Link to full article in the Chicago Sun-Times
A town hall meeting in Old Town on May 7 demonstrated perfectly everything broken about Chicago’s housing and zoning policies.
The meeting was the seventh on a proposal to build 500 homes, 100 of which would be rented at affordable rates. The proposal would seem to be an easy win for the city. The development would build desperately needed housing in place of an aging Walgreens, two gas stations and a parking lot. The location is well-served by the CTA and popular bike routes, would add millions to the city’s tax base, and is in an area lacking housing options.
Unfortunately, a small, angry group of neighbors was not interested.
Credit is due to Ald. Brian Hopkins of the 2nd Ward. He started the meeting by plainly stating the alarming truths: Many areas are experiencing record-high rents and record-low housing construction, the city’s pension obligations require a new tax base and Chicago needs more residents to reverse the trend of boarded-up storefronts. Hopkins also noted that the common solution is more housing for more people, and fast. That message was unpopular in the room, and we appreciate the alderman for delivering it straight.
Despite the city’s housing crisis, most people at the meeting were unconcerned. Most speakers started with brief, perfunctory “everyone supports housing” statements, before angrily demonstrating that they were, in fact, not meaningfully supportive of new housing.
Some insisted that the development should be cut from 44 floors to 8 to 10 (unconcerned that this would eliminate the majority of affordable units). Others were upset that zoning changes were being discussed at all, proudly noting that a previous alderman had downzoned Old Town, celebrating the exact pattern causing much of Chicago’s housing cost crisis. Others still insisted that Old Town was a special location and that more housing should be built in other parts of the city. This is, by definition, NIMBY-ism (or “not in my backyard”).
As frustrating as it was hearing the crowd ignore the critical situation Chicago is in, we were also sympathetic to Hopkins.
Head-scratching reasons to oppose new housing
In addition to the above comments, there was a long list of more “eccentric” reasons why we shouldn’t support the 500 new housing units. One gentleman insisted that he’d examined the plans for the development and was sure that the plumbing wouldn’t work. Another commenter was worried that no one would move into the building, and it would stand empty, despite housing being in record-tight supply, driving rents to record rates. A third quoted Joni Mitchell’s “Big Yellow Taxi,” seemingly mistaking it as a song in favor of preserving parking lots.
We mention these absurd examples not to ridicule the individuals; Chicago is a huge and diverse place, and every meeting has crank commenters. We mention these concerns because they were extremely popular with the crowd and because this was the seventh meeting on this development. Desperately needed housing is being postponed or blocked because of these nonsensical ideas. People are being denied a place to live because of this process.
We understand that change brings challenges along with opportunities. Vehicle traffic is a predominant concern, and more people may bring more traffic. But the right way to address these concerns is to support public transit and other forms of transportation. We should support policies that allow Chicagoans to commute without each requiring their own private automobile, not policies that intentionally reduce the number of Chicagoans.
As Hopkins mentioned at the start of the meeting, Chicago is at a critical, historical moment. In 20 years, Chicago could look like St. Louis, in a “doom loop” where fewer residents result in fewer jobs and businesses, leading to even fewer residents. Alternatively, in 20 years Chicago could be a model for the country, welcoming new residents, strengthening our economy and building a tax base to manage the pension (and other) obligations dangling over our heads. We could maintain our status as a global city.
Which path we take depends on whether we build more housing, quickly. Our analysis of census data shows housing starts are 30% lower than they were before COVID-19, much of which is due to the city preventing the building of new housing. Since that neighborhood meeting, another housing proposal at 1628 N. Wells St. (31 homes) has been denied in the 2nd Ward, joining other recently denied 2nd Ward proposals at 1320 W Fullerton Ave. (154 homes) and 1542 N Wells St. (16 homes).
Chicago needs to build more housing fast to make it easier for people to move to (or stay in) Chicago. Worryingly, our current system seems designed to prioritize the concerns of a small, loud, angry and wealthy few over the future of the city.
Peter Snyder and Steven Vance are members of Urban Environmentalists Illinois.