Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brown Deer adopts temporary ordinance allowing overnight angled parking near Village 43 amid enforcement concerns
Summary
The board adopted Ordinance 25-09 to permit a one-year trial of angled overnight parking on the west side of Deerwood Drive north of Brown Deer Road to ease parking at Village 43 Apartments; trustees raised enforcement, snow-removal and precedent concerns and two trustees registered 'No' votes in roll call.
Get email alerts on the Parking Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Village of Brown Deer on Dec. 5 moved to temporarily allow overnight angled parking on a segment of the west side of Deerwood Drive north of Brown Deer Road to address a shortfall of off-street parking at the new Village 43 Apartments.
Staff explained the proposal: F Street and the property manager for Village 43 asked staff for on-street overnight parking because leasing revealed higher-than-expected demand (roughly two vehicles per unit for some units). The village does not currently allow on-street overnight parking; the proposed ordinance would permit angled overnight parking in a narrowly defined area for up to one year, require vehicles to not remain more than 24 hours, and place striping and snow-removal responsibilities on the developer per the MOU.
Police and public-works staff warned of enforcement and operational challenges. As one trustee noted, marking tires (a common informal enforcement practice) is now a violation, complicating monitoring of the 24-hour limit. Staff said the police department would adjust enforcement and officers would be educated on the temporary change, but also acknowledged the village would not plow the angled spaces and that the developer would need to remove snow and maintain striping.
Trustees debated whether the change would create a precedent for other complexes and whether the proposed 50/50 cost-share for striping and removal was fair since much of the benefit would accrue to the developer. Staff said the village sought some cost participation to show commitment and to cover removal costs if the trial is reversed.
At the vote, the roll call recorded two 'No' votes (Trustee Johnson and Trustee Greaves); the transcript contains extensive procedural interruption during the roll call before the board moved on to other business. The ordinance was advanced consistent with board action at the meeting.
Staff said they would monitor the trial, consider alternatives such as shared off-street parking or different permit schemes, and could terminate the arrangement at the end of the one-year trial if problems arise.

