Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Streetscape topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lake Bluff trustees direct staff to seek bids for Block 1 streetscape after grant outcome

3623491 · June 2, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Trustees were told the village did not win ITEP funding for the Block 1 streetscape. Staff presented design, cost options and financing context; trustees directed staff to solicit bids and to present specific numbers before any final commitment.

At a May 28 meeting of the Village of Lake Bluff Board of Trustees Committee of the Whole, staff reported the village did not receive Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program (ITEP) funding for the Block 1 streetscape but recommended moving quickly to get contractor bids so the village can decide whether to proceed this calendar year.

The matter matters because the design would widen sidewalks, create a mostly curbless “flex” streetscape for outdoor dining and events, and alter parking and traffic patterns in the downtown central business district. Staff told trustees the work would activate the downtown but carries a sizable price tag and timing constraints for construction this fall.

“Just really quickly, the reason we're bringing this to you, is we wanted to start the conversation sooner rather than later, and talk about some options that you have still,” staff member Drew said as he opened the presentation. He told trustees the village must give staff direction soon if it wants to pursue the work this year.

Jeff, the project engineer, reviewed the design and the choices trustees face. He described the proposal as a “curbless street” on parts of the block with wider sidewalks, seat walls, large planters to act as barriers, bench and furnishings, and a flexible lane that could be used for parking or closed for events. Jeff said the existing north-side streetscape has deteriorated and that the plan matches materials used on Block 2.

Trustees were given two cost pathways. Repairing the block in its current geometry — replacing cracked bluestone and repaving — was estimated at $150,000–$200,000. Fully implementing the proposed curbless design was estimated at about $890,000. Staff said roughly $110,000 of that estimate is for festoon lighting that could be removed or deferred and about $70,000 is for furnishings; the hardscape and construction components were said to be roughly $700,000 of the total estimate.

Bettina, the village finance staff member on the call, outlined the village’s fiscal posture but cautioned numbers were preliminary and the audited fiscal statements will not be available until August. “Revenues are about 3 to 400,000 in the general fund greater than expected,” Bettina said, adding that capital projects and transfers already budgeted affect available fund balance and that figures remain estimates.

Trustees asked technical questions about lane widths, parking, and event barriers. Jeff said typical through-lanes would be about 11 feet for the low-speed street and that large planters and temporary barriers could be used for special-event closures; the project scope does not include automated bollards. Trustees also discussed a separate but related proposal to relocate a sculpture donated by the garden club near the train station; staff said the sculpture relocation and related landscaping would likely cost about $37,000 and could be bundled with the streetscape work for better pricing.

Board members expressed a mix of priorities: several trustees said they supported pursuing the full design and getting bids, others voiced concern about losing parking or competing capital needs such as police pension and stormwater repairs. Multiple trustees emphasized the project’s economic and community activation benefits for the downtown.

Rather than approve construction now, trustees gave staff direction to solicit formal bids and refine cost and financing numbers, with the option to omit festoon lighting in an initial, “bare-bones” scope. The board’s direction was characterized in the meeting as a consensus to obtain detailed estimates and return with specific numbers before signing contracts. The committee did not take a formal vote to award work during the meeting.

Next steps: staff will solicit bids based on the presented design, produce updated line-item estimates (including an option that removes festoon lighting), and return to trustees with those numbers and updated fiscal detail once the audited statements and refined cost estimates are available.