-501-6041. Page 1 of 252  e. Resolution No. R-48-2026: Approving a License Agreement with Level 3 Communications, LLC for Installation of Fiber Optic Cable in Village Rights of Way (Adoption) 11. Ordinances and Resolutions a. Ordinance No. M-07-2026: Granting a Special Use Permit for the Operation of an Audiology Medical Office Within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District of the Village (730 Elm Street, Suite 120) (Introduction/Adoption) b. Resolution No. R-46-2026: A Resolution of the Village of Winnetka in Support of the Illinois America250 Commemoration (Adoption) 12. Old Business 13. New Business 14. Appointments a. Appointment of 2026/2027 Council Organizational Assignments 15. Closed Session 16. Adjournment Village of Winnetka Page 2 of 252 Village Council - May 5, 2026  MINUTES WINNETKA VILLAGE COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING April 7, 2026 (Approved: xx) A record of a legally convened meeting of the Council of the Village of Winnetka, which was held at Council Chambers on Tuesday, April 7, 2026, at 7:00 PM. 1) Call to Order. President Dearborn called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM. Deputy Village Manager Hannah Lipman called the roll. Present: Trustees Kim Handler, Scott Myers and Bridget Orsic. Absent: Trustees Kirk Albinson. Also present: Deputy Village Clerk Berina Gradjan, Village Attorney Peter Friedman, Community Development Director Scott Mangum, and approximately 11 people in the audience. Trustee Apatoff has provided the required notice that he will be unable to attend the regular meeting due to work obligations. The Village’s policy provides that Trustee Apatoff may participate remotely unless 2/3 of the Council objects. With no objections, Trustee Apatoff participated remotely fully in the meeting. Trustee Dalman has provided the required notice that she will be unable to attend the regular meeting due to work obligations. The Village’s policy provides that Trustee Dalman may participate remotely unless 2/3 of the Council objects. With no objections, Trustee Dalman participated remotely fully in the meeting. Call to Order. Deputy Village Manager Hannah Lipman called Trustee Apatoff and Trustee Dalman for attendance. 2) Pledge of Allegiance. Trustee Orsic led the group in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3) Quorum. a) April 14, 2026 Special Study Session All of the Council members present said they expect to attend. b) April 21, 2026 Regular Meeting All of the Council members present said they expect to attend. c) May 5, 2026 Regular Meeting All of the Council members present said they expect to attend. 4) Public Comment: i. Ted Wynnychenko addresses Council regarding back flow prevention testing. ii. Christina Codo provides feedback regarding the Winnetka Former Post Office Site Redevelopment survey issued. iii. Warren James addresses Council regarding a news article from the Record North Shore as it relates to the restoration of Tower Road Pier, urging the Village to reconsider their course of action. 5) Reports: a) Trustees. No report. Page 3 of 252 Village Council Regular Meeting April 7, 2026 b) Village Attorney. No report. c) Deputy Village Manager. No report. d) Village President. No report. 6) Establishment of the Consent Agenda President Dearborn requested that Resolution No. R-36-2026 be pulled from the consent agenda for a separate discussion. Without objection, Resolution No. R-36-2026 is pulled from the consent agenda. Trustee Handler seconded by Trustee Orsic moved to approve the establishment of the Consent Agenda. By voice vote, the motion carried 7) Approval of the Consent Agenda a) Approval of Village Council Minutes i. February 10, 2026 Special Study Session ii. March 3, 2026 Regular Meeting b) Approval of Warrant List Dated March 13, 2026 – April 2, 2026 in the amount of $2,341,382.56. c) Resolution No. R-38-2026: Designating Lakeside Bank as a Depository for the Village of Winnetka and Designating Authorized Signatures (Adoption) Trustee Myers seconded by Trustee Handler, moved to approve the foregoing items on the Consent Agenda by omnibus vote. By roll call vote, the motion carried. Ayes: Trustees Apatoff, Dalman, Handler, Myers and Orsic. Nays: None. Absent: Trustee Albinson. 8) Ordinances and Resolutions. a. Resolution No. R-36-2026: Awarding a Contract to Bulley & Andrews Concrete Restoration, LLC for Services Related to the Hubbard Woods Parking Garage Repair and Restoration (Adoption) President Dearborn requests that Council be provided an update from the January 6th Council meeting regarding the Hubbard Woods Parking Deck Repairs. Deputy Village Manager Hannah Lipman confirms that the parking garage repair and restoration project is still within budget and with Council approval, the resolution would approve critical and structural repairs, as well as certain aesthetic repairs. Additionally, Council is advised regarding bid package stipulations. Council discusses signage costs and budgeting matters related to the project. Trustee Handler, seconded by Trustee Orsic, moved to adopt Resolution No. R-36-2026. By roll call vote, the motion carried. Ayes: Trustees Apatoff, Dalman, Handler, Myers and Orsic. Nays: None. Absent: Trustee Albinson. b. Ordinance No. MC-01-2026: Zoning Text Amendment to Confirm Lot Line Designation on Lots with more than Two Street Frontages (Public Hearing and Introduction/Adoption) At the March 19th Council meeting, a resolution initiating a zoning text amendment and public hearing to make amendments to the Zoning Ordinance regarding lot line designations was adopted. The Village President announced that a public hearing is held at Page 4 of 252 Village Council Regular Meeting April 7, 2026 this meeting to consider such amendments. A public hearing notice was advertised in the Chicago Tribune ahead of the meeting in accordance with law. The public hearing opens at 7:22 pm. Village Attorney Peter Friedman confirms that amendments made to the zoning code, and zoning map, require a public hearing. Should members of the public testify, an oath will be administered. Community Development Director Scott Mangum advises Council that the amendments to the zoning code confirm the existing designations of lot lines, noting minor changes to the front lot line definition, the rear lot line definition, and rear yard definition. There was no public comment offered. Village Attorney Peter Friedman suggests a minor language change in the ordinance; the word “shorter” to be replaced with “most nearly parallel” in the fourth and fifth recital; WHEREAS, the Village Zoning Ordinance has historically and consistently required that the two most nearly parallel frontages be designated as “front lot lines” on properties with more than two street frontages, including, without limitation, for purposes of calculating and granting required setback variations; and WHEREAS, in light of the final order in Case No. 2025 CH 9530 (Circuit Court of Cook County), the Village Council has determined that it is necessary to amend the Zoning Ordinance to confirm that the Zoning Ordinance requires that the two most nearly parallel frontages be designated as “front lot lines” on properties with more than two street frontages (“Confirming Amendments”); and Trustee Orsic, seconded by Trustee Myers, moved to waive introduction of Ordinance No. MC-01-2026. This voice vote was approved unanimously. Trustee Handler, seconded by Trustee Orsic, moved to adopt Ordinance No. MC-01-2026 with amendments to the fourth and fifth recital as indicated by Village Attorney Peter Friedman. By roll call vote, the motion carried. Ayes: Trustees Apatoff, Dalman, Handler, Myers, and Orsic. Nays: None. Absent: Trustee Albinson. Old Business. None. 9) New Business. a) Short-Term Rental Regulations – Policy Direction Community Development Director Scott Mangum provides information regarding current regulations related to short-term rentals in the Village Code. Currently, short-term rentals are not directly referenced in the Village Code and are prohibited due to not being listed as either a permitted principal use or special use in the Zoning Code, making it difficult to determine the duration of a rental that can be enforced by the Village. Council is advised of neighboring community regulations regarding short-term rentals. Council discusses duration of short-term rentals, concerns related to rentals in the community, noise concerns related to rentals, and consideration of commercial property code maintenance. Council directs Village Attorney Peter Friedman to prepare an ordinance permitting sixty- day rentals with regulations. Page 5 of 252 Village Council Regular Meeting April 7, 2026 10) Appointments: a) Re-appoint Margaret Benson as Chairperson of the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners – her term will expire on May 1, 2029. b) Re-appoint Tim Ring to a full term on the Environmental, Forestry & Sustainability Commission – his term will expire on May 1, 2029 c) Re-appoint Megan Bauman to a full term on the Firefighters Pension Board – her term will expire on May 1, 2031. d) Re-appoint Thomas Thibeault to a full term on the Firefighters Pension Board – his term will expire on May 1, 2031. e) Re-appoint Joe Stuart to a full term on the Historic Preservation Commission – his term will expire on May 1, 2029. f) Re-appoint Paul Weaver to a full term on the Historic Preservation Commission – his term will expire on May 1, 2029. g) Re-appoint Mamie Case to a full term on the Plan Commission – her term will expire on May 1, 2029. h) Re-appoint Matt Bradley as Zoning Board of Appeals representative on the Plan Commission – his term will expire on May 1, 2029. i) Re-appoint Michael Ritter to a full term on the Zoning Board of Appeals – his term will expire on May 1, 2031. Trustee Handler seconded by Trustee Myers, moved to re-appoint the said members to their respective boards as set forth by appointments a and i, by omnibus vote. By voice vote, the motion carried unanimously. 11) Closed Session: None. 12) Adjournment. Trustee Handler, seconded by Trustee Orsic moved to adjourn the meeting. By voice vote, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:46 p.m. _______________________________ Recording Secretary Page 6 of 252  MINUTES WINNETKA VILLAGE COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION April 14, 2026 (Approved: xx) A record of a legally convened meeting of the Council of the Village of Winnetka, which was held at the Council Chambers on Tuesday, April 14, 2026 at 7:00 PM. 1) Call to Order. President Dearborn called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. Village Manager Kristin Kazenas called the roll of the Village Council. Present: Trustees Kirk Albinson, Rob Apatoff, Tina Dalman, and Scott Myers. Absent: Trustees Kim Handler and Bridget Orsic. Also present: Deputy Village Manager Hannah Lipman, Deputy Village Clerk Berina Gradjan, Village Attorney Ben Schuster, Community Development Director Scott Mangum, and approximately 4 persons in the audience. 1) Public Comment: i. Ted Wynnychenko addresses Council regarding back flow prevention testing. Trustee Handler enters at 7:05 pm. ii. Warren James addresses Council regarding a misstatement made regarding the Tower Road Pier and Park District annual dredging. Village Manager Kristin Kazenas advises members of the public that the community is under a tornado watch and should weather conditions escalate, President Dearborn will call a recess and all in attendance will seek shelter in the basement. 2) Open Space Policy Discussion The Winnetka Council Caucus surveys have included questions about open space, and the 2025 survey asked respondents to personally define open space in the community. Results show that residents value and want to protect open spaces and define open spaces in the community as parks, natural areas, and public gathering spaces. Additionally, the survey indicated that open spaces may still be enhanced or modified but should remain open space and not be limited in considering alternate uses for spaces without buildings. Community Development Director Scott Mangum addresses key policy initiatives related to open spaces, defining open space, zoning and special uses, regulations of open space, various land use matters, and public and private regulated areas within the Village. Council is advised on various policy direction options including a Comprehensive Plan recommendation to establish specific zoning district or standards for open spaces, expanding the overlay zoning district, or negotiate an inter-governmental agreements with applicable agencies. Environmental, Forestry, & Sustainability Chair Peter Eck addresses Council regarding open space survey results and the importance of preservation of open spaces. Public Comment Page 7 of 252 Winnetka Village Council Special Study Session April 14, 2026 Christina Codo, Park District Commissioner, addresses matters related to communication between the Village Council and Park District Board regarding the open space discussion. Warren James addresses the Park Districts implementation of the Waterfront 2030 plan and regulations related to land use and zoning. Peter Eck emphasizes the importance of protecting open space and defining what open space means. Ted Wynnychenko addresses matters related to public access at street end beaches. Jeffrey Liss emphasizes the importance of also protecting parking lots within the Village. Council discusses matters related to open spaces, both public and private, zoning, land transactions and legal matters, implementation of measures to preserve and protect open spaces considered as parks and natural spaces by the community, amending the Village Code to regulate open spaces, zoning designations, comprehensive plan pillars, Village Attorney Ben Schuster advises Council regarding zoning regulations, defining open spaces, and the process of implementing text amendments for zoning regulations and mapping. Council further discusses zoning amendments regarding the regulation of open spaces. Policy direction is provided to staff to proceed with option 1: Comprehensive Plan recommendation: establish specific zoning district or standards for open spaces. 3) Adjournment. Trustee Handler, seconded by Trustee Dalman moved to adjourn the meeting. By voice vote, the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:34 pm. _________________________________ Recording Secretary 2 Page 8 of 252  Agenda Item Executive Summary TITLE: Approval of Warrant List Dated April 17, 2026 - April 30, 2026 PRESENTER: Kristin Kazenas AGENDA DATE: May 5, 2026 CONSENT: Yes ITEM TYPE: Consent Agenda ITEM HISTORY: None. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Warrant List Dated April17, 2026 - April 30, 2026 RECOMMENDATION: Consider Approving the Warrant List Dated April 17, 2026 - April 30, 2026 ATTACHMENTS: None Page 9 of 252  Agenda Item Executive Summary TITLE: Ordinance No. M-06-2026: Approving a Final Plat of Subdivision and Granting Variations from the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance (829 and 833 Foxdale Avenue) (Introduction/Adoption) PRESENTER: Scott Mangum AGENDA DATE: May 5, 2026 CONSENT: Yes ITEM TYPE: Consent Agenda ITEM HISTORY: On April 21, 2026, the Village Council considered the Plan Commission (“PC”) and Zoning Board of Appeals’ (“ZBA”) recommendations regarding an application submitted by Deanna and Stephen Nied (collectively, the “Applicant”), as the owners of the properties located at 829 Foxdale Avenue and 833 Foxdale Avenue (collectively, the “Subject Property”), seeking approval of a Final Subdivision Plat to consolidate the two existing lots into a single lot of record along with the associated zoning relief required. Following discussion, the Village Council provided policy direction requesting that the Village Attorney and staff prepare an ordinance approving the request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: INTRODUCTION On May 5, 2026, the Village Council is scheduled to consider Ordinance No. M-06-2026, An Ordinance Approving a Final Plat of Subdivision and Granting Variations from the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance (Attachment 1). The Applicant is seeking approval of the following relief as part of a Final Subdivision Plat approval to consolidate the two existing lots into a single buildable lot: 1. Zoning Variations to permit the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue to: a. observe less than the minimum required side yard setback from the northerly property line, which is due to an increase in the minimum required side yard setback as a result of the proposed increase in total lot area and increase in average lot width; b. not provide the required building line articulation along the north side building walls; and 2. A finding of “No Material Increased Adverse Impact” for the existing detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue, which does not provide the minimum required rear yard setback from the easterly property line. Page 10 of 252 The residence on the 829 Foxdale Avenue parcel has been torn down. The existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue remains and the Applicant intends to construct an addition on the south side of the existing residence and replace both existing detached garages with a new detached garage. ADVISORY BOARD/PLAN COMMISSION REVIEW The Plan Commission (“PC”) considered the request at its December 17, 2025, meeting. After hearing from staff, the Applicant’s architect, and two members of the public, the PC discussed the request and the impact the consolidation would have on the unique character of Foxdale Avenue and the availability of housing in the denser R-5 zoning district in the Village. Some members commented that the addition proposed by the Applicant would maintain the character of the neighborhood more than new homes on each lot would. With eight (8) voting members on a request that also required ZBA consideration, the PC was initially split. In order to forward a recommendation to the Council, the PC continued its discussion, which focused on the consistency of the proposed consolidation with the Winnetka Futures 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ultimately, by a vote of 5-3, the PC recommended denial of the request. Details of the request can be found in the attached staff report to the PC. A similar report was also provided to the ZBA. For additional details please reference this report as well as the minutes of the December 17 PC meeting, which are included as Attachment 2. Subsequent to the PC meeting and prior to the ZBA’s consideration of the request, the Applicant’s architect provided a letter to the ZBA and Village Council to further explain the reason for the Applicant’s request to consolidate the two existing lots. This letter is provided in Attachment 4. The Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) considered the zoning variations required for the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue, as a result of the proposed consolidation, on March 16, 2026. After hearing from staff, the Applicant’s architect, as well as the Applicant, the ZBA heard from four members of the public, who all expressed support for the request. On the day of the meeting, the ZBA also received several written comments from the public regarding this request. These comments are included in Attachment 5. The ZBA discussed the challenge of applying the standards for granting a variation to a request that is created as a result of a proposed consolidation. The ZBA also discussed the impact on the character of the neighborhood the proposed consolidation would have compared to construction of one or two new homes. In the end, by a vote of 5-0, the ZBA recommended approval of the zoning variations. The meeting minutes of the ZBA meeting are provided in Attachment 3. Written comments that were not included in the April 21, 2026, Council agenda packet, but were distributed to the Council prior to the meeting, are included in Attachment 6. The property owner and architect presented additional information at the April 21, 2026, Village Council meeting emphasizing the uniqueness of the property with a narrow, shared driveway. Members of the public were also present in support of the request. Following discussion, the Village Council provided policy direction requesting that the Village Attorney and staff prepare an ordinance (Attachment 1) approving the request. RECOMMENDATION: Given the Village Council provided policy direction at its April 21, 2026, meeting, the Council may wish to (a) consider waiving introduction of Ordinance No. M-06-2026 and consider adoption of the Ordinance, OR (b) consider only introduction of Ordinance No. M-06-2026. Page 11 of 252 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment 1: Ordinance No. M-06-2026: Approving Final Plat of Subdivision and Granting Variations from the Zoning Ordinance (829 & 833 Foxdale Ave) 2. Attachment 2: December 17, 2025, PC Meeting Staff Report and Meeting Minutes 3. Attachment 3: March 16, 2026, ZBA Meeting Minutes 4. Attachment 4: March 11, 2026, Letter from Applicant's Architect to ZBA and Village Council 5. Attachment 5: Public Correspondence Received for March 16, 2026, ZBA Meeting 6. Attachment 6: Public Correspondence Received Since Posting of April 21, 2026, Village Council Agenda Packet Page 12 of 252  ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. M-06-2026 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION AND GRANTING VARIATIONS FROM THE WINNETKA ZONING ORDINANCE (829 and 833 Foxdale Avenue) 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; and WHEREAS, Deanna and Stephen Nied (collectively, “Owner”) are the record title owners of the parcels of real property located at 829 and 833 Foxdale Avenue in Winnetka, Illinois, and legally described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance (collectively, “Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located within the R-5 Single Family Residential District of the Village (“R-5 District”); and WHEREAS, the area of the parcel located at 829 Foxdale Avenue is 7,498 square feet and the parcel at 833 Foxdale Avenue is 7,499 square feet, both being legally nonconforming as to the minimum lot area of 8,4000 square feet required in the R-5 District; and WHEREAS, the Owner desires to (i) consolidate the two existing lots into a single lot of record (“Proposed Subdivision”); (ii) demolish the existing residence at 829 Foxdale Avenue, which demolition has occurred; (iii) construct an addition on the south side of the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue; and (iv) replace the existing detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue and existing detached garage at 833 Foxdale Avenue with a new detached garage in the southeast corner of the Proposed Subdivision (collectively, the “Proposed Improvements”); and WHEREAS, following the Proposed Subdivision, the new lot will measure approximately 14,977 square feet, which lot size fully complies with the minimum lot area, lot width, and lot depth requirements set forth in the Village’s Zoning Ordinance, as amended (“Zoning Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, although ultimately being replaced, the 829 Foxdale Avenue and 833 Foxdale Avenue detached garages will remain on the Subject Property during the construction of the addition to the residence, and while the existing detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue remains, it will not meet the rear yard setback requirements from the easterly property line (“Legal Nonconformity”); and WHEREAS, Section 17.30.060 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of 12 feet for lots with an average width of 100 feet or more, and the Proposed Subdivision renders the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue nonconforming, resulting in a setback of 7.55 feet from the northerly property line; and WHEREAS, Section 17.30.090 of the Zoning Ordinance requires building line articulation of at least 18 inches for side building walls longer than 40 feet that face the smaller side yard, and the Proposed Subdivision results in the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue having unarticulated northerly building walls of 45.34 feet in length; and May 5, 2026 1 M-06-2026 Page 13 of 252  WHEREAS, the Owner filed an application with the Village for: (i) approval of a final plat of consolidation for the Proposed Subdivision (“Final Plat”); (ii) a variation from Section 17.30.060 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a side yard setback of 7.55 feet from the northerly property line (“Set Back Variation”); and (iii) a variation from Section 17.30.090 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow unarticulated northerly building walls of 45.34 feet in length (“Unarticulated Building Walls Variation”) (collectively, the Set Back Variation and the Unarticulated Building Walls Variation are the “Variations”) (collectively, the Final Plat and Variations are the “Requested Relief”); and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2025, after due notice thereof, the Plan Commission held a public hearing on the Requested Relief, and by a vote of three members in favor and five opposed, recommended that the Village Council deny the Requested Relief; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2026, after due notice thereof, the Zoning Board of Appeals conducted a public hearing on the Requested Relief, and by a vote of five in favor and none opposed, recommended that the Village Council approve the Requested Relief; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.12.010(D)(4) of the Village’s Subdivision Ordinance (“Subdivision Ordinance”), as amended, the Plan Commission determined that the Legal Nonconformity, in the context of the proposed Final Plat, would not result in a material increased adverse impact upon the public health, safety, or welfare; and WHEREAS, the Village Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the Village to approve the Requested Relief, subject to and in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of this Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the Village of Winnetka do ordain as follows: SECTION 1: RECITALS. The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated as the findings of the Village Council, as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT. Subject to and contingent upon the conditions set forth in Section 4 of this Ordinance, and pursuant to Sections 16.04.030 and 16.08.010 of the Subdivision Ordinance and the Village’s home rule authority, the Village Council hereby approves the Final Plat, prepared by Greengard, Inc., and consisting of one sheet, with a latest revision date of June 27, 2025, attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance as Exhibit C. SECTION 3: APPROVAL OF VARIATIONS. Subject to, and contingent upon, the terms, conditions, restrictions, and provisions set forth in Section 4 of this Ordinance, the following variations are hereby granted with respect to the Subject Property, in accordance with and pursuant to Chapter 17.60 of the Zoning Ordinance and the home rule powers of the Village: A. Minimum Side Yard Setback. A variation from Section 17.30.060 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a side yard setback of 7.55 feet from the northerly property line. May 5, 2026 2 M-06-2026 Page 14 of 252  B. Maximum Unarticulated Building Walls Length. A variation from Section 17.30.090 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow unarticulated northerly building walls of 45.34 feet in length. SECTION 4: CONDITIONS. The approvals granted by Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance are subject to, and contingent upon, compliance by the Owner with the following conditions: A. Compliance with Subdivision Ordinance. The approvals granted in Section 2 and 3 of this Ordinance are subject to and conditioned upon compliance with, and the inclusion of all of the information on the Final Plat required by Chapter 16.08 of the Subdivision Ordinance. B. Compliance with Regulations. Except to the extent specifically provided otherwise in this Ordinance, the development, use, and maintenance of the Proposed Subdivision, Proposed Improvements, and the Subject Property must comply at all times with all applicable Village codes and ordinances, as they have been or may be amended over time. C. Reimbursement of Village Costs. In addition to any other costs, payments, fees, charges, contributions, or dedications required under applicable Village codes, ordinances, Ordinances, rules, or regulations, the Owner must pay to the Village, promptly upon presentation of a written demand or demands therefor, of all fees, costs, and expenses incurred or accrued in connection with the review, negotiation, preparation, consideration, and review of this Ordinance. Payment of all such fees, costs, and expenses for which demand has been made shall be made by a certified or cashier’s check. Further, the Owner must pay upon demand all costs incurred by the Village for publications and recordings required in connection with the aforesaid matters. SECTION 5: EXECUTION OF FINAL PLAT. The Village Council hereby authorizes and directs the Village President and the Village Clerk, upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 4 of this Ordinance, to execute and attest, on behalf of the Village, the Final Plat. SECTION 6: RECORDATION OF FINAL PLAT. Upon execution of the Final Plat by the Village President and the Village Clerk, as provided in Section 5 of this Ordinance, and upon this Ordinance taking effect as provided in Section 11 of this Ordinance, the Village Clerk is hereby directed to cause the Final Plat to be recorded with the Cook County Clerk Recording Division. SECTION 7: RECORDATION OF ORDINANCE; BINDING EFFECT. A copy of this Ordinance will be recorded with the Cook County Clerk Recording Division. This Ordinance and the privileges, obligations, and provisions contained herein inure solely to the benefit of, and are binding upon, the Owner and each of their heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. May 5, 2026 3 M-06-2026 Page 15 of 252  SECTION 8: FAILURE TO COMPLY. Upon the failure or refusal of the Owner to comply with any or all of the conditions, restrictions, or provisions of this Ordinance, in addition to all other remedies available to the Village, the approvals granted in Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance will, at the sole discretion of the Village Council, by ordinance duly adopted, be revoked and become null and void; provided, however, that the Village Council will not revoke the approvals granted in Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance unless it first provides the Owner with two months advance written notice of the reasons for revocation and an opportunity to be heard at a regular meeting of the Village Council. In the event of revocation, the development and use of the Subject Property will be governed solely by the regulations of the applicable zoning district and provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, as they may, from time to time, be amended. In the event of revocation, the Village Manager and Village Attorney are authorized and directed to bring a zoning enforcement action as may be appropriate under the circumstances. SECTION 9: AMENDMENTS. Any amendment to this Ordinance may be granted only pursuant to the procedures, and subject to the standards and limitations, provided in the Zoning Ordinance for amending or granting variations. SECTION 10: SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Ordinance or part thereof is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect, and shall be interpreted, applied, and enforced so as to achieve, as near as may be, the purpose and intent of this Ordinance to the greatest extent permitted by applicable law. SECTION 11: EFFECTIVE DATE. A. This Ordinance will only be in full force and effect upon the passage and approval of this Ordinance as provided by law; in accordance with all applicable provisions of the Village Code. B. The Approvals set forth in Sections 2 and 3 of this Ordinance will be effective only upon: (i) the filing by the Owner with the Village Clerk of an Unconditional Agreement and Consent in the form of Exhibit D attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance to accept and abide by each and all of the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth in this Ordinance and to indemnify the Village for any claims that may arise in connection with the approval of this Ordinance; and (ii) the approval and recording of the Final Plat. C. In the event that the Owner does not file with the Village Clerk a fully executed copy of the unconditional agreement and consent described in Section 11.B of this Ordinance within 60 days after the date of passage of this Ordinance by the Village Council, the Village Council shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to declare the Approvals granted in this Ordinance null and void and of no force or effect. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] May 5, 2026 4 M-06-2026 Page 16 of 252  PASSED this 5th day of May, 2026, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: APPROVED this ____ day of _________, 2026. Signed: Village President Countersigned: Village Clerk Published by authority of the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Winnetka, Illinois, this ___ day of _______, 2026. Introduced: 5th day of May, 2026 Passed and Approved: ______________, 2026 May 5, 2026 5 M-06-2026 Page 17 of 252  EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 829 FOXDALE AVENUE PARCEL 1: LOT 15 IN BLOCK 4 IN WINNETKA PARK BLUFFS, BEING A SUBDIVISION BY WILLIAM H. CAIRNDUFF OF PART OF SECTIONS 16, 17 AND 20, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 13, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL 2: EASEMENT APPURTENANT TO AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 1 AFORESAID, AS MENTIONED IN AGREEMENT REGISTERED JANUARY 13, 1950 AS DOCUMENT NO. LR1278028, OVER AND UPON A PART OF LOT 14 IN WINNETKA PARK BLUFFS, AFORESAID, FOR DRIVEWAY PURPOSES, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PIN: 05-17-401-009-0000 Commonly known as 829 Foxdale Avenue, Winnetka, Illinois. Page 18 of 252  EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 833 FOXDALE AVENUE LOT 14 IN BLOCK 4 IN WINNETKA PARK BLUFFS, BEING A SUBDIVISION BY WILLIAM H. CAIRNDUFF OF PART OF SECTIONS 16, 17 AND 20, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 13 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PIN: 05-17-401-008-0000 Commonly known as 833 Foxdale Avenue, Winnetka, Illinois. Page 19 of 252  EXHIBIT C FINAL PLAT (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT C) Page 20 of 252  EXHIBIT C EEX Page 21 of 252  EXHIBIT D UNCONDITIONAL AGREEMENT AND CONSENT TO: The Village of Winnetka, Illinois ("Village"): 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; and WHEREAS, Deanna and Stephen Nied (collectively, “Owner”) are the record title owners of the parcels of real property located at 829 and 833 Foxdale Avenue in Winnetka, Illinois, and legally described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance (collectively, “Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located within the R-5 Single Family Residential District of the Village (“R-5 District”); and WHEREAS, the area of the parcel located at 829 Foxdale Avenue is 7,498 square feet and the parcel at 833 Foxdale Avenue is 7,499 square feet, both being legally nonconforming as to the minimum lot area of 8,4000 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Owner desires to (i) consolidate the two existing lots into a single lot of record (“Proposed Subdivision”); (ii) demolish the existing residence at 829 Foxdale Avenue, which demolition has occurred; (iii) construct an addition on the south side of the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue; and (iv) replace the existing detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue and existing detached garage at 833 Foxdale Avenue with a new detached garage in the southeast corner of the Proposed Subdivision “(collectively, the “Proposed Improvements”); and WHEREAS, following the Proposed Subdivision, the new lot will measure approximately 14,977 square feet, which lot size fully complies with the minimum lot area, lot width, and lot depth requirements set forth in the Village’s Zoning Ordinance, as amended (“Zoning Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, Section 17.30.060 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of 12 feet for lots with an average width of 100 feet or more, and the Proposed Subdivision renders the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue nonconforming, resulting in a setback of 7.55 feet from the northerly property line; and WHEREAS, Section 17.30.090 of the Zoning Ordinance requires building line articulation of at least 18 inches for side building walls longer than 40 feet that face the smaller side yard, and the Proposed Subdivision results the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue having unarticulated northerly building walls of 45.34 feet in length; and WHEREAS, the Owner filed an application with the Village for: (i) approval of a final plat of consolidation for the Proposed Subdivision (“Final Plat”); (ii) a variation from Section 17.30.060 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a side yard setback of 7.55 feet from the northerly property line (“Set Back Variation”); and (iii) a variation from Section 17.30.090 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow unarticulated northerly building walls of 45.34 feet in length (“Unarticulated Building Walls Page 22 of 252 Variation”) (collectively, the Set Back Variation and the Unarticulated Building Walls Variation are the “Variations”) (collectively, the Final Plat and Variations are the “Requested Relief”); and WHEREAS, Ordinance M-06-2026, adopted by the Village Council on _____ __, 2026 (“Ordinance”), approved the Requested Relief; and WHEREAS, Section 11 of the Ordinance provides, among other things, that the Ordinance will be of no force or effect unless and until the Owner has filed, within 60 days following the passage of the Ordinance, its unconditional agreement and consent to accept and abide by each and all of the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth in the Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the Owner does hereby agree and covenant as follows: 1. The Owner hereby unconditionally agrees to accept, consent to, and abide by each and all of the terms, conditions, limitations, restrictions, and provisions of the Ordinance. 2. The Owner acknowledges that public notices and hearings have been properly given and held with respect to the adoption of the Ordinance, has considered the possibility of the revocation provided for in the Ordinance, and agrees not to challenge any such revocation on the grounds of any procedural infirmity or a denial of any procedural right. 3. The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the Village is not and will not be, in any way, liable for any damages or injuries that may be sustained as a result of the Village’s grant of the Requested Relief for the Subject Property or its adoption of the Ordinance, and that the Village’s approvals do not, and will not, in any way, be deemed to insure the Owner against damage or injury of any kind and at any time. 4. The Owner hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Village, the Village’s corporate authorities, and all Village elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, representatives, and attorneys, from any and all claims that may, at any time, be asserted against any of such parties in connection with the Village’s adoption of the Ordinance granting the Requested Relief for the Subject Property. 5. The Owner hereby agrees to pay all expenses incurred by the Village in defending itself with regard to any and all of the claims mentioned in this Unconditional Agreement and Consent. These expenses will include all out-of-pocket expenses, such as attorneys’ and experts’ fees, and will also include the reasonable value of any services rendered by any employees of the Village. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] Page 23 of 252  Dated: , 2026 ATTEST: DEANNA NIED By: By: Its: ATTEST: STEPHEN NIED By: By: Its: Page 24 of 252  ATTACHMENT 2 MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: PLAN COMMISSION FROM: ANN KLAASSEN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DATE: DECEMBER 11, 2025 SUBJECT: 829 & 833 FOXDALE AVENUE – FINAL PLAT APPROVAL 829/833 FOXDALE AVE. CONSOLIDATION (CASE NO. 25-29-SD) INTRODUCTION On December 17, 2025, the Plan Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on applications submitted by Deanna and Stephen Nied (collectively, the “Applicant”), as the owners of the properties located at 829 Foxdale Avenue and 833 Foxdale Avenue (collectively, the “Subject Property”). The Applicant has filed applications seeking the following approvals as part of a Final Subdivision Plat approval to consolidate the two existing lots into a single lot of record, together with the following relief: 1. Variations to permit the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue to: a. observe less than the minimum required side yard setback from the northerly property line, which is due to an increase in the minimum required side yard setback as a result of the proposed increase in total lot area and increase in average lot width; b. not provide the required building line articulation along the north side building walls; and 2. A finding of “No Material Increased Adverse Impact” for the existing detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue, which does not provide the minimum required rear yard setback from the easterly property line. This application is limited to the consolidation request and the existing improvements, no proposed improvements to the Subject Property are included in this request. The Plan Commission is charged with making a recommendation to the Village Council regarding the consolidation, including the requested zoning relief described above. Because the proposed subdivision incorporates a request for zoning relief, the application is subject to review by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for the variations. The ZBA is scheduled to consider the request on January 12, 2026. The Applicant has also submitted a demolition application to demolish the existing residence 829 Foxdale Avenue. The Historic Preservation Commission considered the demolition application on May 5, 2025, and by a vote of 5-0 approved the demolition without delay. A mail notice was sent to property owners within 250 feet of the Subject Property in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance, informing them of the public hearing being held by the Plan Commission. The hearing was also properly noticed in the Winnetka Talk on November 27, 2025. As of the date of this memo, staff has not received any written comments from the public regarding this application. The Village Council has final jurisdiction on this request. Page 1 Page 25 of 252 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located on the east side of Foxdale Avenue, between Eldorado Street and Tower Road, is zoned R-5 Single Family Residential and currently consists of two buildable lots. The area of each existing lot is as follows: 1. 