Agenda and Meeting Packet

VILLAGE BOARD – MEETING AGENDA WHITEFISH BAY VILLAGE HALL 5300 N. Marlborough Dr. Whitefish Bay, WI 53217 Monday, August 31, 2026, 6:00 PM As an alternative to attending in-person, the public may access this meeting of the Village Board by phone or by computer. Please note that those participating remotely will not have an opportunity to provide public comment. The phone number is: +1 312 626 6799. The Zoom Meeting code is: 854 6369 2688 and the Passcode is: 267748. https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85463692688?pwd=d0w0WmxVZFpyWThGSXhTejdPNU8vQT09 I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Consent Agenda – Upon request of any Trustee, any item may be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration under General Business. 1. Minutes of the regular meeting held on August 10, 2026 2. Investment Report for July, 2026 3. Sendik’s Food Market alcohol and cigarette/tobacco licenses change of premise 4. Citizen appointment of Benjamin McGillicuddy to the Public Works Committee, replacing Piper Plummer Mehigan following her resignation. III. Report of Village Officers 1. Village Attorney 2. Village Manager 3. Village President 4. Miscellaneous Trustee IV. Petitions and Communications – This is an opportunity for anyone to address the Village Board on any issue NOT on the current agenda. While the Board encourages input from residents of the Village, it may not discuss or act on any issue that is not duly noticed on the agenda. V. General Business 1. Discussion/action on Resolution No. 3204 – Recognizing Whitefish Bay Little League. 2. Discussion/action on the Hampton and Santa Monica Intersection Improvement Project concept design. 3. Discussion/action on design concepts and survey results for the Klode Warming House. 4. Discussion/action on new Silver Spring monument signs to be paid for by private development projects. 5. Discussion/action on single-family dwelling side yard setback and distance to neighbor dwellings in Districts 1, 1A, and 2. 6. Discussion/action regarding proposed changes to the improved space requirements for accessory buildings or structures in District 1, 1A, 2, and 3. VI. Adjourn Upon reasonable notice, efforts will be made to accommodate the needs of disabled individuals through appropriate aids and services. Contact Village Hall at (414) 962-6690. It is possible that members of and possibly a quorum of members of other Boards, Commissions, or Committees of the Village including in particular the Business Improvement District Board may be in attendance at the above stated meeting to gather information; no action will be taken by any other Boards, Commissions, or Committees of the Village except by the Board, Commission, or Committee noticed above. Agendas and minutes are available on the Village website (www.wfbvillage.gov). A REGULAR VILLAGE BOARD MEETING A regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of Whitefish Bay was held in-person August 10, 2026. Pursuant to law, written notice of this meeting was given to the press and posted on public bulletin boards. I. Call to Order and Roll Call President Buckley called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Present: Trustees Saunders, Kasper (via Zoom), Serebin (via Zoom) and President Buckley Absent: Trustees Dettmann, Haller, & Vanevenhoven Also Present: Village Manager – Kelsey McElroy-Anderson Village Attorney – Chris Jaekels Assistant Village Manager – Anna Christopherson Police Chief – Patrick Whitaker Clerk/Finance Director – Jaimie Krueger Administration Intern – Amelia Olson Director of Building Services – Joel Oestreich (arrived at 6:43 p.m.) Deputy Clerk – Erin Granstrom II. Consent Agenda It was moved by Trustee Saunders, seconded by Trustee Kasper, to approve the consent agenda as presented. Motion carried 4-0. 1. Minutes of the regular meeting held on July 20, 2026. 2. Check Register for July, 2026. 3. Strategic Plan Quarterly Updates. III. Report of the Village Officers 1. Village Attorney – No Report. 2. Village Manager – It was noted that Lake Drive will be one way only near the Sendik’s development. There will be detour signs for motorists to follow. Neighboring communities have also been notified. 3. Village President – It was noted that Sendik’s has posted that the store will be closing on August 23, 2026, and re-open on September 23, 2026. The Partisan Primary is tomorrow. Sounds of Summer is this Saturday and hope everyone will attend. 4. Miscellaneous Trustee – It was inquired if the Sendik’s closing the old store would be included in the weekly construction update. IV. Petitions and Communications No Petitions or Communications received. V. General Business 1. Discussion on the 2027 Village Board Budget – Projects, Priorities, and Visioning Session. Finance Director, Jaimie Krueger, provided a general overview of the 2027 budget as presented in the meeting packet. Staff are seeking feedback on additional funds for the Health Department as was done for 2026 and should be done again in 2027. It was mentioned to wait on deciding on a Health Department contribution to determine if other municipalities will be contributing for 2027. There was interest in increasing the training and travel for both staff and possibly Village Board. A part-time marketing/communications staff member to assist with the Business Improvement District and Civic Foundation, with discussion on if only 2027 or ongoing part- time position. There was mention of getting a report from all department heads for wish list items, including small ticket items. It was mentioned that adding safety improvements on Hampton outside of the Santa Monica area should be considered in the 2027 budget. There was mention of improving the monument signs in the Village outside of the Silver Spring improvements that are upcoming. There was a comment about not adding too many initiatives or projects if it results in staff being stretched thin to complete. The abated debt information from the packet was further discussed along with the long-term outlook on the levy limit. Net new construction calculation was discussed along with the impact of closing TID No. 1 in 2031 on the levy limit. 2. Discussion/action on the Village Board Community Event Engagement Program policy. Administration Intern, Amelia Olson, provided background on discussions at previous meetings and summarized the proposed policy. There was inquiry whether board members are attending socially if events would need to be noticed which it was noted that all events will be noticed. It was moved by Trustee Saunderr, seconded by Trustee Kasper that the Village Board adopt the Village Board Community Event Engagement Program as presented. Motion carried 4-0. 3. Discussion on abolishing the Whitefish Bay Municipal Court and joining the North Shore Municipal Court. Village Manager McElroy-Anderson stated there was a recent study into joining the North Shore Municipal Court, which is included in the meeting packet. If the court was consolidated changes to the current court process were described. There was mention of the range of change in expenditures depending on how many communities would join the North Shore Municipal Court. The innovation grant may be available depending on how the contract is written for potentially five years. If the board would like to proceed with abolishing the court the timeline and steps were provided. Chief Whitaker stated that the police administrative staff would be taking on additional tasks which was further described, stating that he believes that staff will be able to handle the additional workload. The impact on officers was discussed. Response time and safety concerns with court in Glendale were inquired about, which Chief Whitaker stated he did not have concerns. Attorney Jaekels stated that prosecutors may or may not be the same, which could lead to a different court experience. Attorney Jaekels stated that what the Village Board wants out of court determines if this would be a good option or not. There was discussion that roughly 20% of citations issued are Village residents. Craig Johnson (4918 N Idlewild Ave) stated he is the current municipal judge, however, has decided not run for a new term. Judge Johnson stated he feels that approximately 50% of cases at court are village residents. Judge Johnson stated he feels that residents like that they can walk to court and would not like to go to Glendale for court. It was stated that both Fox Point and Shorewood municipal judges have stated that their communities will not be joining the North Shore Municipal Court. Judge Johnson stated he feels overtime for officers will be increased as officers wait for cases to be heard. There was concern that the police department and court are required to be separate. There is a personal aspect as there is a portion of the population that knows the judge and Whitefish Bay voters would only be a portion of votes, decreasing the ability to determine the judge preferred by the Whitefish Bay voters. Judge Johnson stated that the study used the Mid-Moraine Municipal Court, which he described why he feels it is not a comparable setup to this situation. There was discussion on the study including the process used, how it was initiated, and the numbers provided. There was additional discussion on the innovation grant and the impact of other municipalities participating or not. Paige Styler (4918 N Idlewild Ave), wife of Judge Johnson and attorney, having observed municipal court in its’ current process, stated that the court’s reputation on how those attending court is very important and we can only control if we have a separate municipal court. There was description of how the judge hearing cases are able to provide information tailored to the community and it is a much more personalized experience if the court is held in Whitefish Bay. There was mention that in the future it could be difficult to find a municipal judge and may be easier if part of the North Shore Municipal Court. Trustees expressed that they are not interested in pursuing abolishing the Whitefish Bay Municipal Court. Staff directed to not include on any future agendas unless a trustee that is not in attendance requests that it be included on a future agenda. 4. Discussion/action on Ordinance No. 1928 to reduce the speed limit on a portion of North Lake Drive to 15 mph. Chief Whitaker stated that this proposed ordinance is to continue with Bicycle/Pedestrian safety initiatives. The portion of Lake Drive in this ordinance was described and it was stated that the speed limit would be decreased to 15 mph when children present. Signage has previously been approved by the Public Works Committee. There was discussion on if speed limits can be different for various types of vehicles which was stated that is not allowable in Wisconsin. It was moved by Trustee Saunders, seconded by Trustee Kasper that the Village Board adopt Ordinance No. 1928 to amend the speed limit identified in Municipal Code 6-4 from 20 mph to 15 mph for N. Lake Drive from a point 158 feet south of the south curbline of East Carlisle Ave. extended to a point 172 feet north of the north curbline of E. Belle Ave extended at such time children are present in the school crossing zone. Motion carried 4- 0. 5. Discussion/action on Ordinance No. 1929 to create Article VII of Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code with regard to lead service line replacement. Attorney Jaekels stated this is a result of recent changes in state statutes. It was stated that the proposed ordinance complies with Act 137 which was approved by the Wisconsin Public Service Commission. Attorney Jaekels stated the special charges are handled like other ordinance violations such as grass being too long. It would require that if there was a leak and the lateral was lead that it be replaced. There is also a provision for a loan agreement which then would be put on the tax roll for properties that choose that option. It was mentioned that the special charge can be on a property until that property is foreclosed or there is a sale, ensuring the loan is repaid. Eligibility for the loan program was discussed. Brook Miller, with the North Shore Health Department, inquired if a resident is independently replacing and the Village is required to replace the Village side, would the loan be available, which Attorney Jaekels stated they would not be eligible. There was a proposed amendment to include emergency repairs be eligible for the loan program which was discussed. It was moved by Trustee Saunders, seconded by Trustee Kasper, that the Village Board adopt Ordinance No. 1929 – Creating Article VII of Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code with Regard to Lead Service Line Replacement as amended. Motion carried 4-0. 6. The Board may convene into Closed Session pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute §19.85(1)(c) considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility – specifically regarding 2027 employee compensation and benefits AND pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute §19.85(1)(e) deliberating or negotiating the purchase of public property, investing of public funds, conducting other specified business whenever competitive and/or bargaining reasons require a closed session – specifically regarding contract negotiations with the Police Union. It was moved by Trustee Saunders, seconded by President Buckley that the Village Board convene into Closed Session pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute §19.85(1)(c) considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility – specifically regarding 2027 employee compensation and benefits AND pursuant to Wiscon§19.85(1)(e) deliberating or negotiating the purchase of public property, investing of public funds, conducting other specified business whenever competitive and/or bargaining reasons require a closed session – specifically regarding contract negotiations with the Police Union. Motion carried by roll call vote 4-0 at 7:38 p.m. 7. The Board may reconvene into open session. The Board reserves the right to take action on any topic discussed in Closed Session It was moved by Trustee Saunders, seconded by Trustee Kasper that the Village Board reconvene into open session at 8:06 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. 8. Adjourn There being no further business, it was moved by Trustee Saunders seconded by Trustee Kasper to adjourn the meeting at 8:07 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. General Investments Post Retirement Investments Ehlers Investments Total LGIP 14,724,898$ - $ - $ 14,724,898$ Investment Cash 46,625 8,556 14,620,937 14,676,118 US Treasury Less than 1 Year 1,427,848 341,185 - 1,769,033 1 to 3 Years 299,906 381,587 - 681,493 3 to 5 Years 1,407,655 - - 1,407,655 Total US Treasury 3,135,409 722,772 - 3,858,181 CD's Less than 1 Year $787,778 - - 787,778 1 to 3 Years 1,018,871 487,519 - 1,506,390 3 to 5 Years - - - - Total CD's 1,806,649 487,519 - 2,294,168 Total Investments 19,713,581$ 1,218,847 $ 14,620,937 $ 35,553,365 $ Accrued Interest 143,189$ 31,981 $ 31,981 $ 175,170 $ Monthly Investment Summary July 2026 41% 42% 11% 6% $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 LGIP Investment Cash US Treasury CD's Memorandum To: Village President Buckley and Members of the Village Board From: Erin Granstrom, Deputy Clerk Date: August 25, 2026 Re: Request to Change Premise Description on Sendik’s Alcohol and Cigarette/Tobacco Licenses _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Sendik’s Silver Spring holds a Class “B”/”Class B” retail license and a Cigarette and Tobacco retail license. It is required that a premise description be provided and included on the license to describe where alcohol beverages, cigarette and tobacco products are sold, served, consumed or stored. This description must include the building(s) and all rooms, including living quarters, used for sale, service, consumption or storage of alcohol beverage and cigarette and tobacco products and related records. Sendik’s Silver Spring was granted licenses on June 15, 2026 for both liquor and cigarette and tobacco with the premise description for the store on site at that time. Sendik’s Silver Spring has submitted a request to change the premise description to reflect the new location which would go into effect on September 7, 2026. The premise descriptions for each license at the new location are requested to be: Class “B”/”Class B” Premise Description Fermented Malt Beverages and Wine & Intoxicating Liquors will be sold in the Wine and Spirits department and in the second-floor Restaurant/Bar. Alcohol purchased in the Restaurant/Bar may be consumed inside the entire public space in the store, including the second-floor mezzanine and balcony space, in addition to the patio seating area located outside the store. Products purchased online may be brought to designated parking stalls for pickup. Special events (private functions catered by Sendik’s) may occur in the parking lot and those would be managed with point-of-sales in that outdoor location, with consumption restricted to the outside space. Records of purchase and sale are maintained online and are accessible by both store and support locations. Cigarette and Tobacco Premise Description Cigarettes and Tobacco products will be sold at the Customer Service counter and registers. Products will be stored in a secure location behind the Customer Service counter and in a locked humidor in the Wine and Spirits department, both identified in the facility floor plan. Records of purchase and sale are maintained online and are accessible by both store and support locations. Recommendation Motion to approve premise description change as requested. Village of Whitefish Bay 5300 N. Marlborough Drive Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin 53217 Phone: 414-962-6690 Fax: 414-962-5651 Village of Whitefish Bay Attn: Erin Granstrom, Deputy Clerk 5300 N. Marlborough Dr. Whitefish Bay, WI 53217 Sendik’s Silver Spring LLC has received a Fermented Malt Beverages and Wine & Intoxicating Liquors Class B/Class B Retail License (License 2027-02L) for the period June 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. We are in the process of building a new location in the parking lot of our current store location at 500 E. Silver Spring Drive in Whitefish Bay. Upon completion of the new building, which will use the same address as the current location, we intend to raze the current store location to provide parking for the new facility. As a result, we would request an amendment to the premises for the existing licenses. We would like to request the premises description of the new facility for the Fermented Malt Beverages and Wine & Intoxicating Liquors Class B/Class B Retail License be modified to reflect the new facility layout. The new description proposed would be: Fermented Malt Beverages and Wine & Intoxicating Liquors will be sold in the Wine and Spirits department and in the second -floor Restaurant/Bar. Alcohol purchased in the Restaurant/Bar may be consumed inside the entire public space in the store, including the second -floor mezzanine and balcony space, in addition to the patio seating area located outside the store. Products purchased online may be brought to designated parking stalls for pickup. Special events (private functions catered by Sendik’s) may occur in the parking lot and those would be managed with point-of-sales in that outdoor location, with consumption restricted to the outside space. Records of purchase and sale are maintained online and are accessible by both store and support locations. Included in this request is a copy of the existing license, as well as a map of the new location. We greatly appreciate your consideration of this premises amendment. Please contact me with any questions or concerns relating to this request. Sincerely, David Ace Chief Financial Officer Sendik’s Food Markets, LLC 7225 W. Marcia Road Milwaukee, WI 53223 414-716-5500 Village of Whitefish Bay Attn: Erin Granstrom, Deputy Clerk 5300 N. Marlborough Dr. Whitefish Bay, WI 53217 Sendik’s Silver Spring LLC has received a Cigarette and Tobacco Retail License (License No. 2027-001T) for the period June 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. We are in the process of building a new location in the parking lot of our current store location at 500 E. Silver Spring Drive in Whitefish Bay. Upon completion of the new building, which will use the same address as the current location, we intend to raze the current store location to provide parking for the new facility. As a result, we would request an amendment to the premises for the existing licenses. We would like to request the premises description of the new facility for the Cigarette and Tobacco Retail License be modified to reflect the new facility layout. The new description proposed would be: Cigarettes and Tobacco products will be sold at the Customer Service counter and registers. Products will be stored in a secure location behind the Customer Service counter and in a locked humidor in the Wine and Spirits department, both identified in the facility floor plan. Records of purchase and sale are maintained online and are accessible by both store and support locations. Included in this request is a copy of the existing license, as well as a map of the new location. We greatly appreciate your consideration of this premises amendment. Please contact me with any questions or concerns relating to this request. Sincerely, David Ace Chief Financial Officer Sendik’s Food Markets, LLC 7225 W. Marcia Road Milwaukee, WI 53223 414-716-5500 Print Board or Commission Applying For Public Works Committee Name Benjamin McGillicuddy Email Address mcgillicuddy.ben@gmail.com Address 5964 N Kent Ave City Whitefish Bay State WI Zip Code 53217 Phone Number 630-577-7296 Fax Number Are you a registered voter of Whitefish Bay? Yes How long? 2 years Have you attended a meeting of this Application - Submission #11362 Date Submitted: 8/25/2026 y g Board/Commission? No Present Employer GRAEF Job Title Civil (Transportation) Engineer Previous Governmental Bodies/Elective Offices Applicant Has Served Position/Office Held Dates Civic or Charitable Organizations to Which Applicant Has Belonged Position Held Dates Special Interests/Hobbies/Talents Home renovation projects/remodeling College, Professional, Vocational Schools Attended Marquette University College of Engineering Major Subject Civil Engineering Dates — Degree/Date Bachelors of Science (2024) College, Professional, Vocational Schools Attended Major Subject Dates — Degree/Date College, Professional, Vocational Schools Attended Major Subject Dates — Degree/Date Please state reasons why you want to become a member of this Board or Commission, including what specific objectives you would be working toward as a member of this advisory board: (Attach second page if necessary) Since moving to Whitefish Bay a couple of years ago, I've been looking for ways to become more active in the comm nit Oneof m neighbors JacobHallerlet mekno abo t thisopeningandit seemedliketheperfect 8/1/2021 5/1/2024 mm/dd/yyyy mm/dd/yyyy mm/dd/yyyy mm/dd/yyyy community. One of my neighbors, Jacob Haller let me know about this opening and it seemed like the perfect opportunity given my background. As a Civil Engineer with 12 years of experience designing and managing local roadway projects in the greater Milwaukee area, I would be able to offer unique insight and expertise to the public works committee to help the committee make informed decisions that have the best possible outcomes for the community. I have specific experience with the management and design of multimodal (bus, bicycle, and pedestrian focused) projects similar to what the Village has been undertaking recently and have successfully worked with other local municipalities public works departments to deliver meaningful solutions while soliciting public feedback and navigating sometimes challenging environments involving business and property owners. Ultimately, I would bring a collaborative, thoughtful, and community focused perspective to the committee, while listening to the concerns and ideas of the villagers we serve. As a member, my specific objectives would be to help identify community needs, provide constructive recommendations, support effective and responsible initiatives, and work collaboratively with other members and community leaders to develop solutions. I would also strive to increase community engagement, encourage transparency, and ensure that residents’ perspectives are considered when making recommendations. My overall goal would be to help create meaningful, lasting improvements and contribute to a stronger and more connected community. Any other information which you feel would be useful to the Board of Trustees in reviewing your application: (Attach 2nd page if necessary) I actively hold a Professional Engineering license (PE) in State of Wisconsin Are you or a member of your family associated with any Organization/Employment that might be deemed a conflict of interest in performing your duties if appointed to this position? Yes No If yes, please state name of Organization/Employment No direct conflict of interest, but as a GRAEF employee, if I served on the committee I believe I would have to recuse myself from any voting regarding the selection of an engineering firm for a Village project in the event that GRAEF were to submit a proposal Do you have any relatives working or serving for the Village of Whitefish Bay? Yes No If yes, please indicate the name and relationship of the person Would you be willing to abstain from voting on matters where a potential conflict of interest exists? Yes No Have you been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor? Yes No If yes, explain convictions Do not list any misdemeanor settled in juvenile court. How did you hear about the opening on this Commission? My neighbor, Jacob Haller recommended I apply Signature of Applicant Ben McGillicuddy By typing your name into this field you authorize the Village to consider this an electronic signature. Date 8/28/2026 STATE OF WISCONSIN: MILWAUKEE COUNTY: VILLAGE OF WHITEFISH BAY RESOLUTION NO. 3204 A RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION WHEREAS, The Whitefish Bay Little League has been a part of the community since 1967 helping boys and girls learn the sports of baseball and softball; and WHEREAS, The Whitefish Bay Little League is a chartered nonprofit organization that provides opportunities to play for children ages 6 through 14 who reside in and/or attend school in Whitefish Bay; and WHEREAS, The Whitefish Bay Little League made history this year by winning the state tournament in all five age groups; and WHEREAS, The Whitefish Bay Little League U12 team had games broadcast live nationwide as the team advanced to the finals of the 2026 Little League Baseball Midwest Region Tournament for the first time in program history, which is one game away from making the Little League World Series; and WHEREAS, The U13 team also advanced to the regional final in its attempt to qualify for the “Intermediate 50/70 World Series”; and WHEREAS, The U14 team advanced to the 2026 Junior World series just one year after the team reached the Intermediate World Series; and WHEREAS, The Whitefish Bay Little League continues to be a great partner with the Village and playing games at Craig Counsell Park and Cahill Park – two focal points of the community; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the VILLAGE BOARD of the Village of Whitefish Bay, that the Village Board offers forth on behalf of the Village residents a resounding thank you and congratulations to the Whitefish Bay Little League for the excitement of this year’s run to the Little League World Series and helping hundreds of Whitefish Bay kids learn baseball and softball every year. This resolution is hereby adopted this 31st day of August, 2026. Kevin Buckley, President Countersigned: Jaimie Krueger, Village Clerk Village of Whitefish Bay Public Works Department 155 W. Fairmount Ave  Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin 53217  (414) 962-6690  Fax (414) 967-1391 Mathew Collins, Director of Public Works August 31, 2026 Memo to: President Kevin Buckley and the Village Board of Trustees From: Matthew Collins, Director of Public Works Re: Hampton and Santa Monica Intersection Improvement Project Conceptual Design Approval The intersection of Hampton Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard has experienced a history of severe crashes. The intersection of Hampton and Santa Monica municipal boundaries border the Village of Whitefish Bay and the City of Milwaukee. Seventy-five percent of the intersection is within the Village and twenty-five percent (southwest corner) is within the City of Milwaukee. Nine crashes have occurred at this intersection in the five-year period from 2019 through 2023, including one involving a pedestrian. Traffic signal poles have also been struck four times as well as the Village median sign struck two times in the past five years. There are many contributing factors to the frequency and severity of the crashes, including the lack of protected left-turning movements, older traffic signal equipment, no signal heads present over the northbound and southbound lanes, and signal poles being in the medians on the north and south legs. For pedestrians, there are no high- visibility crosswalks and the curb ramps are not up to ADA standards. In 2024, the Village was awarded a Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant to cover 90% of the requested intersection improvements. The Village is responsible for 7.5% of total project costs, whereas the City of Milwaukee will be responsible for 2.5%. The total estimated project cost is $1,543,731 with federal share covering $1,384,858 for design and construction activities. Design is anticipated to continue through July, 2027 with construction commencing in 2028 as shown in the adopted 2026 – 2031 Capital Improvement Plan. On June 16, 2025, the Village Board approved the Hampton Avenue and Santa Monica State/Municipal Financial Agreement and Village of Whitefish Bay and City of Milwaukee Agreement as a means to accept WisDOT/Federal funding and work in conjunction with the City to make improvements to the intersection. On February 2, 2026, the Village Board approved the project design services to Strand Associates with the final signed contracts approved by WisDOT in March, 2026. Strand has since completed data collection and surveys in order to develop three concepts that will be presented to the Public Works Committee for review and comments as shown within the attached exhibits. On June 24 th, 2026, the project team hosted a Public Information Meeting (PIM) to share three concepts of the intersection improvements. Village staff publicized the event on social media, the bi -weekly newsletter, and distributed door to door flyers to neighboring residents and businesses to gain input on the proposed design. Three concepts were presented during the Public Information Meeting that are outlined below and included within the packet. On July 13th, 2026, Strand and Associates presented three concepts to the Public Works Committee as outlined below and within the packet. Feedback was gathered by Strand from the PIM, local businesses, and the Public Works Committee to narrow down the alternatives to incorporate stakeholder feedback into one proposed concept. The proposed alternative accounts for additional improvements including the adjustment of driveways to accommodate the gas station located on the SE corner of the intersection, constructing a parking pod to aid in street parking for the funeral home, and modifying the north median to support future signal pha sing and operational needs. 2 | Page Alternative A: Traffic Signal Alternative Summary • Pavement Resurfacing • Multimodal Enhancements o Curb Ramps o Bike Lanes o Bus Stops o High Visibility Crosswalk • Traffic Signal Improvements o Lane Designated Signal Heads o Reflective Backplates o Updated Detection o Emergency Vehicle Preemption o Pedestrian Push Buttons & Countdown Timers o Updated Signal Timings and Phasing with Protected Only Northbound and Southbound Left -Turn M ovements • Right of Way o Temporary Limited Easement During Construction A lternative B Summary • All Improvements as listed in Alternative A • A dditional Storage for Northbound Left-Turn Movement with • Re stricted Parking Along Horizontal Curve to Improve Sight Distance Around Curve • Adjust Driveway Opening to Gas Station • Incorporate Parking Pod in front of Funeral Home • M odified North Median on Santa Monica R oundabout Alternative • Intersection Reconstruction • Multimodal Considerations o Shortened Crossings with Pedestrian Refuge Islands o Curb Ramps Improvements • Lower Intersection Speeds • Right of Way o Impacts in All Intersection Quadrants o Potential Takings • Project Cost Likely to Exceed Funding Amount Village Staff Recommends to the Village Board: To approve the Hampton Ave. and Santa Monica Blvd. Alternative B traffic signal and intersection design concept as shown on the attached memo and exhibits. Excellence in Engineering SM Strand Associates, Inc.® ( ) The content in this document is technical in nature and is intended for an audience with specific training and expertise and therefore may not fully conform to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ( WCAG) 2.1 Level AA accessibility criteria. If you require the content of this document in an alternative format for conformance with WCAG 2.1 Level AA, please contact the Village of Whitefish Bay. The Village of Whitefish Bay, as the Web site administrator and op erator, is responsible for ensuring that posted content on its Web site conforms to applicable accessibility criteria. Village of Whitefish Bay, City of Milwaukee, and WisDOT August 31, 2026 Village Board Meeting Hampton Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard Intersection Improvement Project (ID 2545-05-01) • Project Background • Existing Conditions • Alternative Evaluation • Schedule Agenda Project Background • Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Project  Address existing crash trends at the Hampton Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard intersection • Main scope of work:  Traffic signal replacement  Milling and resurfacing pavement  Curb ramp improvements Project location Source: Milwaukee County GIS • Northeast, northwest, and southeast quadrants of the intersection are in the Village of Whitefish Bay • Southwest quadrant is the City of Milwaukee • Oak Leaf Trail and Estabrook Park Project Background Hampton Avenue Hampton Avenue Santa Monica Boulevard Source: Google Earth ProProject overview Santa Monica Boulevard City of Milwaukee Village of Whitefish Bay Estabrook Park Existing Conditions – Crash History Crash diagram (2019-2023) at the intersection of Hampton Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard Source: Highway Safety Improvement Program Application • 19 crashes over five years (2019-2023) • Severe left-turn angle crashes  1 A-level - Pedestrian  2 B-level  1 property damage only • 5 right-angle crashes • 4 signal poles hit 1. Negative offset for northbound left and southbound left turn movements 2. Poor traffic signal visibility 3. Non-compliant pedestrian facilities 4. Inconsistent bicycle markings 5. Access control Existing Conditions Hampton Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard existing conditions Hampton Avenue Santa Monica Boulevard Source: Google Earth Pro Alternative Evaluation Traffic Signal Alternative A Traffic Signal Alternative B Roundabout Alternative Alternative Evaluation – Traffic Signal Alternative B Traffic Signal Alternative B 1. Pavement Resurfacing 2. Multimodal Enhancements • Curb ramps • Bike lanes • Bus stops • High visibility crosswalk 3. Traffic Signal Improvements • Lane-designated signal heads • Reflective backplates • Updated detection • Emergency vehicle preemption • Pedestrian push buttons and countdown timers • Updated signal timings and phasing with protected only movements • Leading pedestrian intervals • Intersection Lighting 4. Right of Way • Temporary limited easement during construction Alternative Evaluation – Incorporating Stakeholder Feedback into the Design Driveway modifications to gas station business Traffic Signal Alternative incorporating stakeholder feedback 1. Property Owners  Adjusting driveway openings to gas station Alternative Evaluation – Incorporating Stakeholder Feedback into the Design Parking pod in front of funeral home business Traffic Signal Alternative incorporating stakeholder feedback 1. Property Owners  Adjusting driveway openings to gas station  Parking pod in front of funeral home Alternative Evaluation – Incorporating Stakeholder Feedback into the Design Modified north median 1. Property Owners  Adjusting driveway openings to gas station  Parking pod in front of funeral home 2. Public Works Committee  Modified north median to support future signal phasing and operational needs Traffic Signal Alternative incorporating stakeholder feedback Alternative Evaluation – Incorporating Stakeholder Feedback into the Design 1. Property Owners  Adjusting driveway openings to gas station  Parking pod in front of funeral home 2. Public Works Committee  Modified north median to support future signal phasing and operational needs Traffic Signal Alternative Schedule Excellence in Engineering SM Village of Whitefish Bay Public Works Department 155 W. Fairmount Ave  Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin 53217  (414) 962-6690  Fax (414) 967-1391 Mathew Collins, Director of Public Works August 31, 2026 Memo to: President Kevin Buckley and the Village Board of Trustees From: Maxine Miller, Staff Engineer Re: Klode Park Warming House Design Survey Results On August 7th, 2023, the Village Board and Public Works Committee adopted the 2024 - 2028 Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (CORP). The CORP created the framework for the Village to develop a strategic plan to optimize outdoor park and recreation spaces which was then integrated into the Village Board’s adopted 2026 – 2031 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The Village Board approved $1.5 million in 2027 as part of this plan to replace the Klode Park Warming House. The architectural design team, from GROTH Desing Group, lead public meetings to engage the community about Klode Park and gathered input regarding features the community desires to be included in the design of the new warming house. The GROTH staff incorporated the needs of the community into the initial designs of the warming house and further refined the designs into two options. The architectural design team then created a public survey, available to be completed either online or on paper. The public survey included renderings of the proposed designs, and images of both buildings’ layout. In total, the survey gathered 465 responses. The responses and summarized results are available as an exhibit to this memorandum. The goal of the Village Board meeting will be to share themes of the survey and integrate Village Board recommendations to have enough direction to transition the project to design development. The final design based on the direction of the Village Board will then be presented to the Village Board and ARC prior to finalizing design, construction and bid documents. Anticipated Project Schedule: • 8/31/2026 – 10/5/2026 – Design development • 10/5/2026 – Village Board - Final design review and approval • 10/15/2026 – ARC Meeting • 12/18/2026 – Estimated final design completion date • 1/25/2027 – Estimated project bid date • 3/8/2027 – Estimated construction start date • 10/29/2027 – Estimated construction completion date Recommended Action to the Village Board: To provide final conceptual design direction to GROTH Design Group for the Klode Park Warming House design as they move into design development. A P P L E T O N | C E D A R B U R G | M I L W A U K E E August 27, 2026 Summary of Klode Park Public Survey Survey Overview This summary includes 435 online responses and 30 paper surveys collected between August 10, 2026, and August 24, 2026. The responses were reviewed and analyzed to identify key feedback, themes, and recommendations. The complete raw survey data has also been provided for reference. Key Takeaways Overall, respondents showed a clear preference for Option A , both for the warming house design and the location of the multi-use pavilion. Specifically, 65% preferred the Option A building design , while 62% preferred the Option A pavilion location. Common reasons cited in support of Option A included its architectural character, functional layout, covered outdoor space, proximity of the pavilion to the building, and the amenity provided by the outdoor fireplace. While Option B was not the preferred alternative, respondents identified several positive features, including its stone and material palette, large windows, and simpler building massing. Across all responses, the most frequently cited factors influencing preferences were: • Architectural appearance and character • Functionality and usability • Building layout • Overall fit within the park setting Several concerns and suggestions were also identified. For Option A, respondents expressed concerns regarding the darker exterior materials, the long ranch-style appearance, and the perception that the building f elt too residential. For Option B, concerns included the pavilion's distance from the building, a perceived lack of architectural detail, and limited storage capacity. Suggested Items Missing from Both Options Respondents identified several amenities and design elements that should be considered regardless of t he selected option. The most common suggestions includ ed: • Covered bicycle and stroller parking • Safer pedestrian connections and circulation • A family and all-gender restroom • Amenities for beach users, such as an outdoor shower, storage cubbies, and related conveniences Conclusion The survey results demonstrate a consistent set of priorities and a clear preference for Option A. Com munity feedback was generally aligned across respondents, providing clear direction for the project team as the design process moves forward. The survey findings offer valuable guidance for refining the preferred concept and advancing to the next phase of design. Klode Park Warming House Design 428 responses Which architectural style do you prefer for the new warming shelter? Q1 Option A Option B No Preference 0% 7% 14% 21% 28% 35% 42% 49% 56% 63% 70% Klode Park Warming House Design 428 responses Overall, which design concept do you prefer? Q3 Option A Option B No Preference 0% 7% 14% 21% 28% 35% 42% 49% 56% 63% 70% What factors most influenced your preference? For example: appearance, functionality, accessibility, park character, flexibility, or other considerations. What do you like most about Option A? What concerns or suggestions do you have regarding Option A? What do you like most about Option B? What concerns or suggestions do you have regarding Option B? Is there a specific feature or element from one option that you would like to see incorporated into the final design, even if it is not your preferred option? Are there any features, amenities, or design elements you feel are missing from both options? Please share any additional comments or suggestions. Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Res ponse Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Response All options are so dark - might be nice to have something a bit brighter/cleaner More traditional design style I'm not seeing any place to put my stroller or large cargo bike, and the driveway looks really close to the door of the building and playground. This scares me for the safety of kids here! I like the consolidated shape. Will we be able to have food vendors here, like a beer garden sort of thing? Also the cars near kids is worrisome. Not much. The proximity to cars trying to park in the parking lot is again, scary. Have we considered some sort of sturdy barricade to prevent awful accidents? The all in one shape of a? Bike parking? I've tried biking here and I feel uneasy just leaving my bike, which is my only transportation, in the grass. I saw some very nice bike racks at UWM that are covered, and could fit my big bike, that would be neat! Thanks for doing this, I hope the latter stages focus on how to let us go to the park without a car! Pavillion location Love the stone!! Classic, fits the village, light. I prefer the layout of the building of option A I don't love the darker brick or the placement of the pavilion. Think it would be too difficult to gather around if that is where bands will be staged? The stone!! I like the stand alone pavilion, though I'm not sure that is the best location either. Maybe stand alone but more towards the east border. I do prefer the roof of this pavilion as well. Love the stone! Also love the abundant windows! Thinking about how it would work for events like July 4 and others where you could have a band under the roof. I also like the stone vs. brick exterior. Nice design, it flows better and might use interior space more efficiently. Appearance of the brick exterior and long-term maintenance cost. Stone exterior, simpler roof design on the pavilion. It looks more flexible too. I would orient the roof so the higher end would face the main part of the park (south) for bands or entertainers to be able to perform under the roof. The stone exterior would look nice on either design. I’d like to see that choice implemented. If possible, a raised “stage” area in the pavilion would be nice. Park character Boring, uninspired design Also uninspired design but lesser of two evils . Think y’all could do better, expect better from design firm Flexibility Better. Fireplace. None. Fireplace and dormers. The rest of the design looks like something from out west. Tahoe or a ski resort. Fireplace The brick, brown etc.. color scheme does not match our village. Nothing It to me does not look appealing. Fireplace indoor and outdoor. An aesthetic that matches our town. Color/scheme and materials being used. Dormers are fantastic. Fireplace is great. It’s a good beginning in plan A. This is a waste of tax payer dollars. Build bathrooms. We only have so much green space in this community. Quit building on it. Why not take an actual vote what every WFB resident wants. Spending 1.5 million on a warming hut is frivolous. Let the park be a park. None of it. Don’t build None of it Don’t build Bathroom only. Appearance Water bottle filler, place for teens to gather - maybe ping pong, pool table? Building a permanent bandstand is a terrible mistake. The Fourth of July can use a temp stage and tent without the infrastructure They have to address the parking. The streets are unsafe with cars parked on both sides. And this will make it even worse Fireplace and location of the pavilion to the playground. Don’t remember which one it was but also like a viewing area over looking the possible ice rink Fireplace that’s always on like the one near stormonth Character and function!! It’s functional and looks similar to our current structure. Character I really wish there was a greenhouse space incorporated into the building. This is what beautiful communities like WFB would appreciate. A huge thing that was missed during the playground upgrade was a splash pad. Can that be included in this project perhaps? As a resident of Shore Drive, there needs to be consideration for parking while protecting residents of shore drive’s access to their homes. After our experience with the World Cup party in Klode and how hard it was to get to our home there needs to be thoughtful review of parking. Appearance and features. Please ensure parking issues are addressed through doing it. Detached pavilion The separate bandshell/covered pavilion I don’t love the look of the solid brick wall from the one angle. Sort of looks like someone built a ranch house in the middle of klode from one angle More broken up walls. I like the look of the stone Use stone like B in design A but have lighter color colored accents Lighter colors. More coastal feel. White accents Lighter colors. More coastal feel. White accents Liked windows and stone. Seems to better echo of building at the beach. Pavilion is interesting Materials not a good fit Windows and stone I don’t like the rectangle pavilion as much. NA Please make sure it is accessible for a wheelchair NA Aesthetics Its more exciting Outdoor fireplace More public seating Appearance, design, flexibility. Appearance, fireplace Bandshell, fireplace, increased restrooms, warming house area for skating, mulit purpose community room. Appearance, accessibility — everything is together. Doesn’t look as modern as the option b, so fits better with WFB architecture. That is looks less “modern” Some might prefer the pavilion to be on its own. If you are picnicking there, there would be less people traffic that way. It’s a nice design too. See 6. Maybe more expensive to maintain (heat, cool?) as it is almost 3 distinct structures and seems to have more glass. Also, for either if they are intended to shelter from storms, you might not want as much glass, although I understand these are not storm shelters. Do windows open in either? Bike racks? Appearance and function The look and that it is one continuous space The separate pavilion Smaller size and less intrusive on the open space It looks far too big Make it as small and unintrusive as possible to protect the view toward the lake and maximize green space Appearance Style Size Functional space Wood beams Looks current vs historic. A little indoor-outdoor, seems larger and therefore more welcoming. See above Change the materials outside. Tudor feels dated and like it’s clinging to past. Functionality The band shell seems larger in this one I guess. Why is the band shell oriented on the side where a stage has never been set up before. Hard to see the band shell. Glass walkway seems like a waste. It seems like in both designs the band shell is located in the east side of the building… At all the live music events it is more central or on the western side. It seems like this is limiting vantage points. Functionality Style None Too box like, not enough architectural style Make sure there’s a way to have a band stage How about a kitchen in some way so parties and or food truck stops can happen in the easiest way I think this is great! Good job! Character and functionality. Looks to have a traditional old school appearance. Looks like a dental office Scrap the option A Open concept shelter encourages outdoor friend and family gatherings. Main building looks very fitting with Whitefish Bay traditional architecture None Ensure plenty of windows and light to best enjoy the lake and park views. If there’s a second floor of any sort- makes full use of lake view for resident enjoyment year around. Is there a partial second floor for year around lake view access? Appearance and amenities Flexibility The lime stone and the design of B seem a better fit with the rest of the village. A reminds me of more traditional and 70s style park shelters in the greater area. I much prefer the design of the band shelter in B as well. Option B appears to have a smaller footprint. The bathroom locations are better for access from the playground, allowing parents to keep better eyes on their children. The viewing area looks out onto the fields/skating area. The location of the pavilion and the inclusion of the hardscape patio that connects the building to the pavilion. The bathroom entrance is on the west side of the building. Parents with multiple children using the playground lose sight of their children entering/exiting. The bathroom placement for enter/exit. The pavilion placement is in the middle of the green space. This detracts from the overall view of the park from Lake Drive and is