The next time you need a U-Haul for a move you may need to budget extra money to pay the city. Evanston aldermen tonight are scheduled to vote on an ordinance to charge a $100 fee to have temporary “no parking” signs posted for moving vans.

The city previously has provided the service for free upon request.

City officials say they anticipate they’ll raise $50,000 year from the new fee.

The ordinance doesn’t require that people moving in or out of a building pay the fee, if they’re willing to let their moving van compete for parking spaces like any other vehicle.

The new fee would also apply to the placement on streets of portable storage containers used for moving.

Update 6:25 a.m. Tuesday, Jan. 10: The new fee was approved by aldermen Monday night on a 8-0 vote.

Related document

Draft ordinance and staff memo

Bill Smith is the editor and publisher of Evanston Now.

Join the Conversation


  1. Are you kidding me???

    I think we need to replace this "nickle and dime me" aldermen and alderwomen of Evanston.  They need to focus on bringing in businesses to the area instead of taxing and imposing fees on its residents.  

  2. Moving? That will be $100 please

    What ever happened to the notion that City Government was devised to provide services and security to its residents?  Part of our Social Contract is to collectively pay (very high) taxes to share the cost of lots of things in the community (Police & Fire protection, schools, roads, snow removal, etc…).  It is disturbing that the trend is to reach ever deeper into the pockets of our already overtaxed citizenry for more and more of our hard earned money.

    What is next I wonder?  To our leaders – please know that our pockets are not bottomless!

    Respectfully submitted, Brian G. Becharas


    1. The City is Supposed to Pay for You to Move?

      I love how people think they should get a free ride.  

      The streets are public spaces.  Why should you get a reserved spot for free?

      It makes no sense.  The idea that the "social contract" should pay your moving expenses is laughable.

  3. This _might_ bring in $5000/year if they are lucky…

    "City officials say they anticipate they'll raise $50,000 year from the new fee".

    And they will be shocked when people avoid this unnecessary fee and the projection is miles from being met.  Sounds like the "it caught us totally by surprise that people weren't willing to pony up the $1.75 for each and every lawn refuse bag they use" scenario all over again…

  4. How much does this service cost the City?

    This does sound like kind of a high fee, but on the other hand, I've never heard of this service being offered anywhere else I've lived: typically, you have to take your chances with parking when you're moving.

    My question is this: I assume there is some cost to this service, and it's eminently reasonable that if you want  to get some kind of service that isn't offered to your neighbors, you should pay for it – but the fee should at least be based in part on the cost of providing the service.  I didn't see this detailed in the ordinance.

    There are the salaries of the employees who need to post and remove the signs, the parking enforcement officers who probably have to sweep before the moving van comes in, and the time involved in processing the paperwork.  I'd be surprised if this amounted to $100, but then, if it isn't detailed anywhere – how would we know?

    Brian, I assume you are reacting to the somewhat misleading headline and didn't read the article through. The City is not asking for a fee for a general service that all taxpayers use, but for a specialized service that isn't a necessity.  I don't see a problem with that, any more than I do for charging wedding parties for the private use of public parks.

    1. misleading headline

      Michele – you are right and the headline fooled me too – anyone glancing at it would assume the city has put a $100 fee on anyone who moves. Not only misleading, it's false. A good alternative would be – Signs for Moving May Cost $100. EvanstonNow has to be read carefully, remembering that editorials and news are not clearly separated. Ponzi is always around.

      1. Read the story


        Read the story it clearly states "The ordinance doesn't require that people moving in or out of a building pay the fee, if they're willing to let their moving van compete for parking spaces like any other vehicle"

        As some have noted here – the city will not make the $50,000 it claims-  that assume 500 moves, does the city provide that much service now?  I doubt it.  Just like the yard waste stickers, they would have had to sell 500,000 stickers to make the budget, it just did not happen.  The made about $200,000 versus the $900,000 they projected.

        Assuming 2 hours per move of employee time – that would be over 1/2 a year of one employees time, who are they kidding , are they provide that much service now I doubt.

        I would not be suprised if they make less than $10,000.

        Clif maybe you should come up with a cartoon to submit to Bill, If you are concern about facts and fiction, 


        1. So…you’re in agreement with us?

          We both pointed out that the HEADLINE was misleading, and close reading of the CONTENT provided accurate information.  

          Your post seems to indicate simultaneously that we were both wrong and both right.  Which did you mean?

  5. What Chicago Does

    In the City of Chicago you pick up the NO PARKING signs at the Alderman's office and post them yourself.

    There is absolutely NO ENFORCEMENTand NO PENALTY  that I'm aware of for violating the No Parking signs, and most Chicagoans seem to know it.  

    At least they're free – you get what you pay for!

  6. You deserve the service for free

    The city already charges you a precentage of the sale price when you sell your home. They do nothing to deserve this charge. Why can't they throw in this service for nothing. They can fillout the dates and times for the parking restriction. The person moving can post the signs several days before the move and take the signs down when they are done. The parking patrol doesn't need to do a drive-by. The mover can call if someone violates the parking restriction. The cost to the city should run 1 – 2 dollars.

    Since the city is making big bucks on the house sale with no effort on their part why screw the people one more time as a parting shot.


  7. Seems pretty reasonable

    People pay for residential parking permits. Why shouldn't a person pay a nominal fee to get their moving van a huge space in front of a building for a day? Seems pretty reasonable to me. In fact this situation has occured on my block several times in the last few months and I always think it sucks for the people who paid for the right to park there to get screwed out of those spots all day.

    1. $100 a day to park is now

      $100 a day to park is now nominal?  Can you seriously stand behind that comment?  Not everyone is as well off as you obviously are. 

      1. I’ll stand behind that

        I'll stand behind that comment – for whoever posted it – because they didn't say $100 to park is nominal.  You are the only one who said that.  No one is simply "parking" in this scenario.

        $100 a day, to privately use 5-6 public parking spaces, inconvenience neighbors, and use public property for one's own personal convenience is nominal.

      2. Please

        To pay Evanston taxes, and into the price of Evanston homes and apartments, if you DON'T think $100 is nominal fee considering how much it costs to move, you have a child's understanding of money.

      3. Get your facts straight

        Seriously, Brian, did you read the post?

        The $100 is not to park, but to reserve street space in front of your house.  If that space is open, you can park there without paying anything.

        Why should a private person be able to restrict usage of public space without compensation?

        It is the same deal we have with lakefront parks and picinic areas.  Anyone can use the facilities, but if you want to reserve them you have to pay.

  8. Love this idea.

    Our street had been riddled with moving vans all year and they keep them there all week. It's bumper to bumper as is trying to find parking and I've often parked up to a half mile away trying to find a parking spot. It seems that landlords just have these parking signs for use for whatever (they don't even have a contact number on them, but say they are issued by the City of Evanston). It's an abuse of parking rights, especially for streets that need parking permits.

    Would love to pay $100 to park my gigantic UHaul in front of the street. Where do I sign?

  9. Studentification of Neighborhoods

    The destabilizing effect of transient students moving in and out of established residential neighborhoods every Fall and Spring with their moving trucks should be addressed; I just dont know if a fee is the answer to the problem, unless it pays for stepped up traffic enforcement costs. I have been blocked many times by trucks with arrogant drivers who feel it is okay to unload and stop traffic at their own convenience.

Leave a comment
The goal of our comment policy is to make the comments section a vibrant yet civil space. Treat each other with respect — even the people you disagree with. Whenever possible, provide links to credible documentary evidence to back up your factual claims.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *