A scenario possible per Craig Failor, Oak Park Development Services director at the Shape Oak Park meeting, Monday Sept. 14: Mr. Failor stated, no limits would be placed on the number of buildings allowed to be built, per block or per area, with the proposed changes.
Imagine the block you live on and the block directly across from you. A developer comes in, builds, two buildings on your block and two buildings across the street, permissible under the zoning proposal. Because these lots are 5,000 square feet or greater, each building can have four units. With a “special use permit,” six units per building. Six units @ four buildings equals 24 units. Assuming two bedrooms per unit, village code allows five persons per unit, translating to 30 occupants per building, and 120 persons for the four-buildings. Imagine the effect on water pressure and village infrastructure. Who would pay for service upgrades?
The village, which claims its goal is to make housing more affordable, voted in September to increase water/sewer rates, implementing a two-tier system. Usage above 10,000 gallons triggers a rate increase from 2% to 6-7% affecting almost every multi-unit building. Those utility rate increases would be passed on to renters. How is that making more affordable housing? Additionally, assume only 50% of the units in this scenario own a vehicle; the rest walk or have alternate transportation. That represents 12 additional vehicles to be absorbed into street parking already present. The average block accommodates approximately 13 vehicles; this equates to almost an entire block of new parking.
This scenario is 100% possible, per information contained in the Opticos packet and what Craig Failor has stated. With no limitations placed on building in any block or area, this can happen in your neighborhood.
The village is attempting to enact this zoning where evidence suggests, stated goals have not been proven to have worked elsewhere or contradict themselves. Why are they assuming they will work here?
The Single Use Bag Fee failed to achieve the stated goal of getting people to use less bags. Per Wednesday Journal on Sept. 8, “It may not be changing consumer habits but it is producing revenue” – $1.16 million since 2018. Is that what this zoning initiative is really about? To generate even more tax dollars in a community already overburdened by taxes? The question asked many times in meetings: “How will this affect my property taxes?” The village and Opticos’ response to this question has been a constant, “We don’t know, we are not experts.” Isn’t it prudent to have answers to this question?
Former Cook County Assessor Fritz Kaegi lives in Oak Park. Was he invited by village officials or Opticos to speak and render an expert opinion? With items such as $15 million for a new pedestrian bridge over the expressway, a new police station, $84.6 million for OPRF Phase 3, street markings rivaling O’Hare airport’s runway system, and a proposed 7.94% Property Tax levy increase, aren’t we suffering from enough tax fatigue, with an already dense population which this zoning change would exacerbate?
Sources for this piece can be found in the online version at oakpark.com/Opinion.
1) https://engageoakpark.com/shape
2) Craig Failor, Oak Park Development Services director, Sept. 14, 2026, Shape Oak Park Meeting at the Community Recreation Center
3) www.mimbyoakpark.org
4) “Feasibility Study says new multi-unit development is unlikely,” Wednesday Journal, Oct. 7, 2026
5) “Oak Park proposes property tax levy increase,” Wednesday Journal, Nov. 4, 2026
6) “Oak Park creates pricing tiers to reduce water use,” Wednesday Journal, Sept. 17, 2026
7) “At Home Avenue, Oak Park plans ‘a statement’ with new bridge,” Wednesday Journal, Sept. 9, 2026
8) “Oak Park shares plans for new pedestrian bridge at Home Ave,” Wednesday Journal, July 15, 2026
9) “OPRF delays ACT 3 Tax Referendum until 2028, Wednesday Journal, Oct. 28, 2026
10) “Oak Park ramping up costs for single-use bags,” Wednesday Journal, Aug. 28, 2026
11) “The single-use bag fee doesn’t work,” Wednesday Journal, Sept. 8, 2026