detached from the building. Would this location also require new electricity routing/wiring? Neither option A or B address the parking and traffic concerns around Klode Park on N. Shore Drive, Belle and Lake Drive. Also parking and loading traffic around the playground area is a safety concern. I am a resident of N. Shore Drive on the cul-de-sac north of the park. Over the past few years, there has been an increase in traffic and parking back-ups around the park. There has also been an increase in litter/garbage around the park including dirty diapers and fast food trash left at the curb/on the street. People often speed down the street and around the cul-de-sac. The park signage points to "dogs must be on leash" and "no grilling", yet people continue to run their dogs off leash and bring grills into the park. Rules aren't being enforced. I am very concerned with an increase in access and usage to Klode Park that these bad behaviors will increase. appearance layout, stone, color scheme Needs more attention at the Lake Drive side- should be more interesting from the road given the high traffic volume. No curb appeal from the street nothing- too modern pavilion off in the distance makes no sense Lends itself to combined use for larger events Materials and footprint None External seating options Appearance for option B. The stone and windows keep the aesthetic and architecture integrity of WFB: option A looks outdated and old with the brown color. However, having the pavilion attached to the warming house is essential to actually make use of it. Having the pavilion detached and makes it seem incohesive and will be less utilized. At the same time, we have a beautiful lake behind us. As we’re listening to music etc. patrons experience will be more enjoyable with the view of the lake vs having their back behind and looking at the road. I like the interior layout of option B in that the bathrooms are separated as both renters and the public will have access. The pavilion attached. The appearance and layout of the bathrooms. The appearance and exterior aesthetic. The detached pavilion. It doesn’t make sense having it separated with patrons viewing the street vs viewing the lake behind. Detached, besides a band, no one will use it. It looks outdated of place. The Pavilion attached. Yes. This is a huge opportunity to maximize what the area and building is and create a community space for gathering. We should be making the warming house a space for everyone to frequently use. As seen with the World Cup experience and beer garden, food and drink bring people together. To Make it more frequent and accessible we should create dedicated space for vendors to operate. Similar to what Estabrook Park and Hoyt Park allow. Without it, having just the warming house for events really diminishes the potential of what the space could offer the community. See above. Functionality Pavilion location, flexibility of use for community room and pavilion Very skeptical about the actual usage and value of the fireplace More bathroom separation Pavilion location is not ideal and would likely go unused for most of the year Attached pavilion I apologize if this was already discussed at one of the prior public meetings- but has there been consideration for a more robust kitchen area that could support food/beverage vendors on a somewhat seasonal basis? I’ve been to a few of the pop up beer garden fridays at Klode this year and it seems like they are very popular. I’m sure that a kitchen would greatly improve the ability for an operator to host more of these in the summer months and be well utilized in tandem with that pavilion. I wouldn’t expect this project to go full south shore terrace, but something closer to the scale of what Estabrook provides with their food/beverage options seems achievable. I’ve heard many Villagers voice their desire for more dining/entertainment options, but sky high rents on silver spring seem to pose obvious challenges. However, this area being fully owned and controlled by the Village presents a unique opportunity. At the end of the day, both designs A and B accomplish the main goal of replacing and improving the warming house and you can tell lots of effort has been put in so far! Excited to see the end result! Appearance and flexibility I think it’s beautiful, more architectural components, and very functional. N/a I do not like option B at all. It’s boring. I don’t care for the layout. Go with option A No No Appearance and park character. I think Options A fits the park on the lake better. All the windows. Accessibility needs to be stressed. The outdoor pavilion. It’s a little too heavy looking. Add an outdoor pavi lion to Option A. Not at this time. Emphasize the connection with the lake. Functionality and appearance The windows. Covered outdoor space connected to building. Didn’t look like option b had any. Covered outdoor space. I would make it bigger connected to the building and ditch the gazebo See comment above More covered outdoor space connected to building Appearance, position in the park. Overall look of the design Lots of windows The position of the open air pavilion doesn’t feel right Fireplace I think these are too similar to each other in style to be considered “choices”. They are both modern-looking, trendy, Barndominium-style. Completely inappropriate for the village. We should build something classic-looking that matches the majority of home styles in WFB. Please don’t build a big, ugly, charm-less building as a public space for our charm-filled community. A more classic design. Red brick, Georgian colonial, with a lovely chimney and a steep-pitched roof. I like how option a seems to be all aligned. Appearance Accessibility Design and layout Nine Nothing Pavilion placement is awkward imho No No I like the appearance of A best. The detailed overhang on the covered patio and the dormer windows along the roof add visual interest. I love the fireplace and covered patio and the location of the Pavillion since it is close to the bathrooms and the playground. I love the design of the pavilion. It looks a little long and linear and I don't like the brick. I'd prefer the stone from option B instead of the brick. The L shaped layout and the stone. It lacks the covered patio and the Pavillion appears much further from the building which has pros/cons. Covered patio is nice. It may be nice to have viewing area that is situated so you can see the playground and the rink. I actually like the stone work on B, but I like A because everything is close together. Everything is close together. None I like the exterior stone work, i.e. the look of the outside. I think that the pavilion should be closer to the main building. No. No. Lower cost. We can't even fix the middle school. Or the Cumberland playground. Cost Cost A playground at Cumberland and an updated or new middle school A playground at Cumberland and an updated or new middle school A playground at Cumberland and an updated or new middle school Appearance Design I like separate pavilion so not everything is happening in a single space. Smaller footprint by the playground. See above - separate pavilion especially. Hard to tell what really is included with the designs. Would hope maintenance/cleaning plan is in place. Esp for public restrooms. Mostly appearance Have you considered any amenities for the beach. An outdoor shower and changing rooms would be great Park character and the pavilion Resembles shelters at national parks and feels warm and welcoming. None No fireplace Fireplace Possibly a counter or builtins to aid in possible rental features This would be such a great addition to such a great park. Appearance and park character Fits better with architecture of area Too modern, does not fit with charm of whitefish bay Cubbies for skating! And overall look - quaint, classic, not modern Kitchen space and diaper changing areas in both bathrooms! A family bathroom would be nice too - always hard if a dad is out with kids who have to use the bathroom Appearance Exterior appearance and fireplace More viewing Viewing area Prefer exterior of option A Fireplace and maximum exterio r views Practicality, appearance, Covered outdoor seating area. Large hospitality bar. Fireplace Bathrooms on far side from playground. Limited outdoor covered seating. No fireplace Covered outdoor space. Serving window to ex terior Need more parking if the plan is to accommodate 100+ people gatherings in the space. Especially for an older population, very few spots available if the plan is to rent the space out for large gatherings. The double sided fireplace. The double sided fireplace in both A or B Flexibility for access to beach goers is a must. There is a LARGE group of community members who open water swim at Klode (throughout the entire year!) and would love a space that provides better access for restrooms, changing, and safe storage of gear. Any design that takes this into consideration would be incredibly appreciated. I like that it seems to orient towards the beach parking lot and field towards the bluff making it more accessible to the beach More public restroom access Easy restroom access, changing areas, maybe an outdoor rinsing shower (?) would all be amenties that would be a massive improvement There is a large community group of open water swimmers that utilize Klode Park as a convening spot. The beach is an incredible open water swim spot, and it would be so significantly improved if we had access to public restrooms, a space to safely store personal items (cubbies, lockers), and/or a simple changing room or outdoor rinse shower. I know this is meant to be a community gathering space, but I’d urge you to consider the open water swim/paddle board/kayak community members in this design as well! For the pavilion, option b offers a more central location with ample seating in the field Generally prefer the look of option b Will the glass corridor be heated and if so, will that be inefficient to maintain due to all the glass. It is unclear from the presented drawings but it would be nice if the community space windows could open during the summer and/or there were large doors that could be opened to better blend the indoor and outdoor spaces during the summer. Option B main building less imposing but seems to offer the same interior space and bathroom capacity. Also, a fireplace is not necessary; going without a fireplace reduces maintenance needs for something like that. N/A Eliminate the fireplace. Overall flow and layout of the building and the pavilion located further away from the building. N/A No. Don't add a fireplace to Option B. No. Do not build either option with a fireplace. I can’t open the link to see the plans. Can you make this easier to access? The light-colored exterior on Option B gives a airiness to the design. I also like the 'hallway' of windows for viewing in Option B, versus most windows in the community room in Option A. The upper windows seem rather pointless in Option A - just a place for dirty windows and spiderwebs. At least one or more family restrooms! A lowered/small toilet for toddlers, a lower sink, and enough room to balance multiple kids all in the bathroom (I personally juggle a baby and a toddler!). This is a VERY kid-centric area, catering to kids in the bathroom should be priority. I'm not sure what the plans are for the community room, but if it has heating and cooling, as well as moveable seating, it would be a HIT for showers/small parties all year round. So many parks buildings can't be used in both seasons due to the lack of heat or cooling. Families are always looking for third spaces for gatherings. Appearance Functionality and the window wall in option B Where would there be sitting for concerts near the bandshell? Window wall Also not entirely clear where the pavilion is in this option or where the seating would be. Window wall Seating areas near the pavilion Functionality and appearance Flexibility Functionality Appearance Many windows It looks too closed off Openness The dormers in the roof add natural light and should be included. More detailed design, the dormers and smaller windows add interest to the overall look of the building and seem more welcoming. It's a more interesting design, more traditional design. My husband says... the expense. Neutral on Option B. It looks like many current designs that are being approved in the village for commercial buildings. They are monolithic in appearance and flat and rather uninteresting. No. No. We believe that Option A would be a better fit and look for the neighborhood. I think the two designs are almost identical, so there isn't much different to them to make a huge retermination. Biggest design decision was liking the stoage, hospitatlity bar, and fireplace on A. Fireplace When considering any of these decisions, I think you need to think about the operations of the facility first- especially if you are opening this to the public and renting it out to the community. First, I would review the location of the bubbler in option A. You are going to get to a point where you are only going to want to have the external doors open to the bathrooms, so the public cannot get in the vestibule (to try to prohibit breaking of the cubbies, benches, hooks, etc..). I would suggest putting a bubbler in between the outside doors too so then there is water access without needing to go inside. Ideally, you have a bubbler on the inside of the building and the outside of the building so water can be accessed however the facility is being used. I'd also question if the doors are going to be set on automatic timers and a FOB setting which would be ideal so you can lock/unlock the doors on a schedule without needing to pass around keys to a rentor or locking/unlocking bathrooms. I would entend and have a cantilever roof and patio with some patio seating and room for beer garden: food truck electrical, beer tap trailer, seating, etc.. The storage is too small on both facilities. Depending on what type of furniture you will want to put inside of the room will determine the size you want for storage. For example, if you are buying tables and chairs, you might want to have the chairs stacked and the tables on dollys. Will the renter set up the shelter and would they be responsible for putting them away? You could host a yoga class in that room, but without being able to store the tables you would be limited. If you add picnic tables, you are limiting yourself to what type of activity might be able to do inside the community room because the tables would be too heavy to move. That then would get into the type of flooring for the community room- what would you consider? I'd so like a polished concrete. I don't like anything about option b. If we are going to build this, lets build it right. I'd give $42/year (double) to make sure we have a great space. Not big enough storage, not big enough community room, very basic- lets do it right. Fire place Id like to see the patio, cantilevered roof for beer garden/patio vibes. You could add on a small concession stand area that would have a space for a fridge/freezer, sink, selling window, counter space, etc.. Out of the box idea would be to add a second story rooftop patio instead of a pitched roof. Unrelated by close by: I'd close in the entire playground. The lack of fence near the shelter poses a risk for families where children might be able to sneak out. Maybe that could be added to this design? I would encourage anyone to go to the Ridge in Sussex. Their newest shelter/event space. While that space was 7.8 million and out of the price range of what im assuming we'd want to spend.. there are some fun design elements to see. Option A has double-sided fireplace with greater functionality/flexibility to accommodate inside/outside activities. See #4 response. Linear design should be more cost effective. Consider removing roof windows for bathroom space area. This change will be more cost effective and does NOT detract from Option A design. Appearance Appearance. Functionality and character Functionality flexibility - Option B provides more Look/Aesthetic Like the windows and dormers but like the walkway of b so my answer really us a combo Windows and dormers and event space No walkway Walkway with windows No dormers Windows dormers walkway and event space No both look good but would prefer if combined Thank you - will be a great renovation for the village Option A has more useful features and the linear concept creates a more welcoming space people to gather between the pavilion and the community room. The interior layout accommodates more of the features that this space should offer such as: - -cubbies/hooks for safe and orderly storage of gear (e.g. ice skates, soccer bags) - seating at viewing areas on both the south facing and north facing sides provides a comfortable place to watch you kids -more space for storage for DPW and WFB Civic Foundation -the dual- sided fireplace will attract much more community engagement in all seasons both indoor and outdoor -bigger hospitality bar gives more options for private events -positioning the pavilion adjacent to the community room and hardscaped space makes a natural environment for people to gather, and better logistical sense for band setup and electric connectivity -overall the floor plan uses the space wisely. -The linear layout risks looking like a single family home in the middle of the park. Can it be softened to blend into the landscape. -lack of wall space in the community room for dry-erase boards or a place to give presentations. -The pavilion design from Option B is more attractive and discrete -The south facing viewing window is small. Could it be expanded? -I prefer a more natural wood siding over the brick selection and green painted siding. -include exterior flood lighting to light the ice skating rink and playground to extend the hours of use. - Include landscaping around the windowless restroom portion to integrate it into the landscape. -The pavilion design is attractive. It reminds me of the Lake Park pavilion. Could we use this design in the Option A layout? Acoustically, this design is better too. - -Sendik's is rebuilding it's grocery store on Silver Spring and it is much larger than many people anticipated and there are questions about how necessary that was. The community may be more sensitive to developing a large building at Klode Park, which is distinct for preserving it's natural and open views. Is this larger community room completely necessary? -The modern architectural features may look dated in a few years. Option A appears more timeless. -The solid roof line stands out as monolithic. I prefer the dormers on Option A, and I suspect there will be better natural light too. -The vestibule / warming area lacks critical features such as: seating for viewers and storage for parkgoers. I like the cubbies and seating options in Option A. -Lack of fireplace -The smaller hospitality bar would less utilitarian than Option A. -Separating the pavilion from the main building and parking would be logistically difficult for bands to set up, bring in power. Furthermore, the pavilion will obstruct the view of the park and Lake Michigan from Lake Drive. Neighbors and passersby would be disappointed to see a structure prominently in a new area of the park. Lastly, there is less opportunity for the community to "collide" and socialize when the structures are separated which is less fun. -Option B pavilion design -Option A cubbies / hooks and viewer seating - Option A fireplace -Lighting to shine on playground and ice skating rink to extend hours of use -Include design feature that make it easy to clean and maintain. The current building has a bad reputation for cleanliness. -Design materials should match the park environment to blend in -The building structure should avoid blocking views or changing the feel of the park -Make the band shell accommodate temporary scaffolding for production lights and speakers -Clearance height to be able to use the bandshell for other activities such as open air movie screens -Include diaper changing stations in both restrooms -Include water bottle filling I think it will look smaller and not such a long building The flow of the overall building might be better Not a fan of the brown brick. Is it trying to sort of look like a Tudor without the German styling? From the multiple angles, it seems smaller. Not as much horizontal surface area. Same color/design brown brick as option A The current building has a colonial feel. I think it looks better than these designs. Red brick is being painted over now? But in 5 years, it will come back. If brown, add more Tudor design elements. Thank you for asking for this feedback. Open space I like the band shelter is separate from the pavilion. The rustic look. It looks too big and out of place. I like the design. How will the building be maintained. I think the band shelter should have a raised stage. No. How much is this project going to cost? Layout Fireplace and the location and size of the bar. The use of the vestibule/warming area is good too. I like how there are cubbies. We used to have my daughter’s Brownie meetings at Cahill and coat hooks are very helpful. Does the footprint take up more space? The windows Lack of cubbies/coat hooks I like the fireplace, but does anyone use the one at Cahill? Would it be a gas fireplace? I can’t think of anything NA It needs to be accessible to all and usable in all weather conditions Very protective Not as much outside room The design None Appearance and practical use It's more cohesive Cost to villagers I don't really like it It seems too disjointed No No None Appearance and functionality The two sided fireplace and dormer windows I'm really not a fan of the covered shelter. I think we are better off with a covered band shelter. Could WFB do a summer concert series there? Appearance Option A looks less expensive without the glass walkway. Looks great - and less expensive than B. For both options, I’m concerned over the cost, how community room use is determined and managed. For both options, I’m concerned over the cost, how community room use is determined and managed. It would have Neeb good to have an explanation along with this survey that explains the rational for this project, the estimated budget and how it will be funded, etc. Frankly - I think this is an unneeded expense that we should not incur especially at this time. Let’s spend our tax money wisely and prioritize the school. Upgrade the current facility to provide more bathrooms. Upgrade the warming house at Cahill for a community room. This is an unneeded expense that we can live very well without! Frankly - I think this is an unneeded expense that we should not incur especially at this time. Let’s spend our tax money wisely and prioritize the school. Upgrade the current facility to provide more bathrooms. Upgrade the warming house at Cahill for a community room. This is an unneeded expense that we can live very well without! All of the above Flexibility, functionality, appearance Pavilion near playground, classic brick look/design Long “viewing” hallway seems like a waste of space I think there should be access to the building from both the field side and the parking lot side. Honestly think there should be pavilion or shaded picnic table spaces in both spots - I think that would allow FULL functionality of the entire park- you may have families with kids who are utilizing the field and picnicking. Playing in the field is not as ideal if there is not a convenient home base. I believe having doors on all sides of the building also would help families feel like the main structure is fully accessible from all aspects of the park regardless of which part you are enjoying and therefore making a very popular park seem less crowded or busy The outdoor pavilion on option A looks much more functional and the red brick won’t be dated as soon as the stone design will. The red brick and the outdoor pavilion. Having the halls connected in a stretch design is more functional for setting up events. N/A Looove the hallway made out of windows. So much opportunity for multiple functions at the same time. Larger events won’t be able to congregate efficiently. The some just isn’t a vibe. The long glass hallway in option b looks so nice. Could overheat very easily however without proper ventilation however and won’t be cost effective to keep heated in the winter without proper insulation. Garage style doors on the outdoor pavilion. Could be used for excess storage in off season months and used for safety shelter during inclement weather. Klode is well overdue for a facelift, I think this is a great initiative for adding this spaces in whitefish bay. All above The open pavilion. I can imagine it used also as a stage area for bands or performances in the round. More expensive Not a fan. Seems awkward in flow I like the open pavilion feature Fireplace Outdoor fireplace and location on stage near playground. Leaves the larger grass area open for play vs the other design with large stage Fireplafe outside Stone use looks good and should last Too big of a stage Smaller stage is a good fit in the neighborhood Rooftop viewing for fireworks show or other Option A is more aesthetically pleasing in my opinion and has a fireplace. Double fireplace The covered patio I would like to see the fireplace and patio together in the final design The pavilion by lake dr. Mothers room and/or family restroom since it is by the playground 2 separate building Aesthetics Too big 2 buildings and glass in between Morhing No No No Multi use pavilion proximity to the playground. I like the attached pavilion and the ability for things to be easily moved inside from there from an event and connectedness perspective. Having the main entrance -> community -> pavilion seems like a really nice flow to set things up if people rent things out. Concerned how frequently the loading spots going to have things in-and-out. It's right by the playground entrance and, really in both cases, is a high ped-traffic spot