Tinley Park trustees weigh changes to 60-year-old overnight parking ordinance; direct staff to study pilot options
Loading...
Summary
Trustees discussed possible updates to Tinley Park’s overnight parking ordinance — originally adopted in the late 1950s and last substantially amended decades ago — and directed staff to study data and design targeted pilot programs rather than adopt immediate changes.
Tinley Park trustees spent the majority of the Jan. 21 Committee of the Whole meeting discussing revisions to the village’s overnight parking ordinance — a rule trustees said dates to about 1958 and was last amended roughly in the mid-1980s. The committee did not adopt an ordinance change; instead trustees asked staff to study the issue and return recommendations, including the possibility of neighborhood pilot programs.
Trustees and staff noted several recurring concerns: narrow lot sizes in older neighborhoods, an increase in vehicles per household since the ordinance’s adoption, snowplow and emergency-vehicle access, enforcement workload, and equity between neighborhoods. Trustee Shaw urged a measured approach and suggested pilot tests in different areas using consistent objectives. “From a purely equity standpoint, we have to make sure that we are not creating arbitrary rules,” Trustee Shaw said.
Suggestions on the record included allowing vehicles with village vehicle stickers to park overnight without citation in certain circumstances, permitting parking on only one side of narrow streets (for example, prohibiting parking on the hydrant side and allowing it on the opposite side), running 90-day pilot programs in the most affected neighborhoods and collecting before/after data for analysis. Trustee Sullivan and others described the ordinance as “dated” and urged community input.
Multiple trustees and public commenters emphasized enforcement and administrative cost concerns. Clerk O’Connor noted that if the village moved to a mandatory sticker system the clerk’s office would need to verify registrations when issuing stickers — a potential administrative tradeoff. Chief Tilton said the police department can review call logs and provide data on how often cars are called in for overnight parking, and trustees asked the police to compile that information for staff review.
Members of the public who spoke during the committee’s public-comment period urged a pilot program targeted to older neighborhoods, recommended gathering baseline counts of on‑street vehicles, and suggested limiting pilot permits to operable, registered Tinley Park vehicles (excluding trailers, inoperable vehicles and commercial vehicles). A resident suggested a six-month pilot to capture seasonal differences; others recommended 90-day trials as a starting point.
The committee did not vote to change the ordinance on Jan. 21. Instead trustees assigned staff follow-ups: police to compile data on overnight-parking calls and problem areas; Trustee Brennan and Chief Tilton to coordinate on operational details; and village marketing staff (Donna and Colleen, as referenced in the meeting) to field public outreach or a poll to gather resident input. Trustees discussed equity implications for neighborhoods such as Parkside and Bremantown/Remintown and the need to balance public-safety objectives with administrative workload.
Next steps recorded in the committee: staff to present data and specific pilot-program options to the trustees for further consideration before any ordinance change.
