Parking reform could soon gain traction in Evanston as the city looks to create a new comprehensive plan and zoning code
Ald. Devon Reid (8th) says reducing off-street parking requirements is important because it “affects affordability…the City of Evanston has to view parking as a service we provide to residents.”
When parking costs are passed on to developers, Reid says, housing becomes more expensive.
Last year, Reid unsuccessfully pushed for a zoning code change to expand the city’s Transit Oriented District parking rules to include areas within half a mile of a rail transit station.
Current rules apply the less-restrictive TOD parking rules to areas within one-eighth mile of a rail transit station and to all property within a quarter mile of a station along main commercial corridors.
Those rules cut required parking spaces for studio and one bedroom units from 1.25 spaces per unit to 0.55 spaces; for two bedroom units from 1.5 to 1.1 spaces and for units with three or more bedrooms from 2 to 1.65 spaces.
Reid’s change was approved for introduction at the July 10 council meeting, but was stripped out of an omnibus zoning reform package at the July 24 meeting where the rest of the changes were adopted.
Jane Wilberding, is a City of Chicago Mobility Planner and a co-founder of the Parking Reform Network.
Wilberding spoke at a recent 8th Ward meeting about how parking reform might help Evanston fulfill its goals regarding ongoing concerns such as housing costs and sustainability.
She said current parking policies were embedded in zoning codes decades ago, and that there was no rhyme or reason for determining the number of parking spaces appropriate for different types of buildings.
She provided a Report from the American Society of Planning Officials written in 1954, which observed that “it is doubtful that any two planners or architects could agree on the number of square feet of parking space required for a shopping center or individual store.”
Many cities, including Seattle, Washington; Buffalo, New York, and Columbus, Ohio, are tweaking their zoning codes to enable parking reform.
Some cities choose broad reform, while others limit parking changes to certain areas of town that attract dense traffic.
California has prohibited parking requirements statewide in areas within a half mile of a transit station.
In an interview, Wilberding said that several Cook County suburbs, including Skokie, Wilmette and Winnetka, have eliminated minimum parking requirements in their downtown districts.
“It’s really becoming more of a standard that cities are doing across the nation,” she said.
According to data provided by the Parking Reform Network, constructing and maintaining parking spaces comes at a substantial cost.
It costs around $5,000 annually to maintain a parking space in a central business district surface lot. The construction cost per space in a parking garage usually runs $20,000-$30,000. Chicago falls in the upper end of that range, at $29,153.
Parking construction also affects the cost of housing. One garage parking spot adds $225 to monthly rent costs on average nationally. Parking costs often end up being a substantial percentage of housing costs, especially for lower-priced urban housing.
During her presentation, Wilberding said that parking reform has allowed developers to reduce parking construction associated with their projects by 15 to 30 percent. “More housing was built…but less parking was built.”
Parking reform may seem like a no-brainer, but, as with anything related to urban planning, there are some caveats to consider.
Parking is already a challenge in parts of Evanston, especially on the south side of town.
Many older large apartment buildings in the area do not offer onsite parking, or offer it on a very limited basis, nearly making these areas parking deserts. Residents in these neighborhoods must try their luck parking on the streets, provided the street parking in the area is not restricted or metered parking.
One goal of parking reform is to wean people away from automobiles and get them to use public transportation. This aids in creating a sustainable environment.
But on a practical level, many people do not feel comfortable utilizing public transportation because of crime both on the transportation itself, and the areas where stations are located. Also, many people who have health or mobility issues find it easier to rely on private transportation.
Wilberding admits that parking reform “is not an overnight solution.” She said that parking reform must be a comprehensive plan. She said tools for such situations might include permit parking for residents, which would better manage over-parking in areas, allowing residents to retain some parking capability.
“It is really about taking these tools that can be applied more broadly, but really looking at individual communities…and their characteristics and the people in them to make sure we’re catering those tools to their specific needs and preferences,” she said.
Interesting. The statement about fear of crime on public transportation caught my eye. We’ve closed and are working to eliminate human service on our public transportation systems. Without employees interacting with transit riders daily, it will be very difficult to lure riders back into the system. Seeing employees makes for a rider experience that feels much safer than entering a system devoid of employees being watched over by security cameras. You can reduce expenses to the point the product, transit, is unappealing.
Evanston has the fortunate history of being largely laid out before the destructive idea of “parking minimums” was dreamed up and implemented by unqualified planners. Livable, walkable cities like ours are now largely impossible throughout North America due to these outdated and unconsidered policies. Eliminating parking requirements is a good first step toward protecting our city from the incursion of even more polluting vehicles and dangerous motorists.
If the City is contemplating a shift of the parking burden from private developers to the public via on-street parking, it should think about what happens during snow emergency events when parking is not allowed on certain streets. If more of the parking demand is shifted to public streets, then during emergency times there may be too much demand and not enough on-street capacity. I know the public garages are open for parking, but would they have sufficient capacity during emergency events?
Interesting from a guy that does not own a car.
When you remove parking minimums, the emphasis moves to street parking. How does that impact plans for more bike lanes?
Evanston needs to keep an eye on the needs of cyclists and pedestrians, not just cars.
I completely agree with this comment. We need to encourage more biking and walking versus more driving and parking.