829 Foxdale Avenue: 7,498 square feet 2. 833 Foxdale Avenue: 7,499 square feet Both of the existing lots are legally nonconforming with respect to the minimum required lot area of 8,400 square feet for an interior lot in the R-5 District. Also, each of the existing lots has an average lot width of 50 feet, while the minimum required average lot width for an interior lot in the R-5 District is 60 feet. Each of the existing lots contains an existing two-story residence and a detached garage. The existing parcels and improvements are depicted below and on the following page in Figures 1 and 2. Lincoln Foxdale Avenue Avenue 833 Foxdale Eldorado 829 Foxdale Street Figure 1 – Two Existing Lots Page 2 Page 26 of 252  833 Foxdale 829 Foxdale Figure 2 – Subject Property The Comprehensive Plan designates the Subject Property as appropriate for “Single-Family Residential” uses (Figure 3). The Subject Property is located in a residential area with single-family residences. The Land Use Plan Map designates the surrounding properties as appropriate for “Single-Family Residential” uses. Subject Property Figure 3 – Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map – Winnetka Futures 2040 Plan Page 3 Page 27 of 252 The Comprehensive Plan also contains the following vision statement and goal relevant to the proposed application: Pillar 1: Quality Liveable Neighborhoods Vision Statement: A community of connected neighborhoods with safe, pedestrian-oriented streets, tree-lined parkways, and a variety of well- maintained housing offerings to meet the needs of all of its residents and create a unique and powerful sense of place. Goal 1.1: The Village will encourage renovation of existing homes and construction of new homes to be contextually consistent with existing single-family housing in its neighborhood. Initiative 1.1.6: Strengthen and maintain the rich and diverse character of the Village’s neighborhoods and sense of identity by highlighting each neighborhood’s unique elements that contribute positively to the Village. The Applicant’s use of the Subject Property for a single-family residence is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the R-5 zoning district. PROPERTY HISTORY AND PREVIOUS ZONING APPLICATIONS There are no previous zoning cases on file for either of the lots that make up the Subject Property. The building permit history for each lot is provided below. 829 Foxdale Avenue. The existing residence at 829 Foxdale was constructed in 1921. The following subsequent building permits were issued in: 1. 1922 to construct a detached garage; and 2. 1979 to replace the detached garage. In October of this year, the Applicant submitted a site restoration permit to remove the existing residence and detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue. The permit has been approved and is ready to be issued. 833 Foxdale Avenue. The existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue was also constructed in 1921. The following subsequent building permits were issued in: 1. 1959 to construct a one-story enclosed porch and powder room; 2. 2003 to construct a two-story addition and detached garage; and 3. 2018 to construct a one-story addition on the rear elevation. Other minor permits have been issued for both properties over the last several years. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PLAT OF CONSOLIDATION / RESUBDIVISION The Applicant resides at 833 Foxdale Avenue, which they acquired in 2005. Subsequently, the Applicant acquired the adjacent property at 829 Foxdale Avenue in 2024. If approved, the Applicant will demolish the existing residence and consolidate the two parcels into a single buildable lot measuring 14,997 square feet. The existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue would remain. As described in the attached application materials (Attachment A), the Applicant intends to construct an addition on the south side of the existing residence on the 833 Foxdale Avenue parcel, and replace the existing detached garages with a new detached garage in the southeast corner of the proposed lot. During construction of the proposed addition, both of the existing detached garages would remain. The 833 Foxdale garage for Page 4 Page 28 of 252 vehicle storage and the 829 Foxdale garage for temporary storage of salvaged building materials removed from the 829 Foxdale Avenue residence. As noted earlier in this report, preliminary plans for the proposed improvements have not been provided, the Applicant is simply explaining what their intent for the proposed consolidated lot is at this time. The proposed subdivision is represented in Figure 4 below and an excerpt of the proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation plat is provided in Figure 5 on the following page. Figure 4 – Proposed subdivision (neighborhood map view) Page 5 Page 29 of 252  Figure 5 – Excerpt of Proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation Plat DESCRIPTION OF ZONING STANDARDS As noted earlier in this report, the Subject Property is located in the R-5 Single Family Residential zoning district, which is one of five different single family residential zoning classifications in the Village. The R-5 zoning district provides for the densest form of single-family development compared to most other residential zoning districts, with the R-5 zoning district’s purpose statement describing the district as demonstrating a “relatively intense suburban” character. Residential Zoning Hierarchy A comparison of the Village’s five different residential zoning classifications (Table 1 on the following page) shows the hierarchy of zoning standards throughout the Village’s residential neighborhoods, ranging from larger “estate” character lots in portions of the Village, to smaller, more intensive developed areas. Surrounding Zoning Neighboring lots to the north, south, and west are similarly zoned for smaller lot sizes called for in the R- 5 zoning district (minimum lot area of 8,400 square feet for interior lots). Neighboring lots to the east are zoned for slightly larger lot sizes called for in the R-4 zoning district (minimum lot area of 12,600 square Page 6 Page 30 of 252 feet for interior lots), as depicted below in Figure 6. There are currently 13 lots on the east side of Foxdale Avenue (between Eldorado Street and Tower Road), 7 of which measure 50 feet by 150 feet (7,500 square feet). There is one lot that has the same lot dimensions and area as the proposed lot, 100 feet by 150 feet (15,000 square feet). There are two other lots that are more than 11,000 square feet, there are also two lots that are smaller than the existing parcels that make up the Subject Property. In summary, the average lot size of the existing lots on the east side of Foxdale Avenue, between Eldorado Street and Tower Road, is 8,837 square feet. The majority of the lots on the west side of Foxdale Avenue are 6,000 square feet due to the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The average lot size for lots on the west side of Foxdale Avenue, between Eldorado Street and Tower Road is 6,917 square feet. Table 1 R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 Residential Zoning (“estate” (“small estate” (“moderately intense” (“relatively intense” (“relatively intense” Hierarchy character) character) suburban character) suburban character) suburban character) Minimum Lot 48,000 s.f. 24,000 s.f. 16,000 s.f. 12,600 s.f. 8,400 s.f. Area - interior lots Minimum Lot Width – interior 150 ft. 100 ft. 75 ft. 60 ft. 60 ft. lots Minimum Required Front 50 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. Setback 15% of lot 15% of lot depth, depth, but not 15% of lot depth, but 15% of lot depth, but Required Rear but not less than 10 50 ft. less than 10 ft. not less than 10 ft. nor not less than 10 ft. Setback ft. nor more than 25 nor more than more than 25 ft.. nor more than 25 ft. ft. 25 ft. Table 1 – Residential Zoning Hierarchy Subject Property Figure 6 – Area Zoning Map Page 7 Page 31 of 252  COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING STANDARDS – LOT SIZE AND DIMENSIONS All subdivisions are evaluated by staff at the time of application to ensure compliance with basic minimum quantitative measures including, but not limited to (a) minimum lot area, (b) minimum lot width, and (c) minimum lot depth. The proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation fully complies with minimum lot area, lot width, and lot depth requirements as summarized in Table 2 below. Both of the existing lots are nonconforming in two respects: (i) the minimum required lot area of 8,4000 square feet, with each lot measuring approximately 7,500 square feet; and (ii) the minimum required average lot width of 60 feet, with existing average lot widths of 50 feet. The proposed consolidation would eliminate two nonconforming lots and create one conforming lot. Table 2 Existing Lot Existing Lot Proposed Lot R-5 Zoning Standards 829 Foxdale Avenue 833 Foxdale Avenue Minimum Lot 14,997 sq. ft. 7,498 sq. ft. 7,499 sq. ft. Area 8,400 sq. ft. COMPLIES DOES NOT COMPLY DOES NOT COMPLY (Interior lot) Minimum Lot 100 feet 49.99 feet 49.99 feet 60 feet Width (average) COMPLIES DOES NOT COMPLY DOES NOT COMPLY Minimum Lot 100 feet 49.99 feet 49.99 feet Width (at front 20 feet COMPLIES COMPLIES COMPLIES street line) Minimum Lot 150 feet 150 feet 150 feet 120 ft. Depth COMPLIES COMPLIES COMPLIES Table 2 – R-5 Zoning Standards COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING STANDARDS – REQUIRED SETBACKS AND BUILDING SIZE The allowable size of buildings on a residential lot and the required amount of open space around the buildings is dictated by the Village Zoning Ordinance. As a general rule, the allowable size of buildings and the setback requirements for those buildings change with any modifications to lot dimensions. As a result, staff conducts analyses of proposed lots and the improvements on those lots to determine (a) whether any new zoning nonconformities would be created by the resubdivision and (b) whether there are any existing zoning nonconformities which will remain. In the event of a zoning nonconformity arising out of a proposed subdivision, relief must be reviewed by both the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals, with the Village Council having final jurisdiction. The proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation does not comply with two provisions of the Zoning Ordinance related to required setbacks: (i) minimum required side yard setback; and (ii) building line articulation. Staff evaluation of the proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation is summarized in Tables 3 and 4 later in this report, indicating the extent to which the proposed consolidated lot complies with (or falls short of) zoning standards. The item highlighted (in yellow) in Table 3 indicates the creation of a zoning nonconformity. The items highlighted (in green) in Table 3 indicate an existing zoning nonconformity. Description of minimum side yard setback requirements – Side yard setback requirements are calculated based on a lot’s width: • Lots with an average lot width that is 100 feet or more: The minimum required side yard setback Page 8 Page 32 of 252  is 12 feet. • Lots with an average lot width that is more than 60 feet, but less than 100 feet: The minimum required side yard setback is 10% of the average lot width. • Lots with an average lot width of 60 feet or less: The minimum required side yard setback is 6 feet on one side and 8 feet on the other side. Newly created zoning nonconformities (zoning variations required) – The proposed consolidation has the effect of increasing the average lot width to 100 feet, resulting in an increase in the required minimum side yard setback to 12 feet. As a result, the proposed larger lot renders the existing 833 Foxdale Avenue residence (which is set back 7.55 feet from the northerly property line), nonconforming with the new minimum side yard requirement of 12 feet. The existing improvements providing a minimum side yard of 7.55 feet, are deficient with the new requirement by 4.45 feet or 37.08%. In addition to the variation required for the side yard setback, a variation from the building line articulation requirement is also necessary as a result of the proposed consolidation. The northerly building walls of the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue do not provide the required building line articulation, with unarticulated northerly building walls totaling 45.34 feet in length. The Zoning Ordinance requires the side building walls that face the smaller side yard, on a residence constructed prior to April 1999, be articulated by at least 18 inches when the residence is more than 40 feet long. Currently, the smaller side yard is along the southerly property line and the existing residence complies with the building line articulation requirement. However, as a result of the proposed subdivision the smaller side yard is now along the northerly property line and the existing north side building walls do not comply with the building line articulation requirement. The existing north side building walls measuring 45.34 feet in length are deficient with the articulation requirement by 5.34 feet or 13.35%. Page 9 Page 33 of 252 Table 3 Existing Lot Existing Lot Proposed Consolidated Lot Zoning Setback Requirements 829 Foxdale 833 Foxdale Minimum Required Front Yard 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet Front yard provided existing 35.84 feet 35.88 feet 35.84 feet structures Minimum Required Side Yard 12 feet 6 feet 6 feet SETBACK REQUIREMENTS 7.55 feet (north) Side yard provided by VARIATION of 4.45 FT 8.57 feet (south) 6 feet (south) existing structures (37.08%) Minimum Required Remaining 18 feet 8 feet 8 feet Side Yard 7.55 feet (north) Side yard provided by 9.85 feet 63.55 feet (south) EXISTING existing structures (north) NONCONFORMING Minimum Required Rear Yard 22.5 feet 22.5 feet 22.5 feet Rear yard provided by 57.56 feet 79.49 feet 57.56 feet existing structures Minimum Required Rear & Side Yard Setbacks for 2 feet 2 feet 2 feet Accessory Structures in Rear Quarter Rear yard provided by 1.71 feet 1.71 feet EXISTING 3.4 feet existing garages 3.4 feet NONCONFORMING Table 3 – Zoning Setback Requirements Page 10 Page 34 of 252 Table 4 below, highlights (green) one existing zoning nonconformity that would be eliminated with the proposed subdivision. The existing improvements on the 833 Foxdale Avenue parcel currently exceed the maximum permitted impermeable lot coverage by 605.96 square feet or 16.16%.. The proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation would eliminate the impermeable lot coverage nonconformity. Table 4 – Zoning Existing Lot Building Size Proposed 829 Foxdale Avenue Existing Lot Requirements Consolidated Lot (house to be torn down, 833 Foxdale Avenue garage to remain) Maximum Allowed Gross 4,814.4 sq. ft. 2,999.2 sq. ft. 2,999.6 sq. ft. Floor Area (GFA) GFA provided by existing 3,349.67 sq. ft. 1,864.58 sq. ft. 2,952.16 sq. ft. structures ALLOWABLE BUILDING SIZE Maximum Allowed Roofed Lot Coverage 4,049.19 sq. ft. 2,024.46 sq. ft. 2,024.73 sq. ft. (RLC) RLC provided by existing 2,193.88 sq. ft. 1,129.8 sq. ft. 1,796.37 sq. ft. structures Maximum Allowed Impermeable Lot 7,498.5 sq. ft. 3,749 sq. ft. 3,749.5 sq. ft. Coverage (ILC) (50% of lot area) ILC provided by 4,355.46 sq. ft. existing 4,440.97 sq. ft. 2,723.8 sq. ft. EXISTING structures NONCONFORMING Table 4 – Zoning Building Size Requirements COMPLIANCE WITH SUBDIVISION CODE STANDARDS All changes to the configuration of parcels of land are classified as Land Subdivisions under the Village Code and are subject to review by the Plan Commission and approval by the Village Council. As part of that review process, resubdivisions are subject to review for compliance with both the Village Subdivision Code as well as the Zoning Ordinance. According to Section 16.12.010 Minimum land subdivision standards of the Subdivision Code, subdivisions shall conform with the Comprehensive Plan and with the minimum standards outlined in Section 16.12.010, such as the street system, street and alley widths, lot size, etc. The proposed subdivision complies with all requirements of Section 16.12.010. Additionally, the proposed subdivision conforms with the Comprehensive Plan as the Land Use Map designates the Subject Property as appropriate for single family residential development, which is the proposed use of the newly created lot. Pre-existing zoning nonconformity (finding of No Material Increased Adverse Impact required) – One existing nonconformity will remain on the proposed consolidated lot. The existing detached garage on 829 Foxdale Avenue parcel provides a nonconforming rear yard setback of 1.71 feet from the easterly Page 11 Page 35 of 252 property line, whereas a minimum setback of 2 feet is required (deficient by 0.29 feet or 14.5%). According to the Applicant, they do intend to remove the existing nonconforming detached garage upon completion of an addition to the existing residence that is to remain. Pursuant to Section 16.12.010(D) of the Subdivision Code, in the instance of such nonconformities, the Plan Commission must consider the existence of such nonconformities, and “shall determine whether such nonconformity, in the context of the proposed subdivision, would result in a material increased adverse impact upon the public health, safety or welfare.” Location of Existing Nonconforming Rear Yard Setback that will remain Figure 7 – 829 & 833 Foxdale Avenue Plat of Survey Excerpt STORMWATER The proposed subdivision consists of consolidating two lots into a single larger lot. As previously mentioned, the Applicant intends to demolish the existing residence at 829 Foxdale Avenue, construct an addition to the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue, and eventually demolish both of the existing detached garages on the Subject Property. The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed consolidation and has noted that upon submittal of the necessary permits to construction any proposed improvements, the Engineering Department will evaluate grading and stormwater detention as part of final engineering approval to verify stormwater is being managed on-site and complies with Village stormwater regulations. Additionally, the stormwater utility fee will be reviewed and adjusted based on final impermeable lot coverage calculations. Page 12 Page 36 of 252 For reference, Figure 8 below represents the Subject Property’s proximity to the floodplain; the cyan represents the 100-year floodplain. Subject Property Figure 8 – GIS Floodplain Map COMMISSION CONSIDERATION The Village Code does not require an applicant to obtain preliminary plat approval as a precondition of final plat approval. In this case, the Applicant has chosen to directly proceed with final plat review. In addition to evaluating prescriptive standards of the zoning and subdivision code, consideration of Final Subdivision Plat approval also needs to consider the details of the final plat such as utility easements, final plat formatting and related matters. The Village Water & Electric and Engineering Departments have reviewed the proposed consolidation and are not requiring any utility easements. With respect to plat formatting, the Applicant is working with staff to finalize all of the necessary signature blocks on the plat of subdivision. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATION The Plan Commission is to consider whether the proposed consolidation complies with the Subdivision Code and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. After hearing from the Applicant and the public, the Commission may decide to take action on one or two options: 1) Continue further review of the application to a specific date in order to provide the Applicant and/or staff additional time to address questions and comments from the Commission; or 2) Consider a motion recommending approval or denial of the Final Plat of Consolidation. If the Commission is prepared to make a recommendation to the Village Council regarding the requested relief, a Commissioner may wish to make a motion recommending approval or recommending denial based upon the following: Move to recommend approval [denial] of: A. The proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation Final Plat consolidating the two existing lots commonly known as 829 Foxdale Avenue and 833 Foxdale Avenue into a single Lot of Page 13 Page 37 of 252  Record, as the Final Plat of Consolidation, which consolidation requires: a. A variation to permit the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue to observe a north side yard setback of 7.55 feet, whereas a minimum of 12 feet is required [Section 17.30.060 Side Yard Setback]; b. A variation to permit the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue to have unarticulated north side building walls 45.34 feet in length, whereas building line articulation of at least 18 inches is required when the residence is more than 40 feet in length [Section 17.30.090 Building Line Articulation]; c. A finding of “No Material Increased Adverse Impact” for the existing detached garage at 829 Foxdale, which does not provide the required rear yard setback of 2 feet from the east property line; and d. A finding that the lot consolidation is [is not] consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Map designation of the Subject Property as appropriate for “Single-Family Residential” development. Based upon these findings, the Plan Commission recommends [does not recommend] that the proposed 829/833 Foxdale Ave. Plat of Consolidation be approved subject to the following condition: 1. Final review and approval of the plat by the Village Attorney prior to recordation of the plat. [If the Commission chooses to place additional conditions as part of its recommendation of approval, it will want to include the conditions here.] ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Proposed Plat of Consolidation (829/833 Foxdale Ave. Consolidation) Page 14 Page 38 of 252  25-29-SD Page 39 of 252 The proposed consolidation of 833 Foxdale Avenue and 829 Foxdale Avenue will create a unified parcel totaling approximately 15,000 square feet (0.34 acres). Each existing residential lot measures 50 feet in width and 150 feet in depth, allowing for a seamless merger into a single, rectangular parcel that aligns with the contextual pattern of neighboring properties. The new parcel complies with the R-5 zoning district requirements, which mandate a minimum lot area of 8,400 square feet and minimum width of 60 feet. All proposed structures will conform to current setback ordinances and will be designed to respect the scale, massing, and architectural rhythm of the surrounding neighborhood. The primary goals of this consolidation are: • Expand the living space of 833 Foxdale in a manner consistent with neighborhood character. • Relocate and consolidate detached garages into the southeast corner of the new parcel. • Enhance privacy and increase green space by removing the existing structure at 829 Foxdale. • Reduce overall building bulk and improve pervious landscaping. This proposal is not intended to maximize buildable floor area. Instead, it aims to preserve and elevate cottage-style architectural elements that define Foxdale Avenue, while improving air flow, natural light, privacy, and visual openness for both the property and its neighbors. Chip Hackley - Principal Hackley & Associates Architects, Inc. Architect for Owners of 833/829 Foxdale Ave Page 40 of 252  25-29-SD Page 41 of 252 1) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulations in that district. This variation request stems from a change in lot width due to the proposed lot consolidation. The increased width alters the side yard setbacks, resulting in the existing house becoming non-conforming. However, the proposed addition does not affect the portion of the home that is rendered non-conforming, so no further relief is required. 2) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. Such circumstances must be associated with the characteristics of the property in question, rather than being related to the occupants. This variation request is unique due to the proposed consolidation with the neighboring property to the south. The increased lot width will result in greater side yard setback requirements, causing the existing home to become non- conforming on the north side. These setback regulations are part of the Village’s zoning code and were not established by the homeowners. 3) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue will remain, with a proposed addition to the south. The property will continue to function as a single-family home, consistent in scale, materials, and character with other homes along Foxdale Avenue. The new addition will fully comply with all current zoning and setback requirements. 4) An adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property will not be impaired. The increased setbacks resulting from the lot consolidation will enhance the supply of light and air, and the proposed addition will not negatively impact neighboring properties. The larger lot will help reduce congestion, and the design will improve privacy for the adjacent homes. Page 42 of 252 5) The hazard from fire and other damage to the property will not be increased. The encroaching portion of the residence at 833 Foxdale will remain unchanged. The proposed addition will increase separation between adjacent properties, thereby reducing potential risks associated with close proximity. 6) The taxable value of the land and buildings throughout the Village will not diminish. The proposed addition and overall property improvements are expected to enhance the taxable value of the home. 7) The congestion in the public street will not increase. Public street congestion will be reduced as the consolidation results in one single- family residence instead of two. This change will decrease the number of vehicles and equipment typically associated with multiple households. 8) The public health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the Village will not be otherwise impaired. The proposed enhancement will benefit the Foxdale Avenue community by increasing greenspace, improving treescapes, enhancing sun exposure, and reducing automobile presence. Page 43 of 252 Page 44 of 252 Page 45 of 252 Page 46 of 252 Page 47 of 252 Page 48 of 252 ATTACHMENT B Page 49 of 252  Minutes adopted 01.28.2026 1 WINNETKA PLAN COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES EXCERPT 2 DECEMBER 17, 2025 3 4 Members Present: Layla Danley, Chairperson 5 Jonathan Alt 6 Christopher Blum 7 Mamie Case 8 Chris Enck 9 King Poor 10 Cyrus Subawalla 11 Kate Van Vlack 12 13 Members Absent: Matthew Bradley 14 15 Non-Voting Members Present: Bridget Orsic 16 17 Village Staff: Scott Mangum, Community Development Director 18 Ann Klaassen, Assistant Director of Community 19 Development 20 21 *** 22 23 New Applications: 24 a. Case No. 25-29-SD: 829 Foxdale Avenue and 833 Foxdale Avenue: Applications seeking approval 25 of a Final Plat of Consolidation to consolidate the two existing lots into a single lot of record, which 26 requires (i) variations to allow the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue to: (a) observe less than 27 the minimum required side yard setback from the northerly property line, which is due to an increase 28 in the minimum required side yard setback as a result of the proposed increase in total lot area and 29 increase in average lot width; and (b) not provide the required building line articulation along the north 30 side buildings walls; and (ii) a finding of "No Material Increased Adverse Impact for the existing 31 detached garage at 829 Foxdale Avenue which observes less than the minimum required rear yard 32 setback from the east property line. The Village Council has final jurisdiction on this request. 33 Ms. Klaassen referred to an illustration of the property and location which she identified for the 34 Commission, as well as its zoning classification, size and existing improvements. She stated the 35 Comprehensive Plan designated the property and surrounding properties as appropriate for single family 36 residential uses and the use of the site is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation 37 and R-5 zoning. Ms. Klaassen then identified the site’s photos noting the applicant resides in 883 Foxdale 38 and submitted a demolition application for 829 Foxdale which was approved by the Historic Preservation 39 Commission without delay. She described the proposed consolidated lots’ measurements, the proposed 40 addition and detached garage noting building plans have not yet been submitted. Ms. Klaassen also 41 summarized the variations being requested, the nonconformities being eliminated and created, the 42 setbacks, as well as the sizes of similar neighboring lots. She stated the ZBA is to consider the application 43 at its January 12, 2026, meeting. Ms. Klaassen noted the Village Engineering and Water and Electric 44 Departments are not requiring easements, She also noted that the applicant is working with staff to 45 finalize the necessary signature blocks on the plat. She stated the Commission is to consider whether the 46 proposed consolidation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and complied with the subdivision 47 code. Ms. Klaassen then stated following the applicants’ presentation, public comment and Commission 48 discussion, the Commission may decide to take action one of two options: (i) continue the item to a date Page 50 of 252  December 17, 2025 Page 2 1 certain; or (ii) consider a motion to recommend approval or denial. She noted draft language for a 2 recommendation of approval or denial is included in the packet and that staff did not receive any written 3 comments from the public. Ms. Klaassen then asked if there were any questions. 4 5 Chairperson Danley referred to Figure 4 and asked for clarification with regard to similarly sized lots. Ms. 6 Klaassen clarified the information for the Commission. Mr. Enck asked if R-4 and R-5 zoning is behind the 7 property. Ms. Klaassen identified the properties on Lincoln which are R-4 as well as some lots on Tower 8 Road. Ms. Van Vlack asked if the 15,000 square foot resultant lot would be measured the same as R-3 9 zoned lots. Ms. Klaassen confirmed the proposed lot size would be similar to the minimum required R-3 10 lot area of 16,000 square feet. No additional questions were raised at this time. 11 12 Chairperson Danley swore in those speaking to this matter. Chip Hackley of Hackley & Associates 13 Architects summarized the work he has done in the Village and on this property. He stated the proposed 14 plan would maintain the neighborhood continuity and scale with a seamless addition which would 15 improve the property. Mr. Hackley noted the proposed plans have not been finalized and discussed the 16 setback issues resulting from the consolidation. He also stated the removal of one of the garages would 17 be a nice component of the plan and reduce the combined property’s impermeable effect. The applicants’ 18 team provided no additional comments and Mr. Hackley then asked if there were any questions. 19 20 Chairperson Danley also asked if there were any questions. A Commission Member questioned the 21 existing home’s square footage. Mr. Hackley responded the proposal would be under the maximum 22 allowable FAR. A Commission Member then questioned the home’s square footage with the addition. Mr. 23 Hackley referred to the challenges with regard to drainage and the property’s slope. No additional 24 questions were raised at this time. 25 26 Chairperson Danley asked for public comment. Jason Alcorn, 837 Foxdale, stated the proposal would be 27 an improvement for the neighborhood. He referred to specific language with regard to the northern 28 property owner and stated he wanted to ensure no variations are granted to the setback of the current 29 structure with the proposed addition as well as for articulation. 30 31 Colin Cross, 821 Foxdale, stated his issue is that combining the two Foxdale lots would change the 32 community nature. He described the neighborhood as an old world community due to the small lot sizes. 33 Mr. Cross stated he is opposed to larger 100 foot lots on Foxdale which has a reputation as one of the 34 most unique neighborhoods in the Village which is affordable for the influx of young families. He then 35 commented on 841 Foxdale and questioned what would happen if the larger lot is sold and a larger home 36 is built. No additional comments were made at this time. 37 38 Chairperson Danley called the matter in for discussion. Trustee Orsic commented that both neighbors are 39 right. She noted that there are already larger lots here, unlike the application considered last month. She 40 stated the decision they made last month was due to it being precedent setting. Trustee Orsic stated in 41 this particular case, she would be in favor of the request due to the fact there are similar lots. Chairperson 42 Danley referred to the prior discussion relating to preserving existing housing stock and referred to the 43 nearby larger homes in the R-4 district. Mr. Blum stated the request is approximately 1,000 feet under the 44 standard or 45%. He also stated it is important to consider the entirety of Foxdale and referred to the 45 items the Commission is to consider and specific standards he identified. He also stated the request would 46 not support the plan in that it would eliminate two smaller more affordable homes. 47 48 Mr. Enck stated he also appreciated both views from the public comments and stated the proposed design Page 51 of 252  December 17, 2025 Page 3 1 in this particular instance would fit in better with the neighborhood. He referred to previous discussions 2 for demolition applications and stated the lower scale and size of the addition would help to maintain the 3 street feel more so than what could otherwise be built there. Ms. Case agreed with the comments made 4 and referred to the fact the property is not large enough to go through the special use permit 5 consolidation process in connection with lot size. She also agreed with the discussion with regard to the 6 Foxdale uniqueness and that she is somewhat concerned what would happen with the next application 7 to combine two Foxdale lots. Ms. Case questioned whether the Trustees would consider that possibility 8 which would result in the loss of the R-5 characteristics. She added while the proposal is nice looking, they 9 should consider future possibilities. Trustee Orsic informed the Commission she could bring up the issue 10 at the next Village Council meeting. 11 12 Mr. Blum stated for this area, the home would remain an R-5 home with an R-3 size and referred to 13 instances for homes which were built pre-code. Mr. Alt stated R-4, R-5 and R-3 lots are there for a reason 14 and agreed the Foxdale area is special due to the small lot size and affordability and commented 15 eliminating such housing stock in the R-5 district did not make sense. He then referred to setting a 16 precedent which would change the neighborhood fabric and he would vote against the request. He also 17 agreed with Mr. Blum’s comment to not create an R-3 sized home in the R-5 district and referred to the 18 Comprehensive Plan’s goals with regard to housing stock. 19 20 Mr. Subawalla agreed with Mr. Alt’s comments with regard to incrementally breaking up the 21 neighborhood fabric and scale diversity. He stated he is on the fence. Ms. Van Vlack stated they are 22 struggling with the fundamental issue that they cannot answer in terms of maintaining housing stock, 23 neighborhood character and affordability. She stated while they do need to keep smaller housing stock, 24 she referred to the issue of teardowns by developers. Ms. Van Vlack then stated in considering 849 25 Foxdale which was built in 2005, the guidelines which were not considerably different at that time and 26 how that property was allowed be consolidated at that time. She also stated going from an R-5 to an R-4 27 is not as big of a jump but they must find a way to fundamentally address the issue as these matters come 28 before them. Ms. Van Vlack concluded she would be in support of the request. 29 30 Mr. Poor stated in considering the Sunset matter discussed last month, he referred to the discussion of 31 not setting precedent but described the situation as similar enough. He agreed Foxdale is a unique area 32 which is the type of area the Comprehensive Plan was designed to promote. Mr. Poor concluded he would 33 vote against the request. 34 35 Chairperson Danley stated she would take a straw poll of the Commission Members and noted her 36 preference is to not combine R-5 lots. She then stated while the property is located next to the R-4 district 37 and one home would be maintained and a special use is not being requested, she did not see within the 38 standards they are reviewing, she would be in favor of the request with the provision that both garages 39 would be removed. Chairperson Danley also referred to the finding being made of no increased material 40 adverse impact being a condition. The Commission Members then identified their positions in detail for 41 the straw poll. 42 43 Chairperson Danley indicated the Commission appeared to be split, 4:4 and asked the Commission 44 Members if they felt any additional information is needed to vote on the matter. Ms. Klaassen noted that 45 the Commission should work towards making a recommendation to the Village Council one way or the 46 other. Trustee Orsic informed the Commission if there is a split vote, that is important for the Trustees to 47 know that there is a bigger issue. Chairperson Danley added the Commission Members’ concerns have 48 been noted for the record. Page 52 of 252  December 17, 2025 Page 4 1 Chairperson Danley then suggested they go through the standards to identify those which are not met. 2 Mr. Blum referred to the discussion that the matter is something the Village Council needs to further 3 consider. 4 5 Chairperson Danley then asked for a motion. Mr. Poor moved to recommend denial of the application. 6 The motion was seconded by Mr. Blum with the statement that the request is inconsistent with the 7 Comprehensive Plan. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5 to 3: 8 AYES: Alt, Blum, Case, Poor, Subawalla 9 NAYS: Danley, Enck, Van Vlack 10 NON-VOTING: Trustee Orsic 11 12 *** 13 14 Respectfully submitted, 15 16 Antionette Johnson 17 Recording Secretary Page 53 of 252  ATTACHMENT 3 Minutes adopted 04.13.2026 1 WINNETKA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES EXCERPT 2 MARCH 16, 2026 3 4 Zoning Board Members Present: Matt Bradley, Chairman 5 Mark Haller 6 Kathryn Leister 7 Mike Nielsen 8 Michael Ritter 9 10 Zoning Board Members Absent: Lynn Hanley 11 Todd Vender 12 13 Village Staff: Scott Mangum, Director of Community Development 14 Ann Klaassen, Assistant Director of Community 15 Development 16 17 Village Attorney: Peter Friedman 18 19 *** 20 21 New Cases: 22 a. Case No. 25-29-SD: 829 Foxdale Avenue and 833 Foxdale Avenue: An application seeking 23 approval of a Final Plat of Consolidation to consolidate the two existing lots into a single lot of record, 24 which requires variations to allow the existing residence at 833 Foxdale Avenue to: (a) observe less than 25 the minimum required side yard setback from the northerly property line, which is due to an increase 26 in the minimum required side yard setback as a result of the proposed increase in total lot area and 27 increase in average lot width; and (b) not provide the required building line articulation along the north 28 side building walls. The Village Council has final jurisdiction on this request. 29 Ms. Klaassen summarized the application to request the consolidation of two existing lots into a single lot 30 of record and identified the property’s location, zoning classification and lot size of both lots as well as the 31 existing improvements. She referred to photos of both lots noting the applicant resided at 833 Foxdale 32 which they acquired in 2005 with the adjacent parcel purchased in 2024. Ms. Klaassen noted a demolition 33 permit was approved by the HPC for 829 Foxdale. 34 35 Ms. Klaassen stated the consolidation would create a single buildable lot measuring nearly 15,000 square 36 feet and the applicant planned to build an addition on the south side of the existing residence at 833 37 Foxdale and a detached garage. She identified plans to maintain both garages during construction for 38 storage. She noted the consolidation complied with zoning lot size standards, which she identified for the 39 Board and noted it would create one conforming lot. Ms. Klaassen also noted if a consolidation resulted 40 in a lot measuring more than two times the minimum lot size or more than two times the minimum 41 required average lot width, a special use permit would be required and confirmed the application did not 42 require a special use permit. 43 44 Ms. Klaassen described the two necessary zoning variations in detail as a result of the consolidation and 45 the nonconformity which would be eliminated. She summarized the Plan Commission’s (PC) consideration 46 of the request and its recommendation of denial and noted the Board is to review the request with regard 47 to eight zoning standards. Ms. Klaassen referred to emails received in connection with the request and 48 stated following the applicant’s presentation, public comment and Board discussion, the Board may Page 54 of 252  March 16, 2026 Page 2 1 decide to either continue the matter to a date certain to allow time to address questions or comments or 2 make a motion to recommend approval or denial of the requested variations with draft language included 3 on page no. 187. She then asked if there were any questions. 4 5 Chairman Bradley also asked if there were any questions. He referred to the 2x the minimum lot area and 6 average lot width provision requiring approval of a special use permit. No questions were raised at this 7 time. 8 9 Chairman Bradley swore in those speaking to this matter. Chip Hackley of Hackley & Associates Architects 10 stated he represented Stephen and Deanna Nied and described the request as a technicality in terms of 11 the application of zoning and lot consolidation. He stated the existing home is currently nonconforming 12 and once the lots are consolidated, larger side yard setbacks are required. Mr. Hackley summarized the 13 plan to maintain the existing home at 833 Foxdale, remove the 829 Foxdale home and expand the 833 14 Foxdale home which would also eliminate a narrow shared driveway. He stated their intent is to maintain 15 the continuity on Foxdale and a new home could result in a very large home and affect the block 16 contextually. Mr. Hackley referred to the home’s front elevation illustration and preliminary plans and 17 described the renovation to be done to the home. 18 19 Chairman Bradley asked if there were any questions. Mr. Nielsen asked if the consolidation assumed any 20 further variations. Mr. Hackley responded there would be none and described the relief obtained on the 21 south side of the property once the home is taken down. Mr. Haller referred to the existing north side 22 elevation and home design and asked if their intent is to mimic the character in terms of the home’s design 23 elements. Mr. Hackley confirmed that is correct as well as improve some of the home’s details. He also 24 described the distance between the home and the lot line. 25 26 Chairman Bradley referred to the first standard with regard to whether 833 Foxdale would be able to 27 obtain a reasonable return as well as sizes of neighboring homes which are existing nonconforming. He 28 asked why the home could not otherwise yield a reasonable return without consolidation. Mr. Hackley 29 responded the most important consideration in connection with reasonable return related to how the lot 30 is used and referred to the shared driveway removal which represented a dangerous and uncomfortable 31 situation. He also stated it is not possible to have two driveways on both lots. Chairman Bradley stated 32 the driveway situation was not sufficiently addressed at the PC meeting. He also referred to the third 33 standard and precedent setting on Foxdale. Mr. Hackley responded it would not set a precedent and is 34 dependent on how it would be handled. Chairman Bradley stated their attempt is to preserve 833 Foxdale 35 with consolidation as opposed to removing the home at 829 Foxdale and a new home being built. Mr. 36 Hackley confirmed that is correct. 