Start with the economic feasibility testing. A letter published in this paper on Aug. 25 (“Before changing zoning shouldn’t we have answers?”) reported that study “is being conducted now — after the Opticos Design proposal has already been developed and sent to the Plan Commission.” A separate Aug. 18 letter noted the proposal “supplies no financial feasibility model, rent/sale-price estimates, land/value analysis, affordability covenant, or anti-displacement assessment.” If those accounts hold, the Plan Commission takes this up without the economic analysis contracted for already in hand.
Then there’s community engagement. Sept. 14 was one of the outreach events this money was meant to fund, with more events promised. I attended the presentation at the Community Recreation Center, and it was a mess. There wasn’t nearly enough room for the turnout; the space was hot and packed, and the small breakout-group format left many residents feeling their questions never got answered.
The failure that matters most is affordability, since increasing affordable housing is the stated purpose of this entire rezoning effort. Yet as far as residents have been shown, the plan includes no inclusionary requirements, no affordability covenants, no anti-displacement protections, and no subsidy commitments — nothing that would guarantee affordable units get built rather than market-rate ones. Eliminating single-family zoning without those guardrails doesn’t guarantee affordability; it guarantees more density. We were promised affordable housing. So far we’ve been given deregulation and a promise to check the math later.
If you share these concerns, show up. Tell the Plan Commission what you think of eliminating single-family zoning without the data, without real affordability guarantees, and without a genuine process for public input.
Cindy Kelly
Oak Park