Chicago’s streets are clogged with cars, but the city has come up with a proposal that may well put even more on the street: it wants to change the zoning code so that many new residential units will have to have two parking spaces instead of one, as the current law requires.
The parking proposal is in a chapter titled “Enhancing Transportation Options.” The commissioners made it clear that they’re simply trying to be logical and accommodating: “While a principal goal is to encourage use of mass transit, we also recognize the need to accommodate the automobile and to tailor solutions to different communities.”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
As they see it, the current “across-the-board” rule that there has to be one parking space per residence isn’t working, because different people have different parking needs. “The existing ‘one-size-fits-all’ standard doesn’t recognize that there are differences when it comes to car ownership and types of housing,” states the report. “As a result, the ordinance’s minimum parking requirements sometimes underestimate and, other times, overestimate the need for additional parking spaces.” And indeed, rich families in big homes probably want more than one off-street parking space because they can afford two or even three cars, while most ordinary folks probably want only one parking space.
Burton concedes that many Chicagoans own or want to own more than one car, and he says that if developers want to add more parking units to satisfy the demands of upscale residents they’re free to do so. “I just don’t think it should be required,” he says. “It’s really going to shape the kind of city we have for our children. Will that mean we won’t have backyards for them because we need a couple of units of cement parking?”
In fact, the new parking recommendation was made to head off complaints by residents on the north side. “Every time a new development goes up, that’s the first thing people complain about–where’s the parking?” says the insider. “People don’t care about abstract economic arguments. They want more parking.”
Pincham challenged the ticket before a city administrative hearing officer. He lost, but in 1999 he filed suit, challenging the constitutionality of residents-only parking zones. The case kicked around for a couple of years before a judge ruled against him.
