Council narrows outdoor-dining season and phases permit-fee increase after staff review

Highland Park city staff recommended shorter outdoor-dining dates and a higher annual fee for use of parking spaces on July 14, and the City Council Committee of the Whole agreed to a phased compromise after extended discussion about parking availability, business margins and safety barriers.

Corey, business development specialist, told the committee staff recommended moving the permit season from April 1–Dec. 1 to June 1–Oct. 1 and raising the annual parking-space fee from $150 to $500. "Currently, the dates are from April 1 to December 1…based on staff recommendation, we recommend June 1 to October 1," Corey said. Staff explained the date recommendation was based on historical temperature data and utilization patterns; staff also presented a peer-fee comparison and an "opportunity cost" analysis that estimated a city parking-revenue equivalent of about $981 per parking space over a season.

After council discussion, members asked to soften the staff proposal. Several council members expressed concern about a sudden threefold fee increase and a narrow season. Council Member Annette proposed and the group endorsed phasing the fee: $300 in the coming year, increasing to $500 the following year, and setting permit dates from May 1 through Nov. 1 as an incremental change. "I think if we wanted to raise it this year to 300 and next year to 500, that would be less painful," Annette said.

Staff said current program metrics include 24 outdoor-dining permits issued citywide and 74 licensed restaurants; only 8 locations currently use parking-space dining. Permits may authorize up to three parking spaces per business, and the city provides water-filled barricades at no cost for safety. Corey noted the application processing timeline is typically three to four days once materials — including insurance and a site plan — are submitted.

Council discussion included practical enforcement and neighborhood impacts. Some members worried that taking parking spaces discourages patrons or harms adjacent businesses when reserved spaces sit empty; others emphasized the benefit to restaurants. Safety and aesthetics of barriers were also debated: staff said the city prioritized crash-rated barriers and that more decorative options often require anchoring into pavement and would be more expensive to install and remove. "Other communities, we're all taking a look. We drive through and we're like, oh, those are beautiful, but they're not going to stop a vehicle from crashing into that whether it's by accident or intentionally," a city staff member said when questioning decorative options.

Council members asked staff to continue monitoring utilization and to present options for improved, more attractive but crash-rated barriers as part of future capital planning. Staff said they can add aesthetic options to capital planning for phased implementation and noted that certain retrofit approaches require significant hardware in the pavement. The committee's compromise will be forwarded to the full council for formal action.