37 38 Deanna Nied stated they have lived at 833 Foxdale for over 20 years, which she described as historic. She 39 stated they have lived with the shared driveway situation for quite some time and were fortunate to be 40 able to purchase the home next door which was not in good shape. Mrs. Nied stated the request would 41 allow them to resolve the driveway situation and asked if there were any questions. No questions were 42 raised at this time. 43 44 Chairman Bradley asked for public comment and swore in those speaking to this matter. Andy Cripe read 45 his comments into the record. He noted he owned the home from 2005-2015 and summarized his position 46 to recommend approval of the request. Mr. Cripe also described the structural issues in the home and 47 stated the uniqueness of the situation related to more than the narrow shared driveway situation which 48 he explained as the homes’ proximity and driveway slope impeded views. He then stated renovating the Page 55 of 252  March 16, 2026 Page 3 1 home to make it viable would not be practical and asked for the consolidation request be granted to allow 2 the applicants’ home to remain. Mr. Cripe then asked if there were any questions. 3 4 Jason Alcorn stated he lived to the north of the applicants’ home and agreed the homes on Foxdale are 5 tight and nonconforming. He stated as long as nothing else on the property changed, he had no problem 6 with the home. Mr. Alcorn agreed with Mr. Cripe’s analysis of the home and with regard to meeting the 7 standards, otherwise allowing a new home to be built on 829 Foxdale would create an encumbrance with 8 regard to the homes’ proximity as opposed to allowing it to remain a vacant lot. 9 10 Evan Meister, 825 Foxdale, stated he is a commercial builder in Chicago and with regard to preservation 11 and neighborhood character, he described the applicants as neighborhood stewards. He referred to the 12 street’s character and described it as an eclectic street. Mr. Meister stated if the request is not approved, 13 the lot would end up in the hands of a spec developer which would not contribute to neighborhood 14 character. He stated the request would improve the neighborhood. 15 16 Christina Cripe, former 829 Foxdale resident, stated she agreed with the comments made and the request 17 would contribute to the town’s overall aura and asked for the consolidation to be approved. No additional 18 comments were made at this time. 19 20 Chairman Bradley called the matter in for discussion and referred to the standards the Board is to 21 consider. Mr. Haller stated after having reviewed the standards, he referred to the first two standards in 22 particular and referred to the 829 Foxdale home which is in disrepair and requires substantial expense to 23 repair. He stated if it is removed and a new home built, there would be a challenge in terms of the shared 24 driveway. Mr. Haller stated there are unique circumstances with regard to both properties and the 25 consolidation would not otherwise physically change anything on the street. He stated the alternative to 26 tear down both homes and build a new home would result in a risk to the neighborhood character and he 27 would lean toward recommending approval. 28 29 Mr. Ritter agreed with Mr. Haller’s comments and added the home would be attractive with the addition 30 of green space. He stated given the alternative and while the first two standards were not clearly met, he 31 would be in favor of recommending approval. Ms. Leister stated her initial thought was not to recommend 32 approval in connection with the second standard and that the addition would change the character of the 33 locality. She stated after hearing the testimony, the 8-foot driveway is tighter than is more typically seen 34 and with the plan to maintain the existing home’s character and the neighbors’ comments, she would be 35 in favor of the request. 36 37 Mr. Nielsen referred to three particular standards and the written comment received and determined 38 there are three options including tearing down both homes which would result in one large home out of 39 character for the neighborhood, tear down one home to allow 833 Foxdale to have a larger lot or the 40 proposed plan. He stated the proposed plans for the home made a big difference for him and while the 41 home would be larger, hearing the public comment with regard to the shared driveway and safety issues, 42 he would be in favor of the request. Mr. Nielsen concluded the proposal is by far the best option. Chairman 43 Bradley stated with regard to the zoning relief requested, he would be in support of the request although 44 the reasonable return standard is difficult to meet and referred to the amount of homes which do not 45 have driveways. 46 Page 56 of 252  March 16, 2026 Page 4 1 Chairman Bradley then asked for a motion to recommend approval as noted on page 12. A motion as 2 stated by Chairman Bradley was made by Mr. Nielsen and seconded by Ms. Leister. A vote was taken and 3 the motion unanimously passed, 5 to 0: 4 AYES: Bradley, Haller, Leister, Nielsen, Ritter 5 NAYS: None 6 7 *** 8 9 Respectfully submitted, 10 Antionette Johnson 11 Recording Secretary Page 57 of 252  ATTACHMENT 4 March 11, 2026 To the Winnetka Zoning Board of Appeals and Village Council: I am writing on behalf of my clients, Deanna and Stephen Nied, regarding their lot consolidation request for 829 and 833 Foxdale Avenue, presented to the Plan Commission on December 17, 2025. During the Commission’s discussion and vote, I was unable to provide key information that is directly relevant to the case and may have influenced the outcome (5–4 denial). Only after the meeting was adjourned was I able to offer additional context. Given this, I respectfully request that the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Village Council consider the information in this letter as part of the record as it evaluates the Nieds’ request and its broader impact on the Foxdale Avenue community. Purpose for the Nieds’ Consolidation Request The two lots at 829 and 833 Foxdale share a single, narrow, eight-foot-wide driveway that straddles the property line. While this arrangement may have been workable in the 1920s, it presents significant safety concerns today. Modern vehicles and limited sightlines create ongoing hazards—issues the Nieds have experienced firsthand during their 20 years at 833 Foxdale. Resolving this long-standing safety problem was a primary reason the Nieds purchased the adjacent property and engaged us to design a solution that both aligns with Foxdale’s character and eliminates the risks inherent in the current shared driveway. In addition, shared driveways are well-documented sources of conflict, and while the Nieds have enjoyed positive neighbor relationships, they have understandable concerns about how future owners might handle the shared-access arrangement. Page 58 of 252 Issues with Keeping the Current Lot Arrangement If the lots remain separate, the community is left with a small set of options—all of them suboptimal: 1. Two new homes, each with its own driveway—without a design review board, the resulting homes could be incompatible with Foxdale’s character and diminish the desirability of the block. 2. Add a new driveway to 829 and build a narrow home, a re-subdivision would be required to shift the shared drive entirely to 833. This would make 829 narrower, nonconforming, and produce a home inconsistent with neighborhood character. 3. Keep 829 vacant for the foreseeable future. By contrast, consolidation and the Nieds’ planned addition offer a significantly improved outcome for both the neighborhood and the Village. Page 59 of 252 Benefits of Approving the Consolidation 1. Preservation of Existing Structures • Maintains the original 833 Foxdale house & character. • Although 829 and 833 share similar exteriors, their interiors are nearly mirror images; the addition preserves almost the entire 833 floor plan. • Salvaged materials from 829 will be repurposed into the addition. Materials not repurposed on site will be sold, donated, or recycled. 2. Protection of Neighborhood Character • Prevents construction of two new homes that may diverge from Foxdale’s architectural identity. • Ensures continuity of style and scale consistent with the streetscape. 3. Prevention of Long-Term Vacancy • Avoids the risk of 829 remaining an empty lot for years while the Nieds remain at 833. Working with my firm, the Nieds plan to create a single-family home fully compliant with the R-5 zoning district and aligned with the Village’s Comprehensive Plan. Design & Community Alignment The consolidated home—designed in the Dutch Colonial style and scaled to the surrounding block—will: • Fit seamlessly within the cottage-style character of Foxdale. • Preserve and incorporate the original 833 house, a mirror image of 829. • Reuse, repurpose, and/or recycle salvaged materials from 829. The resulting home will provide: • Modern amenities expected in contemporary homes • Accessibility features supporting aging in place • Space for extended family • Long-term housing flexibility for future generations Page 60 of 252 Advancement of Village Goals The proposed consolidation supports core Village objectives: • Renovation of existing homes in a manner that maintains contextual consistency with the neighborhood • Reduced energy consumption • Increased permeable surface coverage • Improved stormwater management • Expanded housing options for young families, empty nesters, and seniors Beyond resolving the shared driveway in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the project enhances neighborhood character. A planned large front porch will further strengthen the social fabric of this highly walkable street. Addressing Concerns About Establishing a Precedent Some Plan Commission members expressed concern that approving this request might encourage widespread consolidation of small lots on Foxdale. In practice, such a trend is highly unlikely: • The Nieds—long-time Foxdale residents—spent over 20 years before the opportunity arose to acquire the adjacent lot. • No other consolidations have occurred on Foxdale during that period. • The 829/833 driveway is the only shared, narrow (8-foot) driveway on the street. • Other homeowners lack both the motivation and the unique site conditions that exist between these two properties. Thus, the character of Foxdale — particularly lot size — remains secure, and the Nieds’ situation is uniquely limited to their property alone. Page 61 of 252 The Nieds deeply value the Foxdale streetscape and have no desire to diminish it; rather, their proposal allows them to continue living in their home for many years while addressing the long-standing safety and shared-driveway issues that will not subside over time if left unresolved. Plan Commission Meeting Record Clarification In reference to the Village’s Plan Commission meeting minutes, I would like to provide additional clarification regarding the variation request. During the public comment period at the December 17, 2025, meeting, Jason Alcorn, the neighbor to the north, attended to confirm that no variation was being requested for a new structure within the north side-yard setback. At that time, it was clarified that the variation relates only to the revised side-yard dimensions resulting from the lot-consolidation request and does not involve any new construction. For the record, the variation is required because the adjusted, reduced setback causes the existing structure to fall within the newly established side-yard requirement. This request addresses the zoning compliance of an existing condition. Page 62 of 252 Closing I respectfully request that the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Village Council consider the previously omitted shared-driveway facts and the analysis provided in this letter. If reopening deliberations is not possible, I ask that this letter be included in the record so that the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Village Council have the benefit of this additional information as it makes its final decision—particularly given that the Plan Commission did not have an opportunity to fully discuss this key issue. Regards, Chip Hackley cc: Winnetka Zoning Board of Appeals cc: Winnetka Village Council cc: Village of Winnetka Community Development Page 63 of 252 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 64 of 252 From: To: Planning Subject: Case 25-29-SD, Lot Consolidation on Foxdale Date: Monday, March 16, 2026 12:15:56 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Zoning Board Members: I am a long time resident of Foxdale Avenue and recently sold my home at 821 Foxdale Avenue to my daughter and her husband. They have two children, ages 5 and 3. They could afford this home because it is much less expensive than many other homes in Winnetka. I currently reside at 828 Bell Lane, Winnetka, but had owned my home on Foxdale from 1989-2025. Foxdale is a close knit community, largely due to the smaller, 50-foot-wide lots. I am opposed to the proposed combination of two 50’ lots into one 100’ lot for the following three reasons: 1. It reduces the stock of affordable homes in Winnetka; 2. It changes the unique nature of the “Foxdale Community”, arguably one of the best and most welcoming neighborhood in Winnetka; and, 3. It is the thin end of the wedge and will lead to more lot consolidations on Foxdale and other R5-zoned streets, resulting in fewer affordable homes. Please vote No on the proposed lot consolidation. Sincerely, Colin Cross Page 65 of 252 Page 66 of 252 Page 67 of 252 From: To: Planning Subject: Case 25-29 SD Date: Monday, March 16, 2026 2:25:42 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I oppose the petition to combine these 2 Foxdale properties. There is little we can do to address the housing crisis in this country, but maintaining a relatively affordable presence in Winnetka should be a priority. Also, as a 5 decade resident of Foxdale, I would like to preserve the unique family culture of our street. Respectfully, Mark Stefanik Page 68 of 252 Page 69 of 252 Page 70 of 252 I am someone who currently lives next to a corner lot that was “developed” by a builder who removed the prior home and replaced it with new construction that sought, and received, numerous variances so that it could be built to a specification that would attract a different buyer than the other homes in the immediate area. While the design was tasteful and consistent with the area, the home has already turned over three times in twenty years. It also doesn’t meet the village’s FAR or permeable land requirements creating drainage problems for all of the adjacent homes including ours. Once the first combination of lots occurs, it is likely to happen again in an area where a large number of the families live in older, yet renovated, homes. The family orientation and the neighborhood feel will forever be changed as will the curb appeal of these older homes when compared to larger, newer construction on larger lots. It could very well have the effect of decreasing the value of these existing homes to a level consistent with “tear downs” as opposed to a valuation afforded a single-family home. More importantly, it will change the family orientation of the neighborhood as one that welcomes small children and creates a safe environment for them to grow and socialize. Precedent – This lot combination, if approved, will set a bad precedent for a neighborhood that still resembles the Foxdale neighborhood we moved into more than 30 years ago. The neighborhood has maintained its charm and family-first environment with limited new construction and consistent, ongoing renovation of existing structures. The petitioner in this case has ample inventory of other homes in Winnetka that could meet their expectations for square footage, amenities and other creature comforts without the need to “overhaul” the neighborhood with a home that is simply out of place. It’s not like the current residents won’t have to vacate while the new construction occurs so any thought that moving to another home in the village would be an inconvenience is unfounded. However, as with other neighborhoods in the village, once there is a precedent for this type of “conversion,” others will follow and additional requests will begin flowing in that will forever change this area of the village. I appreciate your consideration of this email as I am unable to attend tonight’s meeting. For the reasons cited, I do believe that granting this variance and combining these lots will ultimately lead to a seismic change in the area that will eventually force existing homeowners to leave and will forever diminish the village’s declining availability of entry level family homes. Sincerely, Samuel S. Weiser Foxdale Management LLC Page 71 of 252  Andrew Cripe Comments in Support of 829/833 Foxdale Lot Consolidation  My family lived in 829 Foxdale for 10 years (from 2005 to 2015).  829 is a charming home but it has substantial plumbing, electrical, structural, mechanical challenges (e.g., crumbling stucco, no insulation, only 1 full living space bathroom, fun-house like settling, compromised timbers in substandard addition, out of date plumbing and electric lines, etc.).  833 is a mirror image twin to 829 but substantial investments have been made to address the challenges at 829. 833 has a chance at longevity if the shared challenges on the two currently non- conforming lots can be cured by creating one conforming lot.  We recognized in 2015 that we could not get a reasonable return on the investment needed to make 829 viable for the long term due to shared challenges on the two lots: o Lots are too small and narrow even by R-5 standards (7500 sq feet v 8400; 50 foot width v. 60) o Narrow, sloping, shared driveway presents typical shared driveway challenges but is also dangerous. It is only 8 feet wide:  In the event of a garage, kitchen or other fire at the back of either house, you could not get an emergency vehicle through (lacks needed 10-12 feet minimum access).  The narrow sloping drive is extremely hazardous for visibility; creates non-occupant accident hazard – especially for small children.  The situation cannot be remedied with lots “as is” because they are so narrow --- the homes were built right up to the driveway and there is no room on the south side of 829 or north side of 833 to create an alternative.  For more than 10 years, first as a ZBA member and then as a Village Trustee, I heard or reviewed the facts of every zoning variance application in the village. This one is a no brainer, even if the Plan Commission did not have the benefit of all the relevant facts when it made its decision (i.e., it was not informed of the shared, narrow, sloping driveway, home condition, or substandard R-5 lot size).  Traditionally, the Village has essentially recognized a prima facie showing of unique circumstances for requests that would alleviate shared driveway or flag lot conditions. Even in the best of circumstances, shared driveways can be a cause for constant tension and safety concerns. This one is intolerable for all but the most tolerant of neighbors (which the Nieds were to us).  The Neids have taken on a plan that will save one of these two twin houses, preserving the essential character of the street, and create a lot that is in keeping with similar lots on the same block. This will create one conforming lot from two non-conforming lots. They will eliminate serious health, safety and welfare concerns.  The plan is 100% in keeping with the Winnetka 2040 plan, which recognizes the need to update, adapt and preserve older homes for the long term needs of residents, allowing them to stay in their homes: o Initiative 1.12, p. 76: “Encourage renovation of existing homes to reduce environmental impacts of new construction and to maintain housing diversity for such segments of the community as young families and empty nesters.” o Goal 4.3, p. 138: “‘The greenest building is the one already built.’” Initiatives in Pillar 1 recommend policies that support efforts to encourage the renovation of existing homes in lieu of demolishing houses and building new. Additionally, initiatives recommend ongoing review of regulations to remove potential obstacles that renovation and restoration projects may encounter.” Page 72 of 252 Page 73 of 252 ending list of needed repairs makes this an impossible proposition. Deanna and Steve have demonstrated their commitment to our community. While they split their time between Winnetka and Austin, Winnetka remains home to them. They want to build a home for generations to come to enjoy this community and all it has to offer. Further, they have hired Hackley & Associates Architects out of Kenilworth to draw up architectural plans to include their existing residence. Chip Hackley is known throughout the North Shore for his experience and talent in building the new that pays homage to the past history of Winnetka. Deanna and Steve understand the importance of keeping the quaintness of Foxdale and that is reflected in Chip's design. Please approve the joining of these two lots. Shannon Van Tassel On Monday, March 16, 2026 at 04:53:20 PM CDT, Christina Cripe < > wrote: Sent from my iPhone Page 74 of 252  ATTACHMENT 6 From: To: Ann Klaassen Cc: Planning Subject: Re: Lot consolidation at 833 and 829 Foxdale Date: Thursday, April 16, 2026 11:33:16 AM [You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Ann, I had previously written to express my concerns for the proposed lot consolidation at 833 and 829 Foxdale. After having looked into this matter again I feel that I can live with the proposed lot consolidation and construction of the addition and here is why: #1: I have learned that the neighbors adjacent on either side of the property are OK with the plans. #2: While I am still concerned with the affordability issue for the village overall, I am also concerned that if the Nied’s are not allowed to add on to their existing house that in the future a developer could buy the empty lot at 829 Foxdale and construct a     3000 sq ft home on that lot. That to me is a worse outcome and would not help the affordability issue and would continue to change the character of the neighborhood. With that in mind, I respectfully submit my change of opinion and want to go on record and give my support for the project to move forward. Thanks, Jeff Charatz 832 Foxdale Page 75 of 252 Page 76 of 252 Page 77 of 252 Frankly, I find it disappointing that this request has generated controversy—especially from individuals who no longer live on Foxdale and do not experience its day-to-day character. The Nieds are not seeking to build an oversized or out-of-place home; rather, they’re creating a well-proportioned “forever home” that reflects the look and feel of our street. Their approach stands in sharp contrast to recent speculative builds that maximize lot coverage and disrupt the aesthetic balance that longtime residents have worked hard to preserve. In my view, approving this consolidation is both reasonable and consistent with the values of our community. It supports a family deeply rooted in Foxdale’s history and future—one that enhances, rather than detracts from, the integrity of our neighborhood. I wholeheartedly endorse Steve and Deanna Nied’s request and urge the Council to approve their lot consolidation. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration. Regards, Phil Atteberry Co-Founder, Executive Vice President BRIGHTSIDE 224-205-7866 224-205-7868 (direct) 224-205-7865  (fax) www.brightsideclinic.com Confidentiality Notices: This e-mail transmission may contain confidential materials, confidential health information, or legally privileged information that is intended only for the individual or entity named above. If this e-mail includes health information it is being sent to you only after the proper consent or authorization has been obtained by the appropriate party. As the recipient, you are required to maintain this information in a safe and secure manner. The sender is adhering to both Federal and State rules regarding confidentiality including, but not limited to, HIPAA and Federal Rule 42. C.F.R. Part II, et. seq. This information is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance upon the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited by law,. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please reply to the sender, so that we can arrange for proper delivery, and then please destroy immediately. Page 78 of 252 From: Berina Gradjan To: Cc: Scott Mangum; Ann Klaassen; Hannah Lipman Subject: RE: 4/21 Village Council Meeting: 829/833 Foxdale lot consolidation Date: Friday, April 17, 2026 10:54:55 AM Dear Kellie, Thank you for contacting the Village of Winnetka. Your email has been shared with the Village Council. Thank you, Berina Gradjan Executive Assistant/Deputy Village Clerk Village of Winnetka 510 Green Bay Road Winnetka, IL 60093 Telephone: (847) 716-3541 -----Original Message----- From: Kellie Finney < > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 8:34 PM To: ContactCouncil <ContactCouncil@winnetka.org> Subject: 4/21 Village Council Meeting: 829/833 Foxdale lot consolidation [Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I currently live on Foxdale and I support the Neids in their project to consolidate the 2 lots, move the driveway, and add an addition to their house. I think that their plan will fit it nicely with the neighborhood. Thanks Kellie Finney 791 Foxdale Sent from my iPhone Page 79 of 252 From: Berina Gradjan To: ; ContactCouncil Cc: Scott Mangum; Ann Klaassen; Hannah Lipman Subject: RE: Neid Date: Friday, April 17, 2026 10:56:11 AM Dear Jim and Jane, Thank you for contacting the Village of Winnetka. Your email has been shared with the Village Council. Thank you, Berina Gradjan Executive Assistant/Deputy Village Clerk Village of Winnetka 510 Green Bay Road Winnetka, IL 60093 Telephone: (847) 716-3541 -----Original Message----- From: James McCoy > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 8:38 AM To: ContactCouncil <ContactCouncil@winnetka.org> Subject: Neid [Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To whom it may concern, I am writing in support of the Neid Family who wish to expand their Foxdale property and eliminate the existing shared driveway.   Since, we moved into our house in 2002, that shared driveway has been an issue for residents of those properties. We strongly support their desire to complete their plan. Please feel free to reach out to us if you have additional questions, Jim and Jane McCoy, longtime residents of 739 Foxdale - Sent from my iPhone Page 80 of 252 Page 81 of 252 project reflects that. We strongly encourage the Council to approve the lot consolidation and allow the Nieds to move forward with their plans. This is exactly the kind of thoughtful, neighborhood-sensitive development Winnetka should welcome. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Matthew and Katherine Moran Katherine Moran Page 82 of 252 Page 83 of 252 Page 84 of 252 From what has been shared, the proposed addition is appropriately scaled and designed to complement the existing Dutch Colonial style of the home. Relocating the driveway to the south side would also improve the layout of the property while preserving green space and maintaining the character of the area. Additionally, it seems likely that if this property had been sold to a developer instead, a significantly larger new home—up to the village’s maximum allowable size—could have been constructed, potentially without resolving the shared driveway issue. Developments of that kind often do not reflect the architectural character that defines this neighborhood. For these reasons, I respectfully encourage the Village Council to approve the lot consolidation request. I truly believe it preserves the integrity of our community here on Foxdale. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Sarah Root 714 Foxdale Avenue Page 85 of 252 From: To: Ann Klaassen Cc: Planning Subject: Re: Case 25-29-SD, Lot Consolidation on Foxdale Date: Monday, April 20, 2026 3:57:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Ann, I am no longer in opposition of this proposed lot consolidation since the two homes involved share a driveway and I believe that such a deficiency should be heavily weighted when consolidating two small lots in Winnetka. Thank you, Colin Colin Cross > On Mar 16, 2026, at 3:23 PM, Ann Klaassen <AKlaassen@winnetka.org> wrote: > > Colin - Thank you for your email; we will be sure to share it with the Zoning Board of Appeals. > > Best regards, > > Ann Klaassen > Assistant Director | Village of Winnetka Community Development > 510 Green Bay Road - Winnetka, IL 60093 > 847.716.3525 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Colin Cross <c > > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2026 12:16 PM > To: Planning <Planning@winnetka.org> > Subject: Case 25-29-SD, Lot Consolidation on Foxdale > > [Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > Dear Zoning Board Members: > > I am a long time resident of Foxdale Avenue and recently sold my home at 821 Foxdale Avenue to my daughter and her husband. They have two children, ages 5 and 3. They could afford this home because it is much less expensive than many other homes in Winnetka. > > I currently reside at 828 Bell Lane, Winnetka, but had owned my home on Foxdale from 1989-2025. > > Foxdale is a close knit community, largely due to the smaller, 50-foot-wide lots. Page 86 of 252 > > I am opposed to the proposed combination of two 50' lots into one 100' lot for the following three reasons: > > 1. It reduces the stock of affordable homes in Winnetka; 2. It changes the unique nature of the "Foxdale Community", arguably one of the best and most welcoming neighborhood in Winnetka; and, 3. It is the thin end of the wedge and will lead to more lot consolidations on Foxdale and other R5-zoned streets, resulting in fewer affordable homes. > > Please vote No on the proposed lot consolidation. > > Sincerely, > > Colin Cross > Page 87 of 252 Page 88 of 252 I recently had a conversation with both the owners and a former neighbor who is opposed. As expected, it was a delightfully civil conversation though I was surprised they had not met before our conversation on the sidewalk in front of the properties. It is inconceivable to me that this project, if approved, would have a negative impact on the quality and charm of the neighborhood. I look forward to hearing the council's affordability argument as it relates to homes on Foxdale and in Winnetka in general. I hope we all can support a homeowner’s ability to realize an appreciation of their home value. The existing home, 829, was in need of major repairs and most likely would have been a tear down and rebuilt as a 3000-sf spec home- I think recent new construction homes on the block have sold in the $1.2- $1.6k range. I am curious as to how the 2040 Plan will achieve affordability for first time homeowners in Winnetka. Respectfully, Sheilah Johnson Page 89 of 252 From: Berina Gradjan To: David Kasprisin; ContactCouncil Cc: Scott Mangum; Ann Klaassen; Hannah Lipman Subject: RE: 4/21 Village Council Meeting: 829/833 Foxdale lot consolidation Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 12:16:05 PM Attachments: image001.png image010.png image011.png image012.png image013.png image014.png image015.png image002.png Dear David, Thank you for contacting the Village of Winnetka. Your email has been shared with the Village Council. Thank you, Berina Gradjan Executive Assistant/Deputy Village Clerk Village of Winnetka 510 Green Bay Road Winnetka, IL 60093 Telephone: (847) 716-3541 From: David Kasprisin <DKasprisin@wintrustmortgage.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2026 9:54 AM To: ContactCouncil <ContactCouncil@winnetka.org> Subject: 4/21 Village Council Meeting: 829/833 Foxdale lot consolidation Some people who received this message don't often get email from dkasprisin@wintrustmortgage.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am a neighbor to the north of this proposed project. I live at 861 Foxdale Ave since 2019 and I would be very pleased to see this beautiful project move forward. It will keep the feel and warmth of our street by blending in seamlessly with the other homes that surround it. I look forward to seeing the project completed. DAVID KASPRISIN –Branch Manager NMLS #: 559781              70 W Hubbard St, Chicago, IL 60654 Direct: 312-208-4648 | Dkasprisin@wintrustmortgage.com | wintrustmortgage.com/team/lo-dkasprisin Page 90 of 252           CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The content of this message and any files transmitted with it is a confidential and proprietary business communication, which is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Any use, distribution, duplication or disclosure by any other person or entity is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient or this has been received in error, please notify the sender and immediately delete all copies of this communication. Page 91 of 252 Page 92 of 252 Emily Baillos 795 Foxdale Page 93 of 252 Page 94 of 252 Page 95 of 252  Agenda Item Executive Summary TITLE: Resolution No. R-42-2026: Approving Reimbursement to the Village of Kenilworth for Green Bay Road Streetscape Design Services for Phase I Engineering Study (Adoption) PRESENTER: James Bernahl AGENDA DATE: May 5, 2026 CONSENT: Yes ITEM TYPE: Consent Agenda ITEM HISTORY: On August 1, 2023, Village Council approved resolution R-74-2023, approving a reimbursement to the Village of Kenilworth for Design Services for the Green Bay Road Streetscape Concept Plan (Adoption) December 2, 2025, the Village Council reviewed the streetscape design concepts presented by Teska Associates, Inc. The information presented included the general vision of the streetscape improvement with alternative options. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As part of a joint Streetscape and Business District Revitalization initiative, the Villages of Winnetka and Kenilworth are working collaboratively to advance a shared vision for the Green Bay Road corridor. This effort reflects a mutual commitment to enhancing the functionality, aesthetics, and long-term vitality of this important community asset. To build upon the conceptual design previously presented to both Village Councils, staff are recommending initiation of the Phase I preliminary engineering process. Both communities have formally reviewed the conceptual corridor designs, which were developed with the professional expertise of Teska Associates, Inc. and Ciorba Group—firms with demonstrated experience in delivering successful streetscape improvements in Winnetka and comparable communities. At the December 2, 2025, Village Council Study Session, the Council considered the proposed streetscape vision and associated design alternatives, establishing a foundation for continued refinement. Given the jurisdictional and operational considerations along this corridor, ongoing coordination with the Village of Kenilworth and the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) will be essential. A completed Phase I report will not only guide future design and implementation but also support coordinated discussions with IDOT regarding potential jurisdictional transfer opportunities. Recognizing the importance of continuity and institutional knowledge, both villages have agreed to Page 96 of 252 engage Ciorba Group who contributed to the original concept development to lead the Phase I study. The scope of services includes: Project coordination, stakeholder meetings, and data collection Surveying services Water resources evaluation Roadway lighting feasibility analysis Engineering studies (environmental, geometric, safety, project development report, and public engagement) Quantity calculations and cost estimates Funding strategy support Quality assurance and quality control Project management and administration Preliminary streetscape design (in collaboration with Teska Associates, Inc.) Geotechnical engineering (by Soil and Material Consultants, Inc.) Completion of this work will enable both communities to align on a refined, implementable design that supports long-term corridor improvements. The study is anticipated to span fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Funding for Winnetka’s portion is partially allocated within the approved FY2026 Business District Revitalization Fund (Account 420.15.01-650), with the remaining balance proposed for inclusion in the FY2027 budget. Staff have evaluated Ciorba Group’s proposal based on their technical qualifications, familiarity with the corridor, and proven track record in similar projects. Based on this review, staff are confident in their ability to deliver a comprehensive and high-quality Phase I study that advances the shared goals of both communities. The total proposed fee for the study is not to exceed $432,000. Expenses will be allocated between the villages, with Winnetka responsible for 30 percent of the total cost. On April 20th, the Village of Kenilworth approved a resolution authorizing a bid waiver and execution of a professional services agreement with Ciorba Group for the Green Bay Road Design Services for Phase 1 Engineering Study (See Attachment 2). Accordingly, staff recommend that the Village Council consider adoption of Resolution R-42-2026 approving a reimbursement to the Village of Kenilworth for engineering services related to the Green Bay Road Streetscape with Winnetka’s share not to exceed $129,600 over FY2026 and FY2027. RECOMMENDATION: Consider adopting Resolution R-42-2026 approving Reimbursement to the Village of Kenilworth for Green Bay Road Streetscape Design Services for Phase I Engineering Study (Adoption). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment 1: Resolution No. R-42-2026: Approving Kenilworth Reimbursement Regarding Green Bay Road Streetscape for Phase 1 Engineering Study 2. Attachment 2: Kenilworth Resolution Authorizing Ciorba Group Phase I Engineering Page 97 of 252  ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. R-42-2026 A RESOLUTION APPROVING REIMBURSEMENT TO THE VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH FOR ENGINEERING STUDY SERVICES FOR THE GREEN BAY ROAD STREETSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN WHEREAS, the Village of Winnetka (“Village”) is a home rule municipality in accordance with Article VII, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois of 1970; and WHEREAS, Article VII, Section 10 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, 5 ILCS 220/1 et seq., authorizes and encourages intergovernmental cooperation; and WHEREAS, the Village and Village of Kenilworth (“Kenilworth”) desire to cooperate and coordinate to improve the streetscape along the southern portion of Green Bay Road in the Village and the portion of Green Bay Road in Kenilworth (“Project”); and WHEREAS, Kenilworth has retained the Ciorba Group to conduct a Phase 1 Engineering Study related to the Project (“Services”) in an amount of $432,000.00, pursuant to a professional services agreement approve by the Kenilworth Village Board; and WHEREAS, the Village desires to reimburse Kenilworth for the portion of the Services related to that part of the Project located in the Village in an amount of $129,600.00 (“Reimbursement”); and WHEREAS, the Village Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the Village and its residents to approve the Reimbursement to Kenilworth; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois, as follows: SECTION 1: RECITALS. The Village Council adopts the recitals above as its findings, as if fully set forth in this Section. SECTION 2: APPROVAL OF REIMBURSEMET. The Village Council approves the Reimbursement to Kenilworth for the Services in an amount of $129,600.00. SECTION 3: AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS. The Village Council authorizes and directs the Village President and the Village Clerk to execute and attest, respectively, on behalf of the Village, any documents necessary to make the Reimbursement in accordance with Section 2 of this Resolution. SECTION 4: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval according to law. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] May 5, 2026 R-42-2026 Page 98 of 252  ADOPTED this 5 ____ day of May ______, 2026, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: ____________________________________________________________ NAYS: ____________________________________________________________ ABSENT: ____________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ____________________________________________________________ Signed ____________________________________ Village President Countersigned: _______________________________________ Village Clerk May 5, 2026 R-42-2026 Page 99 of 252  Village of ATTACHMENT 2 Request for Board Action Agenda Item: V.B.5 Considered By: Date: Village Board 04/20/16 Public Works Committee 03/19/26 Staff Contact: Kathy Thake, Administration Village Board 01/26/26 Heather McFarland, Administration (Staff presentation) Village Board 11/17/25 (Ciorba presentation) Subject: Resolution Authorizing a Bid Waiver and Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with the Ciorba Group of Chicago, Illinois for Green Bay Road Design Services for Phase I Engineering Study in the Amount not to Exceed of $432,000 Summary: One of the goals in the FY26 Budget is to continue forward with the Green Bay Road Enhancement Project with a Phase I Engineering Study. Based upon the completion of the conceptual design, it is recommended that the Village engage Ciorba Group to complete Phase I Engineering, thereby requesting a bid waiver to ensure cost savings. Background of Matter: The Village has been assessing community goals and opportunities for improvement for the Green Bay Road corridor for close to twenty years. This has encompassed comprehensive plans, design guidelines, corridor plans, and community workgroups. Early in the evaluation process, the desire to reconfigure Green Bay Road to improve safety, review parking, and revitalize the corridor emerged as a prominent theme. In late 2025, and in preparation of FY26 budget goals, it was evident the Green Bay Road Enhancement Project would need to move forward with a Phase I Engineering Study to continue making progress on the streetscape and alignment concepts, bringing it closer to reality. After the January 26, 2026 Village Board Project presentation, staff was directed to rank project priorities in advance of proceeding with the Phase I study. The Public Works Committee discussed the survey data and priorities on March 19; a consensus was reached that the priorities used to lead discussions on the five geometric studies would be as follows: 1. Aesthetics/Beautification 2. Accessibility (walkability, gathering spaces, accommodation for bike and stroller parking) 3. Safety (illumination, traffic control/crosswalks) 4. Parking The agenda item before the Village Board for consideration is the Bid Waiver and Professional Services Agreement with the Ciorba Group of Chicago, Illinois for Green Bay Road Design Services for Phase I Engineering Study in the Amount not to Exceed of $432,000. The purpose of the Phase I Engineering study is to further explore the preferred roadway and streetscape plan from Kenilworth Avenue to Winnetka Avenue in accordance with IDOT design criteria. Since the work would encompass the villages of Kenilworth and Winnetka, both communities would be engaged during the process and share costs. 