of people going in and out. This would be better than B because of the greater capacity to have people congregate around the multi use pavilion. I like the direct access to the bathrooms from the outdoors. If you got a sandy kid that's trying to get clean, they're going to come in side, track a bit (probably not that much) through the lobby and add that much to be cleaned. Either option is more convinient than today's I like the layout! Just wish the multi-use pavilion was close to where things were. I'd love bike parking, like a handful of staple style racks, none of the 'schoolyard style' racks. Right now, every time I go there's a pile of bikes just lying around. Maybe ditch a parking spot. Or put a handful on the sides of the tennis court. Having a paved connection from the sidewalk on Lake Dr to the building along the tennis courts would be awesome. Really any sort of bike/ped access. The first time I biked there, it was confusing to have to zip all the way around and then not know where to put my bike. After we were done, I actually biked across the grass with my kids, like others had done. Love the playgrounds, wish ped/bike access was better and more welcoming from people coming off of Lake. There are things I like and don't like about each design so I feel like it is hard to decide between the two. The functionality and of the building and the the overall look of the park effect what I like and don't like. I like the look of that building the most. I do like that there is still an open view to the lake from Lake Drive. It's so nice to drive along or walk along and look out to the lake. I don't like that the pavilion is so close to the playground. What if you don't like the music or it is too loud but you want your kids to be able to play on the playground. That the pavilion is not so close to the playground. I'm concerned that the pavilion would interfere with the nice open view to the lake from Lake Drive. Based on the events held at Klode and how we as a community would use it. Option A makes sense. I disagree about having a stage and a pavilion. They don't really get used. It looks great but its use would be limited and it would take space away for other things to do in the park (like the ice rink), picnics, soccer pick up games, etc. Option A - flows great and looks great. People will love to rent it out for family, school, other events. Restrooms with access from the outside and inside - helps solve the Cahill issue of having strangers walk in on your event to use the restroom. I think you should drop the stage and pavilion. it won't get the ROI you think. Kids will just climb all over it with toys, bikes and it will take up space that could be used for other things. It will create a wind tunnel based on its structure. - Concerns about older kids/adults hanging inside of the facility longer then they should. I don't like B N/A I think it would be great to have a small serving area in the vestibule to allow for hot cocoa, tea, coffee - etc during the winter months. I will age myself, but I loved the snacks and cocoa that the brown deer park warming house would offer. It's a nice touch. Some Outdoor Lantern/modern lighting would be helpful. Filtered water fountain to fill up water bottles like the ones in the schools. Hand Dryers in the bathroom. Great to dry hands and great to warm them up in the winter. Flat Screen TV/outlets, placed in easy areas. great for community space. Easy to broadcast pictures, play movies, presentations, etc. Mini Fridge or small full size fridge in community room. microwave. curtains/blinds. N/A Aesthetic of building The roof is kind of boring looking and doesn’t fit in with the charm of wfb architecture of all the tudor homes I would like the exterior to have a very charming look that fits wfb, a Tudor cottage or manor would be the best What does each option cost? Where is the $ coming from? What is the budget for the project? Pls explain the entire process before asking for our opinions on possible options. Option B provides more separation between the gathering space and the restrooms. And the location of the pavilion in Option B is better to keep noise in the gathering room more manageable. The architecture reminds me of the current Sendik’s. Move the pavilion to the space in Option B The separation of the restrooms from the gathering space The architectural style is better in Option A Separate the public restrooms from the gathering space and make the restrooms accessible without entering the main building where events may be happening. Consider putting a kitchenette in the gathering space. Is any of this really necessary? Functionality and appearance I like that the pavilion is attached to the community room. The bar seating in the annex seems like a nice place to sit and work on my laptop. I like the large hospitality station in the community room. The fireplace is a winner for me—it’s one of the things I like most about Cahill. Bonus that it’d be double sided! I like the L shape of option B. If you could incorporate a larger hospitality station and fireplace (bonus if double sided) into B, and attach the pavilion, I’d prob like that best. The L shape rather than it being linear (boring). I also like the parking spot/loading zone nearby. That’d be so useful! No fireplace. Smaller hospitality station. Pavilion too far away. See my notes above. I think a focus on the hospitality area would be beneficial. A refrigerator/freezer, oven, and large sink would be so handy. Make sure there are plenty of tables and chairs like Cahill. A shower could be useful if space allows. And perhaps an additional toilet stall in the men’s room in lieu of one of the urinals. Please make WiFi available!!! And make rentals available for 4+ hours—2 hours is not enough!!! Windows, seemed less “structural” and dark. The pavilion I liked more as it seemed to lend itself more to bands and events versus option a’s pavilion seemed more just general sun or weather cover. The windows and lightness to the design The pavillion Appearance Appearance primarily, I like that it is a good mix or traditional and modern. It looks nice No concerns, just prefer option B design More inviting, feels like a good use of the land… None I like the idea of different yet connecting buildings More picnic tables under structure Fire place addition. Bathrooms don’t jut out as much into the park Should look to maximize windows facing the south. Conscious of what it looks like from Lake Fire place! Storage for tables and chairs to use with a rental. Outdoor storage component for items at the park. More covered porch area Something that can be used to make ice rink maintenance or even skate rental easier! N/a N/a There must be an addition of ablution facilities, clean areas for prayer mats, storage for sajjada, and ideally floor designs to help find the Qibla direction for prayer call. There is a growing Muslim population in Whitefish Bay and we must do our best to accommodate our new neighbors with appropriate prayer sites. Moreover, the warming/prayer center should have very clear gender segregated areas and disallow LGBT activity in adherence with our values of inclusivity for the religions of new neighbors. Appearance Looks inviting Small community space N/a Roof is boring Mo Splash pad!!! We need one at klode Splash pad! Appearance, functionality, cohesion, interior amenities The layout, the aesthetic, and the interior amenities Could there be good lighting on the exterior to be used for the ice rink in the winter? Doesn’t have to stay on late, but in mid winter it gets dark at 4:30pm. We usually have to put the car headlights on the rink for the kids to enjoy the last hour of skating before dinner. Appearance Appearance Indoor and outdoor space Not having outdoor space Pavillion location Pavillion location, cubbies along wall Larger restrooms, 4 stalls is not enough in the women’s room. The building materials/ outside asthetics Pavillion separate More bathroom stalls Form follows function, as they say........ Fire place Fire place Energy efficiency and optimal space usage. Floor plan Overall aesthetic and how it blends with WFB architecture Modern design Layou t and it being energy efficient Pavilion connected to the warming hut Appearance How it looks! Appearance park character Style We liked the stone accents but also liked the open air covered shelter pavilion. Either would be a good upgrade! The open air space and windows Events will still be weather dependent The covered options and stone accents That’s it’s too enclosed for a park pavilion and you lose the views of the lake or outside park/green/ice skating! Windows ! Ensure there is flexible space for more than one event at a time Excited for this one! Appearance! Architectural design consistent with WFB Village traditional architecture! None Prefer A. Not as traditional. Thank you! Style, appearance, simplicity in design. Style, appearance, and simplicity in design. I don't like the location of the pavillion. It would not work for 4th of July or larger gatherings. The pavillion design and location The style The pavillion design and location from Option B Have you considered the location of the pavillion at the East end of the park? Having a uninterrupted view of the lake from more of the area I’m looking forward to the new building and think both A and B are great options. There may need to be more parking than is currently available should events be held there Appearance. Like the appearance that isn’t too boring, something different and interesting, like the use of different materials that is not just more brown brick. Stone is nice. I love the outdoor fireplace. The four sided pavilion/stage is great- feels like opens up to lots of options. The viewing area is nicer than B. Is the four sided band stage good for sound? Great asthetics but is sound ok? Is viewing area able to see the playground to be able to watch the kids if you have to take one kid to bathroom and the other is still playing. Option B is fine but roofline makes it look boring. Very uninspired design and function. Not much of an upgrade except it will be newer. Fireplace, viewing area that can see as much as possible- mainly playground, multifunctional stage, focus on bikes, people, scooters etc over cars. Bike station, runners, beach goers. Bike station, beach goer amenities, runners. Thank you! The windows and overall design Whichever is less expensive Functionality, rental ability, character Style, size Color scheme is pretty but just on the smaller size Lots of windows, park character, flexibility of community use. Option A looks too dark and closed off.. Option B looks modern and light. None, but I like the idea of a separate outdoor stage and bandstand Lots of windows and light. How about a big covered porch for folks to sit in chairs or rockers? Like Schlitz Audobun Nature Center building. Appearance Dormers More windows? Possibly including the extended wall of glass seen in option b. Glass enclosed walkway. Neat contemporary touch that’s not out of place w wood structure. See above. No Appearance and functionality Outside aesthetic The two part structure The building should shield the sound of pickleball and allow for expanded hours. Appearance, functionality The band shelter is a little further away. But that it’s too far away if kids are playing g and parents listening Function separate building area Style A little concerned about a lot of glass. Insulation issue More modern look while still fitting in the park Lighter wood? appearence, functionality, character of the park Love the way it looks and larger warming area none that is more divided into 2 buildings dont like the appreanece as much and the warming area may be too small the larger warming area no Red brick character, more traditional looking Overall look Appearance, the covered outdoor space (pavilion) that was distinctly separate from the building. All the windows by the playground, lots of natural light. The look and feel and the covered outdoor space (pavilion) The building looks like a nice house. And all the windows. None The windows The pavilion is too far from the playground and the building. The covered pavilion by the playground. A shady place to sit and watch your kids is such a win for the families in the community. No I think the pavilion should be set apart from the main warming house as then it won’t be so crowded during events Appearance, park character, fitting in with the town, function The design with the large windows and long ranch style layout I would suggest back doors for ice skaters to enter vs the current side doors I love the light brick and glass walkway The large windows and brick siding Warming features like firepits or heated lamps would be great to get people outside in winter appearance and character less obtrusive than B is the outdoor covered area big enough? lake view I imagine a big beautiful building with amazing views being locked most of the time/inaccessible, or unlocked but underutilized unless "rented" not sure if this is present already, but ample shade from a roof overhang, perhaps even aligned for viewing of tennis courts and/or playground, would be nice. would imagine people sitting outside reading, having coffee together with chairs they bring, etc see #9 Better flow Picnic pavilion proximity to family needs like park, bathrooms Still feels like a missed opportunity to have more of an integrated pavilion It just doesn’t feel special. There is personality missing. Maybe some fireplace options like Fox Point I don’t like that it blocks the view of the park unless you are in the park. Families have multi age kids and spread out when there. This drastically interrupts sight lines when families are spread out. Layout Character and functionality Clean design None The appearance of option A is preferred, however, the layout of option B seems more functional. Exterior appearance has character and charm. The interior layout seems less functional in regard to the viewing space and warming space. The layout The exterior is more modern, drab looking. The exterior features of option A-- windows, trim, etc. Fireplace like in Fox Point Appearance and functionality Appearance and functionality None It’s attractive, too. It seems more cut-up than Option A Just like Option A a bit better architecturally. No Appearance. Flexibility and overall character fit into the community Architecture Size and footprint Viewing area Best use of space The viewing areas Food options Appearance Appearance None Appearance Character Best internal layout Not flexible enough for indoor / outdoor weather Natural light hallway Maybe stage area needed Natural light, and ability for the structure to have large openings Garage door or folding sliding door wall Include a beer garden Simpler design. Convert the Cahill detention pond into an off leash dog park. Park character Fireplace and pavilion location Fireplace I think the appearance matches the architectural design of the village, and I chose the stage location because it makes the most sense for events to have the band nearer the building. I like the design of the building, especially with the fireplace, it seems like it would be a nice place for community events. No concerns. There seem to be a lot of nice windows. It looks smaller and I don’t think it makes sense to separate the pavilion from the warming house. I’d like to make sure the design matches the general aesthetic and design of the homes in the village. It would be nice if there were a refrigerator or stove for community or private events. Could there also be a water bottle filler and water fountain in the final design? Excited to see this space upgraded! flexibility and the pavilion The windows, the simplicity of the roof etc for upkeep Make the warming area larger, ie, bench areas, I didn't realize the current "warming hut" was anything but an ugly concrete antechamber to bathrooms, it is massively uninviting. the hut in bayside by the winter ice area is a much more inviting space. I like the layout with the separation dormers are an additional roof and expense that adds nothing Yes, the outdoor pavilion in A is inviting and probably likely to get th emost use In St Paul (como park?) the outdoor pavilion had a metal catering shelf with an quasi garage door to a kitchen for events--we rented this for our department's annual picnic. Even if you didn't use the kitchen, it had electric plugs outside and was easy to clean. Pavilion Appearance The space of it It looks like there is more space and I just like the appearance better. The fireplace! And, lots of space none The "L" shaped design doesn't seem to have as much space and doesn't seem as functional as A. I like the pavilion design in A and the fireplace. Is the vision that this space could be rented out for parties? Should there be more kitchen space? Maintaining green space Character and functionality and access to the pavilion I liked the design most because I disliked the flat roof of option B an option a has a lot more angles and design No suggestions I like the shape of the pavillion That it will look to flat and not have much character Make the roof look interesting and not just completely flat give it character. As well, I hope that you can make it blend in into the environment by adding surrounding bushes, trees, and or flowers. No Please vote for house A’s roof design Appearance, park character, village chacter Too much like the modern farmhouse design. Fit the community Window breakage Appearance Fits place bettwr Both are good, much needed improvement, thank you! Option B does not have a double sided fireplace or much outdoor space for seating Large community room, and different pockets of viewing from different areas Location of pavilion, I’m not sure that makes the most sense. Where would the audience be sitting? It could be fine and you just need to draw people into the inage. Lots of windows Large viewing area could be a waste of space if it’s not utilized Double sided fireplace and the outdoor patio area Appearance Appearance, character The questions aren’t nuanced enough to help define a final design. The double sided fireplace in option A is great and should be kept in the final design of any scheme. However the layout of option B is better. A detached pavilion is a better option but neither location is ideal. Option A pavilion faces an area that would be difficult to stage an event. Option B is in the west, with the majority of the events in the evening the audience will be staring directly into the sun. A northern pavilion with the audience to the south is the best location. Fireplace Layout is not as nice as B with clear separation of bathrooms and community room. It is also too long and linear The layout and simplicity of the forms Lack of a fireplace. Location of pavilion. Double sided fireplace in all options I don’t think the materials are quite right for either option. Would look to the surrounding context to find materials that better fit the neighborhood. The area is full of revivalist homes. Keep the simplicity of option B but select a stone, brick, or wood that relates to the revivalist homes surrounding klode Better separation between parking playground and bike parking is essential. A protected bike path along shore into the parking lot would be ideal. Appearance, windows. One building Windows to playground area Simple and works on the site the best. The character isn’t perfect, but it’s better to keep it traditional to get the longevity out of it vs trying to do a trendy design. More traditional style. The band pavilion is more inviting. The outdoor fireplace is inviting. The spine that connects the playground side to the field would be much nicer if the doors lined up across from each other creating an axis and allowing light to flow between the two vs the left sided door on one side. The colors are two dark. Use references from the past and bring some brightness. Think Lake Park Bistro, but with more simple column elements that are drawn from the Pabst resort images. It looks like a suburban house at the moment. Needs more unique elements drawing from WFB history. I do like that it’s a bit brighter and glassy. It looks like a 1950’s church. The band pavilion shape from option one is the best. Lighter colored materials and full height glass is nice in option 2. They are too dark. Light colored materials fit better for a park by Lake Michigan. This isn’t a nature preserve. Think white, cedar wood colors. More Lakehouse style. Greater connection to how families typically flow through the area. Some kind of connection to the lake. Historical boards or teaching elements are greatly needed. Either inside or maybe on the playground side. Functionality The look I like the traditional style. I'm torn however about whether the pavilion should be close to the building (for events with spillover) or far (for distinct groups who don't want to interfere with each other). 1) The fact that kids are not walking through cars to get from the playground to the bathrooms. 2) The style is nice. What are we seeing in the view from Lake Dr? It looks like an ugly garage. Maybe make it more inviting to kids, like with visually welcoming bike parking and a fun or attractive bike/walk path. Looks like the roof could handle a lot of solar. Also separate parties could use the pavilion and the building without worry about running into each other. On the other hand, unplanned encounters are actually a feature of good public spaces, so I'm ambivalent. Huge problem: the placement of the building vis a vis driveway/parking means that kids will be walking among cars (distracted ones no less) to get to the bathroom. What do you think about a solar roof? I like the glass viewing bar in Option B - - much better than the ugly facade to Lake Dr in Option A. Is there some kind of intermediate distance you can come up with between the pavilion and the building? My kid would regularly bike there for cross- country practice. Absolutely need more attention to people on bike and foot, preferably friendly hospitable features (and not harsh and glaring warnings). Thanks for asking! Klode Park is a treasure. Appearance, character Overhang appearance and functionality It would be nice if either option had more doors open to the south side of the park to facilitate better entry/exit for ice skating rink. It would be nice if either option had more doors open to the south side of the park to facilitate better entry/exit for ice skating rink. Having the covered pavilion near the playground would be great for parents/daily picnics, etc. Having the covered pavilion closer to the west side would be great for hosting more outdoor concerts and bands. Having both would be the best option. appearance, not sure what point of mixed use pavilion away from rest rooms, trash cans, etc. aesthetics nice big windows pavilion off by itself seems Odd and disconnected from rest bike and scooter parking, pedestrian access points--this is a very car-focused design. keeping cars and kids apart. how does this impact the ice rink? fireworks? community events? why are we not moving the tennis courts away from the houses to reduce disruptions to them and provide more community access? sight lines are important for general safety, so having big windows are good. can we see who's inside to ensure protection of individuals, and also ease for policing? what kinds of accessibility is there for disabilities and those with different needs--changing tables, adult changing table, etc. what about maintenance--ease of collecting trash, ensuring safe use, protecting, closing, etc. will community room be rentable/reservable? Viewing room set up that it has a single building feel all the dormers on "A" aren't needed cleaner design Option B had more continuous viewing areas, particularly to the South which would be ice rink viewing. I don't feel that Option A viewing areas are as useful. I also loved the stone on Option B - a nod to the lannon stone designs around the Village! I like the eastern fireplace - hope we could integrate that into the design one way or another. Length of the building makes it look bigger than it needs to be, leads to waster space by the tennis courts. I like that it crowds around the natural gathering space at the parking lot, playgrounds and tennis courts. I feel like the Option B exits at north and south are more supportive of ice rink activities which would be great. Would love to see the eastern overhang enlarged to offer more coverage during a rainstorm for parents and families at the playground Fireplace - so classic and community- based. Also, the larger overhang from Option A How will this space be utilized during 4th of July festivities? That's arguably when 50% of WFB uses Klode - how can we enhance the festivities using this facility? Both look great! Bathroom access and pavilion location influenced my decision. I like where the pavilion is located in Option A I like the bathroom access from the playground area The pavilion location takes away from the field being used for sports or other activities Move the pavilion in line with the building. The pavilion in option B is too far away from the bathrooms when you're using it for parties or picnics. No Great work! Other I think you got one shot to do this correctly to make it last. My opinion is that there should be two levels. The upper deck should have a wrap around porch all the way around it to watch the tennis courts, playground, and another viewing area of the crowds or bands that play at the pavilion. I guarantee people will donate to have this done. Be creative. Perhaps the people that donate X get their family name on a plaque and get a free rental of the place. Or most likely someone could have their family's name on it as the Jones Family Deck if they want to donate the extra money. I am sure a family would want their name as a landmark for their grandkids and their grandkids to remember Appearance and functionality It is more traditional of a design that matches the architectural style of the Whitefish Bay's houses. I also