Evanston’s Plan Commission Wednesday night recommended reducing the amount of parking required in new multi-family residential developments located near transit stations to 0.55 spaces per bedroom.

That would bring the city’s zoning code in line with provisions adopted by the City Council recently as part of the city’s inclusionary housing ordinance.

A consultant’s study presented to the commission indicated, based on vehicle registration records from the Illinois Secretary of State, that the new rule would closely match the average number of vehicles per bedroom actually registered at large developments near transit stops completed in the city over the past decade.

Plan Commission Chair Jim Ford said the changes “are not ridiculous” and in fact match the reality of parking usage at transit-oriented developments in the city.

The change still requires City Council approval to go into effect.

The city’s transit-oriented development zones are generally located within an eighth to a quarter mile of one or more of the city’s 11 CTA and Metra stations.

Bill Smith is the editor and publisher of Evanston Now.

Join the Conversation


  1. A good idea long overdue

    Higher density of residents begets downtown shops, which makes Evanston a more walkable city.

    1. Parking cuts near transit

      The above comment makes sense to me also. What does not make sense is that the new twelve story apartment building almost completed at Maple and Davis was approved with ZERO parking spaces required. What was the logic here? Was this a thoughtful decision or…??

  2. Parking

    if the new parking proposal was in force three years ago, we would have never moved to Evanston. I believe that it is very short sighted.

    1. This waiver does not match
      This waiver does not match 900 Chicago which has over 150 spaces for 76 units over half of which are 1 brs. And all our spots are filled with people still seeking additional parking. We are literally feet from the Main St. “L” stop and Metra. No other building in Evanston is more transit positioned! That said, there is little street parking available (free) and if a spot opens it is quickly taken. The proposal is VERY short sighted. And aren’t parking spaces valuable in terms of sale and rental? One wonders how those empty storefronts downtown will fill up if no one can drive and park there. And once a project is up, it will be too late to go “oops”.

      1. Too many cars?

        Perhaps the residents should rethink their relationships with their cars.  If you make up your mind to go car free, it is possible.  I sold my car and am figuring out how to be carfree.   But you must rethink your behavior and how you will trade some personal inconvenience with the health benefits of walking, biking and interacting with other human beings.  Slower, but perhaps better.   It takes some planning, but it can be done.

  3. What statistics and from

    What statistics and from which buildings do you have to justify this change?

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 *