52 Page 100 of 252 The Phase I Engineering report is a required step to proceed to Phase II (design engineering) and roadway construction. This, and the fact that the roadway is owned and maintained by the Illinois Department of Transportation. A detailed description of the proposed services, which include several coordination meetings, public meetings, and five possible geometric studies, is included in the Ciorba Scope of Work as an exhibit to the Professional Services Agreement: 1. Road Diet with diagonal parking on west side (with access lane & median), sidewalk on east and west side, and parallel parking on east side. 2. Road Diet with diagonal parking on west side (with access lane & median), sidewalk on west side only, parallel parking on east side. 3. Road Diet with diagonal parking on west side (no median), sidewalk on west or both sides, parallel parking on east side. 4. Road Diet with parallel parking on both sides, sidewalk on west only or both sides (Sidewalk width will be larger if placed on west side only). 5. Road Diet with parallel parking on both sides, bike lanes, sidewalk on west or both sides (Sidewalk width will be larger if placed on west side only). Bid Waiver – Section 3 of Purchasing Manual Due to Ciorba Group’s familiarity with the project and successful delivery of the conceptual design, staff are seeking a waiver of typical bid requirements for the Professional Services Agreement for Green Bay Road Design Services for Phase I Engineering Study in the Amount not to Exceed of $432,000. There are a number of reasons the proposal from the Ciorba Group was identified as preferred. They include: • Experience working on the Winnetka streetscape enhancement project; • Proposed partnership with Teska Associates, who also worked on the streetscape project; • Experience with Kenilworth working on several projects, including Green Streets and the Green Bay Road Conceptual Design; • Experience with grant applications and navigating the complex process of State funding; and • Cost savings based on project knowledge. For these reasons, the village managers of both communities recommend a bid waiver to enter into a professional services agreement with the Ciorba Group. Doing so will allow the Project to continue moving forward without delays. As written, the Village of Kenilworth would engage the Ciorba Group. However, Winnetka representatives would be participating as desired at all stages. If the agreement is authorized by the Village Board, a kickoff meeting would commence as soon as late April or early May. The Village of Winnetka will consider the proposal and reimbursement resolution on May 5. Supplemental Background – Green Bay Road Efforts Green Bay Road Enhancement Project In 2023, the villages of Kenilworth and Winnetka entered into a joint agreement with Ciorba Group to initiate a study of Green Bay Road between Kenilworth Avenue and Winnetka Avenue. The purpose of the study was to explore the feasibility and desirability of roadway reconfiguration concepts and identify streetscape enhancements. Staff from both communities worked with Ciorba to develop potential concepts inspired by the Green Bay Road Conceptual Transportation and Streetscape Plan to share with residents. In 2024, several open houses were held to gather public input on potential streetscape and alignment concepts for Green Bay Road. 53 Page 101 of 252 Green Bay Road Visioning Process In 2021, the Green Bay Road Strategic Vision Committee was assembled to evaluate whether the vision developed as part of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan remained relevant to the business corridor. The Committee’s review process included focus group meetings, public forums, and stakeholder surveys. During the visioning process, several commenters raised concerns related to traffic speed and pedestrian safety along Green Bay Road. Notably, they believed this to be the biggest impediment to development and suggested a lane reduction to slow traffic, additional parking, new pedestrian crossings, and larger sidewalks. Given these concerns, in addition to the renewed interest in the business district and desire to create a pedestrian-friendly area, a review of the configuration of Green Bay Road within the business district was identified as a primary goal of the Village Board in 2023. Green Bay Road Conceptual Transportation and Streetscape Plan One of the first steps in the comprehensive evaluation of the corridor was to plan and design for better multi-modal transportation. The analysis, which began in 2012, was led by the Plan Commission and included representatives from Sears School, the Park District, PACE, METRA, Union Pacific, and IDOT, with consulting support from Houseal Lavigne (planning), Gewalt Hamilton (traffic engineering), Active Transportation Alliance (transit specialists), and Altamanu (urban planning). Following diligent work by all parties to gather stakeholder feedback through surveys and workshops, the Green Bay Road Conceptual Transportation and Streetscape Plan was delivered to the Village Board in October 2013. Several of the recommended changes have since been implemented: • Reconfigured parking on Richmond Road, east of the Metra station; • Reconfigured Metra drop-off area; • Realigned Sterling Road intersection; • New development opportunity at 604 Green Bay Road; and • Shortened pedestrian crossing at Kenilworth Avenue / Richmond Road intersection. Among the recommendations was a suggestion to reconfigure Green Bay Road to incorporate diagonal parking and reduce the drive lanes from four to two. The intent was to meet community interest in maintaining traffic flow, creating a more vibrant commercial area, and to establish a distinct community character. Policy: Village Board approval is required to engage in non-emergency agreements in excess of $20,000. Additionally, the Village Purchasing Manual guides the process for the purchase of materials in excess of $20,000. Section 1 General Provisions of the Kenilworth Purchasing Manual provides an exception to the Formal Bidding process when professional services are sought as well as Section 3 provides for a bid waiver in connection with these services. Financial Impact: The proposal from Ciorba is for an amount not to exceed $432,000. The Village of Winnetka has tentatively agreed to pay 30% ($129,600), leaving $302,400 in Village expenses. The study area is approximately 70% in Kenilworth and 30% in Winnetka. The FY26 TIF fund included $375,000 in projected expenditures for the project. Total Contract Amount $432,000 Total Kenilworth $302,400 Portion 54 Page 102 of 252  Budget Amount (FY26) $375,000 Variance: $72,600 – On Budget GL Number: TIF Fund: 14-100-5322 Recommendation: The Public Works Committee recommends approval of this item by the Village Board. Attachments: Resolution Professional Service Agreement – Ciorba Scope of Services 55 Page 103 of 252  VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH RESOLUTION NO. 2026-xx RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A BID WAIVER AND EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE CIORBA GROUP OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS FOR GREEN BAY ROAD DESIGN SERVICES FOR PHASE I ENGINEERING STUDY IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED OF $432,000 WHEREAS, the Village of Kenilworth ("Village") is a non-home rule municipality located in Cook County, Illinois; and WHEREAS, in 2023, the villages of Kenilworth and Winnetka entered into a joint agreement with Ciorba Group to initiate a study of Green Bay Road between Kenilworth and Winnetka avenues. The purpose of the study was to explore the feasibility and desirability of roadway reconfiguration concepts and identify streetscape enhancements. Over the past year, staff from both communities have been working with Ciorba to develop potential concepts to share with residents; and WHEREAS, in 2024, several open houses were held to gather public input on potential streetscape and alignment concepts for Green Bay Road, and Ciorba has utilized that feedback to further refine the concepts; and WHEREAS, Fiscal Year 2026 budget goals outlined the continuation of moving forward with the Green Bay Road Enhancement Project with a Phase I Engineering Study (“Services”); and WHEREAS, Ciorba’s familiarity with the project and successful delivery of the conceptual design, a bid waiver is sought pursuant to Section 3 of Purchasing Manual; and WHEREAS, the Village determined the proposal from the Ciorba Group of Chicago (“Ciorba”), Illinois to best meet the needed Services; and WHEREAS, the Ciorba proposed providing the Services for an amount not to exceed $432,000; and WHEREAS, The Village and the Ciorba desire to enter into a professional services agreement for the Services (Exhibit A); and, WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees finds that it is in the best interest of the Village and its residents to contract the Services from the Ciorba Group; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Kenilworth, Cook County, Illinois, as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are incorporated in and made a part of this Resolution by this reference. Section 2. Approval. The Agreement with Ciorba Group is hereby approved in a form substantially similar to that provided in Exhibit A. 56 Page 104 of 252  Section 3. Execution. The Village Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute, on behalf of the Village, the Agreement with Ciorba Group. If an executed copy of the agreement is not signed by both parties within 60 days after the effective date of this Resolution, then the Village has the right but not the obligation to cancel the agreement without further obligation. Passed this 20th day of April, 2026. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Village President Attest: Village Clerk 57 Page 105 of 252  Exhibit A Professional Services Agreement 58 Page 106 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PHASE I ENGINEERING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is dated as of the day of April, 2026 (“Agreement”) and is by and between the VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH, an Illinois municipal corporation (“Village”) and the Consultant identified in Subsection 1A below. IN CONSIDERATION OF the recitals and the mutual covenants and agreements set forth in the Agreement, and pursuant to the Village’s statutory powers, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. CONSULTANT. A. Engagement of Consultant. The Village desires to engage the Consultant identified below to provide all necessary professional consulting services and to perform the work in connection with the project identified below: Ciorba Group, Inc. (“Consultant”) 8725 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 600 Chicago, IL 60031 Telephone: 773-775-4009 Email: dolaughlin@ciorba.com B. Project Description. The Consultant will complete a Phase I Engineering study and develop a preferred preliminary roadway and streetscape plan for Green Bay Road from Kenilworth Avenue to Winnetka Ave. The Village of Kenilworth plans to collaborate with the Village of Winnetka in connection with the work. However, the Consultant shall report solely to the Village of Kenilworth. The engineering services are more fully set forth in Exhibit A. C. Representations of Consultant. The Consultant has submitted to the Village a description of the services to be provided by the Consultant, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement (“Services”). The Consultant represents that it is financially solvent, has the necessary financial resources, and is sufficiently experienced and competent to perform and complete the professional consulting services set forth in Exhibit A in a manner consistent with the standards of professional practice by recognized consulting firms providing services of a similar nature. D. Agreement Amount. The total amount billed by the Consultant for the Services under this Agreement shall not exceed $431,410.10, as outlined in Exhibit A, including reimbursable expenses, unless amended pursuant to Subsection 8A of this Agreement. SECTION 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES. A. Retention of the Consultant. The Village retains the Consultant to perform, and the Consultant agrees to perform, the Services. B. Services. The Consultant shall provide the Services pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. C. Commencement; Time of Performance. The Consultant shall commence the Services immediately upon receipt of written notice from the Village that this Agreement has been fully executed by the Parties (the “Commencement Date”). The Consultant shall diligently and -1- 59 Page 107 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version continuously prosecute the Services until the completion of the Work, but in no event later than 18 months from the start of the project (“Time of Performance”). D. Reporting. The Consultant shall regularly report to the Village Manager, or his designee, regarding the progress of the Services during the term of this Agreement. E. Delays. The Consultant is not responsible for damages arising directly or indirectly from any delays for causes beyond the Consultant’s reasonable control and reasonable ability to remedy. For purposes of this Agreement, such causes include, but are not limited to, strikes or other labor disputes; severe weather disruptions that are abnormal considering the time of year and location where the Services are being rendered; other natural disasters or acts of God; fires, riots, epidemics, pandemics, war or other emergencies; failure of any government agency to act in a timely manner; failure of performance by the Village or its contractors or consultants;; or discovery of any hazardous substances or differing site conditions. SECTION 3. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT. A. Agreement Amount. The total amount billed for the Proposal during the term of this Agreement shall not exceed the amount identified as the Agreement Amount in Subsection 1D of this Agreement, without the prior express written authorization of the Village. B. Invoices and Payment. The Consultant shall be paid as provided in Exhibit A. The Consultant shall submit invoices to the Village in an approved format for those portions of the Services performed and completed by the Consultant. The amount billed in any such invoice shall be based on the method of payment set forth in Exhibit A. The Village shall pay to the Consultant the amount billed within 45 days after its receipt and approval of such an invoice. C. Records. The Consultant shall maintain records showing actual time devoted and costs incurred, and shall permit the authorized representative of the Village to inspect and audit all data and records of the Consultant for work done under the Agreement. The records shall be made available to the Village at reasonable times during the Agreement period, and for three years after the termination of the Agreement. D. Claim In Addition To Agreement Amount. If the Consultant wishes to make a claim for additional compensation as a result of action taken by the Village, the Consultant shall provide written notice to the Village of such claim within 7 days after discovering such action as provided by Subsection 8D of this Agreement, and no claim for additional compensation shall be valid unless made in accordance with this Subsection. Any changes in the Agreement Amount shall be valid only upon written amendment pursuant to Subsection 8A of this Agreement. Regardless of the decision of the Village relative to a claim submitted by the Consultant, the Consultant shall proceed with all of the Services required to complete the Services under this Agreement as determined by the Village without interruption. E. Taxes, Benefits and Royalties. The Agreement Amount includes all applicable federal, state, and local taxes of every kind and nature applicable to the Services as well as all taxes, contributions, and premiums for unemployment insurance, old age or retirement benefits, pensions, annuities, or similar benefits and all costs, royalties and fees arising from the use on, or the incorporation into, the Services, of patented or copyrighted equipment, materials, supplies, tools, appliances, devices, processes, or inventions. All claim or right to claim additional compensation by reason of the payment of any such tax, contribution, premium, costs, royalties, or fees is hereby waived and released by Consultant. -2- 60 Page 108 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version F. Final Acceptance. The Services, or, if the Services are to be performed in separate phases, each phase of the Services, shall be considered complete on the date of final written acceptance by the Village of the Services or each phase of the Services, as the case may be, which acceptance shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. SECTION 4. PERSONNEL; SUBCONTRACTORS. A. Key Project Personnel. The Key Project Personnel identified in Exhibit A shall be primarily responsible for carrying out the Services on behalf of the Consultant. The Key Project Personnel shall not be changed without the Village’s prior written approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. B. Availability of Personnel. The Consultant shall provide all personnel necessary to complete the Services including, without limitation, any Key Project Personnel identified in this Agreement. The Consultant shall notify the Village as soon as practicable prior to terminating the employment of, reassigning, or receiving notice of the resignation of, any Key Project Personnel. The Consultant shall have no claim for damages and shall not bill the Village for additional time and materials charges as the result of any portion of the Services which must be duplicated or redone due to such termination or for any delay or extension of the Time of Performance as a result of any such termination, reassigning, or resignation. C. Approval and Use of Subcontractors. The Consultant shall perform the Services with its own personnel and under the management, supervision, and control of its own organization unless otherwise approved by the Village in writing. All subcontractors and subcontracts used by the Consultant shall be acceptable to, and approved in advance by, the Village. The Village’s approval of any subcontractor or subcontract shall not relieve the Consultant of full responsibility and liability for the provision, performance, and completion of the Services as required by the Agreement. All Services performed under any subcontract shall be subject to all of the provisions of this Agreement in the same manner as if performed by employees of the Consultant. For purposes of this Agreement, the term “Consultant” shall be deemed also to refer to all subcontractors of the Consultant, and every subcontract shall include a provision binding the subcontractor to all provisions of this Agreement. D. Removal of Personnel and Subcontractors. If any personnel or subcontractor fails to perform the Services in a manner satisfactory to the Village, the Consultant shall promptly upon notice from the Village remove and replace such personnel or subcontractor. The Consultant shall have no claim for damages, for compensation in excess of the amount contained in this Agreement or for a delay or extension of the Time of Performance as a result of any such removal or replacement. SECTION 5. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. A. Confidential Information. The term “Confidential Information” shall mean information in the possession or under the control of the Village relating to the technical, business or corporate affairs of the Village; Village property; user information, including, without limitation, any information pertaining to usage of the Village's computer system, including and without limitation, any information obtained from server logs or other records of electronic or machine readable form; and the existence of, and terms and conditions of, this Agreement. Village Confidential Information shall not include information that can be demonstrated: (i) to have been rightfully in the possession of the Consultant from a source other than the Village prior to the time of disclosure of said information to the Consultant under this Agreement (“Time of Disclosure”); to have been in the public domain prior to the Time of Disclosure; (iii) to have become part of the public domain after the Time of Disclosure by a publication or by any other means except an unauthorized act -3- 61 Page 109 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version or omission or breach of this Agreement on the part of the Consultant or the Village; or (iv) to have been supplied to the Consultant after the Time of Disclosure without restriction by a third party who is under no obligation to the Village to maintain such information in confidence. B. No Disclosure of Confidential Information by the Consultant. The Consultant acknowledges that it shall, in performing the Services for the Village under this Agreement, have access to or be directly or indirectly exposed to Confidential Information. The Village shall advise the Consultant of all information the Village deems confidential. The Consultant shall hold confidential all Confidential Information and shall not disclose or use such Confidential Information without express prior written consent of the Village. The Consultant shall use reasonable measures at least as strict as those the Consultant uses to protect its own confidential information. Such measures shall include, without limitation, requiring employees and subcontractors of the Consultant to execute a non-disclosure agreement before obtaining access to Confidential Information. SECTION 6. STANDARD OF CARE; INDEMNIFICATION; INSURANCE. A. Standard of Care. The Consultant’s Services will be performed with the degree of care, skill, and diligence exercised by members of its profession practicing under similar circumstances, at the same general time, and in the same or similar locality as the Project. No other warranties, express or implied, are made or intended by this Agreement. B. Indemnification. The Consultant shall indemnify and defend the Village, and its officials, employees, agents, and attorneys against any and all lawsuits, claims, demands, damages, liabilities, losses, and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and administrative expenses, to the extent they were caused by the Consultant’s negligent performance of, or failure to perform, the Services. C. Insurance. Contemporaneous with the Consultant’s execution of this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide certificates and policies of insurance, all with coverages and limits acceptable to the Village, and evidencing at least the minimum insurance coverages and limits as set forth in Exhibit B to this Agreement. Such certificates and policies shall be in a form acceptable to the Village and from companies with a general rating of A minus, and a financial size category of Class X or better, in Best's Insurance Guide. Such insurance policies shall provide that no change, modification in, or cancellation of, any insurance shall become effective until the expiration of 30 days after written notice thereof shall have been given by the insurance company to the Village. The Consultant shall, at all times during the term of this Agreement, maintain and keep in force, at the Consultant’s expense, the insurance coverages provided above. D. No Personal Liability. No elected or appointed official, or employee of the Village shall be personally liable, in law or in contract, to the Consultant as the result of the execution of this Agreement. SECTION 7. CONSULTANT AGREEMENT GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Relationship of the Parties. The Consultant shall act as an independent contractor in providing and performing the Services. Nothing in, nor done pursuant to, this Agreement shall be construed (i) to create the relationship of principal and agent, employer and employee, partners, or joint venturers between the Village and Consultant; or (ii) to create any relationship between the Village and any subcontractor of the Consultant. B. Conflict of Interest. The Consultant represents and certifies that, to the best of its knowledge, (1) no Village employee or agent is interested in the business of the Consultant or -4- 62 Page 110 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version this Agreement; (2) as of the date of this Agreement neither the Consultant nor any person employed or associated with the Consultant has any interest that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the obligations under this Agreement; and (3) neither the Consultant nor any person employed by or associated with the Consultant shall at any time during the term of this Agreement obtain or acquire any interest that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the obligations under this Agreement. C. No Collusion. The Consultant represents and certifies that the Consultant is not barred from contracting with a unit of state or local government as a result of (i) a delinquency in the payment of any tax administered by the Illinois Department of Revenue unless the Consultant is contesting, in accordance with the procedures established by the appropriate revenue act, its liability for the tax or the amount of the tax, as set forth in Section 11-42.1-1 et seq. of the Illinois Municipal Code, 65 ILCS 5/11-42.1-1 et seq.; or (ii) a violation of either Section 33E-3 or Section 33E-4 of Article 33E of the Criminal Code of 1961, 720 ILCS 5/33E-1 et seq. The Consultant represents that the only persons, firms, or corporations interested in this Agreement as principals are those disclosed to the Village prior to the execution of this Agreement, and that this Agreement is made without collusion with any other person, firm, or corporation. If at any time it shall be found that the Consultant has, in procuring this Agreement, colluded with any other person, firm, or corporation, then the Consultant shall be liable to the Village for all loss or damage that the Village may suffer, and this Agreement shall, at the Village’s option, be null and void. D. Sexual Harassment Policy. The Consultant certifies that it has a written sexual harassment policy in full compliance with Section 2-105(A)(4) of the Illinois Human Rights Act, 775 ILCS 5/2-105(A)(4). E. Patriot Act Compliance. The Consultant represents to the Village that neither it nor any of its principals, shareholders, members, partners, or affiliates, as applicable, is a person or entity named as a Specially Designated National and Blocked Person (as defined in Presidential Executive Order 13224) and that it is not acting, directly or indirectly, for or on behalf of a Specially Designated National and Blocked Person. The Consultant further represents to the Village that the Consultant and its principals, shareholders, members, partners, or affiliates, as applicable, are not, directly or indirectly, engaged in, and are not facilitating, the transactions contemplated by this Agreement on behalf of any person or entity named as a Specially Designated National and Blocked Person. The Consultant hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Village, its corporate authorities, and all Village elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, representatives, engineers, and attorneys, from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, risks, liabilities, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from or related to any breach of the representations in this subsection. F. Termination. Notwithstanding any other provision hereof, the Village may terminate this Agreement at any time upon 15 days prior written notice to the Consultant. In the event that this Agreement is so terminated, the Consultant shall be paid for Services actually performed and reimbursable expenses actually incurred, if any, prior to termination, not exceeding the value of the Services completed as determined as provided in Exhibit A. G. Term. The Time of Performance of this Agreement, unless terminated pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, shall expire on the date the Village Manager determines that all of the Services under this Agreement are completed. A determination of completion shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or claims which the Village may have or thereafter acquire with respect to any breach hereof by the Consultant or any right of indemnification of the Village by the Consultant. -5- 63 Page 111 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version H. Compliance with Laws and Grants. Consultant shall give all notices, pay all fees, and take all other action that may be necessary to ensure that the Services are provided, performed, and completed in accordance with all required governmental permits, licenses, or other approvals and authorizations that may be required in connection with providing, performing, and completing the Services, and with all applicable statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations, including without limitation the Fair Labor Standards Act; any statutes regarding qualification to do business; any statutes prohibiting discrimination because of, or requiring affirmative action based on, race, creed, color, national origin, age, sex, or other prohibited classification, including, without limitation, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., and the Illinois Human Rights Act, 775 ILCS 5/1-101 et seq. Consultant shall also comply with all conditions of any federal, state, or local grant received by Owner or Consultant with respect to this Contract or the Services. Consultant shall be solely liable for any fines or civil penalties that are imposed by any governmental or quasi-governmental agency or body that may arise, or be alleged to have arisen, out of or in connection with Consultant’s, or its subcontractors’, performance of, or failure to perform, the Services or any part thereof. Every provision of law required by law to be inserted into this Contract shall be deemed to be inserted herein. I. Default. If it should appear at any time that the Consultant has failed or refused to prosecute, or has delayed in the prosecution of, the Services with diligence at a rate that assures completion of the Services in full compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, or has otherwise failed, refused, or delayed to perform or satisfy the Services or any other requirement of this Agreement (“Event of Default”), and fails to make reasonable efforts to cure any such Event of Default within ten business days after the Consultant’s receipt of written notice of such Event of Default from the Village, then the Village shall have the right, without prejudice to any other remedies provided by law or equity, to pursue any one or more of the following remedies: 1. Cure by Consultant. The Village may require the Consultant, within a reasonable time, to complete or correct all or any part of the Services that are the subject of the Event of Default; and to take any or all other action necessary to bring the Consultant and the Services into compliance with this Agreement. 2. Termination of Agreement by Village. The Village may terminate this Agreement without liability for further payment of amounts due or to become due under this Agreement, pursuant to Section 7(F) above. 3. Withholding of Payment by Village. The Village may withhold from any payment, whether or not previously approved, or may recover from the Consultant, any -6- 64 Page 112 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version and all costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and administrative expenses, reasonably incurred by the Village as the result of any Event of Default by the Consultant or as a result of actions taken by the Village in response to any Event of Default by the Consultant. J. No Additional Obligation. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Village is under no obligation under this Agreement or otherwise to negotiate or enter into any other or additional contracts or agreements with the Consultant, or with any vendor solicited or recommended by the Consultant. K. Village Board Authority. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, any negotiations or agreements with, or representations by the Consultant to vendors shall be subject to the approval of the Village Board of Trustees. The Village shall not be liable to any vendor or other third party for any agreements made by the Consultant, purportedly on behalf of the Village, without the knowledge and approval of the Village Trustees. L. Mutual Cooperation. The Village agrees to cooperate with the Consultant in the performance of the Services, including meeting with the Consultant and providing the Consultant with such non-confidential information that the Village may have that may be relevant and helpful to the Consultant’s performance of the Services. The Consultant agrees to cooperate with the Village in the performance of the Services to complete the Work and with any other consultants engaged by the Village. M. News Releases. The Consultant shall not issue any news releases or other public statements regarding the Services without prior approval from the Village Manager. N. Ownership. Designs, drawings, plans, specifications, photos, reports, information, observations, calculations, notes, and any other documents, data, or information, in any form, prepared, collected, or received by the Consultant in connection with any or all of the Services to be performed under this Agreement (“Documents”) shall be and remain the exclusive property of the Village. At the Village’s request, or upon termination of this Agreement, the Consultant shall cause the Documents to be promptly delivered to the Village. O. GIS Data. The Village has developed digital map information through Geographic Information Systems Technology (“GIS Data”) concerning the real property located within the Village. If requested to do so by the Consultant, the Village agrees to supply the Consultant with a digital copy of the GIS Data, subject to the following conditions: 1. Limited Access to GIS Data. The GIS Data provided by the Village shall be limited to the scope of the Work that the Consultant is to provide for the Village; 2. Purpose of GIS Data. The Consultant shall limit its use of the GIS Data to its intended purpose of furtherance of the Work; and 3. Agreement with Respect to GIS Data. The Consultant does hereby acknowledge and agree that: a. Trade Secrets of the Village. The GIS Data constitutes proprietary materials and trade secrets of the Village and, shall remain the property of the Village; b. Consent of Village Required. The Consultant will not provide or make available the GIS Data in any form to anyone without the prior written consent of the Village -7- 65 Page 113 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version Manager; c. Supply to Village. At the request of the Village, the Consultant shall supply the Village with any and all information that may have been developed by the Consultant based on the GIS Data; d. No Guarantee of Accuracy. The Village makes no guarantee as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the GIS Data in regard to the Consultant’s intended use thereof; and e. Discontinuation of Use. At such time as the Services have been completed to the satisfaction of the Village, the Consultant shall cease its use of the GIS Data for any purpose whatsoever; and, upon request, an authorized representative of the Village shall be afforded sufficient access to the Consultant’s premises and data processing equipment to verify that all use of the GIS Data has been discontinued. SECTION 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Amendment. No amendment or modification to this Agreement shall be effective unless and until such amendment or modification is in writing, properly approved in accordance with applicable procedures, and executed. B. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by the Village or by the Consultant without the prior written consent of the other party. C. Binding Effect. The terms of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their agents, successors, and assigns. D. Notice. Any notice or communication required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered (i) personally, (ii) by a reputable overnight courier, (iii) by certified mail, return receipt requested, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, (iv) by facsimile, or (v) by electronic internet mail (“e-mail”). Facsimile notices shall be deemed valid only to the extent that they are (a) actually received by the individual to whom addressed and (b) followed by delivery of actual notice in the manner described in either (i), (ii), or (iii) above within three business days thereafter at the appropriate address set forth below. E- mail notices shall be deemed valid and received by the addressee thereof when delivered by e- mail and (a) opened by the recipient on a business day at the address set forth below, and (b) followed by delivery of actual notice in the manner described in either (i), (ii) or (iii) above within three business days thereafter at the appropriate address set forth below. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, notices shall be deemed received upon the earlier of (a) actual receipt; (b) one business day after deposit with an overnight courier as evidenced by a receipt of deposit; or (c) three business days following deposit in the U.S. mail, as evidenced by a return receipt. By notice complying with the requirements of this Subsection, each Party shall have the right to change the address or the addressee, or both, for all future notices and communications to such party, but no notice of a change of addressee or address shall be effective until actually received. Notices and communications to the Village shall be addressed to, and delivered at, the following address: Village of Kenilworth 419 Richmond Road Kenilworth, Illinois 60043 Attention: Village Manager E-mail: kthake@vok.org -8- 66 Page 114 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version With a copy to: Ancel Glink, P.C. 140 S. Dearborn St., 6th Floor Chicago, IL 60603 Attention: Kenilworth Attorney Notices and communications to the Consultant shall be addressed to, and delivered at, the following address: Ciorba Group, Inc. (“Consultant”) 8725 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 600 Chicago, IL 60031 Telephone: 773-775-4009 Attn: Duane O’Laughlin, Chief Operating Officer Email: dolaughlin@ciorba.com E. Third Party Beneficiary. No claim as a third party beneficiary under this Agreement by any person, firm, or corporation other than the Consultant shall be made or be valid against the Village. F. Provisions Severable. If any term, covenant, condition, or provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated. G. Time. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. H. Governing Laws. This Agreement shall be interpreted according to the internal laws, but not the conflict of laws rules, of the State of Illinois. I. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any and all previous or contemporaneous oral or written agreements and negotiations between the Village and the Consultant with respect to the Proposal and the Services. J. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed to or constitute a waiver of any other provision of this Agreement (whether or not similar) nor shall any such waiver be deemed to or constitute a continuing waiver unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. K. Exhibit. Exhibits A, B, and C are attached hereto, and by this reference incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between the Exhibit and the text of this Agreement, the text of this Agreement shall control. L. Rights Cumulative. Unless expressly provided to the contrary in this Agreement, each and every one of the rights, remedies, and benefits provided by this Agreement shall be cumulative and shall not be exclusive of any other such rights, remedies, and benefits allowed by law. -9- 67 Page 115 of 252  April 20, 2026 Village Board Version M. Counterpart Execution. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which, when executed, shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. ATTEST: VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH By: By: Asst. to the Village Manager Village Manager ATTEST: CONSULTANT By: By: Title: Its: -10- 68 Page 116 of 252  EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES & AGREEMENT AMOUNT 69 Page 117 of 252  SCOPE OF WORK CONSULTANT: Ciorba Group, Inc. PRINCIPAL Duane O’Laughlin, PE PROJECT MANAGER: Mark Johnson, PE, PTOE ROUTE: Green Bay Road COUNTY: Cook LOCAL AGENCY CONTACT: Kathy Thake, Village of Kenilworth PROJECT UNDERSTANDING This project involves developing a preferred preliminary roadway and streetscape plan for Green Bay Road from Kenilworth Avenue to Winnetka Avenue. Alternates developed in the Green Bay Road Concept Study will be developed further along with new alternates following IDOT design criteria. In addition to the Village of Kenilworth, engaging both the Village of Winnetka and IDOT will be critical to the success of any proposed concept for this section of Green Bay Road. Successful completion of the Concept Refinement Phase now allows the Villages to initiate a full Phase I preliminary engineering study All deliverables to the Village and other organizations will be provided electronically unless otherwise noted. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Meetings, Coordination & Data Collection a. Meetings i. Prepare for and attend one virtual kick-off meeting with Kenilworth and Winnetka staff. At this meeting the project scope and key outcomes of previous and current planning efforts will be discussed. Project needs and goals will be defined. Prepare meeting minutes and distribute for approval. ii. Prepare for and attend one virtual kick-off meeting with IDOT. Prepare meeting minutes and distribute for approval. iii. Prepare for and attend two virtual FHWA meetings with IDOT. Prepare meeting minutes and distribute for approval. iv. Prepare for and attend one virtual meeting with IDOT. Prepare meeting minutes and distribute for approval. v. Prepare for and attend one virtual meeting with the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)/Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). Prepare meeting minutes and distribute for approval. vi. Prepare for and attend two in-person presentations to the Village of Kenilworth Public Works Committee. Prepare meeting minutes and distribute for approval. vii. Prepare for and attend two in-person presentations to the Kenilworth Village Board. A PowerPoint exhibit will be prepared. Assume Village Board will prepare required meeting minutes. viii. Prepare for and attend one in-person presentation to the Winnetka Village Council. A PowerPoint exhibit will be prepared. Assume Village Council will prepare required meeting minutes. ix. Prepare for and attend virtual meetings with Kenilworth to discuss project progress (12 meetings). Winnetka staff will be invited to all meetings. Page 1 70 Page 118 of 252  SCOPE OF WORK b. Coordination i. Coordination with Kenilworth, Winnetka, IDOT, UP/Metra, Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC). ii. Coordinate with IDOT to determine IDOT’s anticipated date to repave Green Bay Road so project will not immediately remove pavement after IDOT improvement. iii. Coordination with subconsultants iv. Coordinate project with private utility companies to identify potential conflicts. v. Internal project team coordination to gauge progress, identify issues, and verify interdisciplinary coordination. c. Data Collection i. Obtain and review existing roadway and traffic signal plans and ROW plats/plans from IDOT and other sources. ii. Obtain data from Kenilworth & Winnetka that could include: 1. Roadway plans 2. Property plats 3. Benchmark Information 4. 5-year crash reports 5. Utility information 6. Plans for any new developments that could impact project limits 7. Flooding/Drainage Issues 8. Village standards iii. Perform a J.U.L.I.E. design locate and obtain utility atlases. Plot utilities into existing CADD files. iv. Conduct a site visit to observe existing conditions, existing travel and parking patterns, and to perform a photo log. v. Obtain Aerials from USGS Site and other sources. 2. Surveys a. Topographic Survey. The topographic survey will include the full ROW of Green Bay Road and extra as needed to capture topographic information from the building line on the west to the UP Railroad property on the East and will extend 50’ past the return radius of the curb at each intersection within the survey limits. Topographic survey items will include the following information within the project limits: i. Spot elevations will be taken at 50-foot cross sections including grade changes, to show topography at a 1’ contour interval ii. Visible man-made features iii. Ditches and above ground features iv. Location of existing utilities within or adjacent to the site including: v. Evidence of existing above ground utilities (if readily visible and accessible or flagged by the utility company or locating service) vi. The size and invert or top of pipe elevations of sewers and water mains if manholes and valve vaults are visible and accessible. vii. Underground utilities may be depicted from drawings provided by utility companies or others, if readily available viii. Utilities will be shown on the survey based on observed evidence (above ground) and the utility atlases. Page 2 71 Page 119 of 252  SCOPE OF WORK b. Limited Boundary Survey. The limited boundary survey will locate the property corners adjacent to the subject property to identify and draft the current right of way lines of Green Bay Rd., adjoining intersections, and the railroad property line along the east side of Green Bay Road within the project limits. c. Ciorba will not perform title searches or create any formal survey plats or documents. Verification of property ownership and Public Right of Way is not included in this scope, and the depiction of property lines on the survey will be limited to what is seen on the Cook County Map Application, evidence found in the field, and any historical documents that may be found during research or provided to Ciorba by the Village to be used for this survey. 3. Water Resources a. Review information on known drainage problems to be provided by Village and/or IDOT. i. Kenilworth indicated that there are no flooding issues other than the Skokie Ditch occasionally backing up. The FEMA map shows the floodway west of Ridge Road, therefore any backups in the storm sewer caused by the Skokie Ditch are considered beyond the scope of this project. b. Obtain land use data for use in hydrologic analysis. c. Identify drainage areas to project site and calculate runoff rates based on existing and proposed land cover. d. Prepare General Location Drainage Map and Existing Drainage Plan. e. Evaluate sensitivity of outlets from project site and determine if detention is needed to address outlet sensitivity or known drainage problems. Determine method of providing detention if needed. f. Evaluate drainage alternatives and coordinate with Village and IDOT to develop preferred plan, including hydraulic analysis of proposed storm sewer improvements. g. Prepare Proposed Drainage Plan for preferred alternate. h. Describe water quality concerns and strategies. i. Summarize all aspects of drainage studies in written Location Drainage Technical Memorandum (LDTM) with exhibits. Submit memo to Village and IDOT for review. Address comments and prepare final LDTM. j. Analyze and develop location of proposed water main throughout the project corridor from Park Drive to north Kenilworth limit (existing water main is 55 to 60 years old). Proposed water main alignment from Park Drive to north of Roger Street developed in 2020 will be reviewed and updated as needed. i. Coordinate with Winnetka to determine if they would need new water main included in project also. 4. Roadway Lighting Feasibility a. Perform high-level photometric analysis and lighting layout to ensure the selected roadway lighting from the streetscape concept meets IES standards for the selected roadway cross section. i. Identify owner requirements ii. Equipment selection/vendor coordination iii. Photometric analysis (1 cross section) iv. Preliminary layout v. Quantities/estimate of cost Page 3 72 Page 120 of 252  SCOPE OF WORK vi. Voltage drop calculations/cable sizing b. Kenilworth has recently used a decorative street lighting system at Kenilworth Avenue and Richmond Road. c. Coordinate with IDOT to verify what they will require for the project. 5. Engineering Studies a. Traffic Studies i. Obtain a 24 hour traffic count at the Green Bay Road and Kenilworth Avenue intersection. Obtain 3 hour counts during the AM and PM peak hour at the Green Bay Road intersections with Park Drive and Winnetka Avenue. Traffic counts will be done using Miovision cameras to obtain traffic and pedestrian data. ii. Coordinate with CMAP to obtain traffic projections and apply these projections to each movement. iii. Perform an existing Highway Capacity Software (HCS) analysis for 3 intersections. Perform proposed HCS analysis for 2 alternatives. iv. Develop an Intersection Design Study for intersections having a revised lane configuration. It is assumed that one IDS will be needed. v. Existing and proposed typical sections will be developed for the project corridor including up to five alternatives for proposed cross sections. Deliverable: Typical Section Plan Sheets. vi. Develop ADA sidewalk detail sheets at side streets within proposed construction limits (includes Park Drive, Melrose Avenue, Wayland Avenue, Roger Avenue, and other proposed crossing locations from the east to west side of Green Bay Road). vii. Since Green Bay Road is an IDOT significant route, a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) will be developed for the preferred alignment and submitted to IDOT for approval. The TMP will identify delays associated with the project and identify measures to notify the public and reduce congestion during construction. Typical sections will be provided for each stage of construction. It is assumed that the project will be constructed using stage construction and a detour route will not be used. b. Environmental Studies i. Prepare Environmental Survey Request (ESR) form and submit to IDOT. ii. Since Green Bay Road is a State Route, IDOT will perform the special waste and wetland analysis. iii. It is assumed that wetlands do not exist within the project limits and a wetland impact analysis will not be required. c. Geometric Studies i. Develop project specific design criteria and document all potential design exceptions that would be required. Perform concept level geometric checks following IDOT reconstruction or rehabilitation criteria. The geometric checks will evaluate the existing alignments, superelevation rates and transition lengths. ii. Develop horizontal geometric layout and plan sheets for up to five proposed alternatives. All geometric design work will be performed using Bently Open Roads software, scaled aerials, and existing topographic survey information. Potential alternatives to be considered are: Page 4 73 Page 121 of 252  SCOPE OF WORK 1. Road Diet with diagonal parking on west side (with access lane & median), sidewalk on east and west side, and parallel parking on east side. 2. Road Diet with diagonal parking on west side (with access lane & median), sidewalk on west side only, parallel parking on east side. 3. Road Diet with diagonal parking on west side (no median), sidewalk on west or both sides, parallel parking on east side. 4. Road Diet with parallel parking on both sides, sidewalk on west only or both sides (Sidewalk width will be larger if placed on west side only). 5. Road Diet with parallel parking on both sides, bike lanes, sidewalk on west or both sides (Sidewalk width will be larger if placed on west side only). iii. Develop preferred plan and profile. iv. Investigate right-of-way and easement requirements based on geometry and construction needs for two alternates. d. Safety Studies i. Perform a crash analysis, identifying any crash patterns and mitigation strategies. Crash data from the past 5 years for the project corridor assumed to be provided by the Village or IDOT. Location, type, severity, and number of crashes will be tabulated. Crash diagrams and a technical memorandum will be provided. e. Project Development Report i. Develop Location Map ii. Include Public Transportation Schedules and/or Maps iii. Review and Document Design Exceptions iv. Prepare draft report and exhibits. v. Process report (Anticipated to be Categorical Exclusion, State Approved). vi. Revise report based on review comments and public comments (2 revisions) vii. Develop two disposition of comments f. Public Involvement i. Prepare for and attend one in-person open house public meeting for the project (Villages of Kenilworth and Winnetka combined). The open house meeting will be advertised in Village newsletter/emails, on Village websites, and via Village social media. At the public meeting, plan exhibits and typical sections will be provided for two preferred alternates. Other exhibits will be provided indicating landscaping concepts, project details, and project schedule. review past research and site analysis information, confirm stakeholder behaviors and attitudes, and brainstorm desired streetscape outcomes. Preliminary recommendations will be presented with two preferred alternatives presented. The meeting will incorporate engagement activities designed to obtain community input and inform the design work. The meeting location will be at a designated venue and preferred exhibits for presentation would be coordinated with Kenilworth and Winnetka. Following the meeting, input will be gathered, documented, and summarized for reporting back to the community and included in the technical memorandum. (Ciorba and Teska) ii. Develop impact letters and exhibits for any properties requiring temporary easement or right of way acquisition. Page 5 74 Page 122 of 252  SCOPE OF WORK iii. A separate Public Meeting with Winnetka is not included will require additional services. 6. Quantity Calculations and Estimates a. Determine quantity of major pay items. b. Develop opinion of probable construction cost for two alternatives using previous similar project bid tabs and recent bid tabs from IDOT website 7. Funding Assistance a. Review potential grants that could be used to help fund the project. b. Assist in developing three grant applications for the project. Potential funding options include Invest in Cook, ITEP, and the MWRD Green Infrastructure Partnership Program. 8. QC/QA a. Perform Quality Control/Quality Assurance during the project per Ciorba Group’s Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan. QC/QA reviews will be conducted by Ciorba for all sub-consultant submittals prior to being submitted to the Village, IDOT, or other agencies/project stakeholders. 9. Project Management and Administration a. Provide project oversight. b. Prepare progress reports. c. Project control of scope, schedule, and budget. 10. Preliminary Streetscape Design (Performed by Teska Associates, Inc.) a. Attend two Village meetings. b. Prepare two alternative streetscape concepts based on the two preferred alternatives. c. Prepare exhibits for and attend public open house. d. Attend Village virtual meeting to discuss public comments. e. Prepare final streetscape based on the preferred alternative. See attached detailed scope. 11. Geotechnical Engineering (Performed by Soil and Material Consultants, Inc.) a. Obtain seven 10’ deep geotechnical borings at 500’ intervals. b. Prepare report findings and recommendations. See attached detailed scope. Page 6 75 Page 123 of 252  February 4, 2026 Proposal No. 23,859 Mr. Duane O’Laughlin, P.E. Chief Operating Officer Ciorba Group 8725 W. Higgins Road, Suite 600 Chicago, IL 60631 Re: Pavement Investigation Green Bay Road Kenilworth, Illinois Dear Mr. O’Laughlin: Submitted for your consideration is our proposal to provide the requested pavement section investigation and subsurface soil condition analysis for the proposed improvements along Green Bay Road from Kenilworth Avenue to Winnetka Avenue in the Village of Kenilworth, Illinois. Scope of the Investigation A total of 7 boring locations will be established at intervals of approximately 500 feet and on alternate sides of the centerline. Offsets from centerline will be varied to include various portions of existing pavement. We will contact JULIE to locate public utilities. At each location existing pavement materials will be cored to determine material types and thicknesses. The soils will be auger drilled to establish the soil profile within 10.0 feet of existing surface elevations. A soil sample will be obtained immediately below the base using a split barrel sampler and at 2.5 foot intervals for the remaining depth of the boring. Additional samples may be obtained from the auger flights. A pocket penetrometer reading will be performed on testable samples of cohesive soil. Soil samples will be returned to our laboratory for testing including determination of moisture content. Cohesive soils obtained by split barrel sampling will be further tested to determine dry unit weight and unconfined compressive strength. Selected soil samples will be tested for determination of grain-size distribution, Atterberg limits and other pertinent testing. Engineering Evaluation, Report The field investigation and laboratory testing will be completed under the direction of a Registered Professional Engineer. Preliminary information will be available upon request. Upon completion of the investigation an engineering evaluation will be completed and a Phase I report prepared. The report will present our findings and appropriate recommendations. 8 W. COLLEGE DR. ● SUITE C ● ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60004 SOIL BORINGS ● SITE INVESTIGATIONS ● PAVEMENT INVESTIGATIONS ● GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING TESTING OF ● SOIL ● ASPHALT ● CONCRETE ● MORTAR ● STEEL 76 Page 124 of 252 Date: February 11, 2026 To: Duane O’Laughlin, Ciorba Group, dolaughlin@ciorba.com From: Jodi Mariano, Teska Associates, JMariano@TeskaAssociates.com RE: Green Bay Road Phase 1 Streetscape, Kenilworth – Landscape Architectural scope Thank you for the opportunity to continue to assist Ciorba Group, the Village of Kenilworth and the Village of Winnetka with the above-mentioned project. Teska provided design services to Ciorba Group for conceptual streetscape design and public outreach between August 2023 and February 2024. We understand Village staff wishes to build upon earlier design efforts and to proceed with additional design studies and public outreach for the Green Bay Road Corridor project. STREETSCAPE DESIGN SERVICES SCOPE Introduction: The Streetscape Design work is focused on Green Bay Road, from Kenilworth Avenue at the south to Winnetka Avenue at the north. This assignment will continue the streetscape and corridor design work conducted by Ciorba / Teska between August 2023 and February 2024. The work also builds upon previous corridor studies conducted by the Villages of Kenilworth and Winnetka below: - Village of Kenilworth Green Bay Road Conceptual Transportation + Streetscape Plan (2013) - Village of Winnetka Downtown Master Plan (2016); Streetscape + Signage Plan (2018); and Comprehensive Plan (2023). The outcome of this design work would be a refined concept level streetscape plan supported by recommended materials, products, and plantings. The plan would be supported by a conceptual cost estimate. Special focus would be on promoting the corridor business environment, opportunities for placemaking, gateway entry features, beautification, and pedestrian safety for the Villages of Kenilworth and Winnetka. Streetscape features that would be addressed include lighting, paving, furnishings, gateway features, and plantings. 1 77 Page 125 of 252 STREETSCAPE DESIGN SERVICES SCOPE (continued) 1. Village review meetings - corridor alternatives review. Teska will review corridor alternatives to be prepared by Ciorba. Teska will attend up to two Village review meetings to evaluate and discuss alternatives towards determining two preferred alternatives for public review. 2. Alternative streetscape concepts packages - two preferred alternatives. Based on Village direction to proceed with two preferred alternatives, Teska will develop two concept plan packages. Two concept plan packages will be supported by plans, sections, vignettes and product and material photographs as appropriate to convey the design intent. Streetscape concept packages will be shared with staff via teleconference for review and feedback. Teska will make updates to the concept packages prior to the public meeting, as required. 3. Public meeting and exhibits. Based on Village feedback about the streetscape concepts, Teska will prepare public meeting exhibits and materials to describe the two corridor alternatives and to receive public feedback. Public meeting exhibits may include the following: Project introduction and summary of work completed to date; Existing conditions maps and photos; Two alternative streetscape concept packages (plans, sections, vignettes, product photos). Exhibits will be designed to be engaging and to invite quantitative and qualitative participant feedback. Teska will provide digital postcards / flyers for the Village’s use in distributing announcements to the community. Meeting logistics shall be by the Village. Following the public meeting, Teska will prepare a meeting summary. 4. Village review meeting and selection of final concept. Following the public meeting we will discuss public feedback with Village staff via teleconference. Together we will discuss which concept – or elements from each concept – will be carried forward into the final streetscape concept package. 5. Final streetscape concept package – one preferred concept. Based on direction from Village staff on the preferred concept, Teska will develop a draft final concept plan packages for staff review. The concept plan package will be supported by plans, sections, vignettes and product and material photographs as appropriate to convey the design intent. A conceptual cost estimate will be prepared. The draft final streetscape concept package will be shared with staff via teleconference for review and feedback. Teska will make updates to the concept package as required. The final streetscape concept package will be documented and provided to Ciorba in PDF format. 6. Team and staff coordination. In addition to the meetings noted above, Teska anticipates coordination with Ciorba and Village staff via email, telephone and teleconference. END OF SCOPE 2 78 Page 126 of 252  WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE 3/5/2026 Project Manager III Project Manager II Project Manager I Project Engineer II Project Engineer I Lead Surveyor Grand Total Principal Technician III Engineer IV Technician II Engineer III Engineer II Engineer I Technician I CAD Manager Activity TOTAL 2260 41 24 40 289 140 24 36 12 403 100 152 207 676 100 16 1. Meetings, Data Collection & Coordination Task Total: 281 11 123 86 45 16 0110 Meetings Meetings: 180 11 85 72 12 Kick-off Meeting with Villages (1 mtg x 1 hrs/mtg x 3 staff) 3 1 1 1 Village Board Meetings (3 mtg x 3 hrs/mtg x 2 staff) 18 9 9 Village Public Works Meetings (2 mtg x 3 hrs/mtg x 2 staff) 12 6 6 Project Progress Mtgs with Village (12 mtg x 1 hrs/mtg x 2 staff) 18 12 6 Meeting with UPRR/ICC (1 mtg x 1 hrs/mtg x 3 staff) 2 1 1 IDOT Virtual Kickoff Meeting (1 mtg x 1 hrs/mtg x 3 staff) 3 1 1 1 IDOT Virtual Misc Meeting (1 mtg x 1 hrs/mtg x 2 staff) 2 1 1 FHWA Virtual Meetings (2 mtg x 1 hrs/mtg x 2 staff) 4 2 2 Meeting Minutes - 20 each 36 16 20 Prepare Agenda/Exhibits for Meetings - 23 each 46 24 10 12 PowerPoint Presentation for Village Board Mtgs (3 Mtgs) 36 12 24 0120 Coordination Subtotal: 66 38 8 16 4 Coordination with Village 16 16 Coordination with Other Agencies 12 8 4 Coordination with Project Team 16 4 4 4 4 Subconsultants Coordination 6 6 Coordination with Utilities 8 8 Submit Plans to Utilities (1 submittal) 4 4 Coordination with Railroad 4 4 0130 Data Collection Subtotal: 35 6 17 12 Obtain Plans from Village 1 1 Obtain Tax Maps/ROW Plats 2 2 Obtain Plans from Other Agencies 2 2 Obtain Utility Atlases & Draft in CADD 18 6 12 Field Checks 12 6 6 2. Survey Task Total: 256 8 36 12 100 100 0210 Field Survey Subtotal: 204 4 100 100 Project Survey Plan & Field Preparation 4 4 Establish Control Points and Ties 16 8 8 Horizontal Topography 80 40 40 Property Corner Location 16 8 8 Cross Sections 64 32 32 Drainage Inventory 24 12 12 0220 Process Survey Subtotal: 12 12 Down Loading Total Station 4 4 Create Digital Terrain Model 8 8 0230 Boundary Survey Office Subtotal: 40 8 32 Property Research / Order Title / Rewiew Documents 16 16 Boundary Analysis & Calculation 16 16 QA/QC of Deliverable / Revisions 8 8 Page 1 of 3 79 Page 127 of 252  WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE 3/5/2026 Project Manager III Project Manager II Project Manager I Project Engineer II Project Engineer I Lead Surveyor Grand Total Principal Technician III Engineer IV Technician II Engineer III Engineer II Engineer I Technician I CAD Manager Activity 3. Water Resources Task Total: 483 21 72 144 42 204 0310 Preliminary Stormwater Analysis Subtotal: 364 60 116 188 Hydrologic Modeling 40 8 12 20 Hydraulic Modeling (Storm Sewer) 84 12 24 48 Storm Water Detention Analysis 40 8 12 20 Alternatives Analysis 16 4 8 4 Analyze Sensitivity of Outfalls 40 8 12 20 Existing Drainage Evaluation and Plans (3 sheets at 1" = 50') 72 8 24 40 Proposed Drainage Plans (3 sheets at 1" = 50') 72 12 24 36 0320 Stormwater Reports Subtotal: 56 12 28 16 Drainage Tech Memo 56 12 28 16 0350 Water Main System Subtotal: 63 21 42 Identify & Report Conflict Locations (Kenilworth) 3 1 2 Identify & Report Conflict Locations (Winnetka) 4 2 2 Water Main Design (Kenilworth) 10 4 6 Water Main Design (Winnetka) 14 6 8 Water Main Sheets (Concept Proposed Alignment) (Kenilworth) 16 4 12 Water Main Sheets (Concept Proposed Alignment) (Winnetka) 16 4 12 4. Roadway Lighting Feasibility Task Total: 34 12 13 9 0410 Lighting Studies and Plans Subtotal: 34 12 13 9 Identify owner requirements 2 2 Equipment Selection 12 8 4 Voltage Drop Calculations 2 1 1 Photometric Calculations - Segment (x segments) 5 1 4 Lighting Layout 13 1 4 8 5. Engineering Studies Task Total: 920 4 104 64 246 112 374 16 0510 Traffic Studies Subtotal: 274 18 34 76 8 138 Traffic Count Reduction & Tabulation 12 6 6 Develop Traffic Projections for each Movement (3 Ints) 12 6 6 Roadway Capacity Analysis 3int x (a.m. & p.m.) (1ex +1 pr)(4hr) 48 4 6 18 20 Develop Existing and Proposed Typical Sections (5 Alts) 20 2 2 8 8 Intersection Design Studies (1 IDS x 60 hrs/IDS) 60 6 12 20 22 ADA Detail Sheets (Estimate 22 Ramps x 4 hrs) 88 4 8 16 60 Traffic Management Plan/Analysis 34 2 6 10 16 0520 Environmental Studies Subtotal: 42 3 5 8 26 Prepare Environmental Survey Request (ESR) Form 10 1 1 8 Prepare ESR Exhibits (2 sheets) 10 2 8 Prepare ESR Aerials (2 Sheets) 20 2 2 8 8 Environmental Document Preparation - Clearance Renewal 2 2 0530 Geometric Studies Subtotal: 336 26 112 84 98 16 Horizontal Geometry Study (5 Alts) 90 10 20 24 36 Vertical Geometry Study 42 6 36 Plan and Profile Sheets (5 Alts x 3 Shts/Alt) 120 10 24 40 46 Sight Distance Study of Preferred Alternate 24 8 16 Right-of-Way Analysis (2 alts x 3,000'/50 = 120 Sections) 60 24 20 16 Page 2 of 3 80 Page 128 of 252  WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE 3/5/2026 Project Manager III Project Manager II Project Manager I Project Engineer II Project Engineer I Lead Surveyor Grand Total Principal Technician III Engineer IV Technician II Engineer III Engineer II Engineer I Technician I CAD Manager Activity 0540 Safety Studies Subtotal: 50 6 24 20 Crash Data Charts and Tables 30 2 8 20 Review and Analyze Crash Data 8 8 Write Crash Analysis Summary (Memo) 12 4 8 0550 Preliminary Project Plans and Report Subtotal: 136 41 37 58 Design Exception checks and documentation 12 1 1 10 Report Preparation 56 20 20 16 Report Revisions (2 revisions) 44 12 16 16 Disposition of Comments (2 dispositions) 24 8 16 0590 Public Involvement Subtotal: 82 4 10 6 16 12 34 Advertise in Newspaper 6 2 4 Prepare Meeting Exhibit Boards 40 4 6 6 8 16 Attend Open House Public Meeting (1 Meeting) 16 4 4 4 4 Collection of Public Comments/Management & Reporting 20 2 4 14 6. Quantity, Specifications & Estimates Task Total: 114 7 6 4 3 32 8 8 46 0710 Quantity, Specifications and Estimates Subtotal: 114 7 6 4 3 32 8 8 46 Quantity Calculations and BOM (Roadway - 2 Alts) 52 2 20 30 Quantity Calculations and BOM (Lighting) 10 1 3 6 Quantity Calculations and BOM (Water Resources) 36 4 8 8 16 Estimate of Cost 16 2 4 4 6 7. Funding Assistance Task Total: 88 22 30 36 0810 Funding Assistance Subtotal: 88 22 30 36 Review Potential Grants for Project 4 4 Assist in Developing Grant Applications (3 Grants) 84 18 30 36 8. QC / QA Task Total: 44 16 24 4 0910 QC / QA Subtotal: 44 16 24 4 Preparation and Revisions of QC/QA Plan - Quality Plan 4 4 Water Resources QC/QA 16 16 Roadway QC/QA 24 24 9. Project Management & Administration Task Total: 40 10 30 1010 Project Management & Administration Subtotal: 40 10 30 Project Management 32 8 24 Work Plan 2 2 Budget Analysis 2 2 Project Startup 2 2 Project Scheduling 2 2 Page 3 of 3 81 Page 129 of 252  Cost Estimate of Consultant Services (Direct Labor Multiple) Firm Ciorba Group, Inc. Date 03/05/26 DIRECT SERVICES DBE % OF ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL COSTS BY TOTAL TOTAL GRAND OTHERS TOTAL Meetings, Data Collection & Coordination 281 $ 56,380.99 $ 168.00 $ - $ 56,548.99 13% Survey 256 $ 33,720.79 $ 720.00 $ - $ 34,440.79 8% Water Resources 483 $ 71,834.37 $ - $ - $ 71,834.37 17% Roadway Lighting Feasibility 34 $ 7,199.97 $ - $ - $ 7,199.97 2% Engineering Studies 920 $ 144,822.86 $ 3,888.00 $ - $ 148,710.86 34% Quantity, Specifications & Estimates 114 $ 17,814.14 $ - $ - $ 17,814.14 4% Funding Assistance 88 $ 14,891.32 $ - $ - $ 14,891.32 3% QC / QA 44 $ 11,830.90 $ - $ - $ 11,830.90 3% Project Management & Administration 40 $ 10,431.75 $ - $ - $ 10,431.75 2% Soil and Material Consultants $ 11,967.00 $ - $ 11,967.00 3% Teska Associates $ 45,740.00 $ - $ 45,740.00 11% TOTALS 2260 $ 368,927.10 $ 4,776.00 $ 57,707.00 $ 431,410.10 100% PRINTED 3/5/2026, 10:25 AM 82 Page 130 of 252  Village of Kenilworth Green Bay Road - Phase I Ciorba Group Direct Costs Meetings, Data Collection & Coordination Description Unit Unit Cost Quantity Extended Cost Vehicle (mileage) mile $ 0.700 240 $ 168.00 $ 168.00 Total Survey Description Unit Unit Cost Quantity Extended Cost Vehicle (day) day $ 90.00 8 $ 720.00 $ 720.00 Total Engineering Studies Description Unit Unit Cost Quantity Extended Cost Vehicle (mileage) mile $ 0.700 80 $ 56.00 Traffic Count (1 day) hour $ 76.00 24 $ 1,824.00 Traffic Count (1 hr) hour $ 84.00 12 $ 1,008.00 Reproductions - Outside sheet $ 40.00 10 $ 400.00 Advertisement dollar $ 600.00 1 $ 600.00 $ 3,888.00 Total 83 Page 131 of 252 Proposal No. 23,859 Page 3 Re: Green Bay Road Kenilworth, Illinois SCHEDULE OF FEES -- PAVEMENT AND SUBSURFACE SOIL INVESTIGATION Item Units Fee Estimated Cost FIELD Boring Layout 5 hr. $ 120.00 /hr. $ 600.00 Utility Location 1 hr. $ 120.00 /hr. $ 120.00 Attenuator Truck 8 hr. $ 220.00 /hr. $ 1,760.00 Mobilization 1 $ Lump Sum $ 700.00 Drilling (7 at 10’) 70 ft. $ 19.00 /ft. $ 1,330.00 Split Barrel Sampling 28 ea. $ 14.00 ea. $ 392.00 Pavement Coring 7 ea. $ 130.00 ea. $ 910.00 IDOT Permit 1 $ Lump Sum $ 3,000.00 LABORATORY Moisture Content Unit Weight 1 $ Lump Sum $ 675.00 Unconfined Compressive Strength Organic Content 3 ea. $ 150.00 ea. $ 450.00 Hydrometer Analysis 3 ea. $ 125.00 ea. $ 375.00 Atterberg Limits 3 ea. $ 125.00 ea. $ 375.00 REPORT Senior Engineer (P.E.) 8 hr. $ 160.00 /hr. $ 1,280.00 __________ Estimated Total Cost: $ 11,967.00 If requested the scope of work can be reduced to include pavement cores only and no soil borings for a cost of $7,570.00. 84 Page 132 of 252 KENILWORTH GREEN BAY ROAD 02.11.26 TESKA ASSOCIATES Principal/PM Sr Assoc LA Assoc LA SUBTOTAL $185 $150 $130 STREETSCAPE + OUTREACH SCOPE 1 Village review meetings and corridor alt review (2 mtgs) 8 $1,480 8 $1,200 0 $0 $2,680 2 Prepare (2) alternative streetscape concept packages 16 $2,960 30 $4,500 90 $11,700 $19,160 3 Prepare public meeting exhibits, attend public meeting 16 $2,960 20 $3,000 40 $5,200 $11,160 4 Village review meeting and final concept selection (1 mtg) 2 $370 2 $300 0 $0 $670 5 Prepare final streetscape concept package + costs 4 $740 20 $3,000 40 $5,200 $8,940 6 Team coordination + staff meetings 8 $1,480 8 $1,200 0 $0 $2,680 SUBTOTAL FEES 54 $9,990 88 $13,200 170 $22,100 $45,290 REIMBURSABLES (REPRODUCTIONS: $450) $450 TOTAL $45,740 85 Page 133 of 252  Agenda Item Executive Summary TITLE: Resolution No. R-48-2026: Approving a License Agreement with Level 3 Communications, LLC for Installation of Fiber Optic Cable in Village Rights of Way (Adoption) PRESENTER: James Bernahl AGENDA DATE: May 5, 2026 CONSENT: Yes ITEM TYPE: Consent Agenda ITEM HISTORY: None. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Background Utilities, including telecommunications, are located throughout the Village. These types of telecommunications utilities have the right to use Village controlled right-of-way, but that right is not unfettered. Specifically, when the Illinois Commerce Commission (IIC) regulates telecommunications carriers operating in Illinois, the Commission establishes a statewide framework governing telecommunications services and taxation. When the ICC licenses carriers, those carriers obtain certain rights, but municipalities retain the authority to manage and protect their public rights-of-way through local ordinances and license agreements. Some of the utilities located throughout the Village include Comcast, AT&T, Village of Winnetka Electrical, and North Shore Gas. While Winnetka Electrical and North Shore Gas are not “telecommunications”, both Comcast and AT&T provide services that fit that description. These utilities do not operate on a one-off basis (meaning obtaining hundreds of Village right-of-way permits), rather they operate under a global contract, whereby certain standards are imposed upon the utilities. With the continual increase in the use and reliance of the internet, the Village has been approached by multiple new telecommunication companies looking to install infrastructure within Village’s right-of-way, either for direct use by Village residents and businesses or for indirect benefits as a limited passthrough of the Village. One such company is Level 3 Communications, LLC (“Level 3”). Level 3 has requested authorization to install fiber-optic facilities within specified public rights-of-way in the Village. Unlike Comcast or AT&T, Level 3 is not requesting a complete and total buildout of its infrastructure to provide services to all properties in the Village, rather Level 3 is requesting a limited buildout since their product will not be for direct consumer use, rather for larger (or one large) commercial entity. The proposed facilities are solely intended to transmit data between endpoints located outside of the Village. Page 134 of 252 This Public Right-of-Way Use License Agreement was developed as part of a coordinated effort with neighboring North Shore communities, including Wilmette, Glencoe, and Lake Bluff, to ensure consistency in regulatory standards and protections for municipal rights-of-way. Evanston, Skokie, and other neighboring communities are also engaging in a similar process and documentation. The Public Right-of-Way Use License Agreement reflects shared terms and conditions developed collaboratively with these communities. Discussion The proposed License Agreement memorializes the respective rights and obligations of the Village and Level 3 Communications related to the installation, operation, maintenance, repair, and potential removal of fiber-optic facilities within approved public rights-of-way. The agreement is expressly non- exclusive and revocable and does not convey any ownership or property interest in the public right-of- way. The license authorizes the installation, operation, and maintenance of fiber-optic facilities within approved public right-of-way locations. It does not grant Level 3 the right to provide telecommunications, internet, or cable television services directly to Village residents or businesses. All construction, installation, and restoration activities are subject to the Village’s Public Right-of-Way Construction Regulations and Supplemental Requirements, including permitting, traffic control, directional boring, and tree protection standards. Level 3 Communications is a certified telecommunications retailer subject to State telecommunications taxes, so no additional franchise fees can be imposed. However, standard permit fees, security deposits, and reimbursement of Village consultant review and inspection costs are included in this License Agreement. The License Agreement has an initial five-year term with automatic five-year renewals, subject to continued compliance. The Village retains the right to terminate the agreement in the event of material default, public safety concerns, or noncompliance with applicable laws and standards. Budget Impact There is no significant fiscal impact to the Village associated with approval of this agreement. Level 3 is responsible for installation, restoration, and relocation costs, as well as for posting required security funds and reimbursing the Village for review and inspection costs. RECOMMENDATION: Consider approval Resolution No. R-48-2026 authorizing the Village Manager to execute the Public Right-of-Way Use License Agreement between the Village of Winnetka and Level 3 Communications, LLC, authorizing the installation, operation, and maintenance of fiber-optic communication facilities within designated public rights-of-way. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. R-48-2026: Approving a License Agreement with Level 3 Communications, LLC for Installation of Fiber Optic Cable in Village ROW Page 135 of 252  RESOLUTION NO. R-48-2026 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC FOR INSTALLATION OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE IN VILLAGE RIGHTS OF WAY WHEREAS, Article VII, Section 10 of the 1970 Illinois Constitution authorizes the Village of Winnetka (“Village”) to contract with individuals, associations, and corporations in any manner not prohibited by law or ordinance; and WHEREAS, Level 3 Communications, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Level 3”), is a telecommunications retailer under the Illinois Telecommunications Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Act and has been certified by the Illinois Commerce Commission as a Local Exchange Carrier, which authorizes it to install fiber optic telecommunications cables and appurtenant equipment (collectively, “Fiber”); and WHEREAS, Level 3 desires to license, construct, install, operate, maintain, and replace Fiber in the Village rights of way for the operation of Level 3’s telecommunications services underground within portions of the Village’s public rights-of-way (“collectively, “Installation”); and WHEREAS, the Village maintains standards for construction of utility facilities within its public rights-of-way, which are set forth in Chapter 14.04, titled “Construction of Utility Facilities within Public Rights-of-Way”, of the Winnetka Village Code (“Right-of-Way Construction Regulations”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14.04.010(D) of the Right-of-Way Construction Regulations, the Village and Level 3 desire to enter into a license agreement (“License Agreement”) to allow the Installation of the Fiber within the Village’s rights-of-way, subject to certain conditions and restrictions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the License Agreement, Level 3 will comply with the Right-of- Way Construction Regulations and certain supplemental requirements intended to enhance the efficient completion of the Installation of Fiber, mitigate the effects of the Installation on Village residents and business, and protect existing infrastructure on, over, and within the Village rights- of-way; and WHEREAS, the Village Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the Village and its residents to enter into the License Agreement with Level 3; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois, as follows: SECTION 1: RECITALS. The Village Council hereby adopts the foregoing recitals as its findings, as if fully set forth herein. May 5th, 2026 R-48-2026 Page 136 of 252  SECTION 2: APPROVAL OF LICENSE AGREEMENT. The Village Council hereby approves the License Agreement by and among the Village and Level 3 in substantially the form attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and in a final form approved by the Village Attorney. SECTION 3: AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE LICENSE AGREEMENT. The Village Council hereby authorizes and directs the Village President and the Village Clerk to execute and seal, on behalf of the Village, the final License Agreement. SECTION 4: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval according to law. ADOPTED this 5th day of May, 2026, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: ____________________________________________________________ NAYS: ____________________________________________________________ ABSENT: ____________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ____________________________________________________________ Signed ____________________________________ Village President Countersigned: _______________________________________ Village Clerk May 5th, 2026 R-48-2026 Page 137 of 252  EXHIBIT A LICENSE AGREEMENT Page 138 of 252  PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY USE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF WINNETKA AND LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC FOR INSTALLATION OF FIBER-OPTIC COMMUNICATION FACILITIES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into on May ______, 2026 (“Effective Date”) by VILLAGE OF WINNETKA, an Illinois home rule municipal corporation (“Village”) and LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Licensee”). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Village owns and maintains the public rights-of-way identified and depicted in Exhibit A to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Village maintains standards for construction of utility facilities within its public rights-of-way, which are set forth in Chapter 14.04, titled “Construction of Utility Facilities within Public Rights-of-Way”, of the Winnetka Village Code, as the same may from time to time be amended (“PROW Construction Regulations”); and WHEREAS, the Licensee has requested that the Village enter into this Agreement to memorialize the parties’ respective rights and responsibilities with respect to the licensing, construction, installation, operation, maintenance, and replacement of fiber optic telecommunications cables and appurtenant equipment (collectively, the “Fiber Facilities”) underground, above ground, and on existing utility poles within portions of the Village’s public rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, the Licensee is installing the Fiber Facilities solely for the purpose of transmitting data between endpoints outside of the Village and the Licensee will not be providing telecommunications or internet services to residents or businesses within the Village; and WHEREAS, the Licensee, which has been certified by the Illinois Commerce Commission both as a facilities and resale basis (i) as an interexchange carrier throughout Illinois; and (ii) as a local exchange carrier (“LEC”) providing both switched and dedicated local exchange services in Illinois. Licensee is not delivering, and does not intend to deliver, cable television services to the residents of the Village, but rather intends to provide fiber optic telecommunications services; and WHEREAS, in consideration of, and subject to, the terms of this Agreement, the Village is willing to allow the Licensee to construct, install, operate, maintain, and replace its Fiber Facilities within the Village’s public rights-of-way identified in Exhibit A 1 (“Approved PROW Locations”); and WHEREAS, the Village has determined that it is useful to the Village and its residents to grant a license to the Licensee as provided in this Agreement for the purpose of memorializing the Licensee’s rights and obligations with regard to the installation, operation, maintenance, and repair of the Fiber Facilities in the Approved PROW Locations; and WHEREAS, the Licensee is authorized to enter into and perform and assume all of its obligations under this Agreement. 