logo
Steve Weinshel: Cutting parking requirements while upzoning Broadway will create a crisis

Steve Weinshel: Cutting parking requirements while upzoning Broadway will create a crisis

Chicago Tribune4 days ago
One of the key aspects of Mayor Brandon Johnson's continued push for more housing development in Chicago is eliminating the city's parking mandates for new multifamily housing construction.
It is a major component in Johnson's 'Cut the Tape' initiative intended to boost more affordable housing. While many of us might hope for a utopian future in which the average Chicagoan no longer owns a car, that is distinctly not the current situation. To pretend otherwise invites chaos throughout Chicago.
The Johnson administration is attempting to rush through the City Council an ill-conceived and massive upzoning of Broadway from Montrose to Devon avenues in Chicago's Uptown and Edgewater neighborhoods. This change would allow for an additional 10,000 units to be built along this stretch of Broadway in addition to the thousands of units that current zoning already allows. A cornerstone of this plan is to radically reduce the number of parking spaces required in new large-scale housing developments.
All of Broadway lies within a transit-oriented development zone due to its proximity to the Red Line and several bus lines. As such, developers are required to provide only one parking space per two housing units. But this is only the city's opening hand for reduced parking requirements. Under the city's Connected Communities ordinance, developers may reduce that one parking space per two-unit requirement even further, even down to no off-street parking at all. For example, several projects currently in development or recently completed in Edgewater provide as little as one parking space per 10 units or less.
As a 35-year resident of one of Chicago's densest neighborhoods, I am no stranger to high-density urban living. I live in the Kenmore-Winthrop area of Edgewater, which together with Sheridan Road immediately to the east, is home to roughly 20,000 housing units, making it among the densest census tracts not only in Chicago but also the nation. To contemplate adding 10,000 housing units along Edgewater's adjacent stretch of Broadway with minimal off-street parking requirements constitutes urban planning malpractice. Such lunacy will plague Edgewater for generations to come.
Anyone familiar with the east side of Edgewater knows that street parking is already virtually nonexistent. There is also a major shortage of off-street parking for current households. Many of the buildings in the area were built long before car ownership was common and have little or even no off-street parking of their own.
Residents, even in higher-end condominiums, are forced to seek off-street parking elsewhere, such as in the neighborhood's many four-plus-one apartment buildings. Historically, residents could find such spaces within a block of where they lived. But in recent years, as parking pressures have continued to increase, residents now often have to venture several blocks or more from home to find a rentable space.
As a result, countless drivers now repeatedly circulate throughout the area looking to win the parking space lottery, posing great risk to pedestrian safety and compromising air quality.
The Chicago Department of Planning and Development's proposed framework for Broadway is predicated on the wishful thinking that people living near mass transit are substantially less likely to own cars. But that is simply not borne out by the facts.
Car ownership rate for homeowners in Edgewater is 1.3 cars per owner-occupied household, according to City-Data.com. Ownership rates for renters in the community are somewhat lower but are still 0.9 vehicles per household. Those figures are similar for the Uptown and Rogers Park communities adjacent to Edgewater.
Even data provided by the city as part of its case for the Broadway upzoning framework demonstrates the point that it's creating a parking nightmare. That means more cars will be coming to Edgewater if its 'visions' are realized. Where these vehicles will go is anyone's guess, but city bureaucrats and their housing density mouthpieces try to deny this reality.
Many new residents will likely aggravate current practices of illegally parking in front of fire hydrants, in handicapped zones, blocking alley entrances and corner tow zones that are essential for the passage of school buses and emergency vehicles.
As a major artery for traffic coming off of DuSable Lake Shore Drive, Broadway is already a busy, relatively narrow corridor. It currently has metered parking and numerous business loading zones, but these may soon be disappearing with increasingly dense residential development. Intensified residential development will inevitably bring even more double parking for ride-share and delivery vehicles, which have already exploded in recent years.
Before the city moves forward with any additional housing in Edgewater or Uptown, it needs to carefully study the car ownership rates for residents and limit additional housing accordingly. It could also help its own housing cause by requiring developers to proactively address parking problems by establishing car-sharing programs in new properties.
Most neighborhoods abutting the CTA's Red, Brown and Blue lines on the North Side are already quite dense. Substantial new housing development has already been coming to all of these neighborhoods, especially along major commercial streets such as Broadway, Clark, Ashland, Western, Milwaukee, Irving Park, Montrose and Lawrence, even under old zoning standards. But does this mean these neighborhoods have endless capacity for further densification?
There is a tipping point, and too much development in these communities threatens to greatly diminish the quality of life for future residents as well as the many thousands of current residents who have worked hard for decades to eradicate urban blight in Edgewater.
If the Department of Planning and Development is serious about enhancing Chicago's north lakefront neighborhoods, perhaps it ought to actually do some planning.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge says R.I. officials have immunity in First Amendment lawsuit
Judge says R.I. officials have immunity in First Amendment lawsuit

Boston Globe

time4 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

Judge says R.I. officials have immunity in First Amendment lawsuit

Travis, who was presiding over the meeting as council president pro-tempore, cut him off and said, 'You will be talking about city government or you'll be leaving.' Cote said he did plan to talk about the government, but Travis had an officer escort him out of the meeting. Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up The ACLU filed the lawsuit, accusing Warwick City Council members of violating Cote's First Amendment rights to free speech and to petition the government for redress of grievances. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case. Advertisement In an order Tuesday, Senior US District Court Judge William E. Smith agreed to dismiss the City Council members in their personal capacities but not their professional capacities, reducing the lawsuit to a case against the city. 'Travis's act indeed may have violated Cote's constitutional rights, may have evinced poor judgment, and may even have been done in service of an inappropriate motive or intent,' Smith wrote. Advertisement 'But legislative immunity 'is not forfeited simply because the activities, if unprotected, might violate a plaintiff's constitutional rights,' ' he wrote, citing a prior ruling. Ultimately, if Travis 'overstepped the boundary of sound judgment,' she should be held accountable not under federal law 'but at the ballot box,' Smith wrote, citing another ruling. In a footnote, the judge said, 'It appears that Travis was, in fact, called to account for her alleged actions.' He noted Travis decided to not seek reelection and in 2024 agreed to Smith said the US Supreme Court has held that local legislators are entitled to 'absolute immunity' for their legislative activities, so the key question in this case is whether Travis's decision to boot from the meeting Cote represented 'legitimate legislative activity.' 'Facing this difficult question, the court believes that both precedent and prudence favor the conclusion that Travis's action ... was within the sphere of legitimate legislative activity,' Smith wrote. He cited a City Council rule that allows council president to 'preserve decorum and order.' On Wednesday, Cote criticized the judge's ruling and said it could have implications for the rest of Rhode Island. 'It's really bad news. This can be interpreted so broadly,' Cote said. 'If you get up in front of your town council or school committee meeting, and they don't like the content of what you are speaking about, they can remove you without ramifications. Your First Amendment rights are gone. I guess we are in Moscow.' Advertisement But Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island, said the lawsuit will proceed against the city even though City Council members can't be held liable in an individual capacity. 'The suit remains quite alive and we will be pursuing the matter,' he said. 'They are not off the hook by any means.' Brown emphasized the significance of the litigation. 'The ability of members of the public to speak to their representatives on topics of public interest is crucial to a democratic form of government,' he said. 'Mr. Cote wanted to talk about something that clearly involved city business and something extremely important, so barring him from being able to talk about it undermined the whole point of the public comment period.' An attorney representing Warwick and City Council members, Marc DeSisto, declined to comment. Edward Fitzpatrick can be reached at

Jimmie Johnson says he could run more NASCAR Cup races in 2026
Jimmie Johnson says he could run more NASCAR Cup races in 2026

