The Village of Oak Park | 123 Madison St.  Oak Park, IL 60302 | village@oak-park.us

Main menu

STAY CONNECTED

Parking Pilot Program

A comprehensive proposal for specific changes to parking rules to be tested in a designated pilot area was presented to the community at a public meeting on Mon., Jan. 29, 2018 at Brooks Middle School.

Hosted by the citizen volunteers on the Transportation Commission, Village staff and consultant Dixon Resources Unlimited, the changes discussed incorporate feedback gathered since the concept of a pilot area test was first presented to the public on Nov. 9, 2017.

Recommendations presented on Jan. 29 are the culmination of months of studying Oak Park’s wide array of parking rules and regulations. The goal is to test a range of options for simplifying and standardizing the Village’s residential parking system that could offer insights into parking issues throughout the community.

This latest public meeting will be the last before final recommendations for the pilot program are presented to the Village Board for consideration.

Information on the Transportation Commission, including meeting agendas and minutes, are posted on this website - just click here.

Jan. 29, 2018 Presentation


Comments posted below are moderated and may not appear immediately

Comments

Submitted by Robert Larson on

I was at the presentation on January 29th. The presentation slide indicated that metered parking would now end at 8PM rather that 6PM. This was not indicated as a change in the presentation. I am strongly opposed to this proposal. This change would hurt both the area restaurants as well as their customers. It also looks like a cheap money grab by the Village. It also looks like the Commission tried to sneak this change through without highlighting it in their presentation.

Submitted by Beverly Forbes on

I agree with Mr Larson. Changing the time to 8PM would hurt the restaurants and any one shopping in the area after work

Submitted by Roberta Arnold on

I agree with the comments above: the restaurants and shops in our area will suffer as a result of the extension of metered parking from 6 PM to 8 PM. This is not a business-friendly change and I cannot believe it will really help Village finances in a substantial way. It's lose/lose!

Submitted by Greg O'Brien on

I agree with the two previous comments. Where did the 8 pm time come from. In the area municipalities or even Chicago I have always seen 6 pm. 8 pm seems odd and a point of probable misunderstanding.

I am also a bit confused as to where these areas will be. I find it hard to understand why, with our tax base, we even pay to patronize the down town area. Do any of the business owners have any input here?

Submitted by k on

The commuters and downtown shoppers/festival visitors are going to park all day for free!!! Is that what we want?

Lifting the 8-10 parking ban is going to cause craziness by the commuter lines which is already crazy when the Economy Shop is open. Please lift the ban ONLY for current resident AND their visitors (with an approved pass - and don't limit the passes - that's a ridiculous rule) and not to the entire village.

This is going to be a tremendous amount of manpower to manage this.

Submitted by Bridget Maher on

The presentation states permit holders are not subject to the daytime restrictions or time limits. Which type of permits are you referring to? 24 hour permits only, or does it also refer to the overnight permits for those particular zones? Thank you.

Submitted by Carrie Hageman on

My block currently is restricted 8-10AM M-F. This has been a problem for us for the 35 years I have lived here! We manipulate our lives so that workers, friends and family do not arrive before 10am. Do I understand correctly that under the proposed pilot this restriction will be continued, adding further restriction of a 3-hour limit for every weekday visit without purchasing a pass? If that is the case, I would like to know the rationale.

Submitted by Marilyn Brumund on

I agree that the extension of metered parking until 8 pm is not in the best interest of restaurants and their clients.

Submitted by James Gates on

I attended the Transportation Commission meeting on January 29. While I value the service my fellow villagers perform on the commission, they have been asked to address an issue that puts at risk the character, ethos, and property values of one of the country's most successful villages. Oak Park is a village composed of residential neighborhoods. It is not a city. It is not Chicago. If the presentation by the consultant, paid for with taxpayer dollars, was intended to be informational, provide clarity, demonstrate confidence in the proposed pilot, offer any semblance of cost benefit analysis of the pilot, and allay resident concerns regarding this massive change in the way of life in Oak Park, it failed. The presentation lacked a coherent explanation of the pilot, any clarity on the process, no information on cost implementation, and no details on how the pilot / easing of parking overnight would be enforced. The explanation of the parking regulations, signage, and schedules made the 1969 moon landing child’s play by comparison. This pilot is a “solution” in search of a problem and appears not to be predicated upon quality of life, villager safety, or long-term sustainability. This pilot, would if implemented, require our fine and brave local police force, whose job is to protect the people and property of Oak Park, to become parking monitors as they navigate this Rube Goldberg contraption, AKA parking pilot. Honorable Trustees, you have done several positive things for our village. This parking pilot is not now and will never be a positive. At an upcoming Village Board meeting, do right thing, do the thing that is in the best interests of our village, and include an agenda item that calls for the end of the proposed parking pilot.

Submitted by Irene on

Other than the additional revenue, what benefits does the village see in extending metered parking? If taking more money from residents and patrons is the sole purpose, then I object. If financial concerns are really that big of an issue, the village could save additional $$$ by giving up on the slate tiles and other unnecessary adornments that they insist on putting on the streets...

Submitted by Mary Ann on

Has ANYONE actually done a "field check" and saw what parking is really like? Come when the Economy Shop is open and look at all the cars parked all day long. Come during the day and see how many cars park on the residential streets but avoid the parking garage at North Blvd & Oak Park, or the metered spaces on South Blvd & Oak Park. Come watch while "parker's" come running to move their car to the other side of the street. Come watch while a car sits all day in a 2 hour spot and does not move until early evening. Come watch when there is a 2+ inch snowfall and everyone just parks where ever, even tho the sign says to park according to the even/odd numbered days on the street. And no surprise there, no one gets a ticket. I oppose the test parking pilot. Transportation Commission- go walk the streets and see what is happening.