like the viewing area. I think the colors is very brown and dark. I think making it slightly lighter and brighter would be nice. Nothing. I think this style is dated. It feels like a library that would have been designed in the late 70s. I'm not sure if this was supposed to be a more modern design, but I think it misses the mark. I like how it looks and flow inside seems better. Accessibility from pavilion to restrooms, etc More traditional styling Pavilion feels far away Appearance and flexibility The detached bandshell Nothing I don’t like that option It is not as inviting as A Bike repair tools and air station See above Functionality and accessibility Include an attached shed for supplies (ice rink supplies, soccer goals, ect.) Appearance and character Functionality and appearance Appearance is beautiful and very fitting wood and open windows to incorporate into nature. More enclosed space. N/A It’s more aesthetically pleasing, and I like the open pavilion. N/A I don’t see benches or tables? The view or appearance from Lake Drive, breaking up the large structure into two units fits better with the park character, I like the streamlined look. I like the pavilion being placed near the structure. It looks like a big garage door when viewed looking east from Lake Dr - just why? It's rare to get views of the lake in WFB. Klode is an exception. Why distract from that view/character with a big multi-purpose structure? Don't think dormer windows are needed - too much. The size looks more appropriate for the park's character. Much prefer the look and architecture of Option B when viewed facing east from the street. I prefer the streamlined, simpler style of B. Not a fan of the pavilion placement especially the direction it opens. I prefer the pavilion placement of Option A. Appearance and the windows It looks nicer The space between bathrooms and the community room looks better in option A and the outdoor but covered space is a lot better in option A A lot of the design - esp the covered outdoor spaces None I did not like Option B it's too chopped up and not a good flow Lack of outdoor covered space bc the area they have is a slanted roof and not very large compared to Option A The outdoor covered space from A should be in both designs if A is not picked Pick option A pls ;) A has the pavilion closer to the warming house. That would be more convenient for events to take place there. I like the red bricks, the large windows, the pavilion is closer to the main structure. Will there be a fire place in winter? The stone siding. The pavilion is too far away from the main structure. The size of the pavilion obstructs lake views from Lake Drive. The separation of the two spaces has an airier feeling. The natural stone is also much more attractive than all the brick in Option A The brick is so dark. It's all just so brown. The building looks really hulking somehow. The natural stone and the separation of the two spaces makes it less intense looking. NATURAL STONE! Brick and wood materials Pavilion location seems less than ideal for a large audience. Pavilion location Must be nice to have a statutorily defined borrowing limit, versus other government entities that have to beg constituents for every single penny that they want to borrow. Appearance - Option B - functionality and accessibility to bathrooms is what drove my choice. Majority of people will use the structure for the bathrooms and to ensure there is good traffic flow, especially for events like 4th of July. The patio space, but would hope there will be picnic tables to use. I liked the Bandshell, but I didn't like it so close to the playground. Though I like the attempt to include the families that are on the playground, it would be too loud for kids who are on the playground for when there is a band or events centered around the bandshell. IF that could be moved to the other side of the warming hut, the option would be stronger. The separation of the bathrooms, to keep good traffic flow, the amount of windows that would allow you to see through to both sides of the warming hut, but also IF inside, you could see both sides of Klode (playground and park). I also like the location of the multi-use pavillion (this is where the bandshell should be in Option A). More outdoor covered space near the warming hut, and patio space to the side of the warming hut near the playground. I think the Village needs to think about the various events we have at Klode and how this will serve those events, for example - we have the traveling beer garden with food trucks. Where would food trucks set up, where would the beer garden set up, and ideally, where do people sit. 4th of july, when there is live music and vendors, how does all of that get situated around the warming hut. The ice rink in the winter... Weekend Soccer games, when families rent out the park, etc.... Marking up and showing those possible events and the "end use" of the space will really help visualize the possible usability of both options. I'm also happy to see that the fence remains around the playground - thank you! Appearance. Dormers on the roof provide architectural interest. The roof is uninspired and is a sea of shingles. Will the dormers in Option A be functional (i.e. light from the dormers will enter the building) or are they there purely for external interest? Is the band shell large enough to accommodate something like the WFB Community Band? Nobody really wants more parking lot, but should the parking lot near the shelter be expanded? Outdoor Pavillion Outdoor pavilion I’d like to know if the cost is about the same for the two options. Place for a band Thank you. Location looks the same for both options. Viewing the Lake Appearance and functionality Better aesthetics and utilization of soace B Exterior architecture style and fireplace Fireplace Many windows Option A is better looking, broader range of use, seems bigger, Reimagined Khlode, option B seems like an homage to the structure that already exists. Price, what is this project going to cost taxpayers, where is the money coming from to fund this project? Homage to what is and has been the warming shelter. Too small for a broad range of uses. Not as visually appealing. Bigger playground for both, Khlode has always been one of the better playgrounds for children in the village. N/A N/A The covered open air shelter Same as above Modern look The open air shelter or bandshell The warming structure and lay out of A is far superior. The bandshell location of option B is far superior The architecture and layout. Love the fireplace and the A-Frame overhang. Dont love the bandshell placement. Only the bandshell placement. The warming structure is far less interesting. Very plain and overall a sub-par product. The two way fireplace and the A Frame overhang Could the bandshell over more substantial of a structure? The design style The small pavilion doesn’t seem conducive to concerts The placement WE DON'T NEED A NEW WARMING FACILITY, JUST UPGRADE THE MECHANICALS Nothing Waste of taxpayer money Nothing Waste of taxpayer money Boondoggle -- do not build, just make necessary repairs Appearance/design. Windows look amazing. Less boxy. Closer to playground and lake which is where people want to gather. Design Pavilion style/design is better Too boxy. Not appealing. Splash pad. Appearance Appearance We should have a splash pad somewhere in Klode park! :) A little bigger entertaining area for events or staging for food and drink vendors appearance it feels more welcoming whats the additional cost to add in the multi-use pavilion in Option B to the rest of Option A? Tuck it even further in the Southwest corner , but it would give people an option to land there instead of right next to the playground, and I think would be enjoyed by all. Appearance Overall design and size. Change colors outdoor pavilion Larger space, fireplace Fireplace Changing tables for young kids Coffee shop! I like that there are two smaller buildings rather then one long rectangle. I like the stone on the face of the buildings. The band shell should definitely face the lake! Uninteresting and looks like a box with little character or detail. Two separate buildings; more interesting; I like the stonework Two smaller buildings; stonework; band shell facing the lake I think there should be kitchen facilities, at least a sink and fridge. Maybe they are in a locked room and become available when space is rented? Appearance, Character, Functionality It has better character with large almost Arts & Crafts style chimney, Pavillion is more aesthetically pleasing, wide timbers, high use of glass, seating in viewing areas, potted urns at Lake Drive restroom entrance. Prefer the option A pavillion but believe the orientation of it is too far East, should be more central to the field where crowds will attend events on 4th of July etc. Truly believe a particular architectural style could be more deliberately. That it's Option B. :) Good use of glass and stone. Too generic/basic/shed-like. Pavillion is particularly uninspiring. I like that both options offer restroom access from both outside/inside building. Really embrace an architectural style, like Arts & Crafts, or go wildly modern glass. In general, recommend glass to be used liberally to appreciate the park/lake setting. Fireplace and use of space Fireplace The appearance and proximity to the playground are great in version A. Like the A form factor and covered spaces. Form and proximity to playground. No major concerns. The shelter that would cover band/tables seems functional. B seems to crowd the tennis courts a lot. A generally feels like nicer form factor and use. Seems great, excited to see this come to fruition. N/A Outdoor pergola being near the playground, external appearance Outdoor pergola being near the playground Multiuse pergola being too far from the playground More benches outside There are better uses for taxpayer money. The present "shelter" gets little use. . The upkeep costs will be an order of magnitude higher. Is this not something to make the village trustees feel accomplished? Band shell in the middle of the field, L-shaped design Covered outdoor seating near the playground/courts Band shell is not in the best spot Band shell location, L- shape No outdoor covered seating near playground/courts Covered/shaded seating near playground/courts Outdoor ice rink with walls (temporary structure) and indoor warming house amenities (fireplace) Plan A presents a better overall appearance combining contemporary and classic design. The layout is flexible for all ages and various activities. Will there be safe walkways for those with mobility issues to enter the building to use the restrooms and programming? Plan A offers more flexibility as well a better space design. I like that men and women restrooms are located side by side, the fireplace and over all look and layout. I would prefer the band shell of Option B. Bandshell placement. Seems smaller, don't like bathrooms on separate hallways. band shell placement in A vs B Appropriate drinking fountains? Attractive & easily accessible trash and recycling containers. Native plantings around the building(s). Drinking fountains for all ages and physical needs? Water bottle refill station? Is total project cost available for each plan that includes water, electrical, heating infrastructure? Solar panel roofs? Other utility cost saving considerations currently available? My preference for Option A design concept was influenced by the linear design and location of the pavilion. The linear design. My concerns with Option A include: 1) The fireplace; I think it will be misused and increase maintenance and indoor heating costs. I don't think its needed. 2) The enclosed community room. I think a large covered outdoor space would be more inviting and used more frequently used year round given that everyone can freely enter and exit the space. The architectural style, most notably the lack of dormer windows. I think the style is more "park- like." My concerns with Option B include: 1) The location of the pavilion; Its western location is too far from the "action," especially the playground, and when used as a band shelter, the location results in the spectators looking into the sun and a busy road (yuck). I'd prefer to look at the lake. 2) The enclosed community room (same comment as included above for Option A). I think the options are missing a larger covered outdoor space. All of the above Layout and over all appearance Small viewing on south side, lack of natural light in restrooms. location of Pavilion. Location of Pavilion. larger space on south side for viewing. Appearance, small hospitality area, no fireplace, no area for hanging coats, skates etc, smaller entrance on north side. See above answer I prefer an appearance that is traditional in design. Perhaps using similar materials that are used in many of the buildings on Spring. Red brick etc. The designs look the same. The primary consideration for both of them is parking. The north area by the courts and the kids' playground will be dirty and ugly either way. The parking lot should be replaced with a small brick path. With this eyesore to the north, it doesn't much matter which option is used. Option A looks better from the south, and not as much like the typical park picnic shelter. It looks like Option B does a better job of hiding the parking lot, so that the park won't look like a car dealership. What is the best way for someone walking to the park to get to the pavilion or to the kids' playground? Like now, where you walk through the grass? It is hard to overstate how awful this is going to look on the north side. The pictures are ridiculous. This place is designed for people to arrive only in cars, but yet the misleading pictures show people present with no cars in the parking lot. That would be great, but it's not reality. The parking lot will have cars and trash in it, so no one will to stand around talking at the entrance to the playground. It will be too unpleasant for that. If any parking is provided, it should be along Shore Drive east of the playground, behind the bushes. But there is already too much parking along all of the surrounding streets, so having a repulsive parking lot ruining the north side is unnecessary. Stop hiding the cost. Be up front and honest. The renderings of the north side should be more realistic and show lots of cars and no people, which is the atmosphere the design is looking to create. Appearance -the windows and traditional design That it is traditional Do NOT love the color palette (too much brown) - Could we entertain a more coastal option since we are on the lake right there? Maybe something brighter and cheery? ALSO please add bigger viewing areas! Please visit Antlers Park, Lakeville MN online to see what I'm talking about - https://visitlakeville.org/explore/meetings/venues/antlers-park-swimming- beach/ If link doesn't work please google Antlers Park, Lakeville MN images. It is very bright and open. Liked that option B had large viewing area There's hardly any distinct differences here and I frankly don't care about picking aesthetics before we've established intended functional uses. It's like picking what kind of rims you want on a car before even knowing what car you'll get or even if it will be a sedan or a minivan. The larger (apparently) space near the building, with, maybe, some shade. Appears to have a more accessible bathroom? These are details that are really hard to make value judgements without. Why is there no bike parking but we intended to have drivers drive right to the door where kids will be biking in, and coming and going from the playground? Are you trying to get a kid killed? The pavilion. Some of the only shade in the entire park that also has a place to sit. Probably also frames a beer garden nicely but being disconnected from utilities probably neutralizes its potential. Again, really unclear what problems we're trying to solve, and the lack of a narrative really shows. Again with the car parking at the door right where people are walking, and apparently no bike parking. What are we even doing? It's clear we're just cobbling random ideas together with no vision or plan for what the highest needs of this space are. I mean, find some bike parking, do focus groups with caretakers, elderly, KIDS, people who want to bike to the park more, etc. It's just so lacking in vision and narrative that there's little for anyone to bite into and most opinions are just going to be scattered observations without grounding in a hierarchy of needs. Bike racks, assurances that someone mixing up the gas and brake won't plow through the building and kill a whole family, explanations of how this will accommodate food trucks, beer gardens and other entertainment. Will it be usable year round? Will there be amenities? What is the situation for a parent with multiple kids of different genders who need to change an emergency diaper? How will an elderly person riding a trike make use of the space without being forced to bike amongst cars? Where will a dozen strollers be parked? Scooters? Will the space be activated with more tables, chairs, benches, etc so people can visit for a time and make an entire afternoon of it? The designs look ok, but it's clear someone was given an impossible task with no advance work on what the community and space needs, and the full scope of possible inspirational future it could have. It will be fine, it will be missing dozens of useful characteristics, and bike parking will be deplorable as always. Asking children to design a 3D space at the library was the first indication this was completely off the rails and never going to amount to much. Sigh. Like the pavillion being close to the facility and bathrooms. functionality and protection of the building, free programming for the park space the massing and dormers have a nice residential feel; the covered fireplace and patio (gas or wood burning?) are the dormers are fake? it would be nice if they were daylighting the interior simple and contemporary feel i think the freestanding pavilion is under scaled for the location I like the amount of glass, though worry about that being a long term security and maintenance concern for a public building. I like the fireplace amenity; both secondary structures lack a clear functional purpose - can those be designed for music or theater (think 4th of july, beer garden music, new community events?) they both feel a bit restrained or bland, dominated by the roofs. the roof plane will be taller visually and actually in both schemes compared to the walls. the designs feel squished. park character and appearance It takes up too much visual space in the park and looks like a very long house, rather than a park building I like how it is broken up into smaller buildings. I do not think this needs to be a large building. There isn't even an ice skating rink for most of the winter. Aesthetics One line building Able to close off community room but keep bathrooms open? Don’t like the L shape. 1) functionality/floor plan, 2) appearance, 3) other I like A's style match with WFB's many Tudor homes. I also like that the pavilion looks more substantial than B's. A looks like it will need more maintenance over the years because of the dormers and other roof nooks and crannies. The lobby/viewing area is too much of a "tunnel" with no substantial viewing areas (overlooking the skating pond area) and with no good separation of the bathrooms from the community room. I like B's exterior at least matching Fox Point stylings so not too far out of place in WFB. I also like the good separation of the bathrooms from the community room because of the L-shaped floor plan, which allows the lobby/viewing area to have substantial viewing areas (overlooking the skating pond area). Is the pavilion too simple looking? Would it look better if the roof was a gable roof (matching the warming house) instead of a slanted roof? Will the homes on Lake Drive be upset because the pavilion will potentially block their lake views. Repeated from 8 - "Is the pavilion too simple looking? Would it look better if the roof was a gable roof (matching the warming house) instead of a slanted roof?" B needs a bigger storage room (at least as big as A's). I have used Cahill's warming house for kids' year-end (sports) parties and Cahill's storage room is pretty substantial and easily warehouses folding tables and chairs that can be used for parties, community meetings, etc. Lastly, I would hope that the skating pond gets flooded/used more often so whatever helps make life easier for skaters and all their gear! Thank you for putting these options together...and for orchestrating the build of new warming house. As someone who grew up in WFB, I have always felt that Klode Park is somewhat underutilized. A new warming house might help residents take better advantage of the park's beauty. The design in option A is more interesting and ties into local architecture. The extended porch is also a nice feature. The extended porch with fireplace and pavilion will give options to still sit outdoors in the shade while watching your children play. The viewing area is a nice feature. There is no extended porch or roofline to provide shade or still use the area while being outdoors. I like the added dormers in option A and adds a touch of charm. The post and beam porch would be a huge loss if removed. Fachwerk and more interesting brickwork would really help the building feel like it has been here from the beginning (1928). Thank you for involving the community in this design process. Appearance. Seem equal in all other aspects. I think a gender neutral bathroom would be a positive addition to the building. Not only is it inclusive, but it's also helpful for families or people with accessibility challenges who may have caretakers of the opposite gender. Appearance and flow. Appearance and flow. Are there enough bathrooms? Smaller footprint. Enough bathrooms? Plenty of windows to allow natural light in. functionality, pavillion part of entire facility (more convenient for events) more bathrooms for women. Only 4 stalls?????? You're joking, right? I like the pavilion near the playground. This is much better for families. The pavilion in Option B has the audience looking towards Lake Drive rather than the lake. The placement of the pavilion and the hooks for coats inside the building. None. Might be nice to add some shaded areas similar to Cahill. Not attracted to B Do not like placement of pavilion. I wish it was offset from the park so you could better view the park from outdoor picnic tables Appearance. It is 2026. This should not look like a park pavilion from 1926. Embrace materiality and forms that reflect the surrounding context but do not make it look like a house. The linear plan Looks like a house. The suggested use of a glass connector. Embrace views of the lake. The forms are boring. Too simple can look cheap. Focus on lake view The Pavilion seems too close to Lake Drive. This placement does not present a clean and unified view of the complex as a whole from the street. How would you access the Pavilion from the warming house itself or from parking? Can you simplify the material finishes on the outside of the building? Do you need relatively so much stone if you have the brick already? The street view on both options should be considered more carefully. The first view of this to passersby will be from the street so it should reflect the elements that make the other Village buildings appealing from the street (Village Hall, Library, etc.) Please consider that new building restrooms nowadays are not gender-defined. If there are many stalls that close privately, you may consider making them accessible to all genders rather than strictly defining them. It is 2026. Are there specific, committed to rules governing such topics as number, time and nature of uses? Also is there a defined process for governance of such? Having the picnicking close to the venue is better for weather and proximity reasons for loading and unloading items for events/ get togethers. The proximity of the lay out , if you are renting or having an event, having the items closer to each other is much more convenient for set up / take down and weather issues. none multi use being separate would be ok for those who want to host an event separate from the actual warming house. I prefer option A though the pavilion is too far from the house from what I can discern. There is no outdoor fire place to gather. That is a must with 7 months of crappy winter weather Durable benches Individual cubbies Hooks Boot trays Skate racks Heated floors to prevent puddling, slipping hazards skate friendly pads while walking around A serving window or small commercial-style kitchen Bike racks Decorative lighting Fire pit Seasonal planters Lockers Durable benches Individual cubbies Hooks Boot trays Skate racks Heated floors to prevent puddling, slipping hazards skate friendly pads while walking around A serving window or small commercial-style kitchen Bike racks Decorative lighting indoor Fire pit Seasonal planters Lockers This is great and will build more of a sense of community. We do love renting out Cahill it is just so barren and this has a much more warm feel to it. Thanks again ! Appearance, fireplace Fireplace Fireplace Water bottle filling Character and community use I am very concerned about scale. Having a big community room is not what the residents of WFB need. This will be used by non residents. Parking is already impossible down Shore Drive and Belle. any location for music has to be central in the park and not directed at any homes. Klode park neighborhood did not ask for increased traffic, litter etc. there is no enforcement of current rules against grilling and dogs so I have no faith that police will keep a big public space safe. see above comments. I am very concerned about the traffic and lack of parking which is already unsafe on weekends with all the cars down Shore Dr and Belle. Again, the park is full of