NBC Sports

time4 hours ago

  • NBC Sports

Jimmie Johnson says he could run more NASCAR Cup races in 2026

Seven-time Cup champion Jimmie Johnson, who has run only two Cup races this season, says 'there's a chance that I run more races next year.' One of those races, he hopes, will be the inaugural street race at Naval Base Coronado in San Diego next June. That event has special meaning for Johnson, who grew up in El Cajon, California, about 15 miles east of San Diego. Dustin Long, While San Diego would be a special place for Johnson to run his final Cup race next Father's Day (June 21), the co-owner of Legacy Motor Club said he still wants to race more in NASCAR's premier series even as he's set to turn 50 in September. 'I want to keep going,' Johnson said in response to a question from NBC Sports about his future plans. 'I want to stay in a car. I think it's good for us. 'We're hopeful to have a third charter. Need to start building a team. There's a chance that I run more races next year if we have a third charter on the docket and have a sponsor to bring along, team members to groom, a crew chief to get reps, a driver to get reps. There's a lot of scenarios that are in play. I'm hopeful I can keep going. 'I certainly don't want to feed you guys a line of BS here. There is also a scenario where (making San Diego his final Cup start) would make sense. We've put zero effort into the idea yet at this point. I have more years in me. I want to keep going.' Legacy Motor Club hopes to have a third charter next year but that could depend on the court system. Legacy Motor Club has filed a lawsuit against Rick Ware Racing, alleging that Rick Ware Racing is backing out of an agreement signed in March to sell Legacy Motor Club a charter. Rick Ware Racing claims the wrong charter number is listed in the agreement. A trial is scheduled to begin Jan. 26, 2026. Legacy Motor Club filed a lawsuit July 16 against former Spire Motorsports co-owner T.J. Puchyr, who told The Associated Press in June that he had entered into an agreement to purchase Rick Ware Racing. Legacy Motor Club accuses Puchyr of tortious interference after he helped broker the deal between Legacy Motor Club and Rick Ware Racing. Erik Jones and John Hunter Nemechek are Legacy Motor Club's full-time drivers.

Scalise: House GOP will pursue permitting reform this fall
Scalise: House GOP will pursue permitting reform this fall

Politico

time5 hours ago

  • Politico

Scalise: House GOP will pursue permitting reform this fall

Speaker Mike Johnson is on the defensive as he prepares to let the House leave early for August recess rather than allow his conference be hammered further by agitation on both sides of the aisle over votes to release the Jeffrey Epstein files. The Louisiana Republican Wednesday afternoon insisted, 'no one in Congress is blocking Epstein documents.' He also defended his decision to shut down the Rules Committee this week and cancel consideration of key legislative agenda items after Republicans on the panel rebelled over being forced to take more Epstein votes. 'Republicans are preventing Democrats from making a mockery of the Rules Committee process because we refuse to engage in their political charade,' Johnson said. 'That is what is happening, and nothing more.' Johnson reiterated that Republicans need to 'let the process play out,' and if more information doesn't come out over August recess then Congress 'will act' when lawmakers return. He added there was 'no point in having a vote today' on Republicans' non-binding Epstein resolution expressing support for the documents' release — or any other Epstein-related bill, for that matter — because the Trump administration is working on unsealing grand jury information. But he also cast doubt that a bipartisan bill from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), that would compel the files to be unsealed, would ever see a full House vote, saying it had 'problems.' GOP leaders believe they can kill Massie and Khanna's push for a vote on this legislation if more information comes out over recess. At the same time, Johnson appeared to cast doubt on his own party's movement toward subpoenaing Ghislaine Maxwell, an Epstein co-conspirator, to testify. Johnson said if Republicans want to go ahead and subpoena Maxwell, as they're planning to do, then 'that's fine.' But he quickly referenced past Justice Department allegations that she is a pervasive liar, adding 'can she be counted on to tell the truth…can we trust what she's going to say?'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store