Neighbor News
A Parking Lot Paid by Landlords β and Now Being Sold?
Back in 1981, our village realized North Oakland had a serious parking problem.

π A Parking Lot Paid by Landlords β and Now Being Sold?
Back in 1981, our village realized North Oakland had a serious parking problem. So they created a Parking Assessment District to buy land and build a 49-spot public parking lot β total cost: $226,201.
But hereβs the key part: this wasnβt paid for by the village as a whole. The property owners nearby were assessed special taxes for 20 years to cover the cost, based on how close they were to the lot and how many parking spaces their property required.
Find out what's happening in Shorewoodfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
Here are the properties that helped pay for the 4450 N. Oakland parking lot:
π 4401β4011 N. Oakland β $2,266
π 4413 N. Oakland β $453
π 4422 N. Oakland β $7,931
π 4428 N. Oakland β $8,384
π 4434 N. Oakland β $5,212
π 4442 N. Oakland β $42,374
π 4447 N. Oakland β $5,438
π 4455 N. Oakland β $38,069
π 4459 N. Oakland β $24,700
π 4460 N. Oakland β $25,606
π 4468 N. Oakland β $21,980
π 4473 N. Oakland β $5,665
π 4474 N. Oakland β $17,675
π 4480 N. Oakland β $17,902
π 4484 N. Oakland β $2,266
π 4495 N. Oakland β $453
π 4499 N. Oakland (now 1717 E. Kensington) β $227
Find out what's happening in Shorewoodfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
The villageβs own planning documents said this parking lot would increase apartment rentability, boost commercial income, and raise property values. In other words: it was an investment by landlords, for the communityβs benefit and their own property value.
Now, the problem: the village is selling the parking lot.
That means the original reason for those special taxes β increasing property value through parking access β no longer exists.
Whether or not the same people still own those buildings today, the fact remains: they paid for an amenity thatβs now being taken away.
π Ethically, how is it fair to sell something that was paid for by others?
And legally β could this put the village at risk?