non WFB residents. Building more facilities to invite non residents at our tax expense is terrible. Flexibility, appearance Flexibility and appearance Noise considerations for neighbors I don’t see parking or areas designated for rental or reservation and cost What other nearby villages are these drawings based off !!how have they done 1, 5, 10, 25+ years in the future? Functionality and appearance Feels more connected; one building.; larger hospitality bar Keeping the restrooms clean and not having odors invade the community room and vestibule. So much glass area will increase heating costs No No I like keeping the pavilion further away from the playground, ; ; like the stone look on B option Looks large, the 2 sided fireplace The materials used on the exterior. Pavilion not right next to the playground, thinking of the noise considerations and facing east. Outside art work somewhere Larger coherent viewing area, double sided fireplace, detached pavilion Double sided fireplace Functionality and long term solution. It flows better with space, doesnt seem disjointed. Is it enough? Shoukd there be more space? Flexibility of almost two spaces. None These designs leave a lot to be assumed. Will they be heated year round? Will bathrooms be accessible year round? Winter access to bathrooms and warm spaces for park users. The appearance. Option B looks like a modern Christian church The design - in the particular the windows Appearance, park character More interesting design Looks very functional Windows and light. Open pavilliom size Size the design Not big enough I like Option B pavilion with the pergola Not sure what acoustics will be like for bands. Incorporating food vendors and food trucks. Option A is way too big and will add crowding in the park. Nothing. See 5 above. Only that it is smaller than A. Nonetheless, B is also too big. Shrink the Community room and shrink the locker room to just bathrooms. No. No. We would be way over-building what had been a charming park. The present house probably needs replacing but not as extravagantly as either A or B. Appearance Traditional design in keeping with the Village character and architecture. Appearance and functionality Appearance and layout Does seem a little large with separate pavilion right next to it and separate but like the linear lay out better Like where the separate pavilion located Seems too broken up and takes up more space Would like space for food trucks etc to be parked for beer gardens and other events All the above Appearance Cost Appearance, doesn’t look so huge. More broken up spaces Too big for the space Fits the size of the area, doesn’t overwhelm the space and look out of place None Appearance and functionality Appearance/materials Windows Looks dated Fireplace Functionality Makes better use of the soace Architecture, appearance Architectural details I don't think the contemporary design of option B appropriately fits into the exiting wfb municipal buildings: namely the library, police department and school buildings. Existing municipal and school buildings are traditional in design and we need to maintain this design in future buildings. The traditional design of the building in keeping with the rest of whitefish bay's traditional design. I don't care for the dark colors and would prefer it was lighter in color. see number 4, I don't believe the contemporary design fits in with our community buildings and community. Yes, the original intent of this building is to be a warming house. There should be a fireplace, either inside or outside with room for people to gather and warm up after skating. See the Fox Point warming house at Longacre pavilion. I really feel the lack of a fireplace is a large enough missing element to warrant a redesign. It seems whoever is driving these decisions is really missing the whole point. The additional elements such a band shell should be secondary, not the main focus. Appearance, maintaining park character, ease of access from all sides Layout and architectural style Pavilion feels secondary in terms of location, if it’s going to be used for band events. If that’s the purpose it should be in a more prominent location. Not sure about the pavilion’s location, but I like that it’s in a more prominent spot if it’s going to be where the band will play. Feels difficult to access from all angles and don’t like how the angle cuts off the park between the warming house and the courts. The design also feels more modern and less welcoming and I don’t think that’s the route we should go for the park. I like the more traditional design of option A. The windows on the roof make it feel cozy and welcoming. I like how the bathrooms are accessible from the outside, so they can be used even when the rest of the warming house is closed. I’d really like for this structure to be open to the public whenever the park is open, so it’s usable by all. Appearance, character, flexibility, and layout within the park. B just feels inviting and like it's creating multiple usable spaces. The glass in A is beautiful but it feels overly practical, like it's optimizing for loading/unloading. The glass. Maintenance cost of all those dormers. And I feel like I'm looking at the back of building from Lake Dr. From a presentation perspective on our main thoroughfare. I don't like the it looks like you're seeing a garage/storage space. The pavillion will only have shade midday, then it'll get blasted by the setting sun. Option B pavillion seems to account for actual travel of the sun for optimal shade under the pavillion in the hot afternoon sun. It also reflects how successful the world cup event was - the layout used that day is similar to this pavillion location. I like that the roof lines means we could use lower long term cost metal roofs that require way less maintenance. I think that connecting the 2 buildings via the glass bar is really nice. no major concerns I think the pavillion location and roof/shade aspect. Also the feeling like you're no looking at the back of the building. from Lake Dr or Belle or Shore - I think the parking lot should feel like a nice entry but the "back should face that way to optimize for views from the other angles. Where are the bike racks for kids and their caretakers? The walkable/bikeable thing is quite literally one of THE MOST VALUABLE ammenities sought after by young, vibrant families looking for places to live. From a base monetary perspective - it is part of what retains our home values. It's front and center in our Comp Plan and it's what brings people to Bay. For pennies, we create great community value. I worry that if bike parking is an afterthought, some cheap wave racks will be slapped up last minute. Thank you for your consideration! I think Option B is great. Would be interesting (if it was useful), if one of the walls could have a flip open garage door or upper half window, to create a bar/concessions option, kind of like our local beer garden at Hubbard and Estabrook. This seems a like an amazing opportunity to move our little farmers market out of a weird, hot healthcare parking lot into a beautiful, green space people want to actually go to! Appearance Function of option A. Fireplace is a very nice addition. The outdoor fireplace/ patio with the overhang has a cohesive feeling People using the pavillion may have to deal with the noise from the playground Pavillion seems like an afterthought. Out of pl ace Outdoor fireplace The style is much more in tune with the surrounding homes and it looks more functional The style and the set up Same for both Not much, both ate basically the same Same for both Bathrooms and a large room, these are generic and tableatakes An outside connected raised band shell for concerts like the fourth and the WFB band and ability to expand to others. Maybe a plain island in front of hospitality bar so a vendor could use area for certain events. Some sort of pass through from inside to outside again for a potential vendor situation. More than one lockable storage area near commons area for temporary storage. I feel cost isn’t that much of a concern with these two designs, they are fairly high end for the space and I am not against it. But why try to think so narrowly on the design and answer yesterday’s problems with this design and think about what it could be? Host another festival during the year? Small tennis,pickleball, badminton , volleyball tournament? Have a beer garden which can handle traffic indoors when it rains or outdoors, which would be more unique. I am sure there are more use cases that can be accommodated with a little more flexibility in design. The village has and is experiencing a continuing trend of having nearly every private square foot of green being erased to the boundary line and now has a commercial space adding momentum to this trend. Both option A and option B will allow a public space to continue and participate in this building trend. In a village of bigger house upon bigger commercial space it’s time to say; time out keep the public spaces out of it. A pure, well maintained green space with undisturbed views of Lake Michigan is all that is needed and the testament to that is Klode Park’s enduring appeal. Yes, put a new roof and windows on the existing warming house and make sure the toilets and sinks work that is an inherent expectation. Doing more than that means taking away from what will matter long term. I don’t see or hear anything that tells me a new meeting place or a sheltered pavilion or an expanded warming house footprint is what villagers want. I see ample evidence in regard to those that those needs are already being met through current facilities. I do see a lot and hear a lot about how much Klode is valued for being what it is. A simple pure lovely green space on Lake Michigan. Don’t acquiescence or get caught up in this building trend with expanded facilities, larger footprints, and nods to more indoor or commercial type spaces and uses. That may feel like progress but that’s artifice masquerading as such. Size It looks too big. I like the size and layout. No No Adjacency and function of toilets to community room Connectiveness and the ability to have a fireplace Not sure why cubbies and hooks are needed and how they would be used NA Option B seems very disjointed. Elements seem to be an afterthought to each other - as if one building was built and a 2nd building was added later. I also do not like the stand alone pavilion - band/picnic element. It limits use of the current open park. Looks great Way better look None It’s fine just not as good Will this shelter be available to anyone or just residents of whitefish bay? There is wasted space with the outdoor connection area from warming shelter to pavilion. Flow See comments below The picnic area as a band shelter See comments below Take the separate Band Stage/picnic area of Option B and make it part of A but keep it in the same location as Option B: away from the playground as the sound/music will be too loud for the children on the playground. Also, with option B the band would set up facing north so sound will project away from residences (so as not to cause noise disturbances for them) but far away enough from the playground. Is there a fireplace in the warming hut? traditional character and wood-burning fireplace warming area for possible future ice rink none stone exterior lack of fireplace, too many windows to clean upgraded landscaping features around the building no . The layout of the building in a straight line seems most efficient. Having the pavillion near this building makes it easiest for everyone to access the bathrooms without navigating grass. Best for people that are handicap, older, not as mobile. Always a southern exposure with thsi design ensuring good natural light all day. I also like to proximity of the Pavillion. Can you flip the design so the bathrooms are on the east seide and the Community Room and Pavillion are on the west side (closest to Lake Dr)? Seems like you would want to give this space as much exposure to passing traffic as possible. Seems like a lot of brick wall facing Lake Drive. This is valuable real estate for promoting the village. Seeing the room in use is better that not seeing anything (becasue of the brick wall). Also, would you want walking path from the pavillion to the bathrooms? See my comments in 6 above. Maybe this has been discussed already... Any chance of engaging a third party to operate a coffee kiosk or a seasonal beer garden here? This would benefit people using the park (playground, tennis, pickleball, rec sports, ice skating, etc). It could draw more people to the park. Use the MKE County Park system and the beer gardens as an example. Get a small kick back from each sale that goes to maintaing the park. Character, views Windows Ideally, Id love to have two multi-use pavilions - one connected to the warming house and one separate. However, if I had to choose, I would vote for a separate area (plan B) for the multi-use pavilion. I think if we only have one attached to the warming hut, it would get overrun with children/parents in the playground area. I'd like it separate so it reduces congestion/clutter for those who want to picnic. And having larger crowds (for bands, etc.) away from the main shelter would help with congestion. building design it being overly crowded, due to the multi-use pavilion connected to the playground. having the separate pavilion from the main shelter. Could the multi-use pavilion get moved closer to the warming hut building, but put on the west side of the structure? This way it would be more separated from the playground area, reducing a clustering effect for those who just want to picnic. I like splitting up the viewing options in option A. I think having two multi-use pavilions would be the best of both worlds this will be a huge improvement for the future of Klode and WFB. Appearance Appearance The brick is more in keeping with the Bay aesthetic. The fireplace! Will there be enough parking? The longer viewing windwos No fireplace. Will there be enough parking. The fireplace. The community room has a hospitality bar in both options with a sink. There should also be a small fridge and microwave. Design and character It blends better with the neighborhood I like the appearance of A but I also like that the pavilion is more attached and leaves the grass space unbroken so that the grass usage is more flexible. I also think it would block some viewing for fireworks. The patio connecting to the pavilion. The more classical elements. I also like the hooks/cubbies The placement of the pavilion Overall design. I like the fireplace. Fireplace and community room layout. Making sure restrooms are properly ventilated and clean so they don’t negatively impact community room use. Looks small and not very welcoming. Appearance The chimney It's too much visual bulk for a park building. All the glass. None. What appears to be a more open passageway between the restrooms and community room shown in option B. No Functionality and park character Separate pavilion Lack of outdoor space appearance The patio n/a That the bathrooms are separated The pavilion seems small I like building B but Pavilion A. Love the amount of windows. Bike racks outside, benches outside (especially for when the ice rink goes up - plus cubbies or something to store gear), a snack bar, vending machines, bonfire pit, permanent beer garden Excited for the upgrade! Appearance Appearance None Nothing General look Appearance of design A Functionality, fireplace, coziness, character One building. Fireplace Architecture is too old and boring. Needs a modern update. We’re not living in the 1940s anymore, sorry. More modern. Don’t like the two building look. Fireplace appearance and functionality seem more suitable for what the warming shelter will be used for The building and pavilion are more connected and easier to move around from one to the other none the outside appearance isn't as nice as Option A - looks cheap the glass hallway linking the building and pavilion make them more disconnected Appearance I think the linear layout seems most functional. Option B seems unnecessarily segmented. I like the pavilion near the playground, as many families would appreciate not having to go so far (from the playground and bathrooms) for a picnic with their littles. I like the location of the pavilion. I like all the windows. I like the easy layout I like that bathrooms are more separate as they are shared of you were renting the space. Seems unnecessarily segmented. The viewing vestibule area seems like it wouldn't be used much and is just extra space in this layout I can't tell how big the pavilion is, but I hope it's quite large and can accommodate several groups - I think it would get highly used for birthday parties and post-sports activities Like the multi use pavilion area in A but the design of B. Want the location of the patio and multi use area to be by the playground. The more picnic tables under shade the better in my opinion. Water bottle fill are and bubblers will be important. Some small potty’s for kids would be nice and a little nursing area for moms would be nice. The bathrooms at Northwestern Mutual Community Park downtown at summerfest grounds were done really nicely if you look at those. Apperance Apearance Cist Like the large flexible space. Have electrical brought to pavilion for bands and cooking equipment. I really like the shade tarps that were installed by the Cahill playground. Would be nice to incorporate some of those along with additional seating into this design Pavilion location. Shelter for kids and parents when it rains. Picnickers can go to the field. Though next to the play area not the best for bands. I like the look of B but the design of A. It would be nice if there were a second pavilion attached to the west side of the building. Pavilion attached to building. The hooks in the warming area. Concern for the kids ears when bands play on the pavilion. Lack of room there. Two pavilions would be better. I love the exterior. The stone, how light it is. I like the separate bathroom building. Pavilion location. Patio too small on east end. Second pavilion. Functionality Flexibility i like the design/stone on option b the design/stone functionality park character appearance and functionality the design seems to make the most sense and best use of the space. Design B looks incomplete. no concerns or suggestions I don't care for design B. Its an awkward design and will disrupt the flow of going back and for from the play ground to the grass area no concerns or suggestions I like option A nothing. missing from option A functionality of the restroom doors facing the courts and playground. Ability to lock the community room, but still provide access to the bathrooms and vestibule. places the pavilion in another location to disperse the crowd during an event utilizing the stage. design is ok doesn't orient the space to the largest areas/vision cues to outside uses. better use orientation on the site maybe a large patio along the east side of the building The flat roof scares element seems impractical. B looks more like a church. A reminds me of a house more. I like the layout, bar size and fireplace. If hosting an event (boy scout meeting, birthday party, etc.) having a good size hospitality bar is nice (Option A) Both designs have a lot of windows. Are there concerns about them being vandalized? Could there be more of a patio on the south side for individuals to sit/stand when watching skaters? In the event of severe weather - is there a place to shelter park goers+ instead safely? It would be nice to have a family bathroom. Bathrooms and accessibility to playground, fireplace is a really nice touch Double sided fireplace and coat hook space The look of it? I think I prefer the stone in option B or if cream city brick color is an option for the brick The glass and light and stone For Option B: The larger viewing area and double doors access from the ice skating entrance makes more sense here, and I love the additional pad for concerts out in the field. This design just fits better. The band patio area on the east side is pretty nice. The door way to the ice skating area is so small, that area will get cramped very quickly. Not a good design. The sizing is right and fits well. Double doors between the ice skating area and the viewing areas makes a lot of sense given how much traffic there will be at that location. I do like the sizing overall of option A, it looks a little more impressive. I love the idea of a larger patio surrounding the entire building with an awning and chairs and/or picnic tables underneath. Places to sit where they would be protected from the elements and have some shade. I think these areas would get a huge amount of use. Excited for these improvements! Visibility to playground while enjoying other park aspects Blocks slight lines Accessibility and aesthetics Has a state/national park aesthetic vibe Linear structure makes it feel like it separates the park too much. Prefer a design that opens up the feel. Open patio end and pavilion decentralized. S I like the stone work on option B. More windows and natural light, the better. The more you can bridge the areas of the park without walls and buildings, the better. Appearance Appearance I think having the band shelter separate is a good. The liner layout of the building. The back patio is nice. The band shelter is in an awkward spot. Not a lot of people would have direct visibility. The band shelter. The building layout feels strange. The band shelter separated from the building. I think putting the band at the west end (facing east) will limit the noise traveling into the neighborhood. Apperance, modernity. I like that the lake is still visable and green space is maintained I don't love the concrete slab in between the builidng and the pavilion. It feels unfinished and unintentional. The look of local stone, that the pavillion is set away from the main building. This is better for the flow of people at community events,. The proposed location of the covered pavillion block the view of the lake from Lake Dr. Consider an alternative placement that is not the same as what is in option A I like the style of the pavillion in Option A. Cleaner design Fireplace The women's restroom should be nearest the playground. If you choose option A - the location of the men and women's restrooms should be flipped where the women's entrance is closer to the playground and not around back. Pavilion location The women's restroom should be nearest the playground. If you choose option A - the location of the men and women's restrooms should be flipped where the women's entrance is closer to the playground and not around back. The women's restroom should be nearest the playground. If you choose option A - the location of the men and women's restrooms should be flipped where the women's entrance is closer to the playground and not around back. I like the pavilion closer to the main building. The women's restroom should be nearest the playground. If you choose option A - the location of the men and women's restrooms should be flipped where the women's entrance is closer to the playground and not around back. The women's restroom should be nearest the playground. If you choose option A - the location of the men and women's restrooms should be flipped where the women's entrance is closer to the playground and not around back. Overall building flow and design to match neighborhood. The community space in Option A appears to have more accessible features, including the larger 'bar' area. Layout and aesthetic. Seems to flow well with the surrounding area. Storage - is there enough consideration for what would be kept on the premises and how much storage is needed to not have the community space feel cluttered. The overall pavilion design. I like that it is raised for concerts, but not very conducive for picnics. More accessible loading area. I think the pavilions need considerations on both fronts. I like this overall pavilion style, but with it being flat on the ground it is not ideal for music. A better mixture with the pavilions. Pavilion placement for Option B is more ideal to spread out the crowds. A family restroom. A larger covered patio/picnic area off of the building itself to be able to utilize the community space + outdoor covered space for events. Consider a family restroom. Consider a larger covered area attached to the building. Appearance character and functionality. Everything in same building Everything in same building. Has more character Prefer the architectural design of option B but the layout of option A. Multi use pavilion close to the playground is key. The pavilion closer to Lake Drive is more difficult to access, louder since it is close to the road and more stressful as a parent to keep toddlers away from the road. Please make bathrooms child friendly. If hand driers are necessary, please choose a quiet option. Toilets preferred to not be automatic flush. Short sink and/or toilet. Check out North Shore library bathrooms Functionality The pavilion connected to the building It seems if events are happening inside, the bathrooms and beeping areas are all the same space. Two spectate areas. An event can happen while someone at the park can use the facilities without interference. Pavilion is just sitting off on its own. It should be apart of the structure Pavillon on option B If the ice rink will continue to be a spot, I’d like to make sure the warming area is enough space to accommodate families warming up, putting on skates, Etc. Appearance, functionality, ability for a parent to monitor child from within the building (for ice skating it is nice to have the option to be by a fire both inside or outside with option A The double sided fireplace and ability for families to have a place to gather while still being able to monitor their children. The pavilion appears to be a standalone in the middle of the field. These typically then get relatively very little use in my humble opinion. It is a band shell and that will be the only use for it. Option A it better integrated and could be used as shelter near the bathrooms for picnics or a band shelter. I like the fireplace and the long serving counter in A. If it is rented for birthdays, it's nice to have long counter space. The architecture Lots of windows to keep clean The separate pavilion pavilion location. location of the pavilion - i like that you can see the playground from it and that it is further away from the busy road. Less concerns about strong sun shining in during the am and pm. I get that it will be used for concerts, but the vast majority of the time it will be for patrons of the park picnicking or relaxing. Kids will be spending a lot of time going to and from this structure - so having it in an easy viewing area of the playground and away from lake drive is a priority. n/a n/a Location of the pavilion - it is parallel to busy lake drive and the strong sun in the am and pm will shine right into the shelter n/a n/a n/a I like the overall look of Option A and I think it incorporates the current space well. I like the bandshell/picnic area close to the warming house. I like the layout of the warming house and the proximity of the picnic space. The location of the band location takes away a main walking area for families going to/from the playground. I like the glass incorporation and the non-flat look of the overall design. The bandshell/picnic space is way too far from everything else. The outline of the bathrooms and conference room are well designed. I think the covered band/picnic area needs to be behind the warming house. And not by the playground or far away on the other side of the grass. Excited! Appearance Transparency of the structure, nicer visual appeal Appearance, functionality, character, seems to fit the feel of the area and offer more optionality for events. It fits into the neighborhood and offers flexibility and so many features to bring the community together for events and activities! Cleaning and maintenance of all of the working parts and pieces. The team at Gerhard’s Kitchen and Bath store as the only Whitefish Bay family owned kitchen and bath store would love to volunteer to help with the design on the bathrooms and hospitality bar space! appearance and flexibility Quite handsome outdoor drinking fountains Separation of the two buildings in the L-shape design. VILLAGE BOARD MEETING – STAFF REPORT REPORT TO: Village Board REPORT FROM: Kelsey McElroy-Anderson, Village Manager MEETING DATE: August 31, 2026 AGENDA ITEM: Replacement Silver Spring Monument Signs ACTION REQUESTED: _____Ordinance _____Resolution __√____Motion _____Information Only BACKGROUND There are two existing Whitefish Bay entrance signs on Silver Spring Drive. 