1 In the event that the Village approves additional installation locations by the Licensee in the future, depictions of those locations will be appended to this Agreement without further action by the Village Council. -1- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 139 of 252  NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual consideration exchanged between the parties as set forth in this Agreement, the sufficiency and receipt of which are mutually acknowledged, the parties agree as follow: SECTION 1. RECITALS. The Recitals are incorporated into this Agreement as substantive terms of this Agreement. SECTION 2. GRANT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY USE LICENSE. For and in consideration of the terms of this Agreement and compliance with all federal, State of Illinois, and Village local laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the PROW Construction Regulations, as well as the Supplemental Requirements for Public Right-of-Way Fiber Installations (“Supplemental Requirements”) attached to this Agreement as Exhibit B, the Village hereby grants to the Licensee a non-exclusive revocable license (“License”) to construct, install, operate, maintain, repair, and replace the Fiber Facilities in the Approved PROW Locations (collectively, “Installation”). The License does not convey any right, title, or interest of any kind (including any ownership or leasehold interest) in any Village public rights-of-way, but is a license only for the use and occupancy of the Approved PROW Locations for the limited purposes stated in this Agreement. The License does not grant or convey any permission or right in the Licensee to provide telecommunication services of any kind within the Village. The Licensee acknowledges the jurisdiction of the Village to regulate its public rights-of-way and agrees to comply with the PROW Construction Regulations and the Supplemental Requirements. Notwithstanding the limited scope of the License, in the event of an emergency or other unexpected major repair, the Licensee may access Village public rights-of-way to undertake emergency maintenance or repair work as required under the circumstances. All emergency maintenance or repair work must comply with the requirements for emergency maintenance in the PROW Construction Regulations and the Supplemental Requirements. SECTION 3. DESCRIPTION OF FIBER FACILITIES. A. Facility Specifications. The Fiber Facilities for which the License is granted are composed of dedicated fiber optic cable and related components. The components of, and the general plans for, the Fiber Facilities are depicted in Exhibit C (“Facility Specifications"). B. Changes to Type or Scope of Facilities. The License is granted only for Fiber Facilities matching the Facility Specifications and the Approved PROW Locations. If the Licensee desires to expand the Fiber Facilities into any additional locations or install Fiber Facilities differing from those depicted in the Facility Specifications, then the Licensee must request, in advance and in writing, the approval of the Village for that expansion or alternative or additional equipment. The additions, alterations, or expansions must be documented in an addendum to this License Agreement approved by resolution of the Village Board. SECTION 4. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF FIBER FACILITIES. A. Construction Within and Use of Public-Rights-of-Way; Permits. 1. Construction Within and Use of Public Rights-of-Way. All construction within the Village rights-of-way must comply with the PROW Construction Regulations, the Supplemental Requirements, and other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations. The -2- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 140 of 252 Licensee must not interfere with property of Village and other authorized users of the Approved PROW Locations or any other public rights-of-way. This Agreement does not authorize the Licensee to use, enter upon, or otherwise encroach on, any privately-owned property except if within a Village easement or compatible municipal utility easement identified within the list of Approved PROW Locations. 2. Permits. The Licensee must secure all required permits, including Village permits, for the Installation of the Fiber Facilities prior to commencing Installation of the Fiber Facilities. The Licensee also must post a Security Fund with the Village in the forms and amounts required by the PROW Construction Regulations and the Supplemental Requirements. 3. Fees. The Licensee is not required to pay any additional fees to the Village under this Agreement, so long as: (a) the Licensee maintains its status as a Telecommunications Retailer under the Telecommunications Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Act (35 ILCS 635/1 et seq.), and (b) timely pays the taxes imposed by the Simplified Municipal Telecommunications Tax Act (35 ILCS 636/5-1 et seq.) to the State of Illinois. If at any time the Licensee is no longer a Telecommunications Retailer under the Telecommunications Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Act or the Village no longer imposes a tax pursuant to the Simplified Municipal Telecommunications Tax Act, then the Licensee must pay all applicable and required Village fees, taxes, and other compensation required by the Village in exchange for the License. B. Installation and Maintenance of Fiber Facilities. 1. The Licensee must maintain the Fiber Facilities in a good and safe condition at all times and in compliance at all times with applicable federal, State of Illinois, and Village regulations, including, without limitation, the PROW Construction Regulations and the Supplemental Requirements. 2. The Licensee must be responsible for locating the Fiber Facilities in response to requests from the area one call utility locate provider. 3. The Licensee must be responsible for relocating the Fiber Facilities upon 90-days notice from the Village at the Licensee’s sole cost and expense when the Fiber Facilities are in conflict with a planned Village infrastructure improvement work which benefits the public. C. Property Restoration and Repairs. 1. Obligation to Restore and Repair. Licensee must restore all areas disturbed by the Licensee’s Installation of the Fiber Facilities in full compliance with both the PROW Construction Regulations and this Agreement, including the Supplemental Requirements (“Restoration”). 2. Failure to Restore and Repair. If the Licensee fails to perform any required Restoration within the required time period, then the Village may undertake the Restoration, at the Licensee’s expense, using the Village’s own forces or third-party forces. The Licensee must reimburse the Village for all actual and documented costs and expenses -3- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 141 of 252 incurred by the Village related to the Restoration, including actual and documented administrative costs, within 45 days after receipt of an invoice of those costs and expenses from the Village. The invoice must include reasonable detail of the costs and expenses and must include receipts or other documents when available. If the Licensee fails to pay the Village within the 45-day period, then the Village may issue a written notice to the Licensee that the Village will (i) reimburse itself from the Security Fund and (ii) terminate this Agreement if payment is not received within 30 days after the date of Licensee’s receipt of that written notice. If the Licensee fails to pay the Village within that 30 day period, then the Village may with advance written notice terminate this Agreement. D. Duty to Provide Information. Within 15 days after receipt of a written request from the Village, Licensee must furnish any information requested that is necessary, as determined by the Village, for the Village’s management of the public right-of-way and reasonably related to the subject matter of the Agreement or the Installation of the Fiber Facilities, the License, and any business activities related to the License or business operations of Licensee in the Village. SECTION 5. LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE. A. No Liability for Damage to Fiber Facilities. Unless directly and proximately caused by a willful, intentional, or malicious act of the Village, the Village will not be liable for, and the Licensee expressly waives all claims it may have against the Village for, any and all damage to or loss of the Fiber Facilities caused by the Village, its contractors, or agents. The Village will not be responsible for damage to Fiber Facilities if damaged during routine or emergent infrastructure maintenance or repair work. B. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, and in addition to any indemnification requirements set forth in the PROW Construction Regulations, the Licensee will hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the Village and all of its officials, officers, employees, attorneys and agents (collectively, “Indemnified Parties”) from and against all third-party injuries, deaths, losses, damages, claims, demands, suits, liabilities, judgments, costs, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees (collectively “Claims” and each a “Claim”), to the extent they arise out of, or result from, whether directly or indirectly, any act or omission of the Licensee or any of its affiliates, officials, officers, employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors the Agreement, Installation of the Fiber Facilities, the Licensee’s use of the Village’s public rights-of-way, or the provision of services over the Fiber Facilities, except to the extent arising out of the negligence, willful, intentional or malicious act of the Village, its contractors or anyone acting on the Village’s behalf. C. No Limitation or Subrogation. The indemnification and defense required by this Agreement are not limited by the amount of the insurance available to either party and will not be subject to subrogation. The Licensee, as to its own acts or omissions, will, and does hereby agree to, pay all expenses, including legal fees and administrative expenses, incurred by the Village in defending itself with regard to any and all of the Indemnified Claims. D. Insurance. The Licensee must comply with, and maintain insurance in accordance with, the insurance requirements contained in Exhibit D to this Agreement at all times when Installation is taking place and when any part of the Fiber Facilities is located within any Village public right-of-way. -4- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 142 of 252  E. Security. The Licensee must provide a “Security Fund” in the form of a Letter of Credit or cash in compliance with the PROW Construction Regulations and the Supplemental Requirements. SECTION 6. TERM; TERMINATION. A. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement is five years, beginning on the date the Effective Date of this Agreement (“Initial Term”). Following the Initial Term, this Agreement will automatically renew for successive five-year terms provided that the Licensee is in full compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement at the time of renewal (“Renewal Terms”), unless either party provides written notice to the other party that it does not wish the Agreement to renew at least 90 days before the end of the then-current Initial Term or Renewal Term. In the event this Agreement is not renewed, and upon notice from the Village, the Licensee must within not less than one hundred eighty (180) days from such notice, remove its Fiber Facilities from all Village rights-of-way, or those portions designated by the Village, and complete the Restoration of all the rights-of-way as required by this Agreement. B. Termination of Agreement. 1. Termination by Licensee. Subject to the conditions stated in this Section 6.B.1, the Licensee may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason upon 30 days advance written notice to the Village of its intention to terminate; provided, however, that all unfulfilled or unfinished obligations of the Licensee under this Agreement, whether payment obligations, Restoration, or any other obligation, will survive termination, and the Licensee will continue to be responsible and liable for completion of all unfulfilled or unfinished obligations. 2. Termination by Village. Subject to the conditions stated in this Subsection B, the Village may terminate this Agreement in the event of any default which remains uncured following thirty (30) days prior written notice to the Licensee and a reasonable time to cure, provided that Licensee has commenced a cure within such thirty (30) day period and a cure is capable of being completed within a reasonable time thereafter, for any of the following causes: a) A material violation of any term of this Agreement. b) The material failure of Licensee to comply with all applicable federal, State of Illinois, or local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations including the PROW Construction Regulations and the Supplemental Requirements. c) The Licensee makes a fraudulent, false, misrepresenting, or materially incomplete statement in seeking this Agreement, that is relied upon for renewal of this Agreement, or in a permit application. d) Installation of the Fiber Facilities is contrary to the plans and specifications approved by the Village or outside the scope of the License approved by this Agreement. e) The Licensee is adjudged to be bankrupt, has a receiver appointed for it, makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or has a significant amount of its property sold under the execution or other legal process or is seized by creditors. -5- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 143 of 252  f) The Licensee transfers this License without providing the Village with notice of the transfer within 60 days after the completion of the transfer. The Licensee ceases its business operations or ceases operation of the Fiber Facilities, unless the cessation of operation was due to circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the Licensee and the Licensee resumes operations within 30 days after they were ceased. g) Any portion of the Fiber Facilities presents a direct or imminent threat to the public health, safety, or welfare—whether due to its location, condition, or other circumstance—and the Licensee fails to mitigate that threat promptly. h) Failure to provide the required traffic control during Installation; and to respond to requests from the Village to correct such deficiencies within a reasonable time. i) Failure to perform any Restoration as required pursuant to Section 4 of this Agreement. As part of the termination of this Agreement by the Village, the Village will direct the Licensee as to what portion of the Fiber Facilities, if any, the Licensee must remove from the Village’s public rights-of-way. Any portion of the Fiber Facilities designated for removal must be removed by the Licensee at its expense within 180 days after the date of termination, or as otherwise agreed to by the Village, and the Licensee must restore all disturbed public rights- of-way to the standards in the PROW Construction Regulations. The Licensee must transfer to the Village all rights, title, and interest to all portions of the Fiber Facilities that remain via a bill of sale; provided, however, that even in the absence of a bill of sale, the parties explicitly agree that ownership in any Fiber Facilities abandoned in place after the termination or expiration of this Agreement, and which have not been lawfully transferred to another fiber service provider, will automatically transfer to the Village. SECTION 7. ENFORCEMENT. A. Enforcement. The Village and the Licensee may, in law or in equity, by suit, action, mandamus or any other proceeding, including, without limitation, specific performance, enforce or compel the performance of this Agreement; provided, however, that the Licensee agrees that it will not seek, and does not have the right to seek, recovery of a judgment for monetary damages against the Village or any Village elected or appointed officials, agents, representatives, attorneys or employees on account of the negotiation, execution, or breach of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, except to the extent provided for herein. B. Prevailing Party. In the event of a judicial proceeding brought by one party against the other party, the prevailing party in the judicial proceeding is entitled to reimbursement from the unsuccessful party of all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in connection with the judicial proceeding. SECTION 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Transfer or Assignment of Agreement. This Agreement is binding on, and inures to the benefit of the Village and the Licensee their successors and assigns. Except as -6- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 144 of 252 stated in this Section 8, the Licensee has no right or authority to transfer or assign the License, this Agreement, or any interest in any part of the License or this Agreement without the prior, express, written consent of the Village, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld or delayed so long as the assignment has no adverse impact on the Approved ROW Locations and the assignee fully assumes all of the Licensee’s obligations under the Agreement. The Licensee may assign this Agreement without consent to an affiliate or to a successor in connection with a merger, reorganization, or sale of all or substantially all of the Licensee’s assets or ownership, but only so long as the assignment has no material adverse impact on the Approved ROW Locations and the assignee fully assumes all of the Licensee’s obligations under the Agreement. B. Complete Agreement; Amendments. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the Village and the Licensee. This Agreement may be amended only in writing with the signatures of properly authorized representatives. C. Incorporation of Exhibits. Exhibits A through D are hereby incorporated as substantive provisions of this Agreement. D. Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement will be governed, interpreted, and construed in accordance with the laws, but not the conflicts of law rules, of the State of Illinois. The venue for any dispute between the parties will be in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, or the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. E. Taxes. Nothing contained in this Agreement will be construed to exempt the Licensee from any fee, tax, property tax levy, or assessment that is or may be hereafter lawfully imposed, and the Licensee will be responsible for the payment of any taxes assessed relative to its use of the Village’s public rights-of-way or its operation of the Fiber Facilities. F. No Waiver. The waiver by a party of a particular breach of this Agreement or the failure of a party to enforce a particular term of this Agreement at any particular time, or for any period of time, will not be construed or deemed to be a waiver any other breach or a bar from enforcing any other term. G. Conflict. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement, the PROW Construction Regulations, or the Supplemental Requirements the term or provision that is stricter or more protective of the Village controls. H. Notice. A notice under this Agreement must be in writing and will be deemed to be served effectively when deposited in the mail with sufficient first-class postage affixed and addressed to the party at the party’s place of business. Notices must be addressed as follows: If to Village: Village of Winnetka Attn: Kristin Kazenas 510 Green Bay Road Winnetka, IL 60093 Email: KKazenas@winnetka.org With a Copy to: James J. Bernahl, P.E., CFM – Director of Engineering/Village Engineer Village of Winnetka Public Works -7- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 145 of 252  1390 Willow Road Winnetka, IL 60093 Email: jbernahl@winnetka.org If to Licensee: Level 3 Communications, LLC c/o Lumen Technologies, Inc. 931 14th Street Denver, CO 80202 Attention: Network ROW I. Good Faith Cooperation. The Licensee and the Village agree that in the event a decision by a regulatory authority at the federal, state, or local level requires modifications of this Agreement then the Licensee and the Village will negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement to permit each of them, to the extent practicable, to enjoy the intended benefits of this Agreement. The Licensee and the Village otherwise mutually agree to cooperate with each other in good faith to perform their duties and obligations under this Agreement. J. Force Majeure. The Village and the Licensee will not be responsible for any failure to perform or delay in performance due to unforeseen circumstances or due to a cause beyond the party’s control, including but not limited to acts of God, war, riot, embargoes, acts of civil or military authorities, fire, floods, or accidents. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] -8- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 146 of 252  IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Village and the Licensee have caused this Agreement to be signed by their duly authorized representatives as of the Effective Date. ATTEST: VILLAGE OF WINNETKA By: By: ATTEST: LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC By: By: Title: Its: -9- 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 147 of 252  EXHIBIT A APPROVED PROW LOCATIONS FOR FIBER FACILITIES 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 148 of 252  Level 3 Proposed Work in Winnetka, IL Cr es c e Oakdale Ave nt ± Ln Lake St D rexel Ave E uc Ivy Ln li d Ave Hubbard Woods Station Asbury Ave Tower Road Park Edgewood Park Edgewo od Ln St P ri va t e R d g e Ga Tower Rd Chatfield Hubbard WoodsRd Elementary Locust St School Lloyd Park T rapp Ln Gr Li nc ee ol Pr Rose wood A ve n es Westmoor T rl n os tw Ba Av p e ay Lake Front D y e ct Sko kie C re e k Rd r A ve am R d P e lh Winnetka Golf Sunv iew Ln Club t eS Pine St P in P ine St Skokie Playfield Winnetka L ocust S t N Fore Carleton Washburne e Winnetka Station Cove School Av st Junior High Pro vi d e n t W School Oa k St ay Be rkeley A ve Birch St Cherr y St Che stnut S t Tennis Nellsen Center Ash St Ash St Wi llo w Rd Willow Rd Will ow Rd L ockw o od Ave Crow Island Lat ro be Ave n Lag oon Dr Aubu rn Av e S ko e Oak L Elementary School Rd North Shore k ie st Country Day Ri v e W h it School cu r Lo Ridge Ave Fore st St field Park S u n s et Rd Linden St Chestnut St Birch S t T h orn Rd ll Hi t ree L n Wi n n et ka A v e Wi nnetka A ve H ill R d Rd Ind i a n H i l l n F ox L Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap 94 contributors, and the GIS User Community ier High Northfield 0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles d R Hibba rd Rd W o o d le y Indian Hill Golf Legend Club Proposed Length of proposed = 11,245' Winnetka Page 149 of 252  EXHIBIT B SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FIBER INSTALLATIONS The following requirements are supplemental to, and shall be read in concert with, the requirements of the Village’s PROW Construction Regulations. In the event of a conflict between the PROW Construction Regulations and these Supplemental Requirements, the requirement that is stricter or more protective of the Village governs.  Time Limit on Permit Validity: No PROW construction permit will remain open beyond the time limits set forth below: • If work has not commenced on the installation within 90 days after the date of permit issuance, the permit will be cancelled and a new permit application and fee for installation in same location will be required. • If installation has commenced but not been completed within 180 days after the date of permit issuance, the permit will be cancelled, all ongoing work will cease, and the Village will be authorized to commence site restoration, including reimbursement of its costs from the restoration deposit. Municipal Facilities: All PROW construction permit applications must identify all municipally-owned facilities that will be located within construction area and eligible for fiber installation.  Security Fund: A security fund/restoration deposit based off of a rate of $7.50 per linear foot of proposed installed fiber, per permit will be required to be provided to the Village as a precondition of the issuance of a PROW construction permit. The security fund may be made in the form of a cash deposit or a letter of credit in a form acceptable to the Village. The Security Fund will be returned to the Licensee upon completion of installation, restoration, inspection and approval of the restored PROW and closing out of the permit by the Village. In the event the Security Fund is depleted due to the Village reimbursing itself for consultant or restoration expenses, the Village will have the right to issue a stop work order on any permits the Licensee currently holds. Licensee shall replenish the Security Fund in an amount acceptable to the Village Manager before the Village is required to lift the stop work order.  Reimbursement of Municipal Third-Party Costs: Licensee will reimburse the Village for any actual and documented costs incurred for third-party consultants retained by the village to inspect permit applications, plans, or work sites for compliance with the ROW Construction Regulations and these supplemental requirements. Prior to engaging such consultants, the Village shall provide the Licensee with a written summary of consultant’s scope of work, time estimate for work, and hourly/daily rates. Exhibit B 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 150 of 252 Supplemental Construction and Restoration Requirements  Directional Boring or Jacking Required: All installations of Fiber Facilities must be conducted through directional boring or jacking rather than open trench installation unless approved by Village Engineer or Village inspector.  Location of Fiber Facilities: All installation of the Fiber Facilities must be made in existing easements on either (i) private property (e.g. in back yards) where easements are available or (ii) within public rights-of-way. Where possible, Fiber Facilities should be installed to run parallel and same general location to other fiber/cable installations to keep “like with like.”  Tree Protection: Licensee must protect trees located in the PROW and impacted by the Installation in accordance with the tree protection requirements of Section 14.04.170 of the Village Code (Tree Preservation and Protection).  Local Representatives: Licensee will designate an employee or agent of the Licensee who is able to be on-site at an installation location within 24 hours’ time to address and resolve issues. Licensee will designate the construction contractor’s representative who is on-site at all time during the installation of the Fiber Facilities to address and resolve immediate issues. The contractor’s representative and/or licensee designated employee shall submit weekly progress reports to the Village. Progress meetings shall be scheduled at the Village’s request.  Pre-Dig Meetings: Licensee’s Local Representative and its installation contractor must participate in pre-dig meetings with the municipality’s designated representative. • Televising of Impacted Municipal Utilities: Prior to installation of the Fiber Facilities, and again after completion, the Licensee shall televise each impacted sanitary and storm sewer main, including a view of all lateral lines within the affected area. The Licensee shall retain the footage for a minimum period of 2 year and provide copies to the Village upon written request. Upon receipt of the footage, the Village shall review and provide written approval or comments within ten (10) business days. Failure to respond within this timeframe shall be deemed acceptance of the footage and compliance with this requirement. No additional work or costs beyond the approved scope shall be undertaken without the Licensee’s written consent.  Conduits. The Licensee must label each conduit it installs, with clear indication of Licensee’s ownership of conduit, per Village’s direction.  Notice to Impacted Property Owners: Licensee will provide written notices, in the form of door hangers or physically posted letters, to notify private property owners of dates and scope of installation activities that will impact their properties. Such notices will provide property owners with email and telephone contact information for both the Licensee’s Representative and the installation contractor. Exhibit B 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 151 of 252  Restoration Requirements: Restoration must be completed within five (5) business days after installation of Fiber Facilities on a block (from intersecting/ intercepting street to intersecting/ intercepting street) is completed; subject to adverse weather conditions.  Relocation of Fiber Facilities: Relocation of Fiber Facilities shall be conducted and costs allocated in the manner set forth in the PROW Construction Regulations.  Record Drawings: Licensee shall furnish the Village with as-built drawings in PDF format. Exhibit B 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 152 of 252  EXHIBIT C FIBER FACILITY SPECIFICATIONS Exhibit C 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 153 of 252 Page 154 of 252  EXHIBIT D MINIMUM INSURANCE COVERAGES Source: Winnetka Village Code Sec. 14.04.080. - Insurance. (a) Required coverage and limits. Unless otherwise provided by franchise, license, or similar agreement, each utility occupying right-of-way or constructing any facility in the right-of-way shall secure and maintain the following liability insurance policies insuring the Licensee as named insured and naming the village, and its elected and appointed officers, officials, agents, and employees as additional insureds on the policies listed in subsections (a)(1) and (2) of this section: (1) Commercial general liability insurance, including premises-operations, explosion, collapse, and underground hazard (commonly referred to as "X," "C," and "U" coverages) and products-completed operations coverage with limits not less than: a. $5,000,000.00 for bodily injury or death to each person; b. $5,000,000.00 for property damage resulting from any one accident; and c. $5,000,000.00 for all other types of liability; (2) Automobile liability for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles with a combined single limit of $1,000,000.00 for personal injury and property damage for each accident; (3) Worker's compensation with statutory limits; and (4) Employer's liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000.00 per employee and per accident. If the Licensee is not providing such insurance to protect the contractors and subcontractors performing the work, then such contractors and subcontractors shall comply with this subsection (a)(4). (b) Excess or umbrella policies. The coverages required by this section may be in any combination of primary, excess, and umbrella policies. Any excess or umbrella policy must provide excess coverage over underlying insurance on a following-form basis such that when any loss covered by the primary policy exceeds the limits under the primary policy, the excess or umbrella policy becomes effective to cover such loss. (c) Certificates and Copies of Policies. License will provide the Village with certificates of insurance for all required coverages at the time it submits permits for installation. Licensee facilitate an in person, electronic review of required insurance policies, redacted at Level 3’s sole discretion. Exhibit D 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 155 of 252 (d) Maintenance and renewal of required coverages. (1) The insurance policies required by this section shall require that the Village be provided with no less than 30 days advanced notice of cancellation or non- renewal of any policy in accordance with the notice provisions of this Agreement. (2) Upon renewal of insurance policy, the Licensee shall obtain and furnish to the village evidence of replacement insurance policies meeting the requirements of this section. (e) Self-insurance. A utility may self-insure all or a portion of the insurance coverage and limit requirements required by subsection (a) of this section. A utility that self-insures is not required, to the extent of such self-insurance, to comply with the requirement for the naming of additional insureds under subsection (a) of this section, or the requirements of subsections (b), (c) and (d) of this section. A utility that elects to self- insure shall provide to the village evidence sufficient to demonstrate its financial ability to self-insure the insurance coverage and limit requirements required under subsection (a) of this section, such as evidence that the Licensee is a private self-insurer under the Workers Compensation Act. (f) Effect of insurance and self-insurance on utility's liability. The legal liability of the Licensee to the village and any person for any of the matters that are the subject of the insurance policies or self-insurance required by this section shall not be limited by such insurance policies or self-insurance or by the recovery of any amounts thereunder. (g) Insurance companies. All insurance provided pursuant to this section shall be effected under valid and enforceable policies, issued by insurers legally able to conduct business with the licensee in the State. Exhibit D 4936-4600-2831, v. 2 Page 156 of 252  Agenda Item Executive Summary TITLE: Ordinance No. M-07-2026: Granting a Special Use Permit for the Operation of an Audiology Medical Office Within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District of the Village (730 Elm Street, Suite 120) (Introduction/Adoption) PRESENTER: Scott Mangum AGENDA DATE: May 5, 2026 CONSENT: No ITEM TYPE: Ordinances and Resolutions ITEM HISTORY: On April 21, 2026, the Village Council considered the Plan Commission (“PC”) recommendation regarding an application submitted by DUET Audiology Clinic (the “Applicant”), as the prospective lessee of the commercial space located at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 (the “Subject Property”), seeking approval of a special use permit to operate a medical office in the Commercial Overlay District on the Subject Property. Following discussion, the Village Council provided policy direction requesting that the Village Attorney and staff prepare an ordinance approving the request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: INTRODUCTION On May 5, 2026, the Village Council is scheduled to consider Ordinance No. M-07-2026, An Ordinance Granting a Special Use Permit for the Operation of an Audiology Medical Office within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 (Attachment 1). If approved, the Applicant would establish a Winnetka location of an existing audiology clinic and wellness center that currently operates out of Lake Forest and Northfield, with the Northfield office relocating to the Subject Property. ADVISORY BOARD/PLAN COMMISSION REVIEW The PC considered the request at its March 25, 2026, meeting. After hearing from the Applicant and receiving four written comments from the public, the PC discussed the request. The PC commented favorably on the business itself, however, some members expressed concern that the business in the proposed location does not meet the standards for granting a special use. Commission members asked about the potential volume of clients and length of appointment time, along with inquiring about the specifics of non-retail offerings and services. The Commission members also asked the property owner representative whether the approved off-street parking allotment for the building would be sufficient for the proposed use and the other previously approved uses. The Commission members discussed how much of the proposed business activity would be typical audiology clinic services versus the innovative Page 157 of 252 “experiential retail” that the Applicant described. Commission members also expressed concern about the agglomeration of special uses and non-retail businesses within the One Winnetka building. Commission members were ultimately concerned about the proposed audiology clinic’s ability to contribute to the district’s retail environment and generate foot traffic for the surrounding area. After concluding its discussion, by a vote of 6-0, the PC recommended denial of the request based on the Commission’s findings of fact below that the proposed medical office in the Commercial Overlay District at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 is not consistent with the following standards for granting Special Use Permits in the commercial Overlay District: 2. The Special Use will not be substantially injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity which are permitted by right in the district or districts of concern, nor substantially diminish or impair property values in the immediate vicinity; 3. The establishment of Special Use will not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of other property in the immediate vicinity for uses permitted by right in the district or districts of concern; 5. Adequate parking, utilities, access roads, drainage, and other facilities necessary to the operation of the Special Use exists or are to be provided; 12. The proposed location and operation of the proposed special use shall not significantly diminish the availability of parking for district clientele wishing to patronize existing retail businesses. The standards listed above are by the number from the "Standards for Review/Findings" section of the staff report for the March 25 PC meeting. Details of the request can be found in the attached staff report to the PC. For additional details, please reference this report as well as the draft minutes of the March 25 PC meeting, which are included as Attachment 2. Additional public comments that were received in advance of the March 25 PC meeting, but after the publication of the PC agenda packet, are included as Attachment 3. One additional written comment from the public that was provided to the Village Council in advance of the April 21, 2026, meeting but not included in the agenda packet is provided as Attachment 4. The property owner and Applicant presented additional information (Attachment 5) at the April 21, 2026, Village Council meeting regarding the use, operations, benefits to the Village, and compatibility with surrounding businesses. Following discussion, the Village Council provided policy direction requesting that the Village Attorney and staff prepare an ordinance (Attachment 1) approving the request. RECOMMENDATION: Given the Village Council provided policy direction at its April 21, 2026, meeting, the Council may wish to (a) consider waiving introduction of Ordinance No. M-07-2026 and consider adoption of the Ordinance, OR (b) consider only introduction of Ordinance No. M-07-2026. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment 1: Ordinance No. M-07-2026: Granting Special Use Permit for the Operation of an Audiology Medical Office Within the C-2 Commercial Overlay 2. Attachment 2: March 25, 2026, PC Meeting Staff Report and Meeting Minutes 3. Attachment 3: Public Correspondence Received After Posting of March 25, 2026, PC Agenda Packet 4. Attachment 4: Public Correspondence Not Included in April 21, 2026, Village Council Agenda Packet Page 158 of 252 5. Attachment 5: April 21, 2026, PowerPoint Presentation, prepared by Murphy Development Group, LLC Page 159 of 252  ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. M-07-2026 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF AN AUDIOLOGY MEDICAL OFFICE WITHIN THE C-2 COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT OF THE VILLAGE (730 Elm Street, Suite 120) WHEREAS, DUET Audiology Clinic (“Applicant”) is the prospective lessee of the property commonly known as 730 Elm Street, Suite 120, Winnetka, Illinois, and legally described in Exhibit A attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance (“Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, MDG Winnetka One, LP is the record title owner of the Subject Property (“Owner”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located within the C-2 General Retail Commercial District and the C-2 Commercial Overlay District of the Village (collectively, "Overlay District"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant desires to operate a medical office for an audiology practice (“Medical Office”) at the Subject Property, which, pursuant to Section 17.44.020 and the table of uses set forth in Section 17.46.010 of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance (“Zoning Ordinance”), is not permitted in the Overlay District without a special use permit; and WHEREAS, as part of the approval of the One Winnetka Development, and pursuant to Ordinance M-01-2025 (“One Winnetka Ordinance”), the Village Council previously found, subject to the conditions, restrictions, and provisions set forth in Sections 8 through 14 of the One Winnetka Ordinance, that a Medical Office satisfies the standards set forth in Section 17.56.120(A)(1), (2), and (3), and Section 17.44.020(B)(2)(b)(i) and (iii) of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2026, the Applicant filed an application for a special use permit to operate the Medical Office at the Subject Property (“Special Use Permit”); and WHEREAS, Owner of the Subject Property has consented to the application for the Special Use Permit filed by the Applicant; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2026, the Plan Commission initially considered the Special Use Permit and continued the item to its March 25, 2026 meeting to allow for an updated staff report regarding special use standards; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2026, after due notice, the Plan Commission conducted a public hearing and, by a vote of six to zero, recommended denial of the request (“Denial”) based on findings that the use was inconsistent with certain standards regarding parking and the retail continuity of the Overlay District; and WHEREAS, the Village Council considered the Denial and additional information provided by the Applicant and Owner at its meeting on April 21, 2026; and May 5, 2026 M-07-2026 Page 160 of 252  WHEREAS, the Village Council has determined that approval of the proposed Special Use Permit for the operation of a Medical Office at the Subject Property satisfies the standards for the approval of special use permits within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District set forth in Chapter 17.56 and Section 17.44.020.B of the Zoning Ordinance and is in the best interest of the Village and its residents, subject to the terms and conditions of this Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the Village of Winnetka does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: RECITALS. The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated into this Section 1 as the findings of the Council of the Village of Winnetka, as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Subject to, and contingent upon, the terms and conditions set forth in Sections 8 through 14 of the One Winnetka Ordinance, and Section 3 of this Ordinance, the Special Use Permit is hereby granted, pursuant to Chapter 17.56 and Section 17.44.020.B of the Zoning Ordinance and the home rule powers of the Village, to the Applicant to allow the operation of the Medical Office by the Applicant at the Subject Property within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District. SECTION 3: CONDITIONS. The Special Use Permit granted by Section 2 of this Ordinance is subject to, and contingent upon, compliance by the Applicant with the following conditions: A. Compliance with Regulations. The development, use, and maintenance of the Subject Property must comply at all times with all applicable Village codes and ordinances, as they have been or may be amended over time. B. Reimbursement of Village Costs. In addition to any other costs, payments, fees, charges, contributions, or dedications required under applicable Village codes, ordinances, resolutions, rules, or regulations, the Applicant must pay to the Village, promptly upon presentation of a written demand or demands therefor, of all fees, costs, and expenses incurred or accrued in connection with the review, negotiation, preparation, consideration, and review of this Ordinance. Payment of all such fees, costs, and expenses for which demand has been made shall be made by a certified or cashier's check. Further, the Applicant must pay upon demand all costs incurred by the Village for publications and recordings required in connection with the aforesaid matters. C. Compliance with Plans. The development, use, and maintenance of the Medical Office at the Subject Property must be in strict accordance with the Floor Plan prepared by Valerio Dewalt Train, consisting of one sheet, with a latest revision date of January 15, 2026, a copy of which is attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance as Exhibit B, except for minor changes and site work approved by the Director of Community Development or the Director of Engineering (within their respective permitting authority) in accordance with all applicable Village codes, ordinances, and standards. May 5, 2026 M-07-2026 Page 161 of 252  D. Commencement of Construction. Applicant must commence the construction of the proposed improvements for the Medical Office no later than 15 months after the effective date of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: RECORDATION; BINDING EFFECT. A copy of this Ordinance will be recorded with the Cook County Clerk Recording Division. This Ordinance and the privileges, obligations, and provisions contained herein inure solely to the benefit of, and are binding upon, the Applicant, Owner, and each of their heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. SECTION 5: FAILURE TO COMPLY. Upon the failure or refusal of the Applicant or Owner to comply with any or all of the conditions, restrictions, or provisions of this Ordinance, in addition to all other remedies available to the Village, the Special Use Permit granted in Section 2 of this Ordinance will, at the sole discretion of the Village Council, by ordinance duly adopted, be revoked and become null and void; provided, however, that the Village Council may not so revoke the Special Use Permit granted in Section 2 of this Ordinance unless it first provides the Applicant with two months advance written notice of the reasons for revocation and an opportunity to be heard at a regular meeting of the Village Council. In the event of revocation, the development and use of the Subject Property will be governed solely by the regulations of the applicable zoning district and the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, as the same may be amended from time to time. Further, in the event of such revocation, the Village Manager and Village Attorney are authorized and directed to bring such zoning enforcement action as may be appropriate under the circumstances. SECTION 6: AMENDMENT OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Any amendments to the Special Use Permit granted in Section 2 of this Ordinance that may be requested by the Applicant after the effective date of this Ordinance may be granted only pursuant to the procedures, and subject to the standards and limitations, provided in the Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 7: NON-TRANSFERABILITY. Nothing in this Ordinance will be deemed to allow this Ordinance or the Special Use Permit to be transferred to any person or entity other than the Applicant without a new application for approval. SECTION 8: EFFECTIVE DATE. A. This Ordinance will be effective only upon the occurrence of all of the following events: 1. Passage by the Village Council in the manner required by law; 2. Publication in pamphlet form in the manner required by law; and 3. The filing by the Applicant and Owner with the Village Clerk of an Unconditional Agreement and Consent in the form of Exhibit C attached to and, by this reference, made a part of this Ordinance, to accept and abide by each and all of the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth in this Ordinance and to indemnify the Village for any claims that may arise in connection with the approval of this Ordinance. May 5, 2026 M-07-2026 Page 162 of 252  B. In the event that the Applicant and Owner do not file with the Village Clerk a fully executed copy of the unconditional agreement and consent described in Section 8.A.3 of this Ordinance within 60 days after the date of passage of this Ordinance by the Village Council, the Village Council shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to declare this Ordinance null and void and of no force or effect. PASSED this 5th day of May, 2026, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: APPROVED this ___ day of _____________, 2026. Signed: Village President Countersigned: Village Clerk Published by authority of the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Winnetka, Illinois, this ___ day of _______, 2026. Introduced: __________, 2026 Passed and Approved: ____________, 2026 May 5, 2026 M-07-2026 Page 163 of 252  EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY LOT 1 IN ONE WINNETKA SUBDIVISION BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF PART OF LOT 1 IN PROUTY HOMESTEAD SUBDIVISION, TOGETHER WITH A PART OF BLOCK 24 IN WINNETKA, BOTH SUBDIVISIONS IN THE NORTHEAST ¼ OF SECTION 20, AND THE FRACTIONAL NORTH ½ OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 13, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. Commonly known as 730 Elm Street, Suite 120, Winnetka, Illinois. PINs: 05-20-213-004-0000 05-20-213-005-0000 05-20-213-006-0000 05-21-109-003-0000 05-21-109-012-0000 05-21-109-017-0000 Page 164 of 252  EXHIBIT B FLOOR PLAN (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT B) Page 165 of 252  EXHIBIT B 1.2 1 500 North Dearborn Street Suite 900 Chicago, Illinois 60654 312.260.7300 VESTIBULE SMART WALL DUET - WINNETKA 4 3.8 3.4 3.1 3 2.1 2 ELEC. PANELS COAT HOOKS CONCIERGE COUNTER DISPLAY DISPLAY DISPLAY PRINTER G XFR 3'-0" IT CLOSET BEVERAGES 1'-4 3/4" MOBILE CARTS 4'-11" 3'-0" 7'-6" Project Address 4'-2 1/2" 5'-6" 723 Elm St SMART WALL CLR 4'-0" Winnetka, IL 60093 3'-0" 1'-1" 3'-0" Project Number 3'-0" 3'-1" STORAGE 25079.00 LOCKERS 9'-0" 13'-6" 7'-0" 7'-0" 23 SF CLEANING Date 1'-8" 5'-4" 8'-11 3/4" 9'-1 1/2" STATION STAFF AREA 3'-0" 10'-2" 1/15/2026 11'-3" 11'-3" 92 SF ADA CLINICAL DOCTOR MANGO ROOM Sheet Name 7'-6" RESTROOM EAR CANAL LAB & SPA AREA & SOUND BOOTH WORKSTATIONS SELF-TESTING 56 SF 8'-3 1/2" 102 SF 153 SF 79 SF 76 SF REVISED FLOOR PLAN 7'-6" SOUND BOOTH SMART WALL W/D REF Sheet Number ASK-04 © 2026 Valerio Dewalt Train Associates P.C. Page 166 of 252  EXHIBIT C UNCONDITIONAL AGREEMENT AND CONSENT TO: The Village of Winnetka, Illinois ("Village"): WHEREAS, DUET Audiology Clinic ("Applicant"), is the prospective lessee of the property commonly known as 730 Elm Street, Suite 130, Winnetka, Illinois (“Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, MDG Winnetka One, LP, is the record title owner of the Subject Property (“Owner”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located within the C-2 General Retail Commercial District and the C-2 Commercial Overlay District of the Village (collectively, "Overlay District"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant desires to operate a medical office for an audiology practice (“Medical Office”) at the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. M-07-2026, adopted by the Village Council on ____________, 2026 ("Ordinance"), grants a special use permit to the Applicant for the operation of a Medical Office at the Subject Property within the Overlay District of the Village; and WHEREAS, Section 8 of the Ordinance provides, among other things, that the Ordinance will be of no force or effect unless and until the Applicant and Owner have filed, within 60 days following the passage of the Ordinance, their unconditional agreement and consent to accept and abide by each and all of the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth in the Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the Applicant and Owner do hereby agree and covenant as follows: 1. The Applicant and Owner do hereby unconditionally agree to accept, consent to, and abide by each and all of the terms, conditions, limitations, restrictions, and provisions of the Ordinance. 2. The Applicant and Owner acknowledge that public notices and hearings have been properly given and held with respect to the adoption of the Ordinance, have considered the possibility of the revocation provided for in the Ordinance, and agree not to challenge any such revocation on the grounds of any procedural infirmity or a denial of any procedural right. 3. The Applicant and Owner acknowledge and agree that the Village is not and will not be, in any way, liable for any damages or injuries that may be sustained as a result of the Village's grant of a special use permit for the Subject Property or its adoption of the Ordinance, and that the Village's approvals do not, and will not, in any way, be deemed to insure the Applicant or Owner against damage or injury of any kind and at any time. Page 167 of 252  4. The Applicant and Owner do hereby agree to hold harmless and indemnify the Village, the Village's corporate authorities, and all Village elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, representatives, and attorneys, from any and all claims that may, at any time, be asserted against any of such parties in connection with the Village's adoption of the Ordinance granting the special use permit for the Subject Property. 5. The Applicant and Owner hereby agree to pay all expenses incurred by the Village in defending itself with regard to any and all of the claims mentioned in this Unconditional Agreement and Consent. These expenses will include all out-of-pocket expenses, such as attorneys' and experts' fees, and will also include the reasonable value of any services rendered by any employees of the Village. Dated: , 2026 ATTEST: DUET AUDIOLOGY CLINIC By: By: Its: Its: ATTEST: MDG WINNETKA ONE, LP By: By: Its: Its: Page 168 of 252  ATTACHMENT 2 MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: PLAN COMMISSION FROM: SCOTT MANGUM, AICP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CHRISTOPHER MARX, AICP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER DATE: MARCH 18, 2026 SUBJECT: 730 ELM STREET, SUITE 120 – DUET AUDIOLOGY CLINIC SPECIAL USE PERMIT (CASE NO. 26-05-SU) INTRODUCTION On March 25, 2026, the Plan Commission (“PC”) is scheduled to hold a public hearing to consider an application submitted by DUET Audiology Clinic (the “Applicant”), as the prospective lessee of the property located at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 (the “Subject Property”), to allow a medical office to occupy the Subject Property. The property is currently owned by MDG Winnetka One, LP. The Applicant has filed an application seeking approval of a Special Use Permit in accordance with Chapter 17.56 [Special Uses] of the Winnetka Zoning Ordinance to permit a medical office in the C-2 General Retail Commercial Overlay District at the Subject Property. The Applicant currently operates similar audiology clinics in Lake Forest and Northfield and is looking to relocate the Northfield clinic to the Subject Property. This item was originally scheduled for the February 25, 2026, PC meeting; however, as explained below, the PC continued the item to the March 25, 2026, PC meeting. A sign was posted on the Subject Property and a website notice was posted on the Village website indicating the time and date of the original PC public hearing. A mail notice was also sent to property owners within 500 feet of the Subject Property informing them of the original public hearing date. As of the date of this memo, staff has received one written comment from the public regarding this application which is included as Attachment C. FEBRUARY 25, 2026, PLAN COMMISSION MEETING On February 25, 2026, the Plan Commission continued the item, without objection or discussion, to its March 25, 2026, meeting to allow an updated staff report to further explain standards used to evaluate the application. A copy of the draft February 25 Plan Commission meeting minutes is included in the March 25 agenda packet for the Plan Commission’s consideration. As stated by the Chair at the February 25 meeting, this request is important as it relates to the One Winnetka Development and particularly the uses allowed on the first floor of the One Winnetka Building. As the Plan Commission’s discussion and vote on the SolidCore proposal, and as shown in the Village Council’s deliberations on that request, there are significant issues and concerns regarding non-retail uses on the first floor and the special use standards that must be met for these requests. The Village Council will ultimately resolve those issues when the request is reviewed for a final decision. At this point, however, the Applicant has supplied as part of its application materials a narrative addressing how this proposal complies with all Page 1 Page 169 of 252 twelve (12) standards. The Village Staff and Village Attorney recommend that the Plan Commission evaluate the proposed use utilizing those twelve (12) standards. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is one of the commercial spaces located in the four-story mixed-use building that is currently under construction at 720-736 Elm Street and 515-525 Lincoln Avenue (newly assigned addresses), often referred to as One Winnetka, located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Elm Street and Lincoln Avenue. The approximately 1,565 square-foot space at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 is a portion of the 20,955 square feet of commercial space in the One Winnetka building and is on the eastern portion of the building’s north facing commercial space. To date, the other tenants within the development that have received approvals are the Winnetka Aesthetic Studio medical office and a Charles Schwab financial services office. The Solidcore fitness studio special use permit application was before the Village Council on February 17, 2026, for policy direction and is anticipated to return to the Village Council at a future date with additional information about parking demand and class schedules. A full-service restaurant is expected to occupy the northwestern space on the first floor near the street intersection with a quick-casual format restaurant occupying the remaining tenant space. There will also be 59 residential units on the second, third, and fourth floors. The Subject Property is located within the Village’s Commercial Overlay District, which allows non-retail uses, such as medical offices; however, the Zoning Ordinance requires that they be evaluated by the Plan Commission and Village Council as a special use. Figures 1 through 3 below and on the following page identify the One Winnetka site and the proposed location of the medical office. Proposed Location of DUET Audiology Clinic Figure 1 – One Winnetka Site – GIS Map Page 2 Page 170 of 252  Proposed Location of DUET Audiology Clinic Figure 2 – One Winnetka Site - Aerial Location Map Proposed Location of DUET Audiology Clinic Entrance into Shared Vestibule Figure 3 – One Winnetka – North Facing Elm Street Façade COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT BACKGROUND The Overlay District was established in 1987 out of concern about the viability of the business districts as a whole if non-retail occupancies were allowed to proliferate and occupy significant areas within retail shopping districts. At the time of adoption there was a concern about the possible proliferation of real estate offices and financial institutions. The Village Zoning Ordinance describes the purpose of the Overlay District and its restrictions on non- retail uses as being: “to encourage retailing of comparison shopping goods and personal services compatible with such retailing on ground floor in order to encourage a clustering of such uses, to provide for a wide variety of retail shops and expose such shops to maximum foot traffic, while keeping such traffic in concentrated (yet well distinguished) channels throughout the district.” Page 3 Page 171 of 252 Since its adoption in 1987, the Overlay District has been revised on more than one occasion to alter district boundaries, or to modify the types of uses which are permitted within each district. The most recent amendment occurred on April 4, 2019, when the Village Council adopted MC-01-2019, amending the Zoning Ordinance regarding uses and regulations in the three commercial districts, including amendments to the Overlay District and the standards used to evaluate a special use. ELM STREET BUSINESS DISTRICTS OVERLAY BOUNDARIES A map depicting the zoning classifications of the Elm Street Business Districts is included on the following page as Figure 4. The One Winnetka site is highlighted yellow. Gray areas indicate the underlying C-2 General Retail Commercial zoning, which permits by right a relatively broad array of uses, including various retail uses, along with a number of non-retail uses such as professional offices, financial service firms, medical offices and the like. Red crosshatch areas represent those areas subject to the restrictions of the Commercial Overlay District. The boundaries of the Overlay District are established along certain public streets and extend for a depth of 50 feet from the front property line. Subject Property Figure 4 – Elm Street Business Districts PREVIOUS APPROVALS On January 21, 2025, the Village Council adopted Ordinance M-01-2025, an Ordinance Granting Final Approval of a Planned Development, Zoning Exceptions, a Special Use for Ground Floor Parking, and Special Use Findings for Medical and Financial Services Uses (511-515 Lincoln Avenue and 714-740 Elm Street - One Winnetka). An excerpt of Ordinance M-01-2025 is provided in Attachment B. According to Ordinance M-01-2025, the location and amount of space occupied by medical uses and Page 4 Page 172 of 252 financial service uses in the One Winnetka building are limited as follows: a. No such uses shall occupy the northwesternmost corner of the commercial space of the ground floor commercial space; b. No such uses shall occupy an aggregate space greater than 50% of the gross commercial square footage, or 9,750 square feet of the building; c. No individual financial service use shall occupy more than 1/3 of the gross commercial square footage, or 6,500 square feet of the building; d. No individual medical use shall occupy more than 3,250 square feet of the gross commercial square footage of the building; e. Approval of the “appropriateness” of such uses is limited to 10 years from the approval of Ordinance M-01-2025. There have been three other special use permit applications submitted for the One Winnetka building, two of which have been approved by the Village Council and one that is pending: 1. Charles Schwab. On September 16, 2025, the Village Council adopted Ordinance M-12-2025, an Ordinance Granting a Special Use Permit for the Operation of a Financial Counseling Office Within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District, which approved the special use permit for Charles Schwab financial services to occupy office space at 720 Elm Street. 2. Winnetka Aesthetic Studio. On December 2, 2025, the Village Council adopted Ordinance M-18- 2025, an Ordinance Granting a Special Use Permit for the Operation of a Medical Office Within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District, which approved the special use permit for Winnetka Aesthetic Studio to occupy commercial space at 730 Elm Street, Suite 130. 3. Solidcore. On January 28, 2026, the Plan Commission considered a special use permit application submitted by Solidcore fitness studio and by a vote of 5-3 recommended denial of the request. The application was before the Village Council initially on February 17 and again on March 3, 2026, at which time the Council voted to direct the Village Staff and Village Attorney to prepare an ordinance granting the requested special use subject to certain conditions. The Council is scheduled to consider the approval ordinance at its meeting on March 19, 2026. DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT REQUEST The Applicant is proposing to open a medical office in the One Winnetka building for an audiology practice that would specialize in hearing-related medical treatment using a wide range of technologies, therapies, and techniques that the Applicant describes as holistic and preventative care. The proposed audiology clinic would occupy approximately 1,565 square feet towards the eastern center of the One Winnetka building with approximately 28 feet of street frontage along Elm Street. Access into the tenant space would be through a shared entrance vestibule that would also be used by Winnetka Aesthetic Studio and a quick-casual format restaurant. The front of the clinic would be an open greeting area with a concierge desk and seating area, with offices, workstations, and exam rooms located down the hallway towards the back of the space. The proposed medical office use, and the other previously approved uses, would comply with the location and size limitations outlined earlier in this report. No individual medical use would be greater than 3,250 square feet in size and in aggregate the proposed medical and financial services uses would total 8,585 square feet, which is less than the maximum of 9,750 square feet allowed. The Applicant’s written description of the proposed use is included in the application materials which are provided as Attachment A. Page 5 Page 173 of 252 The audiology clinic would have business hours between 8:30am and 4:30pm from Monday through Friday with occasional appointments on one or two Saturdays each month. The audiology clinic would have a maximum of 8 occupants between employees and patients in any given hour, with 3 to 5 employees and 2 to 3 patients, and an average of 8 to 10 appointments per day with occasional walk-in visits, in a clinical environment that the Applicant describes as low volume. Some of the services that would be offered include diagnostic hearing evaluations, hearing aid consultations, hearing-related massage therapy, a proprietary ear-to-brain fitness system for music training, and related audiology care. The audiology clinic would provide retail offerings towards the front of the office with products related to its practice including hearing protection earmuffs, headphones, hearing aids, therapeutic goggles, small musical instruments and musical accessories. For parking, the Applicant is proposing that its employees secure the necessary parking permit and park in public parking lots in the district, including the Village-owned parking lot adjacent to One Winnetka, which does contain “A” permit parking spaces for employees. The Applicant indicates that patients will utilize parking spaces in the ground level of the commercial parking within the One Winnetka building. The off-street parking provided on the One Winnetka site for commercial uses consists of 39 spaces in the ground level of the building, which is the same number of parking spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance. For reference, the Zoning Ordinance requirement for commercial uses is two spaces for every 1,000 square feet of tenant space. Ten of the ground level spaces are to be reserved for the Charles Schwab office that was approved in a previous special use permit case. The Applicant indicates that some employees and patients will also take advantage of the Winnetka stop on the Union Pacific North Metra line that is immediately adjacent to the One Winnetka Building. Figure 5 on the following page highlights the commercial space the Applicant is proposing to occupy in the north section of the One Winnetka building. Figure 6 shows the proposed floor plan and layout for the audiology clinic. Proposed Location Proposed “Fare” Quick Casual Restaurant Charles Schwab of Solidcore Proposed “Arcadia” Full Service Restaurant Winnetka Aesthetic Studio Proposed Location of DUET Audiology Clinic Figure 5 – One Winnetka Ground Level Plan Page 6 Page 174 of 252  Figure 6 – Excerpt of Proposed Floor Plan DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REVIEW The Applicant has indicated that it has no plans to alter the exterior of the building that is currently under construction, except for potential commercial signs that will be applied for at a later date. Any proposed signage or exterior alterations, including lighting, will require submission of a Sign Permit application or Certificate of Appropriateness application that must be reviewed and approved by the Village’s Design Review Board. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW / FINDINGS The “Purpose” section of Chapter 17.56 Special Uses, states the following regarding special uses: It is recognized that there are special types of uses which because of their specific characteristics in relationship to uses permitted by right in a particular district, or the services which they provide, cannot be properly permitted by right in a particular district without consideration, in each case, of the impact of such uses upon neighboring land, or of the public need for such uses at a particular location. A land use classified as a special use is an allowed land use as long as the Applicant can demonstrate that the proposed use in its proposed specific location meets the applicable standards for granting special use approval. Section 17.44 of the Zoning Ordinance provides a series of twelve (12) standards for the evaluation of Special Use applications within the Commercial Overlay District, which provides a framework for evaluation by the Plan Commission. Although the previous approval granted by Ordinance M-01-2025 refers to certain standards in the context of a proposed medical office use, such as the Applicant’s proposed use, the Applicant has supplied as part of its application materials a narrative addressing how this proposal complies with all twelve (12) standards. Accordingly, Village Staff and the Village Attorney recommend that the Plan Commission review and consider the Applicant’s proposed use in light of all twelve standards listed below: Page 7 Page 175 of 252 Following conclusion of public comment and Commission discussion, a Commission member may choose to make the following motion: I make a motion that: The Plan Commission recommends approval [denial] of the requested special use to allow the Applicant, DUET Audiology Clinic, to operate a medical office at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 within the C-2 Commercial Overlay District, based on the following findings of fact: “The medical office (the “Special Use”) is [is not] consistent with the Standards for granting of Special Use Permits in the Commercial Overlay District, which are as follows: 1. The establishment, maintenance, and operation of the Special Use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, morals, or general welfare; 2. The Special Use will not be substantially injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity which are permitted by right in the district or districts of concern, nor substantially diminish or impair property values in the immediate vicinity; 3. The establishment of Special Use will not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of other property in the immediate vicinity for uses permitted by right in the district or districts of concern; 4. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress in a manner which minimize pedestrian and vehicular traffic congestion in the public ways; 5. Adequate parking, utilities, access roads, drainage, and other facilities necessary to the operation of the Special Use exists or are to be provided; 6. The Special Use in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulations of this and other village ordinances and codes; 7. The proposed special use at the proposed location will encourage, facilitate and enhance the continuity, concentration, and pedestrian nature of the area in a manner similar to that of retail uses; 8. The location of the proposed special use along a block frontage shall provide for a minimum interruption in the existing and potential continuity and concentration of the retail uses along the block’s frontage; 9. The proposed special use at the proposed location will provide for display windows, provided that the street facing windows remain open and transparent as viewed from the sidewalk into the tenant space. The proposed special use at the proposed location will provide for facades, signage and lighting similar in nature and compatible with that provided by retail uses; 10. If the proposed special use provides multi-use areas, such as retail merchandise areas, restaurant dining areas, general office space, private offices, reception areas, or employee work areas, any proposed retail merchandise area or restaurant dining area shall be concentrated and located immediately adjacent to the sidewalk and clearly visible Page 8 Page 176 of 252  from the street in such a fashion as to invite customers to browse or dine; 11. If a proposed new building contemplates a mix of retail, office and service type uses, the minimum frontage for each retail use adjacent to the sidewalk shall be 20 feet with a minimum gross floor area of 400 square feet. In addition, such retail space shall be devoted to active retail merchandising which maintain typical and customary hours of operation; and 12. The proposed location and operation of the proposed special use shall not significantly diminish the availability of parking for district clientele wishing to patronize existing retail businesses.” The Commission’s recommendation is subject to no conditions [the following conditions]: 1. [Insert conditions…] As noted above, the Commission may also wish to consider if there are any additional conditions it may want to place on the facility’s operation. This request is subject to final approval by the Village Council. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Excerpt of Ordinance M-01-2025, adopted on January 21, 2025 Attachment C: Public Correspondence Page 9 Page 177 of 252 ATTACHMENT A 26-05-SU Page 178 of 252 Healthy Hearing – Healthy Brain DUET: Bringing Innovative Ear to Brain Wellness to the Village of Winnetka Dear Members of the Village of Winnetka, I am proud to introduce DUET, an innovative Ear to Brain wellness concept designed to strengthen cognitive health, enhance communication, and promote lifelong hearing vitality for residents of all ages. DUET is not a traditional audiology clinic. Our model is rooted in neuroscience research from the Brainvolts Laboratory at Northwestern University, translating leading-edge research on auditory brain health into accessible, community-based care. After successfully piloting our concept in Lake Forest, we are excited to bring this one-of-a- kind Ear to Brain care experience to Winnetka, a community known for its commitment to education, wellness, and innovation. The DUET experience itself was thoughtfully designed in collaboration with our designers in Switzerland, blending science, aesthetics, and sensory engagement. Why DUET Aligns with Winnetka’s Values Winnetka has long prioritized: • Lifelong learning • Public health and wellness • Strong intergenerational community ties • Support for families and aging residents DUET directly supports these priorities by focusing on functional hearing, cognitive resilience, and social connection — three pillars that significantly influence quality of life and healthy aging. Hearing loss is increasingly recognized as a modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline. By addressing auditory health proactively, we help residents remain engaged, independent, and socially connected. Page 179 of 252 What DUET Offers the Community Preventive Ear to Brain Care Comprehensive evaluations that go beyond hearing thresholds to assess auditory processing and cognitive listening demands. Brain-Strengthening Programs Evidence-informed auditory training is designed to improve speech clarity in noise, attention, and neural timing. Stress-Reducing Music Therapies Programs that support overall wellness and cortisol regulation. Precision Hearing Technology Prescriptive fittings and hearing longevity consultations to ensure safe, optimized listening across the lifespan. Community Educational Programs Monthly educational campaigns offered to community groups, libraries, schools and online based on new research investigating how things going on in our body can affect our hearing brain. A Community with Global Impact DUET also invites Winnetka residents to participate in our “Hearing the Call” initiative, which refurbishes donated hearing aids and provides them to children in underserved communities around the world. This creates a meaningful opportunity for Winnetka to extend its impact beyond its borders while reinforcing values of service and compassion. In Tanzania, we have supported children with albinism who require hearing and safety support. Albino children face severe social vulnerability; they are hunted by witch doctor who believe their bones have magic powers so the chop off their limbs and grind up their bones to create positions. These kids are placed in protected orphanages until 8th grade. If they do not pass the high school exam they are put on the street. Hearing keeps them safe. They can’t learn if they can’t hear. Hearing also alerts them to danger. Several of the children we fitted with hearing aids were able to improve their learning outcomes and continue into protected secondary education programs. Page 180 of 252 Economic & Community Contribution DUET contributes to Winnetka by: • Expanding innovative healthcare offerings within the village • Supporting local partnerships and programming • Attracting families seeking advanced wellness services • Strengthening Winnetka’s identity as a forward-thinking, health-conscious community Retail tax: hearing aids, headphones, Therbody devices, nutraceuticals The DUET Goal Not simply louder hearing — but: • Stronger auditory processing • Sharper speech clarity • Greater cognitive resilience • Lifelong functional hearing wellness Operations Overview Hours of Operation Monday–Friday: 8:00 am to 4:30 pm Saturday (limited hours by appointment) Closed Sundays Staffing • 1–3 practitioners on-site at a time (some take the train) • 1 administrative coordinator Patient Volume • Walk ins welcome all day to learn and shop, popular in Lake Forest • Estimated 6–10 clients per day • Staggered scheduling to prevent waiting room congestion Traffic & Parking Impact DUET is a low-traffic professional service model: Page 181 of 252  • No high-turnover retail traffic • No delivery trucks beyond standard small parcel carriers • Minimal peak-hour congestion • Clients typically arrive individually rather than in groups Parking demand is very light. Our Lake Forest model utilizes street parking with no distribution. Noise & Environmental Impact Despite being hearing-focused, DUET produces no external noise impact: • All sound therapies occur within acoustically treated interior rooms • No amplified exterior sound • No outdoor programming • No vibration or mechanical impact to adjacent tenants The studio design emphasizes quiet, controlled acoustic environments. Retail Component Retail offerings include: • Prescriptive hearing aids • Hearing protection and headphones • Nutraceuticals • Wellness and recovery products Retail sales are accessory to professional services and do not constitute primary storefront retail traffic. DUET aligns with Winnetka’s commitment to: • Preventive health • Lifelong learning • Aging-in-place support • Family-centered wellness Hearing health is increasingly recognized as a modifiable factor in cognitive decline and social isolation. By providing proactive Ear to Brain wellness services, DUET supports both younger students (attention and auditory processing) and older residents seeking cognitive resilience. Page 182 of 252 Additionally, our global hearing aid refurbishment initiative invites local participation in humanitarian outreach, reinforcing Winnetka’s culture of service. We respectfully request approval to operate DUET within the appropriate zoning classification and look forward to becoming a positive, contributing member of the Winnetka community and partnering in its continued leadership in education, health, and civic vitality. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Lori Halvorson, AuD, FAAA, CH-TH Doctor of Audiology Founder of DUET Page 183 of 252 Page 184 of 252 Page 185 of 252 Page 186 of 252 Page 187 of 252 Page 188 of 252 Healthy Hearing – Healthy Brain DUET Proposed Business Operation The proposed use for DUET is a private audiology practice employing an innovative paradigm shift in hearing care, based on scientific biologic evidence. DUET leads with preventive care and wholistic hearing treatment, to engage neuroplasticity in the brain employing auditory biohacking methods such as music for Ear to Brain Fitness, Prescription Fit Hearing Aids to deliver precise sound detail. MTP Massage to increase circulation, Sound Bath to calm the nervous system. Services will include diagnostic hearing evaluations, hearing aid consultations and fittings, trademarked Ear to Brain Fitness with music training, massage therapy and related audiology care. The practice will be staffed by four employees, including board certified doctors of audiology, master degreed musician, certified massage therapist and administrative support staff. The practice is designed to serve a low-volume patient population, with approximately two to three patients on site at any given time. Operations are conducted in a quiet, clinical setting with no manufacturing, hazardous materials, or retail sales beyond audiology- related medical devices. Hours of operation will be Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., with one to two Saturday per month for scheduled appointments and Sound Bath experiences. The business use is consistent with a professional medical office and is not expected to generate excessive noise, traffic, or disruption to surrounding properties. Page 189 of 252 Healthy Hearing – Healthy Brain SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS C-2 COMMERCIAL OVERLAY 1. Public Health, Safety, and Welfare The proposed audiology clinic and medical retail operation will enhance public health by providing diagnostic hearing services and access to hearing health products that improve quality of life. All clinical operations will comply with applicable state healthcare regulations, ADA accessibility standards, and village building and fire codes, ensuring that the establishment, maintenance, and operation are safe, sanitary, and non- disruptive to the public welfare. 2. Compatibility and Property Values The clinic’s professional medical use and attractive retail frontage are consistent with surrounding commercial uses. Exterior design, signage, and operation will be in keeping with nearby retail establishments, ensuring that the use will not diminish property values or interfere with the enjoyment of neighboring properties. Instead, the clinic is expected to increase foot traffic and contribute to the economic vitality of the block. 3. Orderly Development The proposed use is compatible with the village’s comprehensive plan and surrounding land uses. It will not impede the normal development of nearby parcels; rather, it supports the village’s goal of attracting health-related and service-oriented businesses that complement traditional retail. 4. Ingress, Egress, and Traffic Adequate and safe ingress and egress will be provided from [insert street name(s)]. Parking and site access will comply with village standards, and the use is expected to generate low traffic volumes comparable to other medical offices. The layout is designed to minimize pedestrian and vehicular congestion while ensuring ADA accessibility 5. Parking, Utilities, and Facilities Page 190 of 252 The property has access to existing municipal utilities, drainage, and roadways. Adequate on-site or shared parking is available in accordance with zoning requirements. No significant improvements to infrastructure are required beyond normal tenant build-out and signage installation. 6. Ordinance Compliance The clinic and retail operation will comply fully with all village building, signage, health, fire safety, and zoning codes. All applicable business licenses and healthcare professional certifications will be obtained prior to operation. 7. Continuity and Pedestrian Orientation The proposed use will enhance pedestrian activity by offering a welcoming storefront, consistent with nearby retail establishments. Retail educational and product displays (e.g., hearing aids, ear care products) will be visible from the sidewalk, inviting walk-in traffic and fostering street-level vibrancy. 8. Minimal Interruption of Retail Continuity The clinic’s retail frontage will be designed to maintain the visual and functional continuity of retail uses along the block. The clinic’s signage, window displays, and regular hours of operation will contribute to the active rhythm of the streetscape rather than interrupt it. 9. Active Display Windows and Compatible Design The storefront will include transparent, well-lit display windows showcasing retail hearing products and educational materials about hearing health. Signage, lighting, and façade materials will be compatible with adjacent retail stores, maintaining a cohesive aesthetic consistent with village design guidelines. 10. Location of Retail Areas The retail merchandising area will be located adjacent to the sidewalk, clearly visible from the street, and designed to invite browsing. Clinical rooms will be situated behind the retail area to ensure privacy while maintaining an active public frontage. 11. Retail Frontage and Active Use The proposed design provides a minimum of 20 feet of retail frontage and over 400 square feet of dedicated retail space. The retail area will be devoted to active merchandising of hearing-related products and will maintain typical retail hours consistent with nearby businesses Page 191 of 252 12. Parking Availability The proposed use will not significantly diminish the availability of parking for other retail patrons. Traffic generation is limited, as appointments are scheduled to manage patient flow. Available shared or on- site parking will adequately accommodate both clients and staff without affecting surrounding businesses. Page 192 of 252 From: To: Christopher Marx Subject: Re: DUET One Winnetka Date: Friday, January 23, 2026 3:26:26 PM Attachments: image002.png image003.png image004.png Outlook-A person w Outlook-Title_ Lin.png Outlook-Title_ Twi.png Outlook-Title_ goo.png IMG_3346 Frank sign color change.MOV One Winnetka DUET location.