Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Streetscape Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glencoe board continues streetscape study, asks staff to prioritize signage, connectivity and valet pilots over immediate paid parking
Summary
At a continued meeting on the Parkland Streetscape Study, consultants reported survey results and parking analysis; the board directed staff to pursue near‑term signage, connectivity and parking‑management pilots and keep larger Vernon Avenue redesigns on the long list for the final draft. Staff will return with a final draft in coming months.
Consultants and village staff presented updated findings from a second public survey and a parking analysis as the Village of Glencoe continues work on its Parkland Streetscape Study. The board heard options for near‑term parking management and long‑term streetscape concepts for Vernon Avenue and asked staff to refine priorities for a final draft to return later this spring.
"The overall supply is considered sufficient," said Joanna Mariano of Festa Associates, reporting the consultant team's parking assessment and noting a roughly 85% peak use figure during the survey period. Consultants recommended a mix of management tools — improved signage, marketing and targeted enforcement — alongside limited additional on‑street spaces in identified locations.
The presentation identified three Vernon Avenue cross‑section concepts: a "min" option with minimal changes, a "mid" option that converts parking on one side to parallel to widen sidewalks, and a more extensive "max" option that would reconfigure traffic to one‑way to greatly expand pedestrian space. Mariano gave order‑of‑magnitude cost ranges for the mid and max concepts of about $2 million to $3 million and said the min option would be less expensive. Board members emphasized that those larger changes are long‑term and not candidates for the 2027 program year.
On parking management, staff recommended leaving flexible, dynamic paid parking as a possible future tool but flagged limited public support so far. Several board members said they prefer to try lower‑impact steps first: clearer wayfinding to underused commuter lots, enhanced signage and marketing, targeted enforcement and time‑limited valet pilots during peak midday periods rather than systemwide paid parking immediately.
Valet service drew discussion as a targeted approach to serve peak midday demand. Staff cited nearby examples where short‑term valet or vendor‑partnered programs operate at busy times, but board members raised logistics (queuing, circulation and loss of curbspace) that would have to be addressed in any pilot.
The board did not adopt any new fees or a paid parking program at the meeting. Instead, members asked staff and the consultant team to incorporate the survey findings and the near‑term priorities discussed this evening into the draft plan and return with refined recommendations and implementation options.
The board moved on to other agenda items and recessed to continue business upstairs.