1. Located on the northwest corner of Marlborough Drive and Silver Spring Drive in front of the new Sendik’s Food Market store. 2. Located on the southeast corner of Lydell Avenue and Silver Spring Drive in front of the Bay Manor Apartments Both signs are scheduled to be replaced, at the developer’s expense, as part of redevelopment projects. Of note, the Sendik’s sign is located in the Sight Triangle, which restricts the height of the sign to 42 inches. The new monument sign at Lydell and Silver Spring appears to not be located within the Sight Triangle and therefore not subject to the same height restrictions. Page 2 of 2 The Village Board discussed the monument sign replacement during the April 6, 2026 Board meeting and provided the following guidance: • The two signs should match and serve as a gateway into Whitefish Bay. • Better lighting so the sign is more visible. • There were concerns at the Sendik’s location about using the same red brick and that the existing sign camouflages into the new building. • Would like the text “Village of Whitefish Bay” to be higher on the sign so the shrubs don’t grow over it. • Use the Fish logo This topic was also presented to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) on June 28, 2026. There seemed to be consensus from ARC members that the font and form should match. There was discussion about an inlay or panel that could match and then each sign could use their own building materials. The Business Improvement District (BID) reviewed Proposal 2 (see attachment) on August 7, 2026, and unanimously recommended a modified version of Option 1 within that proposal. They liked the inlay concept and would like both signs to share the same form. However, because the signs are located so close to the buildings, they felt the materials should complement and match the materials used in the development. The Community Development Authority (CDA) discussed this topic on July 14, 2026 (Proposal 2) and again on August 18, 2026 (Proposal 3). The following motion was approved with a 3-2 vote: a motion to recommend to the Village Board Silver Spring monument signs that are matching red brick and precast materials, reflecting the Village’s historic use of brick; consistent sign design at both locations, except as necessary to accommodate differing height limitations; blue-and-white fish logo; add a decorative shape to the sign columns; and revise the date by placing “1892” on the column. PROPOSALS 1. Original developer submitted proposals 2. Original Groth designs (incorporated Village Board and ARC feedback) 3. Updated Groth designs based on BID feedback 4. Updated Groth designs based on CDA feedback REQUESTED ACTION Recommendation to approve a design for formal consideration by ARC. Proposal 1: Original developer submitted proposals 08.06.2026 CONCEPTSVillage Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI OPTION 1 - Transitional OPTION 2 - Traditional Wood OPTI ON 3 - Traditional Iron OPTI ON 4 - Modern Proposal 2: Original Groth designs (incorporated Village Board and ARC feedback) 08.06.2026 CONCEPTSVillage Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI Cast Concrete/Stone Caps Backlit WFB Logo Internally Lit Letters Brick Base Inset Stone Detail(s) 42” OPTI ON 1 - Elevation OPTI ON 1 - Sendiks OPTI ON 1 - Mixed Use Site 08.06.2026 CONCEPTSVillage Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI Internally Lit Letters Wood Look Panel Backlit WFB Logo Wood Posts Stone Base 42” OPTI ON 2 - Elevation OPTI ON 2 - Sendiks OPTI ON 2 - Mixed Use Site 08.06.2026 CONCEPTSVillage Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI 42” OPTI ON 3 - Elevation Internally Lit Letters Wood Look Panel Backlit WFB Logo Wrought Iron Posts + Brackets Brick Base OPTI ON 3 - Sendiks OPTI ON 3 - Mixed Use Site 08.06.2026 CONCEPTSVillage Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI Halo Lit Letters Backlit WFB Logo Weathered Steel Brick Base 42” OPTI ON 4 - Elevation OPTI ON 4 - Sendiks OPTI ON 4 - Mixed Use Site 54" Location 1 - Silver Spring & North Lake Drive Artistic and/or computer renderings are not a contractual representation of the finished product and GROTH Design Group makes no warranties and representations that the depictions of such renderings will be replicated in the finished product. Client acknowledges and agrees that the terms of the contract, not the renderings shall control. Village Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI CONCEPTS 08.17.2026 Perspective Cast Concrete/Stone Caps Backlit WFB Logo Inset Stone Detail(s) Brick Base Internally Lit Letters Elevation 42" Proposal 3: Updated Groth designs based on BID feedback Elevation 66" Location 2 - Silver Spring & North Lydell Avenue Artistic and/or computer renderings are not a contractual representation of the finished product and GROTH Design Group makes no warranties and representations that the depictions of such renderings will be replicated in the finished product. Client acknowledges and agrees that the terms of the contract, not the renderings shall control. Village Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI CONCEPTS 08.17.2026 Perspective Elevation 42" Cast Concrete/Stone Caps Backlit WFB Logo Inset Stone Detail(s) Stone Base Internally Lit Letters 54" Location 1 - Silver Spring & North Lake Drive Artistic and/or computer renderings are not a contractual representation of the finished product and GROTH Design Group makes no warranties and representations that the depictions of such renderings will be replicated in the finished product. Client acknowledges and agrees that the terms of the contract, not the renderings shall control. Village Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI CONCEPTS 08.20.2026 Perspective Cast Concrete/Stone Caps Backlit WFB Logo Inset Stone Detail(s) Brick Base Internally Lit Letters Elevation 42" Proposal 4: Updated Groth designs based on CDA feedback 54" Location 2 - Silver Spring & North Lydell Avenue Artistic and/or computer renderings are not a contractual representation of the finished product and GROTH Design Group makes no warranties and representations that the depictions of such renderings will be replicated in the finished product. Client acknowledges and agrees that the terms of the contract, not the renderings shall control. Village Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI CONCEPTS 08.20.2026 Perspective Elevation 50" Cast Concrete/Stone Caps Backlit WFB Logo Inset Stone Detail(s) Brick Base Internally Lit Letters Artistic and/or computer renderings are not a contractual representation of the finished product and GROTH Design Group makes no warranties and representations that the depictions of such renderings will be replicated in the finished product. Client acknowledges and agrees that the terms of the contract, not the renderings shall control. Village Signage - Whitefish Bay, WI CONCEPTS 08.20.2026 Cap Detail 3 Location 2 - Silver Spring & North Lydell Avenue Cap Detail 2 54" Cap Detail 1 VILLAGE BOARD MEETING – STAFF REPORT REPORT TO: Kevin Buckley – Village President Members of the Village Board Kelsey McElroy-Anderson – Village Manager REPORT FROM: Joel Oestreich – Director of Building Services, Anna Christopherson – Assistant Village Manager MEETING DATE: August 31, 2026 AGENDA ITEM: Single-family dwelling side yard setback and distance to neighbor dwellings ACTION REQUESTED: ____Ordinance ____ Resolution ____ Motion ____ Direction to Staff BACKGROUND On March 4, 2026, the Village Board had a discussion related to side yard setbacks and the distance between dwellings. Key points of the discussion revolved around potentially increasing the side yard setbacks, creating a code that would govern the distance between structures, and other solutions that would help avoid large structures being built next to adjacent dwellings. It was decided that Staff should take this topic to the ARC for discussion and get feedback from the ARC on what would help them in the review process. The intent of this conversation was to be centered around preventing large masses being built too close to adjacent dwellings. ARC DISCUSSION On June 18, 2026, the ARC and staff discussed possible solutions or additional data that would help aid ARC in their review of large projects and their proximity adjacent dwellings. A specific case that was referenced was the new house build at 726 E Day Ave. ARC indicated that while the neighboring dwelling’s location was indicated on the plan for that project, the information was not located in a conspicuous place. After a lengthy and thoughtful conversation, ARC determined the following two items listed below would aid in their review. 1. Adding language to the ARC submittal checklist that states, “In the event that the new construction or the addition is six feet or closer to a side property line, the side facades of the neighboring structures must be shown” (see attached). 2. Adding the adjacent dwellings’ side setback information to the Design Area Information Worksheet (see attached). RECOMMENDED ACTION BY THE VILLAGE BOARD Staff recommends that the Village Board direct ARC to amend the submittal checklist to include the aforementioned language regarding required survey information and that staff amend the Design Area Worksheet to include the adjacent dwelling setbacks. Attachments: 1. Amended ARC Submittal Checklist 2. Amended Design Area Information Worksheet (highlighted area is new) 1 The Village of Whitefish Bay Architectural Review Commission (ARC) Application Checklist The purpose of the checklist is to communicate with each applicant what required documents are necessary for the ARC and the Building Inspector to review and approve each a submittal. While complete applications and the submission of the appropriate documents do not guarantee approval, they will expedite the process and minimize the time necessary for review. The following items must be completed or submitted before your petition will be scheduled for consideration by the Architectural Review Commission at an upcoming meeting. Items in red are completed by staff. Note: Only 10 items will be heard at each meeting. The schedule is set on a first come, first serve basis. Project Address _____________________________________________ ______ Pre-Development Conference. All Petitioners must contact staff at the beginning of the design process. The purpose of the pre-development conference is to identify issues early on and set realistic expectations based on the adopted Village ordinances, regulations and Design Guidelines Chapter 16 Article XVI. ______ Design Area given to applicant. $100 A.R.C. Submittal Fee: Date Filed___________ Time Filed __________ $100 Zoning Fee: Date Filed___________ Time Filed __________ A.R.C. Meeting Date _____________ ______ Project Pending Sign Posted for the required five-day posting. ______ Design Area Ortho Photographs ______ Video Tape Project Address ______ Project Pending Sign Removed. _______ Demolition? 200-576 sq _____ Exceeds 576 sq feet _____ Demolition of existing structures must follow the WFB Demolition Ordinance Chapter 15 Article XIV. 2 SUBMITTAL Submittals must be complete and include the required information as outlined in the checklist below. NOTE: All submittal packets should be arranged in the following order. ______ Checklist. All Petitioners must complete and submit this checklist to identify all materials included in your application. ______ Filing Fees. A $100 fee is required to appear before the Architectural Review Commission. ______ Application Form. (Bldg Permit App). ______ Statement of Intent. All Petitioners must complete a statement describing the proposed project. The description should explain the existing site conditions, the design rationale for the project, and any unique limitations of the project. Generally not to exceed one paragraph.(2 copies) ______ Design Area. (Given at Pre-con) ______ Signatures on last page. Architectural Review Commission Application Requirements The following information is required with applications and should be submitted in the format described: __________ One complete set of full size drawings at ¼” scale (sheet size of 24x36) (See page 3-5 for requirements) __________ Seven (7) complete sets of drawings reduced to 11x17 (scalable if possible) (See page 3-5 for requirements) __________ Seven (7) copies of colored elevation(s) or rendering __________ Samples of all exterior finish materials. (Brought to meeting) __________ Provide PDF set of all highlighted items either via a flash drive or email (joestreich@whitefishbaywi.gov). The PDF plans are due by the submittal deadline. 3 SUBMITTAL MATERIALS REQUIRED DRAWINGS of all new structures, additions or remodeling: ______ Plat of Survey This document must include all property lines with distances and bearings, North arrow, exact location of all existing and proposed buildings, parking areas, drives, public improvements, easements, required setbacks, existing trees, grades at one foot (1’) intervals and other key features of the site. In the event a project affects the front façade the fronts of the adjacent properties must be shown . In the event that the new construction or the addition is six feet or closer to a side property line, the side facades of the neighboring structures must be shown.(7 copies) ______ Site Plan (Include a North arrow, dimensions, and proposed roof configuration). This document must include all property lines, North arrow, zoning setbacks, all utility and access easements, the location of all existing and proposed buildings or additions including all roof overhangs, all hard surfaced areas (patios, terraces, side walks, drives, parking pads, etc.), swimming pools and other accessory structures. All areas affected by the project shall be shaded. (7 copies) ______ Floor Plans (Include a North arrow, and fully dimensioned). This document must i nclude all floor plans of the proposed building. Each plan must include a North arrow, complete dimensions and include room names for each space. In the case of an addition, each room should be tagged either existing or new. In the case where there is a detached garage, a separate plan, fully dimensioned, for the garage must be included. ______ All Elevations This document is to include full elevations of all sides of the structure. The elevations should be drawn to scale and include the soffit and ridge heights. In cases where a building element may be skewed from another, it may be necessary to draw more than the four primary elevations of the building to clearly explain the intent of the design. If the project is a building addition or remodeling, the proposed addition or remodeling should be drawn as they relate to the original structure and should be clearly illustrated as new building versus existing structure ALL building materials must be identified and noted on each elevation drawing This is to include, but not limited to type and size of siding, type and size of all masonry, painted or pre- finished products or materials, window type, style and material, roofing material, fascia, rakes, soffits, eaves and flashing materials. 4 ______ Site Data The information provided must be from the WFB Assessor’s information (www.wfbvillage.org/propertydata). Information must be provided on the design area information worksheet that was given at the Pre-Development Meeting and must be included in all plans sets including the PDF plans provided for posting on WFB’s website. (7 copies) ______Provide existing and proposed dwelling and accessory square footages. ______Provide existing and proposed floor area ratios subject property ______Provide existing and proposed heights for subject property ______Provide setbacks for subject property ______Provide the floor area ratios for properties in the design area ______ Streetscape Elevation (Required for all new homes, demolitions, major remodeling and additions) - This document is to be accurate and to include the “streetscape” elevation of the proposed project and the adjacent structures as discussed with the building inspector . In the event of the demolition of an existing structure, an additional “streetscape” elevation of the existing structure and the adjacent structures must be done as well. The streetscape sh ould also include the top of foundation heights and grade heights for the proposed project and the adjacent structures. (7 copies) Although no t required, it is encourage d that a streetscape perspective be submitted for the proposed project. The streetscape perspective should include the adjacent structures. ______ Supporting Documentation All information related to the project that the applicant may deem as pertinent, including background or historical information on the property or letters from the neighboring residents. ______ Photographs Provide colored pictures of ALL sides of the existing dwelling and accessory structures. Also, provide a colored picture of the front of each house in the “design area.” The homes in the design area must be clearly labeled by address. (2 sets of color copies and a pdf). 5 ______ Drainage Grading of lots—The plans shall show the present and proposed grades of the lot on which it is proposed to erect the building for which a building permit is sought and of the immediately adjoining properties in sufficient detail to indicate the surface water drainage before and after the completion of the grading. No permit shall be issued if the erection of the building and the proposed grades shall unreasonably obstruct the natural flow of water from the surface of adjoining property or obstruct the flow of any existing ravine, ditch, drain or storm water sewer draining neighboring property, unless suitable provision is made for such flow by means of an adequate ditch or pipe, which shall be shown on the plans and shall be constructed so as to provide continuous drainage at all times. On larger projects the drainage review will be deferred to the engineering department. Please contact Erin at etarczewski@whitefishbaywi.gov. The drainage review will need to be completed prior to permit issuance not the ARC approval. ______ Other Information Required by Building Inspector (as determined at the pre -development conference) (This is used to determine general compatibility with the “Design Area”) ___ Front Yard Setbacks of all design area homes. ___ Side Yard Setbacks of all design area homes. ___ Heights of all design area homes. ______ Stake the Site Stake the footprint location of all new residences, additions and accessory buildings. Ribbon at least two inches wide and of a bright color must be strung to represent the perimeter or outline of the building. The site should be staked at the time the submittal is made, for staff and the Architectural Review Commission to visit the site. 6 Signature Page ted in submitplans shall be l. Any changes to the approved Projects approved by the ARC are fina the Inspection Department. If the inspectors deem the change to be substantial, to writing the project will need to be resubmitted to the ARC as a new submittal. This will require a full submittal to the ARC including all related fees. Failure to follow the approved plans is a violation of the issued permit and may be subject to penalties including, but not limited to, a four times permit fee and/or citations. Address Owner Date Contractor (prior to permit issuance) Date Architect/Designer Date Design Area Information Worksheet F.A.R. is calculated by dividing the total, or gross, floor area of the building by the gross area of the lot. Enclosed porches should be included in the gross floor area. Garages (attached or detached) should not be included in the F.A.R. calculation. Address: Height To Peak Existing__________ Proposed____________ To Mid Span Existing__________ Proposed____________ To Eave Existing__________ Proposed____________ Setbacks Front Existing__________ Proposed____________ Right Side Existing__________ Proposed____________ Left Side Existing__________ Proposed____________ Rear Existing__________ Proposed____________ Adjacent Principal Structure Setbacks Right ____________ Left ____________ Structure Information First Floor Sq. Ft. Existing__________ Proposed____________ Second Floor Sq. Ft. Existing__________ Proposed____________ Covered Porches Existing__________ Proposed____________ Enclosed Porches Existing__________ Proposed____________ Attached Garage Existing__________ Proposed____________ Detached Garage Existing__________ Proposed____________ Accessory Bldgs Existing__________ Proposed____________ Lot Size (sq ft) _____________ Floor Area Ratio Existing__________ Proposed____________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Please provide the address and Floor Area Ratio for each home in the Design Area VILLAGE BOARD MEETING – STAFF REPORT REPORT TO: Kevin Buckley – Village President Members of the Village Board Kelsey McElroy-Anderson – Village Manager REPORT FROM: Anna Christopherson – Assistant Village Manager Joel Oestrich – Director of Building Services MEETING DATE: Augst 31, 2026 AGENDA ITEM: Discussion/action on an ordinance to amend Municipal Code § 16-3, 16- 8A, 16-8C(1), and 16-11A(4)(c) pertaining to improved space in accessory buildings and structures ACTION REQUESTED: ____Ordinance ____ Resolution ____ Motion ____ Direction to Staff BACKGROUND Staff and Village Board Members have received recurring inquiries from residents seeking to finish space above a detached garage for use as a studio, workshop, or storage. The current text prohibits this outright. The proposed amendment would permit such space under defined conditions while reinforcing that it may not become a second dwelling unit. Chapter 16 currently prohibits improved space in accessory buildings and structures with one narrow exception: a single area of up to 220 square feet on the ground floor of a garage, and then only if at least 440 square feet of garage space remains available for vehicle parking. Accessory buildings may not be used for sleeping. “Improved space in an accessory building or structure” is defined in § 16-3 as “any area, other than that for vehicular parking or unheated storage, with finished walls, finished ceiling and electrical outlets or fixtures.” Finished, electrically served space therefore falls within the definition whether or not it is plumbed or heated. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT Table 1 shows the current regulations compared to the proposed changes. The substantive changes include: • Ability to improve space on the second-floor • Removal of the cap on improved space • Reduction of the garage area that must be retained for parking • Clarifying that the improved space must comply with the garage setback requirement of the underlying zoning district This draft ordinance does not allow for plumbing, sleeping, or cooking facilities in the improved accessory building or structure. Table 1. Current and proposed standards summary Topic Current regulation Proposed regulation Definition of improved space Any area other than that for vehicular parking or unheated storage, with finished walls, finished ceiling and electrical outlets or fixtures Any area, on any floor, other than that for vehicular parking or unheated storage, with finished walls, finished ceiling and electrical outlets or fixtures Ground-floor improved space One area, maximum 220 square feet Permitted with no area cap Garage space retained for parking At least 440 square feet (roughly two stalls) At least 220 square feet (roughly one stall) Second-floor improved space Not permitted Permitted in a private garage, subject to four conditions: 1) The garage conforms to the coverage limits of the zoning district in which the lot is located and to the height limitation of §16-8C(1) 2) The improved space does not extend beyond the footprint of the garage below 3) The ground floor of the garage is maintained for vehicle parking 4) Access to the second floor is provided by a stairway. No exterior stairway serving second- floor improved space shall be located on a wall of the garage that faces a street Footprint Not addressed Improved space may not extend beyond the garage footprint below Access Not addressed Stairway required; no exterior stairway on a street-facing wall Cooking facilities Not addressed Prohibited Permit application Not addressed Application must clearly define the intended use of each space and depict no plumbing rough-in Plumbing Not addressed Prohibited, other than a floor drain and an exterior hose bibb; no sanitary lateral to an accessory building Occupancy No sleeping No sleeping, no occupancy as a dwelling unit, and no separate lease from the principal dwelling Non-garage accessory buildings No improved space No improved space (no change in effect) Rear yard, attached garage with space above 10 feet where dwelling space or quarters are provided above 10 feet, unchanged; improved space above an attached garage expressly requires the 10-foot rear yard Figure 1. How the proposed standards apply The diagram above illustrates the two permissions created by the amendment: improved space on the ground floor under Subsection [1], and improved space on the second floor under Subsection [2]. The conditions listed at the bottom apply to improved space on either floor. Districts affected The amendment reaches all four residential districts, but only three code sections require an amendment: Table 2. Districts affected and sections requiring amendment Because District 2 comprises the large majority of the Village’s residential land, the practical reach of this amendment is Village-wide. Staff notes this expressly because the amendment’s text sits in the Lake Shore district section, which understates its scope. Consistency with existing dimensional standards The amendment does not alter any dimensional standard. The following continue to apply to a garage containing improved space: • 18-foot height limit for any building accessory to a dwelling, under § 16-8C(1). • 10% coverage cap for accessory buildings, and a 40% combined cap for the dwelling and all accessory buildings. • Setbacks of three feet side and three feet rear for a detached garage, subject to §§ 16-35A and 16-36. The proposed draft makes compliance with the coverage and height limits a condition for approving second-floor improvements, rather than treating them as separate requirements. Noncommercial greenhouses, nurseries, and gardens Staff is also proposing moving noncommercial greenhouses, nurseries, and gardens to be with the other accessory uses permitted. This would clarify that residential dwellings are to be the primary use. RECOMMENDED ACTION BY THE VILLAGE BOARD Staff recommends the Village Board refer an ordinance to amend Municipal Code § 16-3, 16- 8A(2)(b), 16-8C(1), and 16-11A(4)(c) pertaining to improved space in accessory buildings to the District Section How the amendment applies All districts § 16-3 Definition amended; applies chapter-wide District 1 — Lake Shore § 16-8A(2)(b) Amended directly District 1A — Single-Family § 16-9A Applies automatically; § 16-9A adopts the uses in § 16-8A by reference. No amendment needed. District 2 — Single-Family § 16-10A Applies automatically; § 16-10A adopts the uses in § 16-8A by reference. No amendment needed. District 3 — Two-Family § 16-11A(4)(c) Amended to a cross-reference, replacing a verbatim duplicate of the old rule. Plan Commission to review. ATTACHMENTS • Proposed revision to Municipal Code §16-3, 16-8A, 16-8C(1), and 16-11A(4)(c) • Draft ordinance language § 16-3. Definitions. [Amended by Ord. No. 1718; Ord. No. 1723; 8-14-2017 by Ord. No. 1832] IMPROVED SPACE IN AN ACCESSORY BU ILDING OR STRUCTURE — Any area, on any floor, other than that for vehicular parking or unheated storage, with finished walls, finished ceiling and electrical outlets or fixtures. § 16-8. District 1 - Lake Shore Residence Dist rict. [Amended by Ord. No. 1227; Ord. No. 1343; Ord. No. 1365; Ord. No. 1467; Ord. No. 1685; Ord. No. 1722; Ord. No. 1723; Ord. No. 1724] A. In District 1, except as in this chapter othe rwise provided, no building or premises shall be used and no building or structure shall be erect ed, altered, or maintained which is arranged, intended or designed to be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) Single-family dwellings. Not more than one dwelling shall be located on any lot. (2) Noncommercial greenhouses, nurseries and gardens. (3)(2) Accessory. (a) Uses and buildings accessory to those enumerated above in this subsection, including private garages designed for not more than one motor vehicle for each 2,400 square feet of top land ar ea, but not including any st ore, trade, professional office, business or industry. However, not exceeding one person may, in a dwelling used as his residence: [1] Furnish room or table board to no more than two persons. [2] Carry on a customary home occupation, provided no persons other than members of his own household are employed therein. (Cannot stock materials and cannot create parking problems.) [2][3] Noncommercial greenhouses, nurseries and gardens. (b) Improved space is not allowed in accessory buildings or structures, except that one area of up to 220 square feet of improve d space on the ground floor of any garage is allowed, provided at least 440 square fe et of garage space in the garage is maintained for vehicle parking. In no ev ent may accessory buildings or structures be used for sleeping . Improved space is not allowed in an accessory building or structure except as expressly permitted in Subsection [1] and [2] below. The purpose of this Subsection (b ) is to permit limited finished space in a private garage while ensuring that such space doe s not constitute or become a dwelling unit. [1] Ground floor. Improved space is allowed on the ground floor of a private garage, provided at least 220 square feet of garage space is maintained for vehicle parking. [2] Second floor. Improved space is allowed on the second floor of a private garage, provided that: (i) the garage conforms to the coverage limits of the zoning district in which the lot is located and to the height limitation of §16-8C(1); (ii) The improved space does not extend beyond the footprint of the garage below; (iii) The ground floor of the garage is maintained for vehicle parking; and (iv) Access to the second floor is provided by a stairway. No exterior stairway serving second-floor improved space shall be located on a wall of the garage that faces a street. [3] Requirements applicable to all improved space. Improved space permitted under Subsections [1] and [2] above shall satisfy each of the following: (i)The improved space contains no cooking facilities and no plumbing fixtures; and (ii) The building permit application depicts no plumbing rough-in and clearly identifies the use of the space. [4] Plumbing prohibited. No accessory building or structure shall contain a plumbing fixture, plumbing rough-in, or fixture supply, waste, or vent connection, other than a floor drain or an exterior hose bibb. No sanitary sewer lateral shall be extended to serve an accessory building or structure. [5] Occupancy. In no event may an accessory building or structure be used for sleeping, occupied as a dwelling unit, or leased or offered for lease separately from the principal dwelling on the lot. (4)(3) Garage. [Amended 3-2-2020 by Ord. No. 1862] (5)(4) Access from the public street or alley or from a private road to each garage required in Subsection A(34) above shall be by means of an approved driveway. (6)(5) Newly constructed driveways shall have a concrete, an asphaltic concrete or an asphaltic penetration surface, free of dust, loose stones or gravel, constructed on an adequate base. (7)(6) Parking spaces shall have an adequate concrete, asphaltic concrete, asphaltic penetration, or a geogrid with organic gr ound cover surface, free of dust, loose stones or gravel, constructed on an adequate base. [Amended 8-5-2019 by Ord. No. 1853; 8-1-2022 by Ord. No. 1892] (a) The minimum setbacks for an approved parking space shall be as follows: [1] In Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3, three feet fro m side and rear property lines where no alley exists. [2] In Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3, five feet from the adjacent alley line. [3] In Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3, the establis hed setback from the adjacent street property line. [4] In Districts 4, 4A, 5, 6 and 7, as required under § 16-17. (b) The maximum number of vehicles permitted to be parked on an approved parking space in Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3 shall be two. (c) A plot plan to a minimum scale of one in ch equals 20 feet, showing the location and size of the proposed parking space, the location and dimensions of all buildings and physical features on the premises a nd the location of buildings immediately adjacent to the parking space shall be submitted to the Building Inspector. (d) The Building Inspector may refer said pl ot plan to the Architectural Review Commission for approval or denial if he believes the proposal will have a depreciating effect on the property values of the neighborhood. (e) The permit fee for construction of the parking space, if approved, shall be as set from time to time by the Village Board. (8)(7) Parking of vehicles, except on public street s, where not otherwise prohibited or restricted; on approved off-street parking facilities; in garages; on approved driveways or approved parking spaces, is prohibited. (9)(8) Parking in the public way, except upon th e public street where permitted, is prohibited. (10)(9) Notwithstanding Subsection A(8) above, no vehicle except an automobile may be parked in the front setback area of an interior lot, nor between adjacent residences which front on the same street, nor in the side setback area which fronts on a street or a corner lot. B. In District 1, each lot shall a but either upon a public street or upon the westerly line of said district; shall extend from such public street or th e westerly line of District 1 to the shore of Lake Michigan; shall contain at least 9,600 square feet of top land lot area and have an average width from north to south of at least 80 feet for each single-family dwelling erected, altered or maintained thereon. No dwelling shall be erected, altered or maintained on any lot in District 1 which occupies more than 30% of the top land area of the lot. No building accessory to a dwelling, including garages, shall occupy more than 10% of the top area of the lot. The combined area of the dwelling and all accessory buildings including garages and any satellite earth station shall not exceed 40% of the top land lot area of the lot. C. Yard minimums; structure maximums. (1) Each dwelling shall have two side yards each at least three feet in width; in case the height of any building exceeds 25 feet, the required width of the side yards shall be increased 10% for each foot that such dwelling exceeds such height. Dwellings shall have a rear yard of at least 10 feet in depth. No building, when accessory to a dwelling, shall be over 18 feet in height. Improved space permitted under §16-8A(2)(b) shall not constitute dwelling space or quarter s for purposes of this subsection. Subject to the provisions of § 16-35A, each garage attached or detached, and each accessory building, shall have a minimum side ya rd of three feet; a detached garage or an accessory building, except where adjacent to alley (see § 16-36), shall have a minimum rear setback of three feet; an attached garage shall have a minimum rear yard of five feet except when dwelling space or quarters are provided over said garage, in which event a minimum rear yard of 10 feet shall be provided. (2) The maximum height of single - and two-family residentia l structures shall be as designated in Article XVI, Single-Family and Two-Family Residential Design Guidelines. 1 D. In the event that the property is on the blu ff of Lake Michigan, the following requirements shall also apply: (1) A registered professional e ngineer, having a minimum of 10 years of geotechnical experience involving foundation investigation/engineering and shoreline slope stability evaluation, and who is hired by the owner of the lot, shall certify to the Village that the construction of any building a nd structure(s) proposed to be located within 100 feet of the top edge of the bluff will be safe. Specifically, he shall certify that: (a) The design of any building or structur e(s), the method of constructing such building or structure(s), and the materials used therefor are structurally adequate and will protect the public health and safety; (b) The proposed building and structure(s) wi ll not in any way adversely affect the structural integrity or safety of any building, or structure(s) located on adjoining or adjacent sites; (c) The proposed building and structure(s) will not adversely disturb ravine and bluff slopes, interfere with surface or subsurface drainage, or create new or exacerbate existing problems of erosion and recession; (d) The drainage system will not adversely affect the adjacent and adjoining properties; (e) There is no danger to the proposed or ex isting buildings or structures and its occupants from slippage of the slope above and/or below the proposed structure. (2) The engineer shall make a technical report accompanying th e certificate, which shall include, at a minimum: (a) Recommendations regardi ng site prepara tion, foundation desi gn, lateral earth pressure and support of slabs on grade; (b) The stability of the slope before, during and after construction; (c) The effect of the construction on the natu ral drainage in the areas, including any measures, such as "weepers," which are de signed to improve natural drainage in the area. (3) The owner of the property shall certify to th e Village that he/she is aware of potential 1. Editor's Note: Original Subsection (3)(c), which imme diately followed this subsection, was repealed by Ord. No. 1724. problems of lake shore erosion, including but not limited to the possibility of adding fill of various types to stabilize the bluff area, is aware of th e requirement for securing of a fill permit from the Village for any such filling, is aware of the provisions of said fill permit ordinance, and is further aware of the potential cost involved. (4) A memorandum of said certifi cations, including the legal de scription of the property, shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds of Milwaukee County. § 16-11. District 3 - Two-Family Residence District. [Amended by Ord. No. 1343; Ord. No. 1722; Ord. No. 1723; Ord. No. 1724] A. In District 3, except as in this chapter othe rwise provided, no building or premises shall be used and no building or struct ure shall be erected, altered or maintained which is arranged, intended or designed to be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) Uses permitted in District 2, subject to all restrictions contained in § 16-10. (2) Duplexes. Not more than one duplex, double house or single-family dwelling shall be located on any lot. (3) Double houses. Not more than one double house, duplex or single-family dwelling shall be located on any lot. (4) Uses and buildings accessory to those enumerated in Subsection A(2) and (3) of this section, including private garages designed for not more than one motor vehicle for each 2,400 square feet of lot area, but not includi ng any store, trade, professional office, business or industry. However, not exceeding one person may, in a dwelling used as his residence: (a) Furnish room or table board to not exceeding two persons. (b) Carry on a customary home occupation pr ovided no persons other than members of his own household are employed therei n. (Cannot stock ma terials and cannot create parking problems.) (c) Improved space is not allowed in accessory buildings or structures is regulated as provided in §16-8A(2)(b) , except that one area of up to 220 square feet of improved space on the ground floor of any garage is allowed, provided at least 440 square feet of garage space in the gara ge is maintained for vehicle parking. In no event may accessory buildings or structures be used for sleeping. B. No duplex or double house shall be erected, altered or maintained which does not contain at least 7,200 square feet of lot ar ea or which dwelling occupies mo re than 30% of the area of the lot. No building accessory to a duplex or double house, incl uding garages, shall occupy more than 10% of the area of the lot. The combined area of the duplex or double house and all accessory buildings, including garages and any satellite earth st ation, shall not exceed 40% of the area of the lot. C. Duplexes and double houses shall have two side yards, each at least fi ve feet in width, and the aggregate width of both side yards shall be at least 20 feet; the height of any duplex or double house shall not exceed 30 feet. Duplexes a nd double houses shall have a rear yard at least 10 feet in depth. No buildi ng which is accessory to a dwelling shall be over 18 feet in height. STATE OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE COUNTY VILLAGE OF WHITEFISH BAY ORDINANCE NO: 19XX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 16-3, 16-8A, 16-8C(1), AND 16-11A(4)(c) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO IMPROVED SPACE IN ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES The Village Board of the Village of Whitefish Bay, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin does ordain as follows: Section One: Section 16-3 of the Municipal Code “Definitions” is hereby amended to include the following: IMPROVED SPACE IN AN ACCESSORY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE — Any area, on any floor, other than that for vehicular parking or unheated storage, with finished walls, finished ceiling and electrical outlets or fixtures. Section Two: Section 16-8A of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to include the following: A. In District 1, except as in this chapter otherwise provided, no building or premises shall be used and no building or structure shall be erected, altered, or maintained which is arranged, intended or designed to be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) Single-family dwellings. Not more than one dwelling shall be located on any lot. (2) Accessory. (a) Uses and buildings accessory to those enumerated above in this subsection, including private garages designed for not more than one motor vehicle for each 2,400 square feet of top land area, but not including any store, trade, professional office, business or industry. However, not exceeding one person may, in a dwelling used as his residence: [1] Furnish room or table board to no more than two persons. [2] Carry on a customary home occupation, provided no persons other than members of his own household are employed therein. (Cannot stock materials and cannot create parking problems.) [3] Noncommercial greenhouses, nurseries and gardens. (b) Improved space in accessory buildings or structures. Improved space is not allowed in an accessory building or structure except as expressly permitted in Subsection [1] and [2] below. The purpose of this Subsection (b) is to permit limited finished space in a private garage while ensuring that such space does not constitute or become a dwelling unit. [1] Ground floor. Improved space is allowed on the ground floor of a private garage, provided at least 220 square feet of garage space is maintained for vehicle parking. [2] Second floor. Improved space is allowed on the second floor of a private garage, provided that: (i) the garage conforms to the coverage limits of the zoning district in which the lot is located and to the height limitation of §16-8C(1); (ii) The improved space does not extend beyond the footprint of the garage below; (iii) The ground floor of the garage is maintained for vehicle parking; and (iv) Access to the second floor is provided by a stairway. No exterior stairway serving second-floor improved space shall be located on a wall of the garage that faces a street. [3] Requirements applicable to all improved space. Improved space permitted under Subsections [1] and [2] above shall satisfy each of the following: (i) The improved space contains no cooking facilities and no plumbing fixtures; and (ii) The building permit application depicts no plumbing rough-in and clearly identifies the use of the space. [4] Plumbing prohibited. No accessory building or structure shall contain a plumbing fixture, plumbing rough-in, or fixture supply, waste, or vent connection, other than a floor drain or an exterior hose bibb. No sanitary sewer lateral shall be extended to serve an accessory building or structure. [5] Occupancy. In no event may an accessory building or structure be used for sleeping, occupied as a dwelling unit, or leased or offered for lease separately from the principal dwelling on the lot. (3) Garage. [Amended 3-2-2020 by Ord. No. 1862] (4) Access from the public street or alley or from a private road to each garage required in Subsection A(3) above shall be by means of an approved driveway. (5) Newly constructed driveways shall have a concrete, an asphaltic concrete or an asphaltic penetration surface, free of dust, loose stones or gravel, constructed on an adequate base. (6) Parking spaces shall have an adequate concrete, asphaltic concrete, asphaltic penetration, or a geogrid with organic ground cover surface, free of dust, loose stones or gravel, constructed on an adequate base. [Amended 8- 5-2019 by Ord. No. 1853; 8-1-2022 by Ord. No. 1892] (a) The minimum setbacks for an approved parking space shall be as follows: [1] In Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3, three feet from side and rear property lines where no alley exists. [2] In Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3, five feet from the adjacent alley line. [3] In Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3, the established setback from the adjacent street property line. [4] In Districts 4, 4A, 5, 6 and 7, as required under § 16-17. (b) The maximum number of vehicles permitted to be parked on an approved parking space in Districts 1, 1A, 2 and 3 shall be two. (c) A plot plan to a minimum scale of one inch equals 20 feet, showing the location and size of the proposed parking space, the location and dimensions of all buildings and physical features on the premises and the location of buildings immediately adjacent to the parking space shall be submitted to the Building Inspector. (d) The Building Inspector may refer said plot plan to the Architectural Review Commission for approval or denial if he believes the proposal will have a depreciating effect on the property values of the neighborhood. (e) The permit fee for construction of the parking space, if approved, shall be as set from time to time by the Village Board. (7) Parking of vehicles, except on public streets, where not otherwise prohibited or restricted; on approved off-street parking facilities; in garages; on approved driveways or approved parking spaces, is prohibited. (8) Parking in the public way, except upon the public street where permitted, is prohibited. (9) Notwithstanding Subsection A(8) above, no vehicle except an automobile may be parked in the front setback area of an interior lot, nor between adjacent residences which front on the same street, nor in the side setback area which fronts on a street or a corner lot. Section Four: Section 16-8C(1) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to include the following: C. Yard minimums; structure maximums. (1) Each dwelling shall have two side yards each at least three feet in width; in case the height of any building exceeds 25 feet, the required width of the side yards shall be increased 10% for each foot that such dwelling exceeds such height. Dwellings shall have a rear yard of at least 10 feet in depth. No building, when accessory to a dwelling, shall be over 18 feet in height. Improved space permitted under §16-8A(2)(b) shall not constitute dwelling space or quarters for purposes of this subsection. Subject to the provisions of § 16-35A, each garage attached or detached, and each accessory building, shall have a minimum side yard of three feet; a detached garage or an accessory building, except where adjacent to alley (see § 16-36), shall have a minimum rear setback of three feet; an attached garage shall have a minimum rear yard of five feet except when dwelling space or quarters are provided over said garage, in which event a minimum rear yard of 10 feet shall be provided. Section Four: Section 16-11A(4)(c) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to include the following: (c) Improved space in accessory buildings or structures is regulated as provided in §16-8A(2)(b). Section Five: All ordinances or parts of ordinances conflicting with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby and to such extent repealed. Section Six: This ordinance shall take effect on May 1, 2026, following its passage and posting as required by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Village Board of Trustees of the Village of Whitefish Bay this day of , 2026. VILLAGE OF WHITEFISH BAY __________________________ Kevin Buckley, Village President Jaimie Krueger, Village Clerk