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Chris, It is a pleasure to meet you! Please see the information you requested in red. What is the sign policy for the village of Winnetka? I have attached a video of the sign we use in my Lake Forest clinic. DUET takes a science driven approach to hearing and brain health based on research from Brain Volts lab at Northwestern. We are leading the field with a paradiagm shift from "wait until it is bad enough" to preventive care now, similar to the dental model to avoid the damage hearing loss can have on the brain. I invite you or any village member to experience this new model live at our Lake Forest DUET location.   I am excited to move my Northfield clinic to One Winnetka to deliver the same preventive care model to every ear of every age in your community. We also lead a very active role in our Hearing the Call charity, refurbishing hearing aids donated by the community and fitting them on children in need around the world, refugee camps in Jordon, orphanages in Tanzania, communities in need around Chicago. Please let me know if you need anything else from me. I look forward to serving your community. All Ears! Preserving Hearing & Brain Health, Page 193 of 252  Lori A Halvorson, AuD, FAAA Preservation Audiologist Founder DUET Hearing Preservation Lake Forest Hearing Professionals Sounhaus Phone: 847-295-1185 Fax: 847-295-1165 Email: lakeforesthearing.com 267 Westminster Lake Forest, IL 60045 www.lakeforesthearing.com From: Christopher Marx <CMarx@winnetka.org> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2026 12:03 PM To: Dr. Lori Halvorson, Au.D. Subject: RE: DUET One Winnetka You don't often get email from cmarx@winnetka.org. Learn why this is important WARNING: This is an external email. Do not reply, click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender. Dr. Halvorson, Good morning. Thanks for providing the application materials for the special use permit application. We will need some more information to prepare the application for the February 25th meeting agenda. The Plan Commission typically expresses interest in knowing the full context of a proposed use, so Commercial Space Size Do you know the approximate square footage of the overall commercial space that would be leased? 1696 sq feet Commercial Signage and Exterior Alterations – As you might or might not be aware, signs and Page 194 of 252 any exterior alterations (on the street frontage) must seek approval through separate permits with the Design Review Board. While Plan Commission does not do a thorough review of proposed signs and sign code, they do like to know what the intended signage is for purposes of context. What does the business intend to install for signage and identification on the exterior of the storefront street façade? Please provide specifics about what signage appearance and form would entail, if possible. If that hasn’t been determined as of yet, try to be as specific as possible. If it’s, say, just a window graphic and a wall sign, then specify that. If there’s an intended logo or wordmark, that should be provided as well. If you have renderings from a sign rep, that’s even better, but provide the best that can be made available. See attached Does the business intend any other exterior alterations (new windows, exterior lighting, new doorway, etc.) besides signage? No this is a new building Employee-Client Volume and Traffic Flow How many employees would be on the premise at any one time? 3-5 How many client visits or appointments would occur on an average daily basis? Is it appointment only or are walk-ups accepted? About 8-10, Primarily appointments, occasional walk-ins Based on the typical number of employees on site at any given hour and the typical number of clients at any given hour, what would you expect the parking demand to be for any given hour? 2-4, some employees will be taking the train Retail – The Plan Commission is usually very interested in what retail component is being provided in the business, even if it serves a very secondary purpose. What sorts of retail offerings will the establishment be providing? The standards response states that the offerings will be located towards the front, but can you specify some of the items that would be sold? Hearing Protection: ear muffs for kids and adults, Head Phones for kids and adults, Therapeutic Googles, Hearing Aids and accessories, Musical Instruments: small key boards, small steel drums, metronomes. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. -Chris Christopher Marx, AICP Associate Planner Village of Winnetka – Department of Community Development Page 195 of 252 I have attached: Winnetka Commercial Overlay Application Special Use Permit Standards These documents were emailed to aklaassen@winnetka.org and sent by mail together with our check for $1200.00. Please let me know if you need anything else. Preserving Hearing & Brain Health, Lori A Halvorson, AuD, FAAA Preservation Audiologist Founder DUET Hearing Preservation Lake Forest Hearing Professionals Sounhaus Phone: 847-295-1185 Fax: 847-295-1165 Email: lakeforesthearing.com 267 Westminster Lake Forest, IL 60045 www.lakeforesthearing.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this email message, and any documents attached to it, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the addressee. Access to this information by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, discrimination, duplication, or distribution of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify this office, and immediately delete this message and all its attachments, if any. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this email message, and any documents attached to it, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the addressee. Access to this information by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, discrimination, duplication, or distribution of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you Page 196 of 252 DUET Preservation Audiology – Dr. Lori Halvorson, AUD, FAA founded DUET’s hearing preservation clinic, which uses a groundbreaking, scientifically proven holistic approach that considers your entire hearing system, going beyond hearing aids to preserve your hearing and brain health. Page 197 of 252  1.2 1 500 North Dearborn Street Suite 900 Chicago, Illinois 60654 312.260.7300 VESTIBULE SMART WALL DUET - WINNETKA 4 3.8 3.4 3.1 3 2.1 2 ELEC. PANELS COAT HOOKS CONCIERGE COUNTER DISPLAY DISPLAY DISPLAY PRINTER G XFR 3'-0" IT CLOSET BEVERAGES 1'-4 3/4" MOBILE CARTS 4'-11" 3'-0" 7'-6" Project Address 4'-2 1/2" 5'-6" 723 Elm St SMART WALL CLR 4'-0" Winnetka, IL 60093 3'-0" 1'-1" 3'-0" Project Number 3'-0" 3'-1" STORAGE 25079.00 LOCKERS 9'-0" 13'-6" 7'-0" 7'-0" 23 SF CLEANING Date 1'-8" 5'-4" 8'-11 3/4" 9'-1 1/2" STATION STAFF AREA 3'-0" 10'-2" 1/15/2026 11'-3" 11'-3" 92 SF ADA CLINICAL DOCTOR MANGO ROOM Sheet Name 7'-6" RESTROOM EAR CANAL LAB & SPA AREA & SOUND BOOTH WORKSTATIONS SELF-TESTING 56 SF 8'-3 1/2" 102 SF 153 SF 79 SF 76 SF REVISED FLOOR PLAN 7'-6" SOUND BOOTH SMART WALL W/D REF Sheet Number ASK-04 © 2026 Valerio Dewalt Train Associates P.C. Page 198 of 252 ATTACHMENT B Page 199 of 252 Page 200 of 252 Page 201 of 252 Page 202 of 252 Page 203 of 252 Page 204 of 252 Page 205 of 252 Page 206 of 252 Page 207 of 252 Page 208 of 252 Page 209 of 252 Page 210 of 252 Page 211 of 252 Page 212 of 252 Page 213 of 252 Page 214 of 252 Page 215 of 252 Page 216 of 252 Page 217 of 252 Page 218 of 252 Page 219 of 252 Page 220 of 252 Page 221 of 252  ATTACHMENT C From: Kristin Kazenas To: Ann Klaassen; Scott Mangum Subject: FW: Duet Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 10:31:14 AM Hi Scott and Ann, Please see below a comment regarding the Duet application. Thank you, Kristin -----Original Message----- From: Robert Dearborn <RDearborn@winnetka.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 10:29 AM To: Maggie Meiners Art >; Kirk Albinson <KAlbinson@Winnetka.org> Cc: Kristin Kazenas <KKazenas@winnetka.org> Subject: RE: Duet Thanks Maggie. I have copied Kristin, so she is aware of your thoughts and can share with Community Development. Bob Robert H. Dearborn President – Village of Winnetka -----Original Message----- From: Maggie Meiners Art < > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 9:41 AM To: Kirk Albinson <KAlbinson@Winnetka.org>; Robert Dearborn <RDearborn@winnetka.org> Subject: Duet CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Bob and Kirk- I hope you are well. I just wanted to put a quick plug in for Duet, which is up for possible approval for a space in the One Winnetka building. I highly recommend them to occupy a space in this building for a couple of reasons: 1) it aligns with the population of Winnetka— health conscious, progressive, and cutting edge technology— hearing specialists, neuroscience and biohacking 2) there are not other ear to brain music therapy opportunities that have community gathering potential 3) they provide supplements that one would otherwise have to drive to Northbrook or Evanston Whole Foods for. 4) We do not have a service like this in the Village and yet, approval of Charles Schwab (with Chase AND BMO Page 222 of 252 just across the bridge) AND a plastic surgeon seems counter to “retail” space more so than Duet. 5) Duet provides educational opportunities as well Thanks for your time and service and I am sure the Council will take these into consideration when making a decision. I look forward to seeing you both soon. Maggie Page 223 of 252  1 WINNETKA PLAN COMMISSION 2 MEETING MINUTES 3 MARCH 25, 2026 4 5 Members Present: Mamie Case, Acting Chairperson 6 Jonathan Alt 7 Christopher Blum 8 Matthew Bradley 9 King Poor 10 Kate Van Vlack 11 12 Members Absent: Layla Danley 13 Chris Enck 14 Cyrus Subawalla 15 16 17 Non-Voting Members Absent: Bridget Orsic 18 19 Village Staff: Scott Mangum, Community Development Director 20 Christopher Marx, Associate Planner 21 22 *** 23 24 Continued Applications: 25 a. Case No. 26-05-SU: 730 Elm Street, Suite 120 - DUET Audiology Clinic: An application seeking approval of 26 a Special Use Permit submitted by DUET Audiology Clinic, as the prospective lessee of the commercial space 27 located at 730 Elm Street, Suite 120, to allow a medical office in the C-2 General Retail Commercial Overlay District. 28 The property is currently owned by MDG Winnetka One, LP. The Village Council has final jurisdiction on this 29 request. This item was continued from the February 25, 2026 Plan Commission meeting. 30 Mr. Mangum provided background with regard to the continued application in connection with the ground floor 31 retail use and the Commission’s evaluation of the application on the 12 special use standards. Mr. Marx identified 32 the applicant and summarized the applicant’s request to relocate their Northfield clinic to the subject property. He 33 then identified the property’s location, zoning classification as well as the retail overlay district area in an illustration 34 and the proposed space to be occupied. Mr. Marx identified the entrance, how the interior space would be laid out, 35 hours of operation and number of employees and patients as well as the services to be provided. He then 36 summarized the parking plans for employees and patients. 37 38 Mr. Marx referred to the three previously approved special use permits for the site as well as two proposed 39 restaurant uses in the building. He then identified the specific limitations for medical and financial uses under the 40 Planned Development as well as the proposed space to be occupied by the applicant in an illustration. Mr. Marx 41 stated the applicant provided their responses as to how the proposed use complied with the 12 standards the 42 Commission is to consider and the recommendation by the village staff and Village Attorney that the Commission 43 review and consider the proposed use in connection with all 12 standards included on page nos. 17 and 18 in the 44 agenda packet. 45 46 Mr. Marx stated the Commission is to consider whether the proposed use is consistent with the standards and 47 following the applicant’s presentation, public comment and Commission discussion, the Commission may decide to 48 either continue the matter to a date certain to allow time to address questions or comments or make a motion to 49 recommend approval or denial of the special use permit. He then asked if there were any questions. 50 51 Mr. Bradley asked for clarification in terms of the square footage to be occupied. Mr. Marx confirmed the square 52 footage proposed by the applicant would be compliant. Ms. Van Vlack questioned the length of the lease agreement. 53 Mr. Marx responded it would be a 10 year lease. Mr. Poor referred to the close vote in February 2026 on the Page 224 of 252  March 25, 2026 Page 2 1 Solidcore application and the fact that there would be guidance from the Village Council in terms of having no retail 2 in the One Winnetka development. Mr. Marx responded the applicant can identify plans for the last space to be 3 occupied. Mr. Mangum informed the Commission the applicant has the ability to request a special use permit at the 4 proposed location with the plans to be evaluated by the Commission and Village Council to determine whether to 5 approve it or not. He added there was no specific requirement that there has to be a retail use. Mr. Bradley provided 6 additional information with regard to the Solidcore approval. A Commission Member questioned how the hallways 7 and shared corridor would be positioned. Mr. Marx stated that area may not be counted toward the leased space 8 and the applicant can respond. No additional questions were raised at this time. 9 10 Chairperson Case swore in those speaking to this matter. Dr. Lori Halvorson, founder of DUET, clarified the difference 11 by DUET and a medical audiology clinic and described several products in detail which generate a significant retail 12 tax base. She also described the office layout and programming services offered. Dr. Halvorson stated the use would 13 not be an old fashioned audiology clinic but would be utilizing a system to keep the area between the ear and the 14 brain healthy with the use of curated retail experiences and products. She stated the business would be a good fit 15 for the neighborhood and generate revenue. 16 17 Chairperson Case noted there is no one in the audience to comment and asked the Commission Members if they 18 had any questions. Mr. Bradley described the business as wonderful and asked if it would be predominately retail. 19 Dr. Halvorson responded it was previously retail until they redesigned the physical structure and is now walk-ins 20 which generate appointments. She also described the current location in Northfield as well as the length of 21 appointments which she described in detail. Dr. Halvorson confirmed they had more walk-ins than appointments. 22 Ms. Van Vlack asked for additional information with regard to marketing to younger generation which Dr. Halvorson 23 provided to the Commission. Dr. Halvorson also described their typical patients and the services provided to them. 24 Ms. Van Vlack questioned why the applicant chose this location since there would not be a lot of foot traffic. Dr. 25 Halvorson referred to their current patient clientele who are from Winnetka and added their retail products and 26 services are not covered by insurance. 27 28 Mr. Alt described the presentation as phenomenal and questioned the cost range for walk-in appointments. Dr. 29 Halvorson responded it varied from $199-$800 and provided the cost of various other products and their features 30 in detail. She described the business as a brain hearing wellness retail studio. Mr. Bradley asked if they have repeat 31 customers. Dr. Halvorson responded they have yearly exam customers as well as new customers with the modeling 32 numbers based on the Lake Forest appointments. The second presenter, Kristin Halvorson, stated the median 33 customer age is low 50’s. 34 35 A Commission Member described the presentation as well thought out and described the Commission’s charge in 36 connection with the overlay district. He asked what percentage of their annual revenue is products vs. services. Dr. 37 Halvorson responded it is a hybrid business with ¾ of their revenue is taxed on products. A Commission Member 38 referred to parking. Deirdre Clein, representative for the property owner, described the available parking spaces on 39 site. Dr. Halvorson explained how the business name was created. Ms. Van Vlack referred to the developer’s 40 agreement in that there would not be special use requests for this location with the preference for the space being 41 retail. 42 43 Chairperson Case asked if there were any other questions. No additional questions were raised at this time. Noting 44 that there were no members of the public present, she then called the matter in for discussion. 45 46 Mr. Bradley commented the presentation was great and it appeared to be a great business but it did not belong in 47 this location in Winnetka. He stated he voted against the Solidcore special use request and referred to the issues 48 that were raised in connection with that application. Mr. Bradley stated he hoped the applicant can find another 49 location in the village. He stated he would not recommend approval and added parking would be an issue in the 50 downtown area with that standard not being satisfied. Mr. Bradley concluded they should try to preserve having a 51 retail overlay district tenant in this space and added standard nos. 2, 3, 5 and 12 have not been met. 52 53 Ms. Van Vlack described the situation as a bait and switch in terms of what they were presented with overall to Page 225 of 252  March 25, 2026 Page 3 1 expect with the developer knowing there would be mostly special uses being requested. She stated there would 2 need to be at least two retail uses in order to provide foot traffic with their being no churn in connection with traffic. 3 Ms. Van Vlack commented she loved the business model and described the situation that the Commission is being 4 presented with special use requests in bits and pieces with them having to recommend denial of a business they 5 would otherwise support. She commented she hoped One Winnetka to have been more retail overall and described 6 the situation as disappointing. Ms. Van Vlack concluded she would recommend against the request at this location. 7 8 Mr. Alt agreed with the comments made and that it would not be the right location. He stated the Commission is 9 concerned with regard to the foot traffic with their being only one pure retail use across the street. He asked for the 10 applicant to consider other Winnetka locations which had stronger foot traffic and concluded he would not be in 11 favor of the request. 12 13 Mr. Poor agreed with the comments made and stated the Commission is the steward of the overlay district and the 14 preference for no retail uses on the first floor of businesses. He stated this hybrid use is not the type of retail use 15 envisioned for the overlay district along with concerns with regard to parking. Mr. Poor stated while the business 16 would be a great business for the village, he referred to the caucus survey that people want to see expanded 17 shopping. He concluded he would not recommend approval. 18 19 Mr. Blum stated while the proposal is close to a retail use and if it were not located in One Winnetka, the Commission 20 would likely recommend approval. He agreed with the parking concerns and suggested they get creative in terms of 21 creating time limits for parking. Mr. Blum compared the proposed use to that of specialty optical retail with an 22 optician. He stated they want people to park, browse and shop and if they want foot traffic, they have to have 23 vehicles. Mr. Blum then stated he is torn and referred to the ordinance they have to adhere to. 24 25 Chairperson Case applauded the applicant’s enthusiasm and agreed it would be a good business but not the right 26 business for this location along with the parking issues raised. She stated standard nos. 2, 3, 5 and 12 are not met 27 and that she hoped the developer would consider tenants which would be more walker friendly. Chairperson Case 28 stated there is still time to consider a retail use for this space and would like to see the applicant find another space 29 in the village. 30 31 Ms. Clein stated she spoke at the Village Council on a number of items and stated an updated traffic and parking 32 analysis was done in conjunction with the restaurant space which concluded they were in compliance from a code 33 perspective and that there is sufficient parking to support the use. She stated with regard to the three different 34 zones considered, she referred to the sidewalk grade changes and confirmed there would still be the same number 35 of spaces. She stated she also presented to the Village Council the list of retailers and specialty retailers they pursued. 36 She stated the retail market has changed and traditional retail required a critical mass of a mall which would generate 37 foot traffic with downtown areas not being able to support higher end retailers the community preferred. She 38 concluded by stating they attempted to fulfill the community’s desires. 39 40 Chairperson Case referred to the agreements made with the developer at the planning level. Ms. Van Vlack 41 questioned what can be done at 1/10th of the way through a 10 year lease with regard to issues regarding traffic, 42 etc. being raised and questioned what can be done to make things better at that point. She stated the alternative is 43 not actionable and referred to the Solidcore approval. Mr. Bradley stated the Village Council’s consideration in terms 44 of look backs is to confirm that employees are parking they are supposed to, etc. and referred to Schwab’s and Solid 45 Core’s affirmation to require customers to use off-street parking. He stated village residents are well aware that 46 there is a parking problem in the village. 47 48 Chairperson Case asked for a motion. Mr. Bradley moved to recommend denial of the special use request as 49 indicated on page 17 in that standard nos. 2, 3, 5 and 12 have not been met. Ms. Van Vlack seconded the motion. A 50 vote was taken and the motion unanimously passed, 6 to 0: 51 AYES: Alt, Blum, Bradley, Case, Poor, Van Vlack 52 NAYS: None 53 Page 226 of 252  March 25, 2026 Page 4 1 *** 2 3 Respectfully submitted, 4 5 Antionette Johnson 6 Recording Secretary Page 227 of 252 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 228 of 252 Parking constraints remain a significant concern for both residents and existing businesses. In the East Elm area, parking demand during peak hours was already strained prior to the One Winnetka development. With the completion of the development, these pressures will only intensify as consumer parking spaces are occupied by service staff and clients within the complex. At its March 17, 2026, Village Council Meeting, longtime East Elm retail owners voiced concerns that the growth of service uses in core retail spaces and constrained parking are directly, negatively, impacting their businesses. For these reasons, I urge you to preserve ground-floor space for retail use, and deny the DUET Audiology Clinic SUP. Thank you for your service, Jessica Tucker Winnetka Page 229 of 252 From: To: Christopher Marx Cc: Subject: RE: Proposed DUET Winnetka store Date: Monday, March 23, 2026 2:16:56 PM Attachments: DUET_Winnetka Community Development_23 March 2026.pdf You don't often get email from djennerjahn@buildordie.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Marx: Please see the attached letter supporting Dr. Lori Halvorson and the proposed Duet retail tenant space at the One Winnetka Building. --David Jennerjahn. David Jennerjahn AIA | buildordie.com D Chicago | San Francisco | Denver | Page 230 of 252 ​23 March 2026​ _​ ​Mr. Christopher Marx​ ​Community Development​ ​Village of Winnetka​ ​cmarx@winnetka.org​ ​RE: DUET Winnetka​ ​720 Elm Street​ ​Dear Mr. Marx:​ ​Regarding the proposed DUET Winnetka retail medical space at 720 Elm Street in the One​ ​Winnetka Building, we, as architects of this project, would like to bring to your attention to​ ​the street engagement between the building exterior and the designed interior of the DUET​ ​store. Like DUET’s prominent downtown Lake Forest establishment, this proposed store will​ ​promote foot traffic and streetscape engagement via retail displays visible at the store​ ​windows, vibrant interior lighting and graphics and open-to-view activities of the store’s​ ​operations. From the sidewalk, pedestrians will see customer retail areas, product​ ​experience displays, “sound bar”, customer concierge desk and lounge. Glassy interior​ ​partitions allow visual access into customer labs, the “audio gym” room, hearing spa, and​ ​the clinical doctors area.​ ​Patients and residents of Lake Forest often comment on how open and welcoming that DUET​ ​store is. We feel that the DUET Winnetka design will similarly evoke the same sentiments and​ ​will positively drive pedestrian activity that contributes to a vibrant street experience.​ ​If you have any questions or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to​ ​contact us.​ ​With Regards,​ ​David Jennerjahn AIA​ ​Charles Riesterer​ ​Valerio Dewalt Train Associates, P.C.​ ​CPR Consulting Architects​ Page 231 of 252 Page 232 of 252 Sincerely, Michael Forman Page 233 of 252 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 234 of 252  have them right in our downtown area and walking distance for so many neighbors and people from our community and those visiting while shopping and dining. My son and  I are patients of their offices - and what a delight to know that we will be able to walk to our near future appointments. I will be sure to share the news with Hadley and PYP and of course, my neighbors who maybe in need of maintenance on their existing hearing devices or future hearing needs. Sincerely, Julie and Brad Ellis 576 Elm Street, Winnetka, IL 60093 Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone Page 235 of 252 DUET Hearing Wellness Special Use Application Village Council – April 21, 2026 Page 236 of 252  One Winnetka: A Completed Vision Fully Leased Tenant Mix Ballyhoo Hospitality By Right Full-Service Restaurant Solidcore SUP Approved Fitness Studio FARE By Right Casual Restaurant Winnetka Aesthetic Studio SUP Approved Medical Aesthetics DUET Hearing Wellness SUP Pending Retail Wellness Charles Schwab SUP Approved Financial Office DUET is the final commercial tenant at One Winnetka. All commercial space is now fully leased with a curated mix of dining, fitness, wellness, and financial services. No additional special use applications are anticipated. 2 Page 237 of 252  Zoning Context The Zoning Code Already Contemplates This Use. Winnetka Zoning Code § 17.46.010 — Table of Uses Category J: Medical and Related Uses Use C-1 C-2 C-2 Overlay Medical and dental offices P P SU Offices for the fitting, sales and repair of hearing aids, P P P prosthetic appliances and the like “Fitting” Requires Clinical Why This Matters for the A Deliberate Policy Choice Services Council The zoning code creates a distinct use The code permits offices for the fitting, sales, We respect the Village’s classification category for hearing aid offices, separate from and repair of hearing aids. Fitting is inherently process. But the Council should know that the general medical offices. This reflects a a clinical activity — it requires audiological code already envisions this exact type of use deliberate policy judgment that these assessment, ear examination, device in the C-2 Overlay. Approving DUET is not businesses activate storefronts and serve the calibration, and follow-up. The services DUET eroding the overlay — it is affirming the kind of community — which is why they were provides are standard components of hearing business the code was written to permitted alongside retail rather than aid fitting, not separate medical services that accommodate. restricted alongside medical offices. change the nature of the use. 3 Page 238 of 252  What We Heard As noted, the zoning code already contemplates hearing aid offices in the C-2 Overlay. We respect the classification process and want to address the Planning Commission’s concerns on the merits regardless. "Too Many Special Uses" "Not Enough Retail" "Parking Impact" CONCERN CONCERN CONCERN Approving additional special uses erodes the One Winnetka was expected to include goods- Each additional tenant adds parking pressure C2 retail overlay and sets a precedent for based retail, and every tenant is a service use. to the Elm Street district. future development. OUR RESPONSE OUR RESPONSE OUR RESPONSE The zoning code already permits hearing aid DUET generates retail product sales and DUET’s demand is 2–3 spaces per hour — a offices by right in the C-2 Overlay — this is the associated sales tax revenue through fraction of any other tenant in One Winnetka. type of use the code was written to headphones, hearing protection devices, No conditions required. After the Council accommodate. Regardless, DUET is the final wellness accessories, and gift items. worked through parking conditions for tenant. This closes the book on One Customers can browse and purchase without Solidcore (15-minute class gaps), DUET is Winnetka. No further special use requests will an appointment. The code classifies hearing effectively a non-event. follow. aid offices alongside retail uses, not medical offices, for this reason — they sell products. 4 Page 239 of 252  DUET: A Retail Wellness Concept More like Warby Parker than an ENT office. DUET is a boutique ear-to-brain wellness concept that combines specialty retail with personalized hearing and cognitive health services. The storefront experience: • Open retail floor with product displays • Headphones, hearing protection, and wellness devices for browsing and purchase • Walk-in engagement encouraged • Window displays are refreshed regularly to maintain visibility and engagement from the street • Concierge desk and beverage station • Music therapy and experiential programming • Gift items and accessories Unlike a traditional medical office, DUET operates as an interactive storefront that encourages product discovery, walk-in traffic, and ongoing customer relationships. 5 Page 240 of 252  DUET Layout & Retail Zone Retail-Forward by Design Front-of-house (customer-facing): • Three dedicated display areas • Concierge reception desk • Beverage station • Self-testing room (Mango Room) • Smart walls with product interaction Back-of-house (clinical): • Sound booth & doctor area • Ear canal lab • Workstations The front of the space reads as a boutique retail environment from the street. Displays, product interaction, and walk-in engagement are the first experience — not a waiting room. 6 Page 241 of 252  DUET Retail Activity Retail Sales Profile Customer Behavior • Product sales represent approximately 60% of total revenue • Walk-ins are common and often originate from nearby businesses • Retail offerings: headphones, hearing protection, wellness devices, accessories, gift items • Trip-chaining behavior supports surrounding retailers • Customers can browse and purchase without an appointment • Retail interaction occurs at the front of the space • Approximate annual sales tax generation: $38,000 • Existing Lake Forest location generates meaningful foot traffic from passersby • Generates ongoing local sales tax revenue to the Village DUET combines retail sales, walk-in engagement, while maintaining low operational intensity — delivering an active storefront with minimal impact on the district. 7 Page 242 of 252  Applying a Consistent Standard DUET satisfies the same criteria the Village has applied to prior Special Uses — with strong retail characteristics and minimal impact. The Village has consistently evaluated Special DUET aligns with each of these criteria: Use applications based on: • Active, visible storefront with walk-in retail engagement • Activation of the storefront • Generates sales tax revenue through product sales • Compatibility with surrounding uses • Minimal parking demand (2–3 spaces per hour, no peak stacking) • Parking and operational impact • Customers are primarily drawn from existing Winnetka foot • Contribution to district vitality traffic, not new destination demand • Low operational intensity relative to many permitted uses Approval of DUET is not about precedent — it is about applying a consistent, objective standard to a low-impact, retail-oriented use. 8 Page 243 of 252  Wellness Complements Fitness During the Solidcore discussion, the Council expressed interest in a tenant that “dovetails” with the fitness use. DUET is that complement. Shared Demographic Solidcore’s core customer — affluent, health-conscious, predominantly female — maps directly to DUET’s. Same demographic, complementary need. Hearing Protection for Active Lifestyles DUET offers custom hearing protection products used during fitness, concerts, and travel. A natural retail cross-sell for the active wellness consumer. Cognitive Health & Brain Wellness DUET’s preservation audiology model focuses on brain health through hearing — a growing priority for the health-conscious demographic already investing in physical fitness. Experiential Programming Music therapy sessions, listening demonstrations, and educational events create community engagement and foot traffic beyond clinical visits. 9 Page 244 of 252  Special Use Approvals in the C2 District No Pattern of Widespread Conversion Recent Special Use Activity 2023 Special use approvals are not widespread across the Village. They are approved • Compass Real Estate Office – Approved selectively where they activate storefronts, serve the community, and fit within the surrounding context. • North Shore Events (Event Planning) – Approved • Chase Bank (Temporary) – Approved Why One Winnetka Is Different 2024 One Winnetka is the only new mixed-use building in the district. It was designed • Toned Yoga (Fitness Studio) – Approved (not pursued) to accommodate modern retail formats, service-integrated uses, and structured parking. These users naturally locate in new construction environments. 2025 • Charles Schwab – Approved (One Winnetka) Market Reality • Winnetka Aesthetic Studio – Approved (One Winnetka) Low vacancy and limited turnover exist in the Village. Few, if any, alternative • Solidcore – Approved (One Winnetka) spaces exist for these users. These uses are not displacing traditional retail — • Sit Still Kids Salon – Approved (not pursued) they are filling available space in the only building designed for them. 2026 • DUET Hearing Wellness – Pending (One Winnetka) C2 Overlay Under Review The Winnetka Futures 2040 Plan calls for evaluating the C2 overlay. The Village will likely be reviewing and revising the zoning ordinance in 18–24 months. Denying a creditworthy long-term tenant while the overlay itself is under review creates the vacancy the overlay was designed to prevent. This reflects a measured, case-by-case approach — not a pattern of widespread conversion. 10 Page 245 of 252  Parking Demand & Capacity 39 93 332 2–3 On-Site Spaces Adjacent Spaces Vacant Spaces at DUET spaces (meets zoning) upon completion observed peak (4 PM) per hour Staggered Tenant Demand DUET Parking Impact Fitness (Solidcore): Early morning / evening • 2–3 customers at a time • Approximately 6-10 clients per day Office (Schwab/Winnetka Aesthetic Studio): Daytime • No peak stacking or group arrivals Restaurant (Ballyhoo/Fare): Midday / evening • Estimated demand: 2–3 spaces per hour DUET: Daytime, low-volume • No special conditions required For context: The Council negotiated 15-minute class gaps for Solidcore’s No single peak is driven by all tenants simultaneously. Parking 15-car surges. DUET’s 2–3 spaces/hour is a fraction of that and needs no demand is distributed throughout the day. conditions. 11 Page 246 of 252  One Winnetka Business Hours 12 Page 247 of 252  Agenda Item Executive Summary TITLE: Resolution No. R-46-2026: A Resolution of the Village of Winnetka in Support of the Illinois America250 Commemoration (Adoption) PRESENTER: Hannah Lipman AGENDA DATE: May 5, 2026 CONSENT: No ITEM TYPE: Ordinances and Resolutions ITEM HISTORY: None. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The U.S. Semi-quincentennial Commission, known as the America250 Commission was established by Congress in 2016 to plan and orchestrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, aiming to engage all Americans in the historic event through educational initiatives. The Commission encourages communities, libraries, schools, local governments, historical societies, cultural institutions and individuals of all ages to develop inclusive commemorations as a way to inspire civic engagement. As part of the America250 celebrations, the Village team along with the Winnetka Park District, New Trier Township, Winnetka-Northfield Public Library District, Winnetka Historical Society, New Trier District 203, Winnetka Public Schools District 36, and the Winnetka-Northfield-Glencoe Chamber of Commerce have partnered in planning 250th themed events and engagements to celebrate locally. The planning team invites all Winnetkans to mark the 250th birthday of our nation with special events and opportunities planned throughout the Village from May 16 to Labor Day. Events or engagements – which are being referred to as “passport stops” – include the following: o May 16 at 10 AM: 2.5k Family Walk/Run starting at Tower Beach. o June 6 from 9 – 11 AM: Stop by the New Trier Extension Table at the Farmers’ Market between 8 – 11 AM. o June 13 from 7:30 AM – 12 PM: Visit Touch-A-Truck in the Village Hall Parking lot at 510 Green Bay Road. o June 27 from 9 – 11 AM: Stop by the Village table at the Famers’ Market to pick up a flag (to use for 4th of July festivities). o July 1 at sunset: Screening of The Sandlot in Hubbard Woods Park. Page 248 of 252  o July 4: Parade down Elm Street at 10 AM, Events on the Green immediately following the Parade & Fireworks on Duke Childs Field at 9:20 PM. o July 5 from 2 – 3:30 PM: Participate in the America250 public skate at the Winnetka Ice Arena. o All summer: visit the restored mural in Winnetka’s Village Hall and the Athenian Oath in Council Chambers, as well as the Surprising Stories of the North Shore Exhibit. o All summer: visit the Schmidt-Burnham Log House every Sunday from 2 – 4 PM. o All summer: donate a nonperishable item to New Trier Township from their Food Pantry's Priority Needs list and pick up milkweed seeds to plant (as part of the Mayor’s Monarch Pledge). o All summer: visit the Historical Society Headquarters & Museum, open every Tuesday and Thursday from 1 – 4 PM. o All summer: visit the Winnetka-Northfield-Glencoe Chamber of Commerce, open Tuesdays between 9 AM – 4 PM, and tell them your favorite Winnetka business. o All summer: visit the Winnetka Branch of the Winnetka-Northfield Public Library District to pick up a bookmark made by District 36 students. Those who participate in the happenings can download a passport on the Village’s America250 webpage or pick one up at Village Hall. Participants will be eligible for various prizes. Residents and businesses may notice banners throughout the Village this summer with the following logo to highlight the ongoing celebrations. 1976 Village Hall Time Capsule When Village Hall was first built in 1925, there was a time capsule placed in the cornerstone of the building to be opened in 1976. Upon opening the original capsule in 1976, the tradition carried on as a new capsule was placed to be opened in 2026, coinciding with the nation’s 250th birthday. The 50-year-old time capsule will be opened publicly in front of Village Hall on July 3, 2026. Additional details and invitations for community participation will follow shortly. The America250 planning team will continue to engage the community in the coming months to determine what will be placed in the next time capsule to be opened in 50 years. RECOMMENDATION: Consider adoption of Resolution No. R-46-2026 A Resolution of the Village of Winnetka in Support of the Illinois America250 Commemoration Page 249 of 252 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. R-46-2026: A Resolution of the Village of Winnetka in Support of the Illinois America250 Commemoration Page 250 of 252  RESOLUTION NO. R-46-2026 A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE OF WINNETKA IN SUPPORT OF THE ILLINOIS AMERICA250 COMMEMORATION WHEREAS, the United States of America will commemorate its 250th anniversary on July 4, 2026, marking a historic milestone in the nation’s history; and WHEREAS, on July 4, 1776, the Second Continental Congress formally adopted the Declaration of Independence, asserting the American colonies’ freedom from British rule and laying the foundation for the principles of democracy and self-governance; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Semi-quincentennial Commission, known as the America250 Commission (america250.org) was established by Congress in 2016 to plan and orchestrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, aiming to engage all Americans in commemorating this historic event through educational initiatives; and WHEREAS, the Illinois America250 Commission (IL250.org) was established to develop, encourage and execute an inclusive commemoration and observance of the founding of the United States of America, and Illinois’ imperative role in the nation’s history; and WHEREAS, the Illinois America250 Commission encourages communities, libraries, schools, local governments, historical societies, cultural institutions and individuals of all ages to develop inclusive commemorations that reflect on Illinois’ role in the nation’s history and development; and WHEREAS, recognizing and supporting the Illinois America250 Commission will help ensure a meaningful and educational commemoration for all residents and future generations; and WHEREAS, the commemoration provides an opportunity to reflect on the state’s historical significance, honor the achievements of its people and inspire civic engagement; and WHEREAS, the Village of Winnetka hereby formally supports the Illinois America250 Commission and its mission to commemorate our nation’s 250th anniversary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Winnetka expresses its support for the Illinois America250 Commission, and encourages all Illinois communities to organize and participate in local events leading up to and culminating on July 4, 2026, to celebrate America’s 250th anniversary. May 5, 2026 R-46-2026 Page 251 of 252  ADOPTED this May 5, 2026, pursuant to the following roll call vote: AYES: ____________________________________________________________ NAYS: ____________________________________________________________ ABSENT: ____________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ____________________________________________________________ Signed ____________________________________ Village President Countersigned: _______________________________________ Village Clerk May 5, 2026 R-46-2026 Page 252 of 252