Submitted by C Palermo on

I was at last meeting & agree with all posted concerns as each one of us lives one of these parking scenarios/ problems daily.

Love this town as everyone else but raising crime, scary property taxes & nightmare parking might make us question whether OP can continue to be home... Sincerely,

Submitted by Oak Lover and P... on

Greetings,

There's nothing wrong with using whatever means needed to reap an extra reward hither and thither. More meters in Oak Park could be great for over all society. Cheminage is a medieval toll collected by lords who own forests and anyone who passed through the forest and trees would have to pay this cheminage toll, and like today anyone who wishes to park in Oak Park must pay a toll. it's ancient tradition and works very well! Just wanted to share that thought.

Thanks and Kind Regards,
Cam, tree removal expert
Contact: https://www.nanaimotreeservices.com/contact.html

Submitted by Tom on

I live in a SFH adjacent to multifamily homes on a street with no overnight parking currently allowed. Even with these current restrictions overnight parking is a common experience on our block. It also common for cars to sit for days at a time. It is quite rare that I can park in front of my home, but at least I can park somewhere reasonably close on my block. These changes will open the flood gates for cars to park up any street adjacent to multifamily. I fully expect not to be able to park anywhere near my home and my neighborhood will become Chicago-like. If cars are allowed to sit for up to one whole week they will. Terrible idea.

I do feel for the multifamily tenants, but this will seriously devalue single family homes adjacent to multi family buildings, is that fair and equitable? Oak Park is urban, but suburban home buyers want to be able to park on the street near their homes. The daily alternating of allowing overnight parking from one side of the block to the other seemed like a reasonable compromise and should be resurrected.

As currently written this proposal sounds terrible with regard to allowing parking anywhere overnight for up to a week at a time. I would have to considering moving if it goes forward in it's current form.

Submitted by Jim on

The newest version of the Parking Pilot Program was presented a week ago Monday.

Now, instead of even/odd or 72-hour schemes, those with a permit may park on any street, anytime, anywhere for up to six days straight. They are only required to move for the one day a week that will be reserved for cleaning.

This does not include metered or pay-by-plate spaces but does include every other street.

I agree with this comment posted to Wednesday journal 100%. I am opposed to the overnight parking regulations as currently proposed.

Residents without a permit will have none of these privileges and must abide by 2-hour time limits and no overnight parking.

I have many concerns about this program. If you have a voice to add, please come to the final Pilot Parking Program meeting on Feb. 12 at Oak Park Village Hall.

Submitted by Barbara Weigand on

I especially appreciate Carrie Hagemen’s & James Gates’ comments. I understand the challenges Oak Park is presented with regarding parking, and appreciate the need to find solutions. As a long time resident, I’ve dealt with this issue on many levels. After trying multiple parking situations (renting a garage, on street permit, etc), and the mass confusion trying to keep track of rules, we finally ripped out half the yard of our historic home to add a parking space for my car. We continue to deal with the ever changing rules where guests and visitors are concerned. I have to say, this doesn’t sound in the least simple, and clearly homeowners in certain zones are “penalized” when it comes to living day to day. Oak Park spends so much time trying to keep non residents out, we seem to have forgotten the cost to people that live and have businesses here. Taxes are already forcing us to think about moving. This “plan" is just another nail in the coffin.

Submitted by Elizabeth Swan on

These signs relieve drivers of having to read 4 + parking signs but cannot be easily read from the street. I have to get out of my car and study them!
They are best for people whoregularly park there and do not have to re-read the signs.

Submitted by Joshua Reed on

One of the elements I thoroughly appreciate about the current overnight parking permits is the zoning which prohibits the sale and parking of more cars on the street than there are physical spaces. After living in Chicago and regularly struggling with people parking too close, parking illegally because of a lack of spots, and struggling to find spaces myself I place a very high value on the fact that I can almost always get a space right outside my building on my way home from work.

I believe zoning could also play an important role in establishing permit parking throughout other areas of the pilot program. Many home owners are concerned about strangers parking in front of their houses for commuting purposes or as long term overnight parking; but if permits continue to be zoned then those cars wouldn't be owned by strangers, they're your neighbors! Commuter permits would only allow long term (greater than 2 hour parking) in your respective zone.

I do believe that there are and will continue to be challenges with enforcing parking rules in oak park. Has the commission ever considered some form of resident reporting? Passionate home owners, provided a secure, fair, and easy to use process could be partners in resolving the enforcement challenges as well as feeling empowered by the new rules in the pilot area.

Submitted by Concerned Resident on

All of the proposals for pilots/changes to parking sound like they will make parking much more difficult for Oak Park residents with permits of any sort. It's difficult enough already to park in the Y2 zone, as a resident with a permit - and parking rules (time limits, overnight parking without permits) are already so infrequently enforced. How will fewer regulations help residents? We'll see a lot more park and riders and a lot more cars being left for days and days at a time. Could we not start by enforcing rules that already exist?
I agree that all proposals were created by someone in an office with no idea of the realities of trying to park in Oak Park.

Submitted by Mary Ann on

I agree wholeheartedly.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.