WC_101118

8 | October 11, 2018 | The winnetka Current NEWS
winnetkacurrent.com
Winnetka Village Council
Trustees pass first step of amended One Winnetka proposal
Village President:
‘It’s regrettable
that the process
has taken this long’
Fouad Egbaria
Freelance Reporter
The introduction was approved for the amended proposal for the One Winnetka
development at Lincoln Avenue and Elm Street. The proposal will face final approval
at an upcoming Village Council meeting on Oct. 16. Photo Submitted
An unmistakable sense
of déjà vu gripped the Winnetka
Village Hall Tuesday
night, Oct. 2.
The Winnetka Village
Council approved a One
Winnetka development
proposal in January 2017,
but the developer has
since brought forth a revised
proposal, which was
presented to the Village
Council at its Tuesday,
Oct. 2 regular meeting.
The proposal underwent
several rounds of review
before Village advisory
bodies this summer, including
the Plan Commission,
Design Review
Board and Zoning Board
of Appeals. All three bodies
voted to approve the
proposal, according to
meeting minutes.
During a nearly fourhour
meeting Tuesday —
almost entirely devoted to
discussion of the revised
One Winnetka proposal
— the Winnetka Village
Council voted to approve
the introduction of documents
reflecting changes
to the proposal, which will
be up for final approval at
a later date.
“This has been an arduous
process and it started
before I was even up here,”
Village President Chris
Rintz said. “It’s regrettable
that the process has taken
this long.”
Rintz added it’s been a
“stumbling, fumbling sort
of a process from the very
beginning.”
“I lived through a period
of about 2008 to 2013
where every deal was being
retraded time and time
and time again, opportunistically
and with calculation,”
he said. “Regretfully,
what I think has come
out of that period is the
idea that retrading is just a
part of the deal, part of the
game, which is in my mind
shameful and regretful.
“I didn’t like how it felt
then, and I don’t like how
it feels now.”
By voice votes, all coming
in 3-2, the Village
Council approved the introduction
of ordinances
calling for: rezoning of
the property at 710 Elm
St., containing a Villageowned
commuter parking
lot; an ordinance granting
a special use permit, a
variation and a certificate
of appropriateness for the
reconstruction and operation
of a public parking lot
within the C2 General Retail
Commercial District;
and an ordinance granting
final approval of a planned
development.
Trustee Andrew Cripe
recused himself on the
vote because of an alleged
conflict of interest.
The ordinance approved
for introduction related to
final approval was amended
to include several modifications,
including those
related to: addressing concerns
raised on behalf of
the Hadley Institute for
the Blind and Visually Impaired,
located at 700 Elm
St.; the desire for balcony
edges to be treated with
cast stone or limestone;
the composition of the
building materials on the
development’s east elevation,
which will be subject
to review and approval by
the Design Review Board.
Since a July 2017 iteration
of the proposal, the
developer has requested
several changes, bringing
the issue back in front of
the Village Council once
again.
The July 2017 plan featured
56 residential units
(15 condominium units,
five townhome units and
36 rental apartments), at
just over 190,000 square
feet (plus 32,700 square
feet of commercial space
on the ground floor). In addition,
the project would
add 102 public parking
spaces.
The revised proposal
features 58 residential
units (15 condominium
units, seven townhome
units and 36 rental apartments),
at approximately
186,000 square feet and
just under 30,000 square
feet in commercial space.
The new plan features an
additional 91 public parking
spaces.
The new plan also calls
for moving the building
footprint about 40 feet to
the east, plus rezoning and
acquisition of 8,448 square
feet of the commuter parking
lot at 710 Elm St.
The developer, represented
by David Trandel,
agreed to other changes
following the summer discussions
with the advisory
bodies, including handling
refuse pickup at an interior
loading dock space, rather
than at an outdoor refuse
structure on the proposed
development’s south platform.
Trustees Bob Dearborn
and Penny Lanphier indicated
they were against approval.
Dearborn said the
previously approved plan
“seemed to work,” but that
the Village Council was
now being asked to “save”
the project by making a
number of concessions.
“I think we shouldn’t
make any mistake about
this, that the burden of
those concessions ... falls
squarely, 100 percent, on
the village and our residents,”
Dearborn said.
“There is no debate about
that. This plan I think most
people would say is less
good than the approved
plan and to the extent it’s
less good, it falls on our
shoulders.”
Trustee Anne Wedner
argued in favor of approval,
positing there’s a need
for housing in the village
geared toward those looking
for something other
than a house.
“I think we suffer in our
society from too much
choice,” she said. “There’s
so much choice and too
many options and there’s
too many versions floating
around. The reality is
we have a very solid plan,
which needs some definition.
... But I think we get
in our own way in Winnetka
by demanding that
something be perfect, because
it’s not going to be
perfect. Perfect is the enemy
of possible.”
During approximately
45 minutes of public comment,
residents weighed
in on the latest iteration of
the One Winnetka development
proposal.
Harvey Bundy, a resident
of the village for almost
50 years, said he had
already put down a deposit
for one of the units in the
proposed One Winnetka
development.
“We want to continue to
live in Winnetka,” he said.
“We’ve got a close tie to
the community, we love
the community. But there
haven’t been any places
that made any sense for us
to live in the community.
We travel a lot, we have a
place in Florida, so we need
someone to watch over
the place and take in mail
packages and those types
of things — effectively the
type of thing that you find
in a downtown apartment
building. There’s nothing
like that here in town.”
Bundy added he has
friends who have left Winnetka
because there is not
anything like the One Winnetka
proposal in town and
that the delay in bringing
the project to fruition has
been an “incredibly frustrating”
experience.
“It’s time to get this
going ... or we’re going
to move downtown,” he
added.
Walter Greenough, a
member of the Zoning
Board of Appeals, said he
reluctantly voted to approve
the project — the
Zoning Board voted unanimously
to approve the proposal
July 9 — but that he
would vote against it if he
were a member of the Village
Council.
“The scale of this project
is just too big for Winnetka,”
he said. “All you have
to do is look at that fivestory
building on Green
Bay Road in Wilmette and
get a sense of what we’re
facing. Ask yourselves, is
that what you want as your
legacy — something that
literally overshadows our
community for the next 50
years.”
Peter Tyor, board president
of the 711 Oak Condominium
Association,
referred to the proposal as
a “one-sided deal.”
“It would be nice if
people did think about the
